I can’t tell you the number of times over the past five years that I have heard critics (and some Mormons) say something along the lines of “Mormons have always believed that the Book of Mormon took place in all of North American and South America, with the Isthmus of Panama as the ‘narrow neck of land.'”
Problem is, that isn’t the case. Not all Mormons have believed that, although some have. Some Mormons, over the years, have believed that the Book of Mormon has been geographically situated in a variety of different places.
I’m not going to go into a bunch of information about Book of Mormon geography. (There are good sources where you can read about it all you want.) What I wanted to address was a common criticism, companion to the above statement, that the limited geography theory (LGT) for the Book of Mormon is a new development—an ad hoc response—brought up by apologists to somehow salvage credibility when it comes to the Book of Mormon. Some say, even, that the LGT is a response to criticisms relative to DNA studies.
Such criticisms show an amazing lack of understanding concerning both Book of Mormon geography theories and Mormons in general. These theories aren’t new with latest generation of apologists; they have been around for almost a hundred years, long before the latest way of recycled and refreshed criticisms against the Book of Mormon.
I was reminded of this fact when I was looking through some older Church magazines in our ward library the other day. One issue of The Instructor, dated August 1956, included an article entitled “Digging Into History’s Storehouse.” The magazine was the official Church publication for the Sunday School organization.
The article (which was tied to a cover photo of the “Temple of the Warriors” in the Mexican Yucatan site of Chichen Itza) talked about archeology in general terms and, very specifically, about archeology in Central America:
The archaeological treasures in Central America, completely covered by jungle growth or buried under plowed fields or even serving as sturdy foundations for more modern buildings, are all dramatically coming into view again. It now appears that unearthing of these remains will make of Mexico a vast archaeological site, and open-air museum a thousand miles long.
What does this article mean for Book of Mormon geography? Not much; it doesn’t try to pin-point locations of Book of Mormon cities, other than to say the following:
No competent student maintains that discoveries of archaeologists as yet prove the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon, as every faithful member of the Church knows, is a divine book whose miraculous “coming forth” and subsequent translation must be accepted on principles of faith.
But that accepted fact has never cooled the interest of Latter-day Saints in findings of archaeologists in Central and South America. The uncovering of cities, walls, pyramids, artifacts or highways are, for Book of Mormon students, strong external evidences of great, ancient civilizations that once thrived on the American continents. Some of those civilizations had their beginnings with Book of Mormon peoples.
The bottom line? A 1956 official publication of the Church should go a long way to help critics understand that a limited geography theory that focuses on Mesoamerica should not be seen as a later development by apologists in response to Book of Mormon criticisms.
-Allen
It is not apparent to me how LGT necessarily falls out of the 1956 publication. Utilizing Central American finds is perfectly viable for a hemispheric view as well as LGT. In fact, the quote even says “But that accepted fact has never cooled the interest of Latter-day Saints in findings of archaeologists in Central and South America. The uncovering of cities, walls, pyramids, artifacts or highways are, for Book of Mormon students, strong external evidences of great, ancient civilizations that once thrived on the American continents. Some of those civilizations had their beginnings with Book of Mormon peoples.” – sounds pretty hemispheric.
Maybe there is good evidence for LGT in Mormon thought fifty years ago, but I don’t see this particular example as support for that notion.
NorthboundZax has a very idiosyncratic manner of interpreting what is otherwise a rather clear pronouncement. The statement acknowledges that Latter-day Saints have been interested in archaeological findings in both Central and South America. No one is disputing that.
The statement goes on to acknowledge that what has been found is evidence that great civilizations once thrived on the American continents. No one is disputing that.
The KEY statement is the one Zax bolds, yet apparently misunderstands. Some of those civilizations had their beginnings with Book of Mormon peoples. Of course, this also implies that some of those civilizations did not have their beginnings with Book of Mormon peoples — a clear acknowledgment that there were “others” than the Nephites and Lamanites. Zax would have us regard the interest of Latter-day Saints in the findings on both continents as evidence of a corresponding belief in a hemispheric geography. It plainly is not. One can be “interested” in the findings throughout the hemisphere without necessarily concluding that everything found is related to the Book of Mormon.
Furthermore, the writer of the article makes it abundantly clear that no later than 1956, it was recognized that the ruins in Central and South America represented other cultures besides that referenced in the Book of Mormon.
Great find Allen. I’m sure the die-hard critics will continue to make insipid arguments like Zax does above — they can’t hardly help themselves. But the statement you’ve cited is quite clear in its import and should take its place among the many other evidences that Latter-day Saints have always been quite open-minded when it came to their interpretation of the geography of the BoM, and that they, no later than 1956, were cognizant that it didn’t speak of all the ancient inhabitants of the Americas.
I’m sorry if I gave the impression that LGT “falls out of the 1956 publication.” It doesn’t. And, in fact, it doesn’t have to since some of the other links I provided show that there were different LGT theories being formally introduced as early as 1907.
I said that the article jogged my memory concerning this fact (the fact that the theories have been around a long time).
Perhaps I could have expressed myself better.
-Allen
Actually I think you make some good points Allen.
There was in the early seventies a person publishing a book saying that Chile and north along the Andes were the book of Mormon lands. There was also the quote by Joseph Smith about finding Zarahemla among the Yucatan so even at that ave there was thoughts about a very limited area.
I personally agree however that there were those who thought the whole land was Nephite, Lamanite land but as time has gone on, long before the advent of DNA dating. It just seems those who are against the Book of Mormon have just cottoned onto the fact.
Hmmm… I’m not sure how else I am supposed to interpret the last line of your post, then:
“The bottom line? A 1956 official publication of the Church should go a long way to help critics understand that a limited geography theory that focuses on Mesoamerica should not be seen as a later development by apologists in response to Book of Mormon criticisms”
I don’t think this publication is going to do that.
The continuing attempts to justify an HGT model for BofM geography are at the minimum an attempt to bolster the accusation that there were no others present in the New World at the arrival of Lehi and his family. This argument is refuted by the history reported in the book of Ether. Jared and his brother brought 7 boatloads of immigrants to the New World. The book of Ether reports the fate of only one of these groups, the descendants of Jared and his brother. In addition we have no written record of other possible immigrations to the New World. There is ample evidence from the archaeological record that there were many seperate cultures present in the New World at the time of Lehi’s arrival. To ignore this fact and to suppose that the descendants of the Jaredites were all destroyed is a naive interpretation of the scriptures and should be placed in the same category as belief in a flat world.
Larry P
Dear people,
If would be foolish to say there were no other civilizations on the American Contenent. First Biblical scripture tells us squarely that God would bring the house of Israel to their own land.
Secondly, the Book of the Hebrew Historian Josephus, tells us many Iraelites left
Juerusalem, feeling they had been commanded by God to leave, even flee across the sea. That there were multiple groups who left the old land crossed the sea!
Our Bible says beyond the rivers of Etheopia….
(Book of Isaiah).
There is record in the New Testiment Paul among other deciples crossed the sea to that land, because he was invovled in a ship wreck…..
Jesus said, ” I come but for the Lost sheep of Israel ”
Jesus also said, “Other sheep I have not of this fold”
Of course there were other people besides Lehi and his family! There were many lost sheep….
Lastly the Book of Mormon confirms as Prophecied the bible, and the bible confirms the Book of Mormon.
The Book of Mormon tells of these people. Such as the Brother of Jared, who’m you’ve find in the Book of Genesis….
A Letter Written by JOSEPH SMITH (1842) Describing America’s Early Inhabitants
Hi There:
I just have to add my two cents. I’m so tired of the apologists trying to reason away the DNA evidence that Indian ancestors are descended from Asian rather than Israeli peoples;
that somehow the DNA has been lost down through the generations.; that the Nephites somehow lost their true DNA in the mix; that somehow members of the Church somehow got this doctrine mixed up. (As if it wasn’t preached to us over the pulpit by Presidents of the Church, Apostles, etc; that the Nephites resided mostly in Central of South America; that there were other peoples on this continent before the Jaredites were here. (When I say Nephites I mean both Nephites and Lamanites)
A while back one FAIRS apologist actually had the audacity to say that he could see how Joseph Smith could have got CONFUSED as to where the Nephites and Lamanites resided. And confused as to where the “REAL” Hill Cummorah was located.
Of course the Indians were in both North and South America – but the DNA just isn’t there to make them Israelites.
This Continent was PRESERVED for the Lord’s righteous people. It was NOT inhabited by other peoples – but SAVED for TWO civilizations. (Could get all the sources from the BOM, but anyone can look up.)
I have a letter that was written by JOSEPH SMITH to a Mr Wentworth, a newspaper editor in Chicago. This letter was published in the “Times and Seasons” in the March 1, 1842 issue. I think it was published in England in the “Millennial Star” but I don’t have that date.
But anyway JS begins his letter by telling where he was born and a little about his early life and describes his vision in the grove and his visits by an angel of God (Moroni, I assume, but doesn’t give that name).
Now to actual quotes from the letter: The capitals are mine.
“I was informed that I was chosen to be an instrument in the hands of God to bring about some of his purposes in this glorious dispensation. I was also informed concerning the ABORGINAL INHABITANTS OF this COUNTRY, and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people was made know unto me. I was also told where there was deposited some plates on which were engraven an abridgement of the records of the ancient prophets that had existed on this continent . . .”
“Through the medium of the Urim and Thummin I translated the record by the gift and power of God.”
“In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its FIRST SETTLEMENT by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the FIFTH CENTURY of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that AMERICA in ancient times has been inhabited by TWO DISTINCT RACES of people. The FIRST were called Jaredites and CAME DIRECTLY from the Tower of Babel. The SECOND RACE came DIRECTLY from the city of Jerusalem about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites WERE DESTROYED about the time the Israelites came from Jerusalem, WHO EXCEEDED THEM IN THE INHERITANCE OF THE COUNTRY. The PRINCIPAL NATION of the SECOND RACE fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The REMNANT ARE THE Indians THAT NOW INHABIT THIS COUNTRY.
, , ,”that the people were cut off in consequence of their transgressions; that the last of their prophets who existed among them was commanded to write an abridgement of their prophesies, history &c., and to hide it up in the earth, and that it should come forth and be united with the bible for the accomplishment of the purposes of God in the last days…”
What is enclosed in quotes is verbatim from the letter.
Now I know the apologists are going to hide behind the argument that Joseph wasn’t speaking from the pulpit or this info in this form wasn’t given to Mr Wentworth in a revelation.
There is plenty of scripture to back this letter in the Book of Mormon and in other Joseph Smith and other Presidents of the Church, etc writings.
The Indians being descended from the Israelites is just another “eternal truth” down the drain.
Mariah
Mariah said: This Continent was PRESERVED for the Lord’s righteous people. It was NOT inhabited by other peoples – but SAVED for TWO civilizations. (Could get all the sources from the BOM, but anyone can look up.)
Certainly, the land was preserved for the Lord’s righteous people, but certainly, there were people….you know, I was just about to debate with you, because of the DNA studies that have revealed that the vast majority of Native American descendants have Asian DNA besides the ones in North America who have Israeli DNA, but then I suppose that the Jaredites could have very well been of Asian descent. I’ve never read into theories concerning the Jaredites, but I suppose that could be a realistic possibility.
On the other hand, until proven otherwise, I also believe that there were other people besides the Nephites and Jaredites who were righteous people. Who’s to say that they weren’t lead into this land of promise?
I’m sure you already know this, but this land was not saved for only “two” civilizations, and the Lord never gives such a number in any revelations that I’m aware of. Besides that, “We” the American people are here, who bring the tally up to three(four actually, since the Lamanites were certainly a separate civilization).
Mariah also points out: In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its FIRST SETTLEMENT by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the FIFTH CENTURY of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that AMERICA in ancient times has been inhabited by TWO DISTINCT RACES of people. The FIRST were called Jaredites and CAME DIRECTLY from the Tower of Babel. The SECOND RACE came DIRECTLY from the city of Jerusalem about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites WERE DESTROYED about the time the Israelites came from Jerusalem, WHO EXCEEDED THEM IN THE INHERITANCE OF THE COUNTRY. The PRINCIPAL NATION of the SECOND RACE fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The REMNANT ARE THE Indians THAT NOW INHABIT THIS COUNTRY.
Mark: You’ve got Book of Mormon chronology down pat, but the Book of Mormon(At least the portion we have) doesn’t give a chronology for the entire world, and it certainly doesn’t give an entire chronology of all the events and happenings that have ever occurred on the American continent. So the idea, which seems implied(I apologize if this isn’t what you intended to write), that Jaredites were the first people here, and the family of Lehi second is speculative at best. We won’t know who was first second or fourth until we have a complete American History guide in its pure, full length, unadulterated form.
I actually think that the Book of Mormon is likely to have taken place on what is now the Eastern United States. Rod Meldrum has put up a case with regard to the theory and I believe there’s truth to it. There’s definitely been some sharp disagreement, and I can see good and fault from both sides of the aisle.
Fair presents some insights into information that was omitted by Brother Rodney in his DVD presentation. One example is the article regarding movement of the Eurasians to America, and how such a movement would have likely taken place 12,500 years ago. I disagree with this statement, since I think the earth has been organized for six thousand years(though the matter may be far, far older), so I’m not finding myself at odds with Brother Meldrum, though he did omit this information.
I do disagree however, with the notion that finding DNA evidence of Lehi’s DNA, Israeli DNA in particular is a faulty expectation. D&C 19″:27 states that the Lamanites are a remnant of the Jews, and I’m pretty sure that God promised that a remnant of Lehi’s seed would remain on the land, so the DNA is going to be there.
I do have to do more research, but I’m still leaning towards Rod Meldrum’s theory.
Mark,
When you say “I’m pretty sure that God promised a remnant of Lehi’s seed would remain on the land, so the DNA is going to be there,” you are drawing a false conclusion.
I, too, agree that a remnant will be there. (Actually, I believe the remnant *is* there.) I don’t, however, believe that we can conclude from that belief that we will be able to detect DNA that somehow proves where that group is located.
First, we don’t know what the original DNA looked like, so we can’t know exactly what we should be looking for now. Second, we can only test for mtDNA, which tests *only* the outside edge of the family tree. Third, because we can only test that outside edge then the bottleneck effect will have a profound effect on anything we can detect this many years later. Fourth, it is unreasonable to expect to find DNA from a small group inserted into a much larger population.
Too many problems for the expectation of finding conclusive DNA to be reasonable.
-Allen
Granted, I believe the surrounding populations exceeded the Lamanites in numbers, the Lamanites probably didn’t marry within the covenant, but there were so many of them that lived over a thousand year period that I’m lead to believe otherwise. On this point I think we all speculate, since DNA studies seem to be a type of research that requires time to become more refined.