historicity of the Book of Mormon
 |
| Books of the Book of Mormon |
The question of whether the Book of Mormon is an actual historical work or a work of fiction has long been a source of contention between between members of the Latter Day Saint movement, who are likely to view the work as a history, and secular scholars, who virtually all reject its historicity. Beginning in the late 20th century, many believing Latter Day Saint scholars, and some denominations such as the Community of Christ, have treated the work as possibly inspired fiction.
For many Saints, the Book of Mormon historicity is a matter of faith, and not amenable to scholarly analysis. For scholars, on the other hand, the historicity issue has been approached from a number of different perspectives.
Latter Day Saint views
The dominant and widely accepted view among Latter Day Saints is that the Book of Mormon is a true and accurate account of three ancient American civilizations whose history it documents. Joseph Smith stated, “I told the brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.”[1] Mormon church leaders have emphasized that the Book of Mormon is a divine work of a spiritual nature, and its purpose is to teach of Christ; and that it was not written to be taken as a historical, geological, archaeological, or anthropological guide.[2]
LDS apologists
LDS apologists point to the rich available history of the several major civilizations in Mesoamerica in the Book of Mormon time period (Olmec, Maya, Mixtec, and Zapotec) where there is ample archaeological data and some recorded history. Some of these were very advanced in writing, mathematics and astronomy. Furthermore, ample evidence has been uncovered of the types of plants, animals and implements available to the early inhabitants. The Book of Mormon makes multiple references to plants, animals, weapons and technology, many of which do not match current knowledge concerning that time period.
Geography
- See also: Limited geography model (Book of Mormon)
Since the time of its publication, some Latter Day Saints have viewed and explained the Book of Mormon as a comprehensive history of all Native Americans;[3] this understanding of the Book of Mormon is referred to as the "hemispheric model." However, other Latter Day Saints believe that the hemispheric model is an assumption not supported by a close reading of the text. B.H. Roberts states the inadequacy of the hemispheric model in Studies of the Book of Mormon:
[C]ould the people of Mulek and of Lehi...part of the time numbering and occupying the land at least from Yucatan to Cumorah...live and move and have their being in the land of America and not come in contact with other races and tribes of men, if such existed in the New World within Book of Mormon times? To make this seem possible the area occupied by the Nephites and Lamanites would have to be extremely limited, much more limited, I fear, than the Book of Mormon would admit our assuming.[4]
The locations of the cities mentioned in the Book of Mormon have not been identified to date. Several groups of Mormon scholars and apologists, including the Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research (FAIR) and the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), have proposed that the city Zarahemla is located somewhere within Central America because of the description given in Alma 22:27 as a narrow neck of land bordering sea on the west and on the east. This approach, often referred to as the "Limited Geography Model," argues for a more limited view of the Book of Mormon, suggesting that the book is a history of only a small group of Native Americans in Central America. This theory has been gaining substantial support since the mid-1980s because it more accurately represents the descriptions given within the text itself. For instance, the populations and civilizations described in the Book of Mormon were likely too small (only a few millions) to fill entire continents; moreover, there is much evidence that one common assumption of the past—that Book of Mormon civilizations were alone in America—is probably incorrect. Most LDS authors hold the belief that the Book of Mormon events took place within a limited region in Mesoamerica, and that others were present on the continent at the time of Lehi's arrival.[5] This geographical and population model was formally published in the official church magazine, The Ensign, in a two-part series published in September and October 1984.[6] This was followed by a book on the subject by LDS anthropologist John L. Sorenson in 1985.[7]
The introduction page to the Book of Mormon states that those who desire may gain a knowledge of its truth through asking God.[8]. This could be considered the official stance on determining historicity.
Archaeology
Discussion regarding the historicity of the Book of Mormon often focuses on archaeological issues, some of which relate to the large size and the long time span of Book of Mormon civilizations. The civilizations described in the Book of Mormon have been compared to other ancient civilizations in terms of size and span. These civilizations, including Ancient Egypt, Ancient Greece, and Ancient Rome have very developed archaeological records and have received much more attention from the archaeological community than Mesoamerican civilizations. Critics believe that insufficient evidence in the pre-Columbian archaeological record for horses, cattle, swine, goats, wheat, steel swords, possibly wheeled chariots and other elements mentioned in the Book of Mormon casts doubt on the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. Supporters of the Book of Mormon believe that a variety of evidence exists that supports the historicity of the Book of Mormon, including plausible locations for Nahom, Bountiful, the Valley of Lemuel, the hill Cumorah/Ramah, the River Sidon, the "stretch of wilderness", the "narrow stretch of land" and some cities; silk, weights and measures, and names with possible Hebrew or Egyptian roots.
Some scholars have said that Mesoamerican archeology is a young field and that more evidence relevant to these and other issues may eventually surface. Archaeological evidence is perceived by some as ambiguous. For instance, although horses lived in the ancient Americas, they are generally thought to have gone extinct long before the time of the Book of Mormon (see Horses in the Book of Mormon). This has been interpreted as evidence against the Book of Mormon by critics, but is not seen as a problem by LDS scholars.[9] Some LDS scholars have said that terms such as "horse," "steel," and "chariot" in the Book of Mormon might be the product of "naming by analogy," where Lehi's group gave Old World names to things which were similar to Old World concepts. Robert R. Bennett writes, "this practice, known as "loanshift" or "loan-extension," is well known to historians and anthropologists who study cross-cultural contact."[10]
LDS-funded archeology
In 1951 Thomas Ferguson, a LDS member, petitioned Mormon President David O. McKay to financially back the founding of the New World Archaeological Foundation (hereafter NWAF). Ferguson requested at first a five year grant to dig throughout Mesoamerica for evidence of the veracity of the Book of Mormon claims. His petition was granted and the first five years were funded from 1955 to 1959.
In a 1961 newsletter Ferguson predicted that although nothing had been found, the Book of Mormon cities would be found within 10 years. In 1972, Christian scholar Hal Hougey wrote Ferguson questioning the progress given the stated timetable in which the cities would be found.[11] Replying to Hougey as well as secular and non-secular requests, Ferguson wrote in a letter dated 5 June 1972: "Ten years have passed... I had sincerely hoped that Book-of-Mormon cities would be positively identified within 10 years — and time has proved me wrong in my anticipation."[12]
During the period of 1959-1961, NWAF colleague Dee Green was editor of the BYU Archaeological Society Newsletter and had an article from it published in the summer of 1969 edition of Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, pp 76-78 in which he acknowledged that the NWAF findings did not back up the veracity of the Book of Mormon claims. After this article and another six years of fruitless search, Thomas Ferguson published a 29 page paper in 1975 entitled Written Symposium on Book-of-Mormon Geography: Response of Thomas S. Ferguson to the Norman & Sorenson Papers. The full text will be omitted here, but he summed up as thus on page 29: "I'm afraid that up to this point, I must agree with Dee Green, who has told us that to date there is no Book-of-Mormon geography...". In referring to his own paper, Ferguson wrote a 20 February 1976 letter to Mr & Mrs H.W. Lawrence in which he stated: "...The real implication of the paper is that you can't set the Book-of-Mormon geography down anywhere — because it is fictional and will never meet the requirements of the dirt-archeology. I should say — what is in the ground will never conform to what is in the book."[13]
The archaeological investigations of NWAF-sponsored projects have contributed towards the documentation and understanding of pre-Columbian societies, particularly in Mesoamerica. Currently BYU maintains 86 documents on the work of the NWAF at the BYU NWAF website and these documents are used outside both BYU and the LDS church by researchers.
Linguistics
An additional criticism concerns linguistics. The Nephites and the Lamanites initially spoke in Hebrew (600 BC), and might have spoken a modified Semitic language up to at least AD 400, where the Book of Mormon stops. [14] However, no Semitic language is spoken natively in the Americas today. Some linguists argue that the 1,000 years after the end of the period covered in the Book of Mormon do not suffice to account for the difference among Native American languages nor for their complete distance from Semitic languages. A common counterargument is that the Book of Mormon mentions contact with other civilizations[15] with their own non-Semitic languages that might have influenced or supplanted any Semitic language being spoken. In addition, an introductory heading added to the Book of Mormon in 1981 states that the peoples mentioned therein are the primary ancestors of the Native Americans; it does not conclude that they are the sole ancestors.[16] A commonly discussed linguistic feature that some scholars believe might indicate Semitic origins of the Book of Mormon is the presence of an ancient literary pattern called chiasmus. Chiasmus is a poetical or rhetorical form used by many languages, including Sumero-Akkadian [Sumeria, Assyria, Babylon], Ugaritic [Syrian area circa. 2000 BC], Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, the Talmud, the New Testament, Greek, Latin and English, among others. It is a form of parallelism, in which related or contrasting ideas are placed in juxtaposition for emphasis. [17] Mosiah 3: 18-19, Alma 31: 13-14, and the entire chapter of Alma 36 are said to display the literary properties of chiasmus.
Martin Harris, an early acquaintance of Joseph Smith, claimed to have carried a sample of writing taken from the Book of Mormon to Charles Anthon who, according to Harris, was able to translate the writings. Martin Harris wrote:
"I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters. He gave me a certificate, certifying to the people of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the translation of such of them as had been translated was also correct. I took the certificate and put it into my pocket, and was just leaving the house, when Mr. Anthon called me back, and asked me how the young man found out that there were gold plates in the place where he found them. I answered that an angel of God had revealed it unto him.
"He then said to me, 'Let me see that certificate.' I accordingly took it out of my pocket and gave it to him, when he took it and tore it to pieces, saying that there was no such thing now as ministering of angels, and that if I would bring the plates to him he would translate them. I informed him that part of the plates were sealed, and that I was forbidden to bring them. He replied, 'I cannot read a sealed book.' I left him and went to Dr. Mitchell, who sanctioned what Professor Anthon had said respecting both the characters and the translation." [18]
Anthon's version of the tale, as related in a letter written to one of his colleagues in 1834, contradicts Martin Harris' telling:
"The whole story about my having pronounced the Mormonite inscription to be "reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics" is perfectly false. Some years ago, a plain, and apparently simple-hearted farmer, called upon me with a note from Dr. Mitchell of our city, now deceased, requesting me to decypher, if possible, a paper, which the farmer would hand me, and which Dr. M. confessed he had been unable to understand. Upon examining the paper in question, I soon came to the conclusion that it was all a trick, perhaps a hoax. When I asked the person, who brought it, how he obtained the writing, he gave me, as far as I can now recollect, the following account:...
"... On hearing this odd story, I changed my opinion about the paper, and, instead of viewing it any longer as a hoax upon the learned, I began to regard it as part of a scheme to cheat the farmer of his money, and I communicated my suspicions to him, warning him to beware of rogues...
"... I have frequently conversed with my friends on the subject, since the Mormonite excitement began, and well remember that the paper contained any thing else but "Egyptian Hieroglyphics." Some time after, the same farmer paid me a second visit. He brought with him the golden book in print, and offered it to me for sale. I declined purchasing. He then asked permission to leave the book with me for examination. I declined receiving it, although his manner was strangely urgent. I adverted once more to the roguery which had been in my opinion practised upon him...[19]
Population genetics
The Book of Mormon tells of the people of Jared, consisting of several families from the Tower of Babel, who migrated to America from the Old World before Abraham's time; a group including Lehi's family who migrated to America from Jerusalem around 600 BC; and another group (the people of Mulek) who migrated to America from Jerusalem about 8 years later. Although The Book of Mormon makes no overt assertions regarding the migration or non-migration of other groups to America, an introductory paragraph added to the 1981 edition identifies the Lamanites as the "principal ancestors of the American Indians."[20]
Many people have examined existing genetic data in order to determine its relationship to the people described in the Book of Mormon. Several studies have been performed in which DNA from modern indigenous Americans has been examined in an attempt to determine Native American origins. Several authors have published works that suggest that current studies of genetic anthropology using DNA evidence do not provide support for the Book of Mormon.[21][22] Other researchers warn against using genetics to attempt to prove or disprove the historicity of the Book of Mormon, citing a lack of source genes and the improbability of tracing Israelite DNA even if present.[23][24]
Smithsonian Institution statement on the Book of Mormon
The Smithsonian Institution issues a standard reply to requests for their opinion regarding the Book of Mormon as an archaeological or scientific guide, stating that "physical type of American Indians is basically mongoloid".[25] In 1998, the Smithsonian stated that its stance did not change, and issued shorter letter without detailed response (which is found in the first letter) and limited its comment to briefly deny any use of the Book of Mormon as an archaeological guide by the institution.[26]
Notes
- ^ From the Book of Mormon: Introduction
- ^ See, for example, James E. Faust, “The Keystone of Our Religion,” Ensign, January 2004, 3
- ^ Mauss 2003
- ^ Roberts 1985, p. 93
- ^ Smith 1997, p. 264
- ^ Sorenson, John L (Sept. 1984). "Digging into the Book of Mormon:Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture (Part 1)". Ensign: 27. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Retrieved on 2007-01-11. Sorenson, John L (Oct. 1984). "Digging into the Book of Mormon:Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture (Part 2)". Ensign. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Retrieved on 2007-01-21.
- ^ Sorenson 1985
- ^ see Book of Mormon Introduction ; see also Moroni 10:3-5
- ^ One item pointed out by Mormon scholars is the lack of evidence for specific animals known to have existed in other ancient societies. One example cited is the apparent lack of evidence for the existence of horses in ancient Mongolia, despite that fact that it is widely accepted that they existed in large numbers.
- ^ See Horses in the Book of Mormon by Robert R. Bennett under "Naming by Analogy"
- ^ Harold H. Hougey, Letter to Thomas Stuart Ferguson, 20 May 1972, University of Utah as quoted in Stan Larson, "The Odyssey of Thomas Stuart Ferguson", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1990, p. 76
- ^ Thomas Stuart Ferguson, Letter to Harold H. Hougey, 5 June 1972, University of Utah as quoted in Stan Larson, "The Odyssey of Thomas Stuart Ferguson", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1990, p. 76
- ^ Thomas Stuart Ferguson, Letter to Mr. and Mrs. Harold W. Lawrence, 20 February 1976b, University of Utah as quoted in Stan Larson, "The Odyssey of Thomas Stuart Ferguson", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Spring 1990, p. 79. See image copy of the letter
- ^ Linguistics and the Book of Mormon
- ^ Omni 1:12-18, Mosiah 24:1-4
- ^ The original 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon does not make this claim.
- ^ http://www.chiasmus.com/whatischiasmus.shtml
- ^ http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/64-65#64 Martin Harris's account of the circumstances.
- ^ Letter from Charles Anthon to E. D. Howe, 17 February 1834, as printed in B. H. Roberts, ed., A Comprehensive History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Provo, Utah: BYU Press, 1965), 1:100–101.
- ^ See the Introduction to the Book of Mormon
- ^ One of the more vocal challengers to the DNA vs. The Book of Mormon issue is Dr. Thomas W. Murphy.
- ^ Southerton 2004
- ^ Geneticists have noted the difficulties in using genetics in this area for a variety of reasons. Some of these are our lack of knowledge concerning Sariah's descent (or others' in Lehi's party), have access to DNA from this period (600 BC Israel), or know what other groups would have intermarried with these groups (or in what numbers). For more information see Whiting, Michael F (2003). "DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective". Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12 (1): 24-35. Maxwell Institute. Retrieved on 2007-01-19.
- ^ Not having the ancient Israelite gene for comparison and the inability for DNA testing to link some Jewish groups that are known to be related, see Butler, John M (2006). "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research". FARMS Review 18 (1): 101-108. Maxwell Institute. Retrieved on 2007-01-19. .
- ^ missingauthor. Smithsonian Institution statement on the Book of Mormon.
- ^ Jeff Lindsay. [http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/smithsonian.shtml#update The Smithsonian Institution's 1996 "Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon"].
References
- Brewster, Quinn (1996), "The Structure of the Book of Mormon: A Theory of Evolutionary Development", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 29 (2): 109–140, <http://content.lib.utah.edu/cgi-bin/docviewer.exe?CISOROOT=/dialogue&CISOPTR=11460&CISOSHOW=11376>.
- Brodie, Fawn M (1971), written at New York, No Man Knows My History, Knopf, ISBN 0679730540.
- Bushman, Richard L (2005), written at New York, Joseph Smith: Rough Stone Rolling, Alfred Knopf, ISBN 1-4000-4270-4.
- Dunn, Scott C (May 2002), written at Salt Lake City, Utah, "Automaticity and the Dictation of the Book of Mormon", American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon (Signature Books): 17-46, ISBN 1560851511.
- Faulring, Scott H (June 2000), written at Provo, Utah, "The Return of Oliver Cowdery", The Disciple as Witness: Essays on Latter-day Saint History and Doctrine in Honor of Richard Lloyd Anderson (Maxwell Institute), <http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=50>. Retrieved on 2007-05-19.
- Givens, Terryl (2002), By the Hand of Mormon: The American Scripture That Launched a New World Religion, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-516888-7.
- Howe, Eber D (1834), written at Painesville, Ohio, Mormonism Unvailed, Telegraph Press, <http://www.solomonspalding.com/docs/1834howb.htm>.
- Jessee, Dean C. (1970), "The Original Book of Mormon Manuscript", BYU Studies 10 (3): 259–278, <https://byustudies.byu.edu/shop/PDFfiles/10.3Jessee.pdf>.
- Mauss, Armand L (2003), written at Illinois, All Abraham's Children: Changing Mormon Conceptions of Race and Lineage, University of Illinois Press, ISBN 0-252-02803-1.
- Midgley, Louis C (1997), written at Provo, Utah, Reynolds, Noel B, ed., "Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon?: The Critics and Their Theories", Book of Mormon Authorship Revisited: The Evidence for Ancient Origins (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies): 101-139, ISBN 093489325X, <http://www.farmsresearch.com/publications/bookschapter.php?bookid=41&chapid=184>.
- Persuitte, David (October 2000), Joseph Smith and the Origins of The Book of Mormon (second edition ed.), McFarland & Company, ISBN 0-7864-0826-X.
- Price, Robert M (Fall 2002), "Prophecy and Palimpsest", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 35 (3), <http://content.lib.utah.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=%2Fdialogue&CISOPTR=29050&REC=15&CISOBOX=%22inspired+fiction%22>. Retrieved on 2007-04-30.
- Roberts, Brigham H (1985), written at Urbana, Illinois, Brigham D. Madsen, ed., Studies of the Book of Mormon, University of Illinois Press, ISBN 0252010434.
- Skousen, Royal (May 2001), written at Provo, Utah, "The Original Manuscript of the Book of Mormon: Typographical Facsimile of the Extant Text", Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies) 1, ISBN 0934893047.
- Skousen, Royal (January 2001), written at Provo, Utah, "The Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon : typographical facsimile of the entire text in two parts", Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Brigham Young University) 2 (1), ISBN 0934893055.
- Skousen, Royal (March 2001), written at Provo, Utah, "The Printer’s Manuscript of the Book of Mormon : typographical facsimile of the entire text in two parts", Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Brigham Young University) 2 (2), ISBN 0934893063.
- Skousen, Royal (2004), written at Provo, Utah, "Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon", Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Brigham Young University) 4 (1), ISBN 0934893071.
- Skousen, Royal Skousen (2005), written at Provo, Utah, "Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon", Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Brigham Young University) 4 (2), ISBN 093489308X.
- Skousen, Royal (2006), written at Provo, Utah, "Analysis of Textual Variants of the Book of Mormon", Book of Mormon Critical Text Project (Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, Brigham Young University) 4 (3), ISBN 093489311X.
- Smith, James E (1997), Noel B. Reynolds, ed., "How Many Nephites?: The Book of Mormon at the Bar of Demography", Book of Mormon Authorship Revisited (Deseret Book Company and Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies), ISBN 0-934893-25-X, <http://www.farmsresearch.com/publications/bookschapter.php?bookid=41&chapid=190>.
- Sorenson, John L (1985), written at Salt Lake City, Utah, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, Deseret Book and The Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, ISBN 0-87747-608-X.
- Southerton, Simon G (2004), written at Salt Lake City, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA and the Mormon Church, Signature Books, ISBN 1-56085-181-3.
- Spaulding, Solomon (1996), written at Provo, Utah, Reeve, Rex C, ed., Manuscript Found: The Complete Original "Spaulding" Manuscript, Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University.
- Tvedtnes, John A (1984), written at Provo, Utah, "Isaiah Variants in the Book of Mormon", Featured Papers (Maxwell Institute), <http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?id=2&table=transcripts>. Retrieved on 2007-04-16.
- Vogel, Dan (2004), written at Salt Lake City, Joseph Smith: The Making of a Prophet, Signature Books, ISBN 1-56085-179-1.
| The Latter Day Saint movement | ||
|---|---|---|
| The Latter Day Saint movement |
Mormonism · Latter Day Saint · Mormonism and Christianity · Latter Day Saint Denominations |
 |
| History | ||
| Sacred texts | ||
| Founders and early sect leaders | ||
| Doctrines, beliefs and practices | ||
| Controversies | ||
| See also Latter Day Saints Portal – Category Mormonism | ||
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
