I think the Book of Mosiah eloquently makes my point that the Nephites broke their covenant with the Lord, and it occured during the reign of wicked King Noah.

Recall that, when the Lord Jesus Christ restored the Nephite inheritance, He combined all those who were repentant/righteous into the Nephite nation.

I will read your article in the near future. If I find that you are persuasive, I will say so.

But I make no promises!

Meanwhile, let us join together in the knowledge that the Book of Mormon and Gospel are both truly of God!

Obviously it is not obvious to you that the Lord’s covenant with Lehi (2 Nephi 1:9) was still in force at the coming of Christ. Let me see if I can help you.

2 Ne 1:10-11
“10 But behold, when the time cometh that they shall dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings from the hand of the Lord–having a knowledge of the creation of the earth, and all men, knowing the great and marvelous works of the Lord from the creation of the world; having power given them to do all things by faith; having all the commandments from the beginning, and having been brought by his infinite goodness into this precious land of promise–behold, I say, if the day shall come that they will reject the Holy One of Israel, the true Messiah, their Redeemer and their God, behold, the judgments of him that is just shall rest upon them.
11 Yea, he will bring other nations unto them, and he will give unto them power, and he will take away from them the lands of their possessions, and he will cause them to be scattered and smitten.”

The covenant would not be voided unit after the Nephites:

1. Had a knowledge of the creation of the earth, and of all men
2. Knowing the great and marvelous works of the Lord from the creation of the world
3. Having power given to them to do all things by faith
4. Having all the commandments from the beginning

These things were not given to the Nephites until Christ came and revealed them.

3 Nephi 26:1,3
“AND now it came to pass that when Jesus had told these things he expounded them unto the multitude; and he did expound all things unto them, both great and small…And he did expound all things, even from the beginning until the time that he should come in his glory–yea, even all things which should come upon the face of the earth, even until the elements should melt with fervent heat, and the earth should be wrapt together as a scroll, and the heavens and the earth should pass away;”

This stuff has not even been given to us as yet. Mormon was going to write them but the Lord told him not to. The Lord would try our faith first and if we would not believe the things Mormon would write then the greater things would be withheld (3 Nephi 26:8-12). These things are also on the sealed portion of the plates given to Joseph Smith as written by Moroni from the plates of Ether (Ether 4:1-7). Mosiah kept them from the Nephites until after the coming of Christ.

“And after Christ truly had showed himself unto his people he commanded that they should be made manifest. (Ether 4:2)

The covenant had to have been in force until after the coming of Christ, and then for at least another 165 years.

Incidentally, I came across another scripture today that also affirms there were no “others” up until the days of King Benjamin.

“And moreover, I shall give this people a name, that thereby they may be distinguished above all the people which the Lord God hath brought out of the land of Jerusalem…” (Mosiah 1:11).

If there were others, King Benjamin would have had to word this differently (or give the Nephites another name by which they could be distinguished from the “others.” )

**But, even if the weather were right, the geography doesn’t mesh with the Book of Mormon text. **

According to whom? For further enlightenment on this subject you can check out “A North American Setting For The Book Of Mormon” by yours truly.

http://brandley.poulsenll.org/files/A_North_American_Setting_For_The_Book_Of_Mormon.doc

Or just use: http://brandley.poulsenll.org.

Larry Poulsen has just gracioulsy put it up on his website. It’s about 20 MB file so give it a little time to download.

Brother Theodore

You said:
**In reference to the question you raise about when the covenant with Lehi may have been broken, the Nephites had one of the most righteous and perfect societies ever recorded for 165 years after the visitation of Christ.**

But that was *after* Christ’s visit to the New World. Moreover, it was His government–not Lehi’s or Nephi’s.

**Obviously the covenant had not been broken prior to that time.**

No, it is NOT obvious. In fact, it doesn’t even follow.

The era of good feeling and righteousness mentioned in IV Nephi was a restoration of blessings, rather than a continuation of the same Nephite government that varied from good to evil.

**I agree that the “Hemispheric Theory” does not require other peoples, but I think that the “Limited Geography Theory” does require “others” because of the ample evidence that much of the continent was covered with people during the Nephite period.**

Actually, it was the land that was covered. See Helaman 11:20 and Mormon 1:7. If the Nephite land was limited, then it is unnecessary for the land to be occupied by others.

Now, I believe that others did occupy the Western Hemisphere, but it isn’t because the LGT demands it.

**Loin cloths would be OK in Louisiana (Zarahemla?) or in Georgia (Bountiful?) in April. **

I modern times, probably. We’re at our warmest since the “Medieval Optimum,” when Greenland was actually green. Prior to that (in antiquity), cold weather was not uncommon, even in April.

But, even if the weather were right, the geography doesn’t mesh with the Book of Mormon text.

In reference to the question you raise about when the covenant with Lehi may have been broken, the Nephites had one of the most righteous and perfect societies ever recorded for 165 years after the visitation of Christ. Obviously the covenant had not been broken prior to that time.

I agree that the “Hemispheric Theory” does not require other peoples, but I think that the “Limited Geography Theory” does require “others” because of the ample evidence that much of the continent was covered with people during the Nephite period.

Loin cloths would be OK in Louisiana (Zarahemla?) or in Georgia (Bountiful?) in April.

**Excellent!! We have some great common ground and our different opinions are centered on the understanding of who “they and “themselves” are referring to in the Lord’s covenant with Lehi.**

We’ve ALWAYS have had common ground: We both believe the Book of Mormon to be authentic; and we both believe that the Nephites numbered what the text says it does. Where we differ is with the mechanics of the population growth, and who is a Nephite.

**Let’s have another look at the covenant:

2 Nephi 1:9
“Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves…”

According to the grammatical rules of English, in this sentence and context the pronouns “they” and “themselves” can only refer to the people previously identified—that is, “those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem.”**

They are the main ones, yes. The verse could also be referring to the culture. For example, in the Old Testament, Israelites who have never been anywhere near the Middle East are considered part of the Chosen People, whereas Canaanites who lived in the land aren’t.

Moreover, the USA could be considered part of the “Anglosphere,” even though most Americans are not of English descent.

**Your analogies and efforts to make “they” and “themselves” inclusive of many others, from who knows where, are commendable but nevertheless wrong, in my opinion.**

And your exclusion is likewise wrong–in MY opinion!

It is certain that one or both of us is wrong. Thus far, I am unconvinced by your reasoning–as you are by mine.

Maybe some day, enough evidence will crop up to convince one or both of us to move from our position, though, it seems, I am less wedded to my view, as it is a suggested POSSIBLE way that the Nephite number could add up to the Book of Mormon figures. I do think, however, that my view is, at present, the most plausible candidate.

**The covenant specifically excludes anyone who did not come out of Jerusalem.**

But that is what the text does NOT say.

Just as illustrated in the Bible [Romans 8:15-17; Galatians 4:5-7], Gentiles who are baptised are Israelites by adoption. Likewise, outsiders who wilfully join the Nephites and live the Gospel are actually Nephites by adoption–and are heir to everything the Nephites by birth are [Mosiah 5:7].

**The Lord ties his own hands with this covenant, until such time as those from Jerusalem stop keeping His commandments. The covenant has then been broken and the Lord is free to bring in people from “other nations” as He sees fit.**

Since most Nephites were NOT living the Gospel from early on, it seems that the Lord’s hands got UNTIED fairly quickly!

More seriously, Daniel’s and others’ righteousness obviously didn’t keep the Lord from executing judgment against Jerusalem! As you see, even when Jerusalem fell, some of those in the city WERE keeping the commandments.

**I suspect that your determination to read “others” into the text stems from your belief in the “Limited Geography Theory,” which requires that there be “others” on the North American Continent during the Nephite period. As I do not believe in the LGT my reading of the text is not influenced by it. The LGT complicates a lot of things. **

Actually, neither the “Limited Geography Theory” nor the “Hemispheric Theory” REQUIRES other peoples–nor are they prohibited by either theory.

Strictly speaking, I am not a believer in either theory, because both fail to explain some of the textual and other evidences. However, I think that the truth lies in some hybrid of the two.

As an aside, I think that the “Great Lakes Theory,” which has sprung up again in recent times, is even MORE out of line with textual and other evidences. I grew up in the Great Lakes region (If you must know, I grew up in “Chicagoland.” Go Cubs! ), and I can tell you that neither January nor April (the usual candidates for the first month of the year!) are warm enough for people to go around wearing loin cloths outdoors–at least not until the Medieval Warm Period, some six centuries after the end of Nephite civilisation!

Pax!

Excellent!! We have some great common ground and our different opinions are centered on the understanding of who “they and “themselves” are referring to in the Lord’s covenant with Lehi. Let’s have another look at the covenant:

2 Nephi 1:9
“Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves…”

According to the grammatical rules of English, in this sentence and context the pronouns “they” and “themselves” can only refer to the people previously identified—that is, “those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem.”

Your analogies and efforts to make “they” and “themselves” inclusive of many others, from who knows where, are commendable but nevertheless wrong, in my opinion. The covenant specifically excludes anyone who did not come out of Jerusalem. The Lord ties his own hands with this covenant, until such time as those from Jerusalem stop keeping His commandments. The covenant has then been broken and the Lord is free to bring in people from “other nations” as He sees fit, as we read in the subsequent verses:

2 Nephi 1:10-11
10 But behold, when the time cometh that they shall dwindle in unbelief, after they have received so great blessings from the hand of the Lord–having a knowledge of the creation of the earth, and all men, knowing the great and marvelous works of the Lord from the creation of the world; having power given them to do all things by faith; having all the commandments from the beginning, and having been brought by his infinite goodness into this precious land of promise–behold, I say, if the day shall come that they will reject the Holy One of Israel, the true Messiah, their Redeemer and their God, behold, the judgments of him that is just shall rest upon them.
11 Yea, [then] he will bring other nations unto them, and he will give unto them power, and he will take away from them the lands of their possessions, and he will cause them to be scattered and smitten.

I suspect that your determination to read “others” into the text stems from your belief in the “Limited Geography Theory,” which requires that there be “others” on the North American Continent during the Nephite period. As I do not believe in the LGT my reading of the text is not influenced by it. The LGT complicates a lot of things.

Shalom

Theodore

You said, “Your Dade County analogy adds a little humor into the discussion….”

Thank you! I’m glad you caught the humour!

You said about II Nephi 1:8-9: “‘Cubans’ and the ‘Mexicans’ would be ‘kept from’ the Jerusalemites and wouldn’t be able to immigrate to them. Just like America was ‘kept from’ the Europeans.”

I disagree with your understanding. The “other nations” in I and II Nephi–at least as I read it–would be their Middle Eastern neighbours. If the Lord had meant EVERY other people, Book of Mormon statements to the effect of the Lord leading other peoples to the American continent could be fatally compromised–as I stated in my article.

You quote II Nephi 1:8: “‘And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.’”

But people emmigrating from a country are no longer part of that country. One my ancestor left Sweden and became an American citizen, he was no longer a Swede. And his American-born children were no more Swedes than, say, President Monson.

You say, “2. ‘…those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem…. possess this land unto themselves.’ ‘Themselves’ excludes anyone who did not come from Jerusalem.”

Not necessarily. Any group of “them” can allow whomever they please as part of “them”–much as the Church permitted me–who was born into a non-LDS family–to become LDS. The Priesthood, Church buildings and other property owned by the Latter-day Saints are just as much owned by me as by a life-long Latter-day Saint.

Unless, of course, you’re claiming that, because I was born a “Gentile,” I am not really a Latter-day Saint, and thus ineligible to be a member of the Bishopric, or to hold any other calling.

You said, “We have no idea what peoples came here during the thousand years between the Nephites and Columbus, so ‘pre-Columbian’ DNA samples may not be evidence of others during the Nephite period.”

That is true. We also have no idea what peoples came here during the Nephite civilisation’s existence.

You continue: “As to the DNA being non-Semitic, how do we know what the Lehite/Mulekite DNA looked like 2600 years ago? This is a complex subject beyond my understanding….”

My training is in economics, finance, international business, and in statistics. I’m no expert, either!

I’m not categorically insisting on the presence of non-Lehite/Jaredite immigrants to this hemisphere. Rather, I’m just stating that this is most probable (I could, of course, be wrong! ). On the other hand, you are insisting that there are no such immigrants. To me, this gives no place for the possibility of error, either in their understanding of God’s explanation (which the Nephites freely admit could happen–in the title page of the Book of Mormon!), or in yours.

You said: “You mentioned evidence of ancient Bering Strait migration to America. You have probably read the article, DNA and the Book of Mormon, by Dr. David Stewart.”

Indeed, I have. He is a respected colleague, and I consider him both a friend and a brother in Christ. However, this does not mean we don’t have differences in opinion. We have spent some time discussing many of those differences, and I like to think that I contributed to making his papers stronger, even if I am unconvinced of some of his points–as he is, no doubt, unconvinced of some of mine.

You say, “Anyway, the difference in our conclusions comes from the fact that you begin with the belief and premise that there were others here in America when Lehi arrived, and then you search for evidence in the Book of Mormon to support that premise.”

Actually, no. I began with the assumption that, because God had shown me the authenticity of the Book of Mormon, the numbers mentioned therein are largely accurate, though possibly not in a way that one might think. Moreover, I realised that the statistical analysis by anti-Mormons such as http://www.josephlied.com was deeply flawed (I’m not sure of your training, but I AM sure you’d agree with my conclusions. ). I then did a socio-economic analysis of the text for clues of how such numbers might be possible. Of course, my conclusions are my “judgment call” of what was most likely.

You conclude: “I begin with the Lord’s promise to Lehi that they would ‘possess this land unto themselves’ and then search for evidence that would contradict the promise. I haven’t found any.”

Neither have I. However, I’m aware of no faithful Latter-day Saint (Certainly not I!) who claims that the Lord’s promises were contradicted.

Your Dade County analogy adds a little humor into the discussion but I do not think it is applicable to II Nephi 1:9 for two reasons.

1. “…those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem…shall be kept from all other nations.” That means that the “Cubans” and the “Mexicans” would be “kept from” the Jerusalemites and wouldn’t be able to immigrate to them. Just like America was “kept from” the Europeans. Verse 8 reinforces this interpretation:

“And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.

If there were “Cubans and Mexicans” here when the Jerusalemites arrived they would be “other nations” (as in “First Nations?”):-).

2. “…those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem…. possess this land unto themselves. “Themselves” excludes anyone who did not come from Jerusalem.

We have no idea what peoples came here during the thousand years between the Nephites and Columbus, so “pre-Columbian” DNA samples may not be evidence of others during the Nephite period. As to the DNA being non-Semitic, how do we know what the Lehite/Mulekite DNA looked like 2600 years ago? This is a complex subject beyond my understanding, but I will comment on a concept that you may not have considered.

You mentioned evidence of ancient Bering Strait migration to America. You have probably read the article, DNA and the Book of Mormon, by Dr. David Stewart. In the section, Ethnohistory and Genetics: Affinities vs. Origins, Stewart writes:

“Could there have been a common origin outside of Mongolia for both native Americans and many modern Mongolians? The Bible tells us that the “ten tribes” were dispersed to the “lands of the North.” Do not Siberia and Mongolia qualify as “lands of the North?” It has been noted that the genetic markers found in modern Native Americans have the greatest affinity for those of modern Mongolians, southern Siberians, and Manchurians. Rather than “disproving” Israelite origins, this is remarkable in view of the fact that over the past few years modern patriarchal blessings have identified LDS members of twelve of the thirteen tribes of Israel in Mongolia. While this does not offer any kind of scientific “proof,” it should at least open our minds to consideration of the possibility of a common origin for Native Americans and many modern Mongolians outside of Central Asia, perhaps in ancient Israel. In light of this and Book of Mormon teachings about the Israelite origins of the Native Americans, one wonders if at least some elements of the genetics of these groups may not represent the genetics of ancient Israel better than many of today’s mongrelized Jewish populations.”
http://www.fairlds.org/Book_of_Mormon/DNA_and_the_Book_of_Mormon_2.html

The Ten Tribes started for the north about a century before Lehi left Jerusalem. They went far enough north to be in a land with a lot of ice (see D&C 133:26). We know that the main body of them did not go into Northern Europe because our patriarchs have not found many there other than Ephraim and Manasseh (that is another issue we can talk about sometime). Therefore the main body of the Lost Tribes must have gone east of the Urals into northern Asia—Siberia, Mongolia and Manchuria (“poorest spot in all of the vineyard?”) As with Mongolia, even among the few Saints there are in Siberia almost all of the tribes have been identified by the patriarchs.

It is reasonable that the North East Asians and the Lehites were of common ancestry. That would explain the Asian DNA and other Asian-like evidence in America without migration across the Bering Strait.

Anyway, the difference in our conclusions comes from the fact that you begin with the belief and premise that there were others here in America when Lehi arrived, and then you search for evidence in the Book of Mormon to support that premise. I begin with the Lord’s promise to Lehi that they would “possess this land unto themselves” and then search for evidence that would contradict the promise. I haven’t found any.