After Noah’s death, the people choose one of his sons, Limhi, to be their king. Then true to the prophecy given by Abinadi, the Lamanites subjugate them. Thus begins a decades long period of chastening by the Lord to bring them back to Him. More on this in a moment.
I just have to wonder. Don’t you think a society brought to ruin by a king would not want any of his descendants to be their new king? I wouldn’t. Joseph Smith nor any American in the 1820’s wouldn't either. Yet the event is recorded as if it’s the perfectly normal thing to do. Hearkening back to what Orson Scott Card said, if an author feels something needs to be explained, he will make a point to do it in the narrative. Mormon does that with the monetary system: it was unusual to him. But handing a kingdom, by the voice of the people no less, from father to son is no big deal. It’s another piece of evidence showing an American living in 1820 did not write this. Someone used to kingly succession amongst an aristocratic class did.
The other thing of note is the evolution of the people through this time. They accept bondage and appoint their own king, Limhi. Then the Lamanites attack them because of the abduction of 24 of their daughters. The Nephites are spared because they capture the Lamanite king and persuade him it wasn’t them. They live in peace but chafe under the tax burden and treatment by the Lamanites. Imagine what it would be like to have “just” a 50% tax burden. It’s bondage to the Nephites, but democracy to us. Go figure.
They try three times to fight their way out, to win their freedom by the sword. They fail and humble themselves to the dust. For a time the Lamanites treat them little better than beasts of burden. They also learn charity by caring for the widows of the dead soldiers. By slow degrees Heavenly Father starts to bless them with ever more abundant crops. Finally, when they are as desirous to be baptized as the people of Alma were, Ammon is led to them and they make their escape.
The community they establish, the Land of Gideon, becomes one of the stalwart cities among the Nephites for generations.
Showing posts with label Orson Scott Card. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Orson Scott Card. Show all posts
Friday, March 11, 2016
Thursday, February 18, 2016
Mosiah 2 - This isn't Kansas Toto... More evidence
As I started into Mosiah, I thought I’d write more about the great doctrinal themes it contains which show up in the LDS Temple rituals. But that isn’t how it seems to be this morning. Instead, I’m struck by the cultural differences on display in Mosiah chapter 2 from anything anyone in 1820 America would be familiar with.
I’m going to say right now as I begin this essay or series of essays, that Orson Scott Card covers the territory I’m going to write about in much greater detail than I will here. Check out his essay here. He is uniquely qualified to say what he does because he is a master story teller and a faithful member of the LDS church.
Why is he qualified to write about it? Because he knows what it takes to write a work of fiction. Critics of the Book of Mormon claim it is just that. Card knows how difficult it is to produce something like it and have it be well done. Read the essay. It’s well worth your time.
In the mean time, I marvel at the different culture on display in Mosiah. These people are not American Indians. Neither are they frontier settlers of 1820, but rather citizens of ancient Israel…with a twist. While Joseph Smith and the other alleged authors of the book knew of kings and kingdoms. We see a succession here which exists no where else in the Bible let alone in history. Well, there’s one place where it does occur, but Joseph knew nothing of it and that’s in the succession of kings in Meso-America. I’m a heartlander myself and it’s hard to admit that, but it’s true just the same.
In Joseph’s day kings filled the role until they died or were deposed. In Mosiah, the people accept what’s happened without any fuss. Imagine what would happen if John Adams said, “I’m going to retire and name my son as your new president.” How well would that go over?
Yet this is what happens in Mosiah and Joseph doesn’t say a thing about how extraordinarily un-American this is. Going back to Card, one theme he states is it’s human nature for an author to point out differences to his readers so they’ll appreciate his wit or understand what’s going on. Joseph never does it, although Mormon does, but that’s fodder for a different essay.
So there you have it, a compelling slice of cultural difference Joseph couldn’t imagine because it was outside his realm of experience. Occam’s razor says all things being equal, the simplest explanation is the truth. In this case, it’s easier to believe the Book of Mormon is a record of an ancient and different culture than any other explanation. The evidence and human nature won’t allow another.
I’m going to say right now as I begin this essay or series of essays, that Orson Scott Card covers the territory I’m going to write about in much greater detail than I will here. Check out his essay here. He is uniquely qualified to say what he does because he is a master story teller and a faithful member of the LDS church.
Why is he qualified to write about it? Because he knows what it takes to write a work of fiction. Critics of the Book of Mormon claim it is just that. Card knows how difficult it is to produce something like it and have it be well done. Read the essay. It’s well worth your time.
In the mean time, I marvel at the different culture on display in Mosiah. These people are not American Indians. Neither are they frontier settlers of 1820, but rather citizens of ancient Israel…with a twist. While Joseph Smith and the other alleged authors of the book knew of kings and kingdoms. We see a succession here which exists no where else in the Bible let alone in history. Well, there’s one place where it does occur, but Joseph knew nothing of it and that’s in the succession of kings in Meso-America. I’m a heartlander myself and it’s hard to admit that, but it’s true just the same.
In Joseph’s day kings filled the role until they died or were deposed. In Mosiah, the people accept what’s happened without any fuss. Imagine what would happen if John Adams said, “I’m going to retire and name my son as your new president.” How well would that go over?
Yet this is what happens in Mosiah and Joseph doesn’t say a thing about how extraordinarily un-American this is. Going back to Card, one theme he states is it’s human nature for an author to point out differences to his readers so they’ll appreciate his wit or understand what’s going on. Joseph never does it, although Mormon does, but that’s fodder for a different essay.
So there you have it, a compelling slice of cultural difference Joseph couldn’t imagine because it was outside his realm of experience. Occam’s razor says all things being equal, the simplest explanation is the truth. In this case, it’s easier to believe the Book of Mormon is a record of an ancient and different culture than any other explanation. The evidence and human nature won’t allow another.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)