Footnotes
[1]. I Peter i: 18-25. Rev. xiii: 8.
[2]. Titus i: 1, 2.
[3]. Heb. x: 1.
[4]. I. Cor. x: 1-4.
[5]. Mr. Campbell cites the first edition throughout.
[6]. Heb. xiii: 20.
[7]. II. Nephi v: 26. II. Nephi vi: 2.
[8]. Alma v: 44. Alma xiii.
[9]. Judges vi: 15.
[10]. Judges vi.
[11]. See this Vol. chapter xxxv.
[12]. Ephesians iii: 5, 6.
[13]. I. Nephi x; also book of Jacob, chapter v.
[14]. Col. i: 2, 3.
[15]. Isaiah xlii: 6, 7.
[16]. Isaiah xlix: 6-9 et seq., specially verses 20-22. Paul himself quotes Isaiah xlix: 6; see Acts xiii: 47. Simeon in the temple quotes Isaiah; see Luke ii: 30, 32.
[17]. I. Nephi xix: 10.
[18]. Alma viii: 7.
[19]. So Hyde: "He [Joseph Smith, through the Book of Mormon] determines none of the great questions pending in the world at large, but only the minor difficulties that would have been likely to have reached a western village." Hyde's "Mormonism," p. 281.
[20]. Moroni viii.
[21]. Following is Mosheim's description of baptism in the third century: "Baptism was publicly administered twice a year, to such candidates as had gone through a long preparation and trial; and none were present as spectators, but such as had been themselves baptized. * * * None were admitted to the sacred font until the exorcist, by a solemn menacing formula, had declared them free from bondage to the prince of darkness and now servants of God. * * * The persons baptized returned home, decorated with a crown and white robe; the first being indicative of their victory over the world and their lusts, the latter of their acquired innocence." (Mosheim's Institute, Century Three, chapter iv.) In describing baptism in the century previous—and the same things accompanied it in the third and fourth—he tells how "the baptized were signed with the cross, anointed, commended to God by prayer and imposition of hands, and finally directed to taste some milk and honey;" also how "Sponsors, or Godfathers, were employed for adults, and afterwards for children likewise." All of which mummeries were additions to the sublimely beautiful and simple ordinance of the baptism of the gospel.
[22]. See Science of Religion, p. 193-300.
[23]. "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors." (Graves), pp. 303-4.
[24]. Alma xxx: 44.
[25]. Helaman xii: 13-15.
[26]. "Golden Bible," p. 336.
[27]. "In the sixth century before our era," remarks Andrew D. White ("History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom," Vol. I, pp. 120, 121), "Pythagoras, and after him Philolaus, had suggested the movement of the earth and planets about a central fire; and, three centuries later, Aristarchus had restated the main truth with striking precision. Here comes in a proof that the antagonism between theological and scientific methods is not confined to Christianity; for this statement brought upon Aristarchus the charge of blasphemy, and drew after it a cloud of prejudice which hid the truth for six hundred years. Not until the fifth century of our era did it timidly appear in the thoughts of Martianus Capella; then it was again lost to sight for a thousand years, until in the fifteenth century, distorted and imperfect, it appeared in the writings of Cardinal Nicholas de Cusa."
[28]. "American Antiquities" (Priest), p. 272.
[29]. "Ancient America," (Baldwin), p. 42.
[30]. "Ancient America," (Baldwin), pp. 122, 123.
[31]. "Conquest of Mexico," (Prescott), Vol. I., p. 103.
[32]. "Pre-Historic America," (Nadaillac), p. 305.
[33]. Bancroft's Works, Vol. II., p. 502.
[34]. Dr. W. M. Paden, Pastor of the first Presbyterian Church, Salt Lake City, Utah, in a Discourse against the Book of Mormon, March 21, 1904.
[35]. Ibid.
[36]. Golden Bible, pp. 308, 309.
[37]. This work Vol. II., p. 138.
[38]. Compendium, p. 289.
[39]. "The Golden Bible," p. 265. I quote from the 1887 edition, which I understand to be the revised and enlarged one. [45]
[40]. Ibid., p. 260.
[41]. "The Prophet" was a Mormon weekly periodical, published by S. Brannan from May, 1844, to May 24, 1845.
[42]. A fac simile of which is given in Vol. II., p. 72.
[43]. Volume II., this work p. 76. This is from his letter to E. D. Howe; in a second letter to Rev. Coit, Anthon gives a similar description. (Ibid., pp. 79, 78.)
[44]. Boston 1882, two volumes. The photographed transcript will be found in Vol. I. of Rawlinson, p. 120.
CHAPTER XLVIII.
OBJECTIONS TO THE BOOK OF MORMON (Continued).
I.
Alleged Plagiarisms of Historical and Biblical Events.
It is charged against the Book of Mormon that many of its historical incidents are mere plagiarisms of historical and Biblical events. I shall only be able to indicate a few of these charges, and point out the means by which they may be fairly met. I call attention to the fact, in the first place, that some of the charges are absolutely false; that they are based on misquotations and misstated incidents. In other cases the comparison is very much strained to get the result of likeness, and throughout the likelihood of similarity in human experience is entirely overlooked.
Mr. John Hyde declares that Nephi's description of the rise of a great and abominable church immediately after the days of the Messiah on earth, together with his description of her pride, power, and cruelty, is a quotation from the book of Revelations, "A description of the Church of Rome;"[[1]] the abduction of the daughters of the Lamanites by the Priests of King Noah;[[2]] the martyrdom of Alma's converts in the land of Ammonihah;[[3]] and the slaughter of the converts of Ammon among the Lamanites,[[4]] are events "borrowed from the history of Nero, Caligula, and Fox's book of Martyrs."
In Alma's conversion, he sees "an imitation of Paul's miraculous conversion" with this difference; that Paul was struck with blindness for three days, and Alma is struck dumb for two days![[5]] In the remarks of King Mosiah on the advantages of a government by the people as against the rule of absolute monarchs, our author sees the doctrine of "Vox populi vox Dei,"[[6]] although that idea nowhere occurs in the passage to which he gives reference, and in fact, in no passage of the Book of Mormon. These citations from the long list that our author makes out will perhaps be sufficient from him. Those who wish to trace out this class of objections, as he makes them, may consult his work.[[7]]
A more recent writer enters into the same line of argument in greater detail.[[8]] His theory is that the author of the Book of Mormon set out to "beat the Bible" in the matter of wonderful things recorded. Thus in the "eight barges" of the Jaredites he sees an attempt to outdo the Bible account of Noah's "one ark." In a complete vision granted to the brother of Jared of the pre-existent spirit-personage of the Messiah, he sees the partial view of the same personage granted to Moses outdone. In the fact that the Nephite prophet, Abinadi, interpreted certain writings upon the wall of a temple, he sees an imitation of Daniel's exploit of reading the writing on the wall of Belshazzar's palace. In Ether's expressed doubt as to his own fate, whether he would be granted the privilege of translation or be required to pass through the ordeal of death, he sees the counterpart of the story of Elijah's ascent into heaven. In the retention of three of the Nephite apostles on earth until Messiah shall come in his glory, he sees the New Testament intimation and the early Christian notion that the apostle John might be granted such a privilege—if such it could be regarded—outdone. In the signs of Messiah's birth, granted to the Nephites—the night of continuous light and the appearance of a new star in the heavens; as also in the signs of his crucifixion and burial—three hours of tempest and earthquake while the Son of Man was on the cross, and three days of darkness while he lay in the tomb[[9]]—our author sees again an effort to outdo the Bible signs accompanying Messiah's birth and death.
In the account given in III Nephi[[10]] of the multitude being permitted to come in personal contact with the Savior one by one, and touch the scars of the wounds he had received in crucifixion, Rev. Lamb sees an effort to outdo the New Testament story of Thomas thrusting his hands in the wounds of our Savior, that he might be convinced of the reality of his resurrection. Indeed, the Reverend gentleman makes very much of this circumstance. He supposes the multitude granted this privilege numbered 2,500; and allowing that five persons would pass the Savior every minute, giving each one twelve seconds to thrust his hand into Messiah's side, and feel the print of the nails, would require "eight hours and twenty minutes of time!"[[11]] The Reverend Gentleman, however, neglected to give the matter due consideration. The number of the multitude, 2,500, is given at the close of the first day's visit of Messiah to the Nephites; whereas, the circumstance of the people being allowed to personally come in contact with the Savior, is an event that took place early in the day, almost immediately upon the Christ's appearance in fact, and when the "multitude" was much smaller than at the close of the day. Two circumstances lead to the belief that the crowd was greatly augmented through the day. For instance, after some considerable time had elapsed after his appearing, and after the multitude had gone forth and felt the wounds in his hands and feet, Jesus called for their sick and afflicted, that he might heal them. It is unreasonable to suppose that the blind and halt and sick were with the "multitude" when Jesus first appeared, as the latter were a party strolling about the temple viewing the changes wrought in the land by the recent cataclysms, while the sick and maimed with their attendants would doubtless be at their homes. Therefore, many of the people departed from the presence of Jesus to bring to him these afflicted ones; and as they went on this errand of mercy they doubtless spread the news of Christ's presence among them, with the result that the people were gathered together throughout the day.
Again, after blessing their afflicted ones, the Lord Jesus caused their children to be gathered together, that he might bless them; which doubtless in many cases caused parents to hasten again to their homes and ever as they went the news spread further and further of the Messiah's presence, until finally, at the close of the day's gathering, 2,500 were found to be present. It by no means follows, however, that all this number thrust their hands into the wounds of Messiah; but only the very much smaller number that was gathered about the temple in the land of Bountiful earlier in the day, when Messiah appeared to them.
Our author sees in these things I have quoted and some others that he details, plagiarisms of Bible events; and concludes that the Book of Mormon, instead of being what it claims to be, is largely but a collection of Bible events distorted by Joseph Smith's inventions.
It places a Christian minister, believing as he does in the divinity of both the Old and New Testament, at a very great disadvantage to make this kind of an argument. Suppose we were to apply it as a test of the New Testament? We could then say that the ascension of Jesus, recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, is but an imitation of the glorious ascension of Elijah into heaven in the presence of a host of angels.[[12]] We could say that the special miracles wrought by the hands of Paul so that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs and aprons to the afflicted, and "the diseases departed from them and the evil spirits went out of them," is but an imitation of what Elijah did when he sent his staff by the hands of his servant, commanding him to lay it on the face of the dead child of his Shunammite friend to restore him to life.[[13]]
"It might be said, also, that in the subsequent conduct of Elijah in restoring this same child to life, we have the original of the New Testament story of Jarius's daughter.[[14]] In this same chapter of Kings we have the following story of Elisha's miraculously feeding a multitude:
And there came a man from Baalshalisha, and brought the man of God bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley, and full ears of corn in the husk thereof. And he said, Give unto the people, that they may eat. And his servitor said, What, should I set this before an hundred men? He said again, Give the people, that they may eat: for thus saith the Lord, They shall eat, and shall leave thereof. So he set before them, and they did eat, and left thereof, according to the word of the Lord.
"Who can doubt," the Biblical sceptic might ask, "but what this story inspired that of the Evangelists concerning the miraculous feeding of five thousand people, in a desert place, from five loaves, and two fishes.[[15]] The excess of people mentioned in the New Testament—five thousand thus miraculously fed as against Elijah's one hundred—"could be pointed to as an effort of the New Testament writer to merely "outdo" in the marvelous the miracles of the Old Testament.
Again, it might be continued that the story of tenth Revelations, where a little book is given to John the apostle to eat, one that should be bitter in his belly, but in his mouth sweet as honey, is but a plagiarism of a very similar story told in Ezekiel where that prophet is commanded to eat the roll of the book, and it was in his mouth "as the honey for sweetness."[[16]]
Thus we might continue in drawing such parallels, but there would be neither profit nor argument in doing so. Such procedure is scarcely worthy the name of criticism. It reminds one of Shakespeare's Rosalind finding the doggerel verses of the love-sick swain, Orlando, hanging upon the trees of the forest of Arden, and of Rosalind reading them—
From the east to the western Ind,
No Jewel is like Rosalind.
All the pictures fairest lined,
Are but black to Rosalind.
Let no fair be kept in mind,
But the fair of Rosalind.
Which doggerel the more sensible Touchstone, listening to—and impatient at withal—finally breaks in upon the fair reader with:
"I'll rhyme you so eight years together, dinners and suppers and sleepin-hours excepted:—for a taste—
If a hart do lack a hind,
Let him seek out Rosalind.
If the cat will after kind,
So be sure will Rosalind.
Winter garments must be lined,
So must slendor Rosalind.
They that reap must sheef and bind,
Then to cart with Rosalind.
Sweetest nut hath sourest rind,
Such a nut is Rosalind.
So with like result one might run on with this kind of argument based upon the Book of Mormon's alleged plagiarisms from the Hebrew scriptures.
II.
The Absence of Book of Mormon Names Both of Place and Persons in Native American Language.
It is objected to the Book of Mormon that there nowhere appears in native American languages Book of Mormon names. "During the one thousand years of their recorded history," says one, "as given in the Book of Mormon, the old familiar names of Lehi, Nephi, Laman, Lemuel and others are constantly recurring; they held on to them with reverential pertinacity. If the Book of Mormon were a true record we should find these names in abundance among various Indian races scattered over both continents." The absence of Book of Mormon names in the native language, is held to be fatal testimony against the claims of the Book of Mormon by this writer.[[17]]
One recognizes here a real difficulty, and one for which it is quite hard to account. It must be remembered, however, that from the close of the Nephite period, 420 A. D., to the coming of the Spaniards in the sixteenth century, we have a period of over one thousand years; and we have the triumph also of the Lamanites over the Nephites bent on the destruction of every vestige of Nephite traditions and institutions. May it not be that they recognized as one of the means of achieving such destruction the abrogation of the old familiar names of things and persons? Besides there is the probable influx of other tribes and peoples into America in that one thousand years whose names may have largely taken the place of Nephite and Lamanite names.
I have already suggested that the name "Nahuas" and the adjective derived from it, "Nahuatl," are probably variations of the names "Nephi" and "Nephite," derived, it may be, together with the Bible names "Nepheg," "Nephish," "Nephishesim," and "Naphtali" from a common Hebrew root.[[18]] Also, that the name "Hohgates," by which names the seven mythical strangers were called who in ancient times settled at Point St. George on the Pacific coast near San Francisco, is a survival of the Book of Mormon name "Hagoth," who is prominent in the Book of Mormon narrative as the man who first started maritime migrations from South America, northward along the Pacific coast of North America.[[19]]
Mr. Priest, the author of "American Antiquities," declares that the word "Amazon," the name of the chief river of South America, is an Indian word.[[20]] Early in the century in which Messiah was born, four of the sons of the Nephite king, Mosiah II, departed from Zarahemla on a mission to the Lamanites. At that time the Lamanites occupied the lands formerly possessed by the Nephites, previous to the migration of the more righteous part of that people to Zarahemla—the old "land of Nephi." This land, so far as can be determined, corresponds somewhat to the modern country of Ecuador and perhaps the northern part of Peru.[[21]] In this region, it will be remembered, the river Amazon takes its rise. The leader of the Nephite missionary expedition referred to was Ammon, doubtless the oldest son of King Mosiah II.[[22]] Such were the achievements of this man; such his rank, and such his high character that it is not difficult or unreasonable to believe that his name was given by the people to the principal stream of the land, and that it has survived under the modern variation of the name Amazon.
Again, the word "Andes," the name of the chief mountain range in South America, is quite generally supposed, if not conceded by the best authorities, to come from the native Peruvian word "Anti," meaning copper.[[23]]
The Peruvians, in order to cultivate some mountainous parts of their country, terraced the mountain sides, facing the same with stone. These terraces the Spaniards called "Andenes," whence some suppose the name "Andes." "But the name," says Prescott, "is older than the Conquest, according to Varcilasso, who traces it to 'Anti,' the name of a province that lay east of Cuzco. 'Anta,' the word for copper, which was found abundant in certain quarters of the country, may have suggested the name of the province, if not immediately that of the mountains."[[24]]
In any event we have the words "Anti" and "Anta" established as native American words, and the word "Anti" is of frequent use in the Book of Mormon in a number of compound words, such as "Anti-Nephi-Lehi," the name of a Lamanite king or chief about B. C. 83.[[25]] The same name was given to his people, that is, they were called "Anti-Nephi-Lehi's,"[[26]] and possibly it may have been given to the land they occupied. If so it accounts for the word "Anti" surviving as the name of a province, according to Garcilasso, lying east of Cuzco.
We also have the word "Antiomno,"[[27]] the name of a Lamanite king; "Antionah," the name of a chief; "Antionum," both the name of a man,[[28]] and also the name of a city;[[29]] also the word "Antiparah," a Nephite city;[[30]] "Antipas," the name of a mountain;[[31]] and "Antipus," the name of a Nephite military leader.[[32]]
It is true these words in the Book of Mormon, are written as simple words, but they are susceptible of being regarded as compound words, as follows: "Anti-Omno," "Anti-Pas," "Anti-Parah," and so following. If the Peruvian terraces derived their name from this native word "Anti," then when applied to Nephite lands Anti-Onum would doubtless mean the terraced lands of Onum, and Anti-Parah, the name of a city, would doubtless be the terraced city of Parah, and so following.
But after all this is said it is still a matter of regret that more of the Nephite names, both of men and countries, have not survived in the native American languages. Still the field of knowledge of American antiquities has not yet been thoroughly explored, and when its buried cities and monuments shall be more thoroughly known all the evidences that can be demanded along these lines will doubtless be produced.