~ An Insighful Discussion ~
Book of Mormon Geography?
Consider how the following is presented on one such page which is actually speaking to the topic of others upon the land beyond the Lamanites and Nephites. A more general quotation from Elder Packer is taken out of its context and inserted into the context of preference of the matter of other peoples besides the Book of Mormon associated peoples being in the Americas. And then immediately after Elder Packer's quotation they present their own conclusion arrived from various other statements and logic developments previously presented as if Elder Packer has also concurred:
"The Book of Mormon is often introduced as "a history of the ancient inhabitants of the American continent, the ancestors of the American Indians." We have all seen missionaries about the world with street boards displaying pictures of American Indians or pyramids and other ruins in Latin America. That introduction does not reveal the contents of this sacred book any better than an introduction of the Bible as "a history of the ancient inhabitants of the Near East, the ancestors of the modern Israelites" would reveal its contents.The presentation of the Book of Mormon as a history of the ancestors of the American Indians is not a very compelling nor a very accurate introduction. When we introduce the Book of Mormon as such a history–and that is the way we generally introduce it–surely the investigator must be puzzled, even disappointed, when he begins to read it. Most do not find what they expect. Nor do they, in turn, expect what they find…The Book of Mormon is not biographical, for not one character is fully drawn. Nor, in a strict sense, is it a history. While it chronicles a people for a thousand and twenty–one years and contains the record of an earlier people, it is in fact not a history of a people. It is the saga of a message, a testament."
Conclusion
The Book of Mormon contains many overt references, and some more oblique ones, to 'other' peoples that were part of the demographic mix in Book of Mormon times. The Nephite record keeps its focus on a simplistic "Nephite/Lamanite" dichotomy both because it is a kinship record, and because its focus is religious, not politico-historical.
Now the point and title of this article was 'Book of Mormon demogrphics' and it made the point that there must have been other peoples upon the land beyond those recorded in the Book of Mormon. The authors present the concept that there were 'others' that made up part of both societies, meaning Nephite and Lamanite societies. Thus they present the concept that beyond Lehi's party, 'other people' where in the land with the implication that the Lamanites as well as the Nephites were of a mixed race beyond being merely Israelite. This, like many presumptions of men is in part true. But Elder Packer's quotation concerning the Book of Mormon not being a 'history' has no relevance to whether there were people upon the land beyond those specifically stipulated by the Book of Mormon.
Of course there were the Mulekites, those associated with Mulek the son of Zedekiah who would become associated with the Nephites. And there were Nephite dessenters who would have mixed those blood lines into the Lamanites even within the Book of Mormon times. It is just not a part of the text as to what peoples and nationalities accompied Mulek and brought him to this land of American. Many presume it to be Pheonecians whose crews would have certainly been of a mixed racial group.
And then there is the matter of other possible visitors which the Book of Mormon left out of its presentation, as it was a religious oriented text pretaining to the people's acceptance of Christ. It did not go into the matters of 'international trade'. And there seems at least to have been some in the days of the Jaredites as the Cocain Mummies of Egypt had obtained their Cocain traces from some such source in what was likely the days round about the age of Solomon. And of course there is the matter of all that may or may not have transpired since the end of the Book of Mormon and 400 A.D., well over another 1000 year period.
But what is known is that the blood of Israel, whether it is able to be detected by DNA readings or not, is in a very 'religious' sense that which, can be 'dominate'. That is, once someone has even one Israelite ancester, even if it is only one amongst the many, that are deemed to then come within the umbrella of Israel and the blood of Isreal. They are no longer merely of a purely 'Gentile' blood line.
Thus when General Authorities speak in the church of the American Indian being of the House of Israel without much exception, they are referencing the fact that they have a Book of Mormon ancestor. And the term Lamanite is most appropriately used to specify the American Indians of North America, South America and even what we understand to be the Polynesian Islands. Perhaps not that they are 'pure' Israelites in that that is the only 'genes', but that they do have a direct ancestral linage back to Israel.
Now Joseph Smith, both personally and in the scriptures, stated the American Indian to be Lamanites or of the House of Israel. Frequently many of the General Authorities so reference the natives of the Americas thus. At this point I would like to place Elder Packer's story of the little 'Lamanite child' of Cusco, Peru. This is taken from Elder Packer's own book though he quotes President Kimball's quoting and telling of it.
: "On one occasion, on a trip to South America, I had a special spiritual experience. When I returned I related it to President Kimball. Sometime later when I was presiding over the New England Mission I received a letter from him asking if he might include that experience in a conference address because it illustrated so well a point that he wanted to make. He sent in that letter a copy of the account as he had recorded it in his journal. I was amazed at the accuracy of his record of the incident. He had recorded it in his journal perhaps that night or even a day or two later precisely as I had given it to him.
: "Inasmuch as he did use it in General Conference, I will include it here just as he gave it as an illustration of the type of account that we are discussing. The point to remember is that he would not quote it without permission, because it was a spiritual experience. That shows both wisdom and courtesy.
: "May I conclude with this experience of my friend and brother, Boyd K. Packer, as he returned from Peru. It was in a branch sacrament meeting. The chapel was filled, the opening exercises finished, and the sacrament in preparation. A little Lamanite ragamuffin entered from the street. His two shirts would scarcely make one, so ragged they were and torn and worn. It was unlikely that those shirts had ever been off that little body since they were donned. Calloused and chapped were the little feet which brought him in the open door, up the aisle, and to the sacrament table. There was dark and dirty testimony of deprivation, want, unsatisfied hungers—spiritual as well as physical. Almost unobserved he shyly came to the sacrament table and, with a seeming spiritual hunger, leaned against the table and lovingly rubbed his unwashed face against the cool, smooth, white linen.
: "A woman on the front seat, seemingly outraged by the intrusion, caught his eye and with motion and frown sent the little ragamuffin scampering down the aisle out into his world, the street.
: "A little later, seemingly compelled by some inner urge, he overcame his timidity and came stealthily, cautiously down the aisle again, fearful, ready to escape if necessary, but impelled as though directed by inaudible voices with "a familiar spirit" and as though memories long faded were reviving, as though some intangible force were crowding him on to seek something for which he yearned but could not identify.
: "From his seat on the stand, Elder Packer caught his eye, beckoned to him, and stretched out big, welcoming arms. A moment's hesitation and the little ragamuffin was nestled comfortably on his lap, in his arms, the tousled head against a great warm heart—a heart sympathetic to waifs, and especially to little Lamanite ones. It seemed the little one had found a safe harbor from a stormy sea, so contented he was. The cruel, bewildering, frustrating world was outside. Peace, security, acceptance enveloped him.
: "Later Elder Packer sat in my office and, in tender terms and with a subdued voice, rehearsed this incident to me. As he sat forward on his chair, his eyes glistening, a noticeable emotion in his voice, he said, "As this little one relaxed in my arms, it seemed it was not a single little Lamanite I held. It was a nation, indeed a multitude of nations of deprived, hungering souls, wanting something deep and warm they could not explain—a humble people yearning to revive memories all but faded—of ancestors standing wide-eyed, openmouthed, expectant and excited, looking up and seeing a holy, glorified Being descend from celestial areas, and hearing a voice say: 'Behold, I am Jesus Christ, the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. . . and in me hath the Father glorified his name. . . . I am the light and the life of the world. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.' (3 Nephi 9:15, 18.)" (Spencer W. Kimball, General Conference address, October 2, 1965.)
: "I cannot read those words even after several years without being touched emotionally by that experience.
: "On several occasions President Kimball has told me that that was an important experience. The last time we talked about it was when we were on a plane trip together. He brought up the subject again and told me that it was a very significant experience."
It is quite one thing to intellectually determine who is and who is not a 'Lamanite', that is of the House of Israel and who is not because of some such DNA qualification or some other qualifying scientific matter and demogrphics. And it is quite another to receive the absolute spiritual witness of the Holy Spirit that these people are indeed 'Lamanites' of the Book of Mormon and of the House of Israel. No, science may not be able to so ascertain and identify them as such, but as sure as there is a God in Heaven, when the Spirit does so confirm it to be so, it is the full truth of the matter for sure.
The specialness and significance of the experience is not in just some poor little boy's story, but in that Elder Boyd K. Packer that day received the absolute witness of the Spirit of the Holy Ghost that those people of Cusco and Peru, of the Americas, were indeed Lamanites, descendants of the people of the Book of Mormon, of Father Lehi, and of Joseph of Egypt, Jacob, Isaac and of Abraham. Indeed the Spirit did testify to Elder Packer that this little boy and his people, the Inca of Peru, the Indians of America, were indeed the people of the Book of Mormon.
And that would be be the special experience which President Kimball so stated that Elder Packer had had that day. And President Kimball in the recording and retelling of it shared in the knowleged of it. And that would have been the same experience from which the Prophet Joseph Smith and other such leaders of the church did and do speak of the Indians of North American as being the 'Lamanites' of the Book of Mormon. And so is the testimony of any who receive that knowledge of by the Spirit of these natives of America. And it is of a truth regardless of the 'wisdom of men' and the supposedly tale tell signs of such as DNA and what it is and is not supposed to report.
Now this would be a good ending, but I am not finished yet. I am married to a Samoan born in Apia Samoa. Our children are of that 'blood' and so are our grandchildren, the children of our children. Of those grandchildren we have currently two blond 'toe-headed' little boys with blue eyes, European in every respect and most likely DNA approved. Of our other grandchildren, there are only 2 or 3 who have brown eyes out of 10 grandchildren. The same you would expect of any such 'white' European marriages. All of our grandchildren are of Israelite descent and the grandchildren of my Samoan wife whether they have her particular 'Samoan' detectible DNA trates or not.
So what is this fuss about? And what is the real truth concerning these matters of the 'wisdom of man' verses the sure knowledge of God as given by the Spirit of God? And who is to say that the American Indians and even the Polynesians are or are not descendants of the House of Israel and the Book of Mormon because of some presences or lack of DNA patterns?