Losing the Remnant: the New Exclusivist “Movement” and the Book of Mormon
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011 Volume 22 Number 2 Article 5 2010 Losing the Remnant: The New Exclusivist “Movement” and the Book of Mormon Matthew Roper Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Roper, Matthew (2010) "Losing the Remnant: The New Exclusivist “Movement” and the Book of Mormon," Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011: Vol. 22 : No. 2 , Article 5. Available at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/msr/vol22/iss2/5 This Book of Mormon is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Review of Books on the Book of Mormon 1989–2011 by an authorized editor of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Title Losing the Remnant: The New Exclusivist “Movement” and the Book of Mormon Author(s) Matthew Roper Reference FARMS Review 22/2 (2010): 87–124. ISSN 1550-3194 (print), 2156-8049 (online) Abstract Review of Prophecies and Promises: The Book of Mormon and the United States of America (2009), by Bruce H. Porter and Rod L. Meldrum. Losing the Remnant: The New Exclusivist “Movement” and the Book of Mormon Matthew Roper Review of Bruce H. Porter and Rod L. Meldrum. Prophecies and Promises: The Book of Mormon and the United States of America. New York: Digital Legend, 2009. xviii + 239 pp., with appendix. $24.95 (paperback). There is a movement going through the church.1 Bruce H. Porter The exciting new Heartland Model . is causing what has been termed a ‘movement’ within the membership of the Church.2 Rod L. Meldrum n Prophecies and Promises, Bruce H. Porter and Rod L. Meldrum Ipresent a narrow interpretation of Book of Mormon teachings about the American land of promise and the remnant of Lehi spoken of in the Book of Mormon. The land of promise, the authors claim, refers exclusively to the United States, while they identify the rem- nant with contemporary Amerindian peoples of the eastern and mid- western region of the United States. The authors also claim that the events of the Book of Mormon narrative were confined to this “heart- land” region—a matter, they assert, made known to Joseph Smith 1. Quoted in Kristen Moulton, “Book of Mormon Geography Stirring Controversy,” Salt Lake Tribune, 27 March 2010. 2. Accessed 1 September 2010, http://www.bookofmormonevidence.org. 88 • The FARMS Review 22/2 (2010) through revelation. For several years the authors have promoted their opinions on this and related topics through firesides, conferences, and tours. They glowingly describe their efforts as having generated a new “movement” in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.3 In this article I will focus on two issues relating to Prophecies and Promises. I will first address the land of promise mentioned in the Book of Mormon. Do the prophecies found in that record provide a key to Book of Mormon geography? What is the land of promise? Does it refer to the United States alone, or does it have more general application? Second, I will address the question of the “remnant” in reference to the Book of Mormon and Lehi’s posterity. Does the term signify only one Native American group, or does it refer to all Native Americans? In connection with this issue, I will review teachings of Latter-day Saint leaders bearing on the identity of the American rem- nant of Lehi’s posterity. I. Promised Lands Confusing Parts with the Whole The authors’ discussion of an American promised land confuses the parts with the whole (pp. 36–40). The Book of Mormon, they note, speaks of some events that have occurred or will occur in what is now the United States. Therefore, they conclude, only the United States can be the promised land spoken of in the Book of Mormon. There are, they observe, scriptures that speak of the remnant of Lehi in the United States, or in the lands that eventually became the United States; therefore, they reason, only those Native Americans in the United States are related to ancient Lamanites. Their argumentation is faulty since prophecies of events that occur in one part of the land do not exclude the fulfillment of other prophecies elsewhere. In the Bible, 3. “ ‘Very few people out there fully grasp the magnitude of this movement and the powerful influence that it is having and the sweeping nature of its message,’ wrote one prominent supporter. ‘It will sweep the church and most LDS will not even understand what happened until it’s past.’ ” Quoted in Michael De Groote, “The Fight Over Book of Mormon Geography,” Deseret News, 27 May 2010. Porter and Meldrum, Prophecies and Promises (Roper) • 89 Israel obtained a land of promise. “And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein” (Joshua 21:43). That land was a land of promise because of the oath and covenant the Lord made with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Deuteronomy 1:8; 34:1–4; 1 Chronicles 16:5–18; Psalm 105:6–11). Hence it has been called a “land of promise” (Hebrews 11:9). Similarly, Moroni tells us that the land of the Jaredites was a “land of promise” because of what the Lord had “sworn” unto the brother of Jared (Ether 2:8). The biblical land of promise was Israel’s land of inheritance. “Unto thee will I give the land of Canaan, the lot of your inheritance” (Psalm 105:11). This refers to the entire land itself, but parts of that land were likewise considered and called lands of in- heritance within that greater land of promise. Both the parts and the whole are precious lands; hence the prophecies can speak of “lands of promise” in the Lord’s land (2 Nephi 24:2). There are in this sense many finite lands of promise in the larger land of promise. This is why the prophet Jacob can speak of the house of Israel in the latter days being “restored to the true church and fold of God; when they shall be gathered home to the lands of their inheritance, and shall be established in all their lands of promise” (2 Nephi 9:2). The covenant the Lord made with Israel concerns their “restoration to the lands of their inheritance” (2 Nephi 6:11; 3 Nephi 29:1). Each part of the land of promise is both the land and a land since they are parts of the whole. My wife promised the family a banana cream pie. She made it for us on Thanksgiving. The next day I said, “I ate the best pie in the world.” In fact, I ate only one piece of the entire pie, but it was still the best pie in the world. The parts were no less good because they were not the whole. Similarly, one can speak of the promised land even if one knows only a part of it. Porter and Meldrum provide a useful chart of thirty-six prophecies and promises, listing passages that they believe show that the American land of promise can refer only to the United States (pp. 80–82). The chart is, however, selective, and many of the passages are inadequately addressed by the authors. In fact, the passages, in- sofar as they are intended to refer exclusively to the United States, do 90 • The FARMS Review 22/2 (2010) not demonstrate what the authors think they do. Most of them make better sense when understood to include the United States and other lands and nations of the Americas as well. Some passages indeed re- fer to events that occurred, commenced, or will happen in the future within the United States. These events include the coming forth of the Book of Mormon, the restoration of the gospel, the organization of the church, and the commencement of the gathering of Israel. Future events include the building of the New Jerusalem. It is erroneous, however, to conclude that such references confine the American land of promise to the United States. One prophecy that deserves more attention than the authors give it is Nephi’s vision of the promised land (1 Nephi 11–14). Nephi saw the future events that would eventually culminate in the latter-day fulfillment of the Lord’s covenants concerning the seed of Lehi in the land of promise. And I looked and beheld a man among the Gentiles, who was separated from the seed of my brethren by the many waters; and I beheld the Spirit of God, that it came down and wrought upon the man; and he went forth upon the many waters, even unto the seed of my brethren, who were in the promised land. (1 Nephi 13:12) Latter-day Saints have almost universally understood this verse to refer to Columbus, a reading with which the authors agree (p. 64). Columbus, however, never visited the land now known as the United States and never encountered the people who lived there. During his first and second voyages, Columbus encountered the islands and people of the Bahamas and the Caribbean, including Cuba and Hispaniola.4 On his third voyage he sailed to northern South America to what is now known as Trinidad and Venezuela. During his fourth and final voyage, he encountered Mayan traders off the coast of Honduras and 4. “All the peoples of the Caribbean came originally by canoe from the continent of South America along the chain of islands known as the Antilles, or the West Indies, via Trinidad and Tobago.” Hugh Thomas,Rivers of Gold: The Rise of the Spanish Empire, from Columbus to Magellan (New York: Random House, 2005), 110.