By Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson from www.mrm.org
Some have criticized the Mormon Church for its failure to provide evidence for any Nephite coins. But should we really expect the LDS Church to produce them? Coinage in the Western Hemisphere during the Book of Mormon time period was unknown. The use of coins did not become popular until the sixteenth century, more than a millennium after the last Nephite had allegedly died. However, the problem does not lie in a lack of Nephite coins. Rather, it lies in Joseph Smith's implication that such coins existed in the first place.
According to Smith, the Book of Mormon states in Alma 11:4, "Now these are the names of the different pieces of their gold, and of their silver, according to their value." Verses 5-19 list several measurements of gold (senine, seon, shum and limnah) and silver (senum, amnor, ezrom and onti). In lower numbers, there were shiblons (worth half a senum), shiblums (half a shiblon), and leahs (half a shiblum). This, according to Alma 11:20, was the measurement of money that the people received for their wages.
The introduction to Alma chapter 11 states that these are "Nephite coins and measures." This explanation comes to us via James Talmage, a Mormon apostle who was commissioned to add both chapter headings and footnotes to the Book of Mormon. James P. Harris, author of The Essential James E. Talmage, noted that Talmage "was customarily meticulous, making sure there were no errors or omissions" (p.xxix).
If these items are actually coins, shouldn't archaeologists expect to find evidence of them as places thought to be Book of Mormon lands are unearthed? In the many ruins uncovered in the Middle East, archaeologists are able to date their findings by the numerous coins they normally find in the same level of their dig.
However, since no Book of Mormon coins have been found, a common LDS response is to dismiss Talmage's explanation altogether.
BYU professor Daniel C. Peterson states,
"It is, alas, quite true that there is no evidence whatsoever for the existence of Book of Mormon coins. Not even in the Book of Mormon itself. The text of the Book of Mormon never mentions the word 'coin' or any variant of it. The reference to 'Nephite coinage' in the chapter heading to Alma 11 is not part of the original text, and is mistaken. Alma 11 is almost certainly talking about standardized weights of metal—a historical step toward coinage, but not yet the real thing" (Review of Books on the Book of Mormon, 5:55)
Mormon apologist Michael Griffith agrees. "Nowhere in the Book of Mormon is the use of coins even mentioned. The term 'coins' in the chapter heading to Alma 11 is a mistake of modern editing, not a part of the original text itself" (Refuting the Critics, p. 60).
Peterson and Griffith's analysis seems to understand how damaging it would be if Alma had been referring to actual coins. Commonly used coins in any culture always have a way of showing up. They don't just disappear entirely from the face of the earth. This compels the Mormon apologist to say that these references were merely weight measurements and would not be something that could be discovered on an archaeological dig. But there are several serious flaws with this rationale.
First, the LDS Church has seen no reason to delete or modify the introduction to Alma 11 despite the protests from the above–named laymembers. It reads the same today as it has since 1920. If coinage is not meant, it seems strange that the church would continue to print this particular heading. On this point alone, the LDS apologist's conclusion seems presumptuous since this introduction to Alma 11 was obviously approved by the LDS First Presidency.
Second, for decades this passage has been understood by Latter-day Saints to speak of coins. For example, B.H. Roberts, a highly respected LDS Seventy and church historian, wrote, "In addition to these words we have also a number of names of Nephite coins and the names of fractional values of coins…" Roberts proceeds to explain the different values, often using the term "coins" to describe them. Though Roberts says "we have no means of obtaining specifically the value of these coins in modern terms," he adds that "there is stated a system of relative values in these coins that bears evidence of its being genuine" (A New Witness for God, 3:145).
Finally, we disagree with Dr. Peterson's claim that no variant of the word coin is used in the text. Taking his advice that Noah Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language is perhaps "our best source for the language of Joseph Smith and his contemporaries" (Review of Books on the Book of Mormon, 5:8) we find that under the word "piece" (the word Smith used in Alma 11:4), there are several definitions. However, none of them have any meaning that would fit Alma 11:4 until the eighth definition: "A coin; as a piece of eight." The meaning for "piece" in Joseph Smith's day was coin.
Click on image to view full size
This rule is followed in the 1979 Book of Mormon Student Manual - Religion 121-122 when a subheading asks students "How Valuable Were the Nephite Pieces of Money?" Showing that "pieces" meant "coins," the manual presents a chart to show "the relative value of silver and gold coins under the system set up by Mosiah" (p.229).
Conclusion
History shows that there was no coinage in the Western world during the supposed time of Nephites and Lamanites despite the fact that there should be if the Book of Mormon is an actual history of real people and real events. Mormon apologists can haggle over the absence of the word "coin" all they want, but the fact remains that the language of Smith's day and how these passages were understood clearly show that Alma 11 is referencing ancient Nephite coins. This issue of coinage is just one of a number of areas that can be used to show that the Book of Mormon is a product of Joseph Smith's nineteenth century world and not an ancient document.
No comments:
Post a Comment