William Wright ("The Promised Land: Landing the Jaredites and Lehites somewhere..." and passim) and Leo ("Mapping God's Vineyard") have proposed that the "sea" across which Lehi's family traveled to reach the promised land was actually outer space. In this post I try to assess how textually plausible that is.
Irreantum
And we did come to the land which we called Bountiful, because of its much fruit and also wild honey; and all these things were prepared of the Lord that we might not perish. And we beheld the sea, which we called Irreantum, which, being interpreted, is many waters (1 Ne. 17:5).
"Being interpreted" appears multiple times in the New Testament, always to translate a Hebrew or Aramaic word or name into the Greek in which the New Testament is written. These glosses are necessary because the language of the intended readers is not the same as the language of Jesus and his disciples. Here, though, Nephi is writing for his own descendants and reporting a name that his own family gave to the sea, so it's not clear why a gloss would be necessary. Why would Lehi's family have given the sea a name that their own children would have difficulty understanding? To me, this strongly suggests that, though this part of the Book of Mormon is not supposed to have been edited by Mormon, it was likely edited by someone and that the gloss was added by this later editor and not by Nephi himself. This in turn implies that the meaning of Irreantum is obscure and that therefore the gloss might be wrong. So that's a point in favor of the theory that Nephi might not have been talking about literal waters.
Since the Astronaut Nephi theory is something I got from William Wright and his friend Leo, and since they also try to tie the Book of Mormon in with Tolkien's world and languages, it occurred to me to try to find an Elvish etymology for Irreantum. Here's one possible analysis as a three-morpheme compound:
- airë -- an archaic Quenya word for "sea" which fell out of use due to conflict with another word airë, which means "holy." Although today we pronounce Irreantum so that the first two syllables sound like those of irresponsible, I don't think it's impossible, given the non-standard spelling habits of Joseph Smith and his associates, that a "long i" sound, corresponding to the diphthong in the Elvish word, was originally intended.
- yána -- Quenya for “wide, vast, huge,” from the root √YAN. In earlier versions of the language, √YAN meant "holy." The root for "holy" was later changed to √AYA(N), but it's interesting that both airë and yan could mean "holy." This is one possible explanation for the gloss: In a compound word, aire-yan would most naturally be understood to mean "holy," since both elements can mean that; hence the need to explain that in this case it actually means "vast sea."
- tumna -- Quenya for "deep" -- or, in Tolkien's earlier notes, "profound, dark, hidden" -- from the root √TUB, also meaning "deep"; in many words derived from the root (for example Sindarin tum, "valley"), the final b becomes m.
So Irreantum could be Aireyantum, suggesting both "vast, deep sea" and "holy darkness." As evidence that the latter reading can be very naturally applied to outer space, we have Carl Sagan's essay "Sacred Black," in which he modifies the French minced oath sacre-bleu and applies it to outer space.
Unfortunately for the Astronaut Nephi theory, everything else about Irreantum seems inconsistent with its being anything other than a literal body of water. Even in the first just quoted, they "beheld the sea" only after they had "come to the land which we called Bountiful." If the "sea" is simply the night sky, it should be equally visible from anywhere, and the association with a particular place seems strange.If anything, the night sky would have been more clearly visible in the desert they had just left than in Bountiful, whose "much fruit" implies higher humidity and probably lots of trees.
Furthermore, we learn that this "sea" has a "seashore":
And it came to pass that we did pitch our tents by the seashore; and notwithstanding we had suffered many afflictions and much difficulty, yea, even so much that we cannot write them all, we were exceedingly rejoiced when we came to the seashore; and we called the place Bountiful, because of its much fruit (1 Ne. 17:6).
What could possibly be meant by the "shore" of outer space? Isn't every point on Earth's surface equally "adjacent" to outer space? I suppose one could say that a very high mountain, being closer to the place where the atmosphere ends and the vacuum begins, is on the border or "shore" of space. Unfortunately, the tops of high mountains are not notable for their "much fruit," and in any case the text seems to make it clear that Bountiful by the sea is not a mountaintop:
And it came to pass that after I, Nephi, had been in the land of Bountiful for the space of many days, the voice of the Lord came unto me, saying: Arise, and get thee into the mountain. And it came to pass that I arose and went up into the mountain, and cried unto the Lord (1 Ne. 17:7).
Nephi has been in Bountiful for many days before he goes "up into the mountain." It was near a mountain but not on it. I suppose this is technically consistent with its being "by the seashore," but that just seems like a ridiculously convoluted way of saying "near a high mountain," especially since one verse later the mountain is referred to plainly as "the mountain."
And it came to pass that the Lord spake unto me, saying: Thou shalt construct a ship, after the manner which I shall show thee, that I may carry thy people across these waters (1 Ne. 17:8).
"These waters" can only mean Irreantum, and for the reasons discussed above, it's hard to force the reading that Irreantum is outer space. I suppose you would have to say that in these verses references to a literal sea and seashore are interspersed with references to the "waters" of outer space. Perhaps Nephi stays down on the (literal) seashore, and perhaps contemplates crossing those waters, but the Lord calls him up into a mountain, away from the ocean but closer to the sky, and says, "No, actually you're going to cross these waters."
This still strikes me as an extremely strained reading, and I would want to find a pretty clear smoking gun in the text before subjecting it to such an extravagant interpretation.
More than just this earth
A bit later in the same chapter, we find some verses more amenable to the Astronaut Nephi theory. In rebuking his brothers for mocking and criticizing his ship-building enterprise, one of the things Nephi says to them is this:
Behold, the Lord hath created the earth that it should be inhabited; and he hath created his children that they should possess it. . . . And he leadeth away the righteous into precious lands . . . . He ruleth high in the heavens, for it is his throne, and this earth is his footstool (1 Ne. 17:36-39).
Is it possible that "the earth" in v. 36 means something more like "the world" -- or perhaps "land" in a generic sense -- including more than just the one planet called "this earth" in v. 39? We can imagine Nephi gesturing up at the stars and saying, "God created all this land -- on all these planets -- to be inhabited, and he created us, his children, to possess it. After all, his domain is the whole of the heavens, of which this earth is just a part."
The expression "this earth" does not occur in the King James Bible, but it used in the Book of Moses, clearly in the context of there being other earths:
And worlds without number have I created; . . . But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds (Moses 1:33, 35).
Nephi alludes to two passages from Isaiah. One of these, Isa. 66:1, has the Lord say, "The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool." The other, Isa. 45:18, says:
For thus saith the Lord that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the Lord; and there is none else.
This strongly implies multiple habitable worlds. It states that the earth would have been created "in vain" if it were not inhabited, implying that the same is true of the heavens.
To throw me into the depths of the sea
After Nephi's rebuke, his brothers
were angry with me, and were desirous to throw me into the depths of the sea; and . . . they came forth to lay their hands upon me" (1 Ne. 17:48).
This has to be a literal sea, right? Everyone is still on earth at this point, so throwing Nephi into outer space doesn't seem possible. I mean, we can make something up -- perhaps the ship included an antigravity device which Laman and Lemuel planned to use to make Nephi fly off into the void -- but nothing in the text warrants that.
Nephi then says,
If God had commanded me to do all things I could do them. If he should command me that I should say unto this water, be thou earth, it should be earth; and if I should say it, it would be done. And now, if the Lord has such great power, and has wrought so many miracles among the children of men, how is it that he cannot instruct me, that I should build a ship? (1 Ne. 17:50-51).
Even though Nephi is talking about seemingly impossible feats, still some things are more readily imagined than others. Douglas Hofstadter writes somewhere that, after driving a car through a swarm of bees, it's very natural to say, "It's lucky the windows weren't open," but not at all natural to say, "It's lucky those bees weren't made of cement." In the same way, it's natural to imagine being able to transform sea into dry land -- but to transform outer space into land? What would that even mean? Here, again, I think water just has to mean "water."
Of course it's possible in principle that Nephi was camped at a literal seashore while he built a ship to cross the very different "sea" of outer space, but this passage makes the most sense if the water he imagines being turned into earth is the very water they intend to cross. Nephi is saying, "Look, if God wanted to get us across this sea by teaching me how to turn it into earth and then having us walk across, he could do it. So why not the much less extravagant miracle of teaching me how to build a ship?"
The building of the ship
Here is the description of the building of the ship itself:
[W]e did work timbers of curious workmanship. And the Lord did show me from time to time after what manner I should work the timbers of the ship. Now I, Nephi, did not work the timbers after the manner which was learned by men, neither did I build the ship after the manner of men; but I did build it after the manner which the Lord had shown unto me; wherefore, it was not after the manner of men.And I, Nephi, did go into the mount oft, and I did pray oft unto the Lord; wherefore the Lord showed unto me great things.And it came to pass that after I had finished the ship, according to the word of the Lord, my brethren beheld that it was good, and that the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine (1 Ne. 18:1-4).
Nephi emphasizes the fact that the construction of the ship "was not after the manner of men." This was not an ordinary ship and did not reflect ordinary human technology. This is consistent with the theory that it was actually a spacecraft. On the other hand, it is apparently made of "timbers," an unlikely material for an interplanetary vessel. Reports of UFOs that incorporate wood in their structure are not unheard of, though, with the Roswell wreckage being the best known example. Who is to say what materials would or wouldn't be suitable for this "curious workmanship" that "was not after the manner of men"?
The voyage
How consistent is the description of the voyage itself with space travel?
And it came to pass after we had all gone down into the ship, and had taken with us our provisions and things which had been commanded us, we did put forth into the sea and were driven forth before the wind towards the promised land (1 Ne. 18:8).
The reference to putting forth into the sea, rather than onto, is consistent with the "sea" being space; a spacecraft does not float on the surface of space but is immersed in it.
"Driven before the wind" is obviously incompatible with space travel if it is taken literally, since "wind" in the ordinary sense is an atmospheric phenomenon. In support of the space-travel reading, though, we might note the way "before the wind" is used in the King James Bible. It is never used to refer to the propulsion of a sailing ship, but only to describe lightweight things such as chaff and stubble being blown away, or made to "fly."
And I, Nephi, began to fear exceedingly lest the Lord should be angry with us, and smite us because of our iniquity, that we should be swallowed up in the depths of the sea (1 Ne. 18:10).
As noted above, a spacecraft is "immersed" or "swallowed up" in the depths of outer space even when it is operating normally. We can contrive ways of making Nephi's fear fit the outer-space setting, but the most natural reading is definitely that he fears their floating ship will sink.
Laman and Lemuel then "bind" Nephi "with cords" (1 Ne. 18:11). Artists almost universally depict Nephi being tied to the mast like Odysseus, but nothing in the text suggests this. Nephi reports that after his bands were loosed, his wrists and ankles were swollen (v. 18), which sounds more like he was hogtied rather than tied to anything. Anyway, no references to a mast and therefore no conflict with the outer-space reading.
18:13 Wherefore, they knew not whither they should steer the ship, insomuch that there arose a great storm, yea, a great and terrible tempest, and we were driven back upon the waters for the space of three days; and they began to be frightened exceedingly lest they should be drowned in the sea; nevertheless they did not loose me. And on the fourth day, which we had been driven back, the tempest began to be exceedingly sore. And it came to pass that we were about to be swallowed up in the depths of the sea. And after we had been driven back upon the waters for the space of four days, my brethren began to see that the judgments of God were upon them (1 Ne. 18:13-15).
Like the earlier reference to "wind," "storm" and "tempest" normally refer to atmospheric phenomena, though we could perhaps contrive a space-friendly reading. Also, in contrast to the earlier reference to the ship's going "into" the sea, here it is "upon the waters" -- more consistent with sailing on a surface than with traveling through space.
When Nephi's parents' lives are in danger during the voyage, he writes,
their grey hairs were about to be brought down to lie low in the dust; yea, even they were near to be cast with sorrow into a watery grave (1 Ne. 18:18).
I don't think this is a very natural way of describing a death in space, even in the context of the "great waters" metaphor.
When the storm ceases, we have this description.
And it came to pass that I prayed unto the Lord; and after I had prayed the winds did cease, and the storm did cease, and there was a great calm. And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did guide the ship, that we sailed again towards the promised land (1 Ne. 18:21-22).
This is essentially the same language used in the New Testament to describe Jesus stopping a storm on the Sea of Galilee: "And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm" (Mark 4:39). There is one hint, though, that this may not be a literal storm on a literal sea: Immediately after the winds cease and there is "a great calm" -- i.e., no wind -- they "sailed again towards the promised land." Obviously you can't sail towards anything when there's no wind. Of course the Gospels also describe the voyage continuing after the wind ceases and there is a great calm, but they don't say they sailed (Luke alone mentions sailing, and only before the storm; see Luke 8:23), and we know that they sometimes traveled the Galilee by rowing (see Mark 6:48).
While I wouldn't call it a smoking gun, this reference to "sailing" in "a great calm" is the only textual evidence I can find against the standard reading that the Lehites sailed an ordinary ship across an ordinary sea.
Conclusion
As much as I like the interplanetary reading of the Book of Mormon and want to find it convincing, so far I'm just not finding it that plausible. For the time being, I think I regrettably have to classify it together with readings that propose that maybe north means "west" and horse means "tapir."
4 comments:
Yeah, great points. No real convincing counter evidence from me.
We might be mistaken in applying our Earth-based and grounded rules and imaginations to other worlds and realities, though, and using it as evidence, which I know is a cop out, but it is also true.
As one example, you imagine and are completely bounded by a spherical Earth in describing the problem of a seashore as something where land meets space (i.e., there is no such thing - it doesn't make sense on a globe, which I agree with). But that is how people on spherical worlds think. What if Nephi's world was a disc or flat (like that disc sitting on Peter's head)? Sounds crazy, yeah, but that is how Tolkien first envisioned Arda when he wrote his stories (before he realized how absurd it was). That is also how CS Lewis formed Narnia.
I've imagined Nephi and his group as not coming from our Earth, and that opens up possibilities for things to be different, including the possibility of living on a disc (why not?). For a person living on said disc, the idea of walking for 8 years due East in the wilderness, coming to the edge of their disc or land, beyond which is only the vastness of space or whatever encircles that world, and calling it a "seashore" would make some kind of sense, I think.
It would make just as much sense as trying to develop a practical explanation for how Lehi's family could have possible taken a full 8 years to cross the Arabian peninsula walking due east while being guided by the Liahona.
This is a great summary. I'm glad you pulled it together. It certainly requires some creative reading to make this fit outer space. No objection on that point.
The biggest hurdle I see from your analysis is the location or setting of the seashore where Nephi built the boat. That's a very good point. I don't think straining over "onto" and "into" will help much. I doubt we can put that much confidence in the BoM's prepositions despite it being the "most correct book". Or worries about a watery grave and drowning. If one is left in outer space I think it's the same result as drowning in the Indian Ocean -- you can't breathe. If the ancients' conception of space was "great waters", which I think both the Bible and Tolkien substantiate, I think they would deem a burial in space as a watery grave.
As foreign as it sounds to us, even today's scientists describe the goings on of space as "storms". Think of a "solar storm". Or read this from NOAA: "Did you know that there are storms always occurring in space? Not rain or snow, but winds and magnetic waves that move through space! This is known as space weather."
According to NOAA we have weather, winds, waves, and storms in space. Why did today's scientists adopt earthly weather terms to describe these phenomena? If NOAA can imagine it certainly we can too. Perhaps Nephi did the same. It's a lot easier than explaining complex astrophysics at least.
None of that helps much with your concern about the setting. For that, I think, we turn to Tolkien's description of the world after it was made round at the end of the Second Age:
"And those that sailed furthest set but a girdle about the Earth and returned weary at last to the place of their beginning; and they said: 'All roads are now bent.' Thus in after days, what by the voyages of ships, what by lore and star-craft, the kings of Men knew that the world was indeed made round, and yet the Eldar were permitted still to depart and to come to the Ancient West and to Avallone, if they would.
Therefore the loremasters of Men said that a Straight Road must still be, for those that were permitted to find it. And they taught that, while the new world fell away, the old road and the path of the memory of the West still went on, as it were a mighty bridge invisible that passed through the air of breath and of flight (which were bent now as the world was bent), and traversed Ilmen which flesh unaided cannot endure, until it came to Tol Eressea, the Lonely Isle, and maybe even beyond, to Valinor, where the Valar still dwell and watch the unfolding of the story of the world. And tales and rumours arose along the shores of the sea concerning mariners and men forlorn upon the water who, by some fate or grace or favour of the Valar, had entered in upon the Straight Way and seen the face of the world sink below them, and so had come to the lamplit quays of Avallone, or verily to the last beaches on the margin of Aman, and there had looked upon the White Mountain, dreadful and beautiful, before they died."
You'll notice these tales and rumors of the straight road occurred exactly where Nephi builds his ship: "along the shores of the sea". What I envision in 1st Nephi is Lehi's crew are among those "permitted to find" the Straight Road and it is upon that Road that they set sail. Think of the Rainbow Connection Kermit the Frog sings about (although I think Sarah McLachlan does it better). You know, the one that "calls the young sailors" like in Tolkien's description.
But most importantly, I think you are forgetting that in WW's theory, Lehi and co are not departing from planet earth. They are departing from Valinor, which I suspect is still flat like earth was originally (per Tolkien). In that case, coming to the seashore would literally be the end of the earth where it meets outer space.
It might be useful to re-do this analysis using the Jaredite experience since they would have departed this earth. The only question there is did they depart it before or after the world was made round?
Thanks for the comments, both of you.
Proposing both Flat Earth and multiple habitable planets is a new one for me. I've only ever encountered it as a joke (e.g. the Flat Mars Society). Flat Earth usually includes the idea that the stars and planets are relatively small objects fixed to a dome above the Earth, not large Earth-like objects which one might in principle travel to and live on.
Anyway, I don't think it makes much sense to envision flat earths coexisting with spherical planets in the same universe -- let alone an originally flat earth being "made round"! The cosmological differences are too great.
I do plan to look at the Jaredite voyage next, so stay tuned.
True, most of this sounds pretty laughable. The idea that the earth was once flat and made round is pretty silly. Or that there are flat land masses floating around space somewhere like Asgard is depicted in the Marvel movies, also a silly idea. The thing is though, if you believe the BoM or the Bible or, frankly, any religion, you are currently embracing ideas that are no less crazy/silly/irrational than those. They only seem normal because you have chosen to accept them as plausible.
Christians believe a story about a resurrected homeless man that pretty much no one has ever seen or heard from. Or that some dude made the Red Sea split. Or that the earth was made in 7 days. Or that a guy once left this planet on a chariot of fire.
Hindu think there's an elephant god with multiple arms who can give you wisdom and good luck.
Most religionists believe at one point the entire planet was covered in water and then somehow drained off.
All of those ideas are completely batsh*t crazy and would seem like a joke akin to the Flat Mars Society if they weren't widely embraced as part of religion. The truth is, you, me, and most humans choose our own list of crazy ideas we want to believe and I don't think that's without good reason. I think it's because there is some innate knowledge that belief in the unexplainable is somehow closer to reality than not. Maybe it's a failing of evolution that hasn't been eliminated yet. Or maybe this human instinct is for good reason.
Regardless, I'm looking forward to the Jaredite analysis!
Post a Comment