Book of Mormon and honey bees

[BartBurk]

In catholic.com it states that one of the problems with the Book of Mormon is the mention of honey bees in Ether. Jeff Lindsay says catholic.com is wrong:

mormanity.blogspot.com/2004/08/anti-mormon-plea-please-dont-pray.html

So is catholic.com going to change its web site or is Jeff Lindsay wrong?

 

[wademann]

I guess another anti-mormon myth bites the dust.

 

[ApostateRLDS]

so, what other so-called anti-mormon ‘myths’ have allegedly bitten the dust?

 

[Leopard]

What’s the problem? Post-columbian european settlers imported honeybees (Apis Mellifera) to the Americas, true.

Pre-columbian american indians collected wild honey from one or more species of bee indigenous to the Americas, and sometimes also domesticated those same bees (not Apis Mellifera), also true.

These indigenous american bees are not honeybees (although some or all may be members of the genus Apis) any more than a lion is a tiger (although both are members of the genus Panthera.) So how does this make Catholic Answers wrong?

 

[Kristine1957]

If you believe in history…The honey bees were introduced to the America’s in the 1500’s by the Spanish and the BoM is from the years 600 BC to 421 A.D.

The honey bees were not in America durning the time that the BoM says they were.

Just like the elephants in Ether 9:19 they were not in America either.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The bees that the Maya gather honey from (even today) are not domesticated, nor could they ever be domesticated. The type of bee, Melipona beecheii, is native to the Mayan region, and the Maya have practiced their bee husbandry for thousands of years, since at least 1800BC, a full 1200 years before the claim of the BoM. The Maya tend wild hives, as this bee only nests in old trees. They divide the hives into additional old trees, in order to increase honey production.

So the problem here is easy to see. Lindsay doesn’t bother to investigate, or point out if he does know, that Mayan beekeeping was in existence long before any bee would have traveled from the Mideast.

The Mideast has used the “Western Honeybee”, apis mellifera. Which is the honeybee that we all recognize as the honeybee. The middle east beekeeping practice kept their bees in tile cylinders that were stacked.

So, there is the second problem with Lindsay’s apologetics. This particular sort of bee husbandry was first practiced by the Egyptians. The Egyptian practice spread into the Mideast and Mediterranean. Logically, this long tradition and practice is what one would expect to have been brought to the new world by people who originated in the Mideast. And we would expect to find this particular bee in the new world when Europeans arrived. Neither the bee or the form of beekeeping that goes with this type of bee were here until Europeans introduced them.

 

[BartBurk]

Actually, the scripture in the Book of Mormon about honey bees comes from the Book of Ether. Those people supposedly came to the Americas in 2000 B.C. in an earlier migration than the Nephites who came in 600 B.C.

The bees that the Maya gather honey from (even today) are not domesticated, nor could they ever be domesticated. The type of bee, Melipona beecheii, is native to the Mayan region, and the Maya have practiced their bee husbandry for thousands of years, since at least 1800BC, a full 1200 years before the claim of the BoM. The Maya tend wild hives, as this bee only nests in old trees. They divide the hives into additional old trees, in order to increase honey production.

So the problem here is easy to see. Lindsay doesn’t bother to investigate, or point out if he does know, that Mayan beekeeping was in existence long before any bee would have traveled from the Mideast.

The Mideast has used the “Western Honeybee”, apis mellifera. Which is the honeybee that we all recognize as the honeybee. The middle east beekeeping practice kept their bees in tile cylinders that were stacked.

So, there is the second problem with Lindsay’s apologetics. This particular sort of bee husbandry was first practiced by the Egyptians. The Egyptian practice spread into the Mideast and Mediterranean. Logically, this long tradition and practice is what one would expect to have been brought to the new world by people who originated in the Mideast. And we would expect to find this particular bee in the new world when Europeans arrived. Neither the bee or the form of beekeeping that goes with this type of bee were here until Europeans introduced them.

 

[Megatron]

Rebecca, that is an excellent reply! Catholic Answer should include it!

 

[Leopard]

The bees that the Maya gather honey from (even today) are not domesticated, nor could they ever be domesticated…

This may not be entirely correct. Some pre-columbian Central and South American indian peoples did domesticate indigenous bees, encouraging them to nest in artificial cavities from which honey could be more easily harvested. I do not know what species of bees these were. They may not have been Melipona beecheii and the people who had domesticated these bees may not have been Maya. But these bees certainly were not Apis Mellifera.

 

[Kristine1957]

Bartburk: Just curious…

Where does the BoM say the people of Ether came to America in the 2000 B.C? The BoM supposedly covers the years of 600 B.C. to 421 A.D.

 

[PoliSciProf]

Re Honey Bees: In The New Yorker of August 6, 2007, Elizabeth Kolbert also says that before the first American colonists, there were no bees in the Americas. The article is entitles Stung. In addition to the Book of Mormon issue, the article is an interesting piece about “colony collapse disorder,” the disappearance of an awful lot of bees as well as bee economics. Read it for the latest apiary buzz.

 

[zerinus]

Bartburk: Just curious…

Where does the BoM say the people of Ether came to America in the 2000 B.C? The BoM supposedly covers the years of 600 B.C. to 421 A.D.

The Book of Mormon is the story of two major migrations to the Americas. The first group, known as the Jaredites, or the people of Jared, immigrated to America at the time when God “confounded the languages of the people,” when He also destroyed the “tower” that the children of men were building in Babel (see Genesis 11:1–9). This group were destroyed by internal warfare, before the Nephites were brought in. The other group were the Nephites (which actually consisted of two different migrations: the people who came with Lehi and his family, and another group who came a decade later, known as the people of Mulek, who were also of Israelite descent). The Jaredites, if you accept Bible chronology, would have come somewhere between 2,000 to 3,000 BC. According to the Book of Mormon, it was the Jaredites who introduced the honey bee (among varous other kinds of animals) into America; here is the quote:

Ether 2:

1 And it came to pass that Jared and his brother, and their families, and also the friends of Jared and his brother and their families, went down into the valley which was northward, (and the name of the valley was Nimrod, being called after the mighty hunter) with their flocks which they had gathered together, male and female, of every kind.

2 And they did also lay snares and catch fowls of the air; and they did also prepare a vessel, in which they did carry with them the fish of the waters.

3 And they did also carry with them deseret, which, by interpretation, is a honey bee; and thus they did carry with them swarms of bees, and all manner of that which was upon the face of the land, seeds of every kind.

4 And it came to pass that when they had come down into the valley of Nimrod, the Lord came down and talked with the brother of Jared; and he was in a cloud, and the brother of Jared saw him not.

5 And it came to pass that the Lord commanded them that they should go forth into the wilderness, yea, into that quarter where there never had man been. And it came to pass that the Lord did go before them, and did talk with them as he stood in a cloud, and gave directions whither they should travel.

zerinus

 

[Montalban]

Re Honey Bees: In The New Yorker of August 6, 2007, Elizabeth Kolbert also says that before the first American colonists, there were no bees in the Americas. The article is entitles Stung. In addition to the Book of Mormon issue, the article is an interesting piece about “colony collapse disorder,” the disappearance of an awful lot of bees as well as bee economics. Read it for the latest apiary buzz.

Isn’t that like the Book of Mormon saying the Jews worshipped in synagogues, when they weren’t - at that time - they did later?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Actually, the scripture in the Book of Mormon about honey bees comes from the Book of Ether. Those people supposedly came to the Americas in 2000 B.C. in an earlier migration than the Nephites who came in 600 B.C.

The fact remains, Egyptians were the first to practive beekeeping. Their practices spread throughout the Mideast and Mediterranean. Whether people supposedly migrated from the Mideast in 2000BC or 600BC, logically, any bees and beekeeping practices that came with them would be of Mideastern origins and traditions. And the bee would be the same bee. Neither of which is true.

 

[dosdog]

Adair’s History of the American Indians
worldcat.org/wcpa/ow/ce21720246e085a9.html
Adair, James Originally published in 1775

Elias Boudinot (1740-1821)
A star in the West or, A humble attempt to discover the long lost ten tribes of Israel, preparatory to their return to their beloved city, Jerusalem.
The Second Advent, or coming of the Messiah in glory shown to be a Scripture doctrine, and taught by divine revelation, from the beginning of the world
by Elias Boudinot Language: English Type: Book : Microform
Publisher: Trenton, N.J. : D. Fenton & S. Hutchinson, 1815.
directtextbook.com/author/elias-boudinot
worldcat.org/wcpa/ow/128e55e54631b184a19afeb4da09e526.html

View of The Hebrew (i.e. BOM)
Ethan Smith’s book is largely a compilation of material from the works of other writers, particularly James Adair and Elias Boudinot

Both books argue that the American Indians are descendants of the Hebrews

Both books relate the discovery of buried records

Both books refer to inspired prophets and describe objects resembling the Urim and Thummim and the breastplate of the Hebrew high priest

Both books refer to written characters similar to Egyptian hieroglyphs

Both books claim that the Indians were separated into civilized and barbarous cultures and that the civilized people were exterminated by the barbarous Indians

Both books emphasize the destruction of Jerusalem, refer to the scattering and restoration of Israel, quote frequently from Isaiah, and claim that American Gentiles are to play an important role in restoring the Indians back into the house of Israel

Both books condemn pride and seeking of riches, and both praise the virtues of the Indians.

Both books describe the appearance of an important person on the American continent – Christ and Quetzalcotl

In addition, Ethan Smith discusses only one theory about the migration of people to the Americas. He holds that they took a northward journey across Asia to the Bering Strait and then spread southward. Adair mentions this theory once

But the parallels actually testify to the fact that the Book of Mormon agrees with many of the popular theories and speculation of the day
mormonstudies.com/author1.htm

 

[BartBurk]

The fact remains, Egyptians were the first to practive beekeeping. Their practices spread throughout the Mideast and Mediterranean. Whether people supposedly migrated from the Mideast in 2000BC or 600BC, logically, any bees and beekeeping practices that came with them would be of Mideastern origins and traditions. And the bee would be the same bee. Neither of which is true.

I’m a recent convert from Mormonism to Catholicism. I simply don’t think the honey bee argument is a good one to use. I would rather use DNA and some of the arguments based on linguistics.

 

[RebeccaJ]

This may not be entirely correct. Some pre-columbian Central and South American indian peoples did domesticate indigenous bees, encouraging them to nest in artificial cavities from which honey could be more easily harvested. I do not know what species of bees these were. They may not have been Melipona beecheii and the people who had domesticated these bees may not have been Maya. But these bees certainly were not Apis Mellifera.

I was addressing Lindsay’s apologetics, which he bases on Mayan beekeeping practices.

The Inca held expertise in many aspects of agriculture and animal husbandry. Beekeeping was one of those activities. However, they were still using indigenous bees.

I am not an expert on bee history. But seriously, Jeff Lindsay’s apologetics on any topic all go along the same vein. Take the stories in the BoM and lay them over the top of any tidbit of information that helps to support the story. It is never a whole picture and beyond inaccurate. It is building a story to match the BoM, rather than looking at the facts and explaining them in the context in which they exist, using all information.

Beekeeping is just one example. All Lindsay says is, look, pre-Columbian people practiced beekeeping, so therefore, the BoM story of transporting bees is true!!! Hell, I could make up all sorts of stuff and apply that sort of “logic”. The problem is, the facts of the practice are separated from the cultures and even the available species.

The fact remains, all pre-Columbian bee husbandry used indigenous bees. The bee Apis Mellifera was not in the New World until Europeans brought it here. The practices of the cultures don’t match to what was developed in Egypt, the Mideast or the Mediterranean.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I’m a recent convert from Mormonism to Catholicism. I simply don’t think the honey bee argument is a good one to use. I would rather use DNA and some of the arguments based on linguistics.

Oh, I completely agree. Bees are just the subject at hand.

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Oh, I completely agree. Bees are just the subject at hand.

And an important metaphor for Mormons, i.e., ‘Deseret.’

And the name of the Angels’ Triple A affiliate: the Salt Lake City Bees.

Robert

 

[zerinus]

I was addressing Lindsay’s apologetics, which he bases on Mayan beekeeping practices.

Beekeeping is just one example. All Lindsay says is, look, pre-Columbian people practiced beekeeping, so therefore, the BoM story of transporting bees is true!!! Hell, I could make up all sorts of stuff and apply that sort of “logic”. The problem is, the facts of the practice are separated from the cultures and even the available species.

The fact remains, all pre-Columbian bee husbandry used indigenous bees. The bee Apis Mellifera was not in the New World until Europeans brought it here. The practices of the cultures don’t match to what was developed in Egypt, the Mideast or the Mediterranean.

The issue that Jeff Lindsay is addressing is not whether the pre-Columbian bees in America were of one type or another, but whether they existed at all. He is addressing specifically the claims in the catholic.com article which asserts that there were NO bees in America before the Europeans brought them in. This is the quote:

Another problem: Scientists have demonstrated that honey bees were first brought to the New World by Spanish explorers in the fifteenth century, but the Book of Mormon, in Ether 2:3, claims they were introduced around 2000 B.C.

That is implying that there were NO honeybees in America before the Europeans came—not of what species they were. Well, the article is wrong. There WERE honeybees in America before the Europeans came, regardless of what species they were, and that is the case that Jeff Lindsay is making.

The article also raises the issue of Jesus being born in Jerusalem, which I have already answered in my Blog articles here.

zerinus