If I could ask them one question about
the Church’s Book of Mormon, Come Follow Me, Lesson 17
« Previous
Next »
For Apr 27 - May 3, 2020
Mosiah 7-10
If I wanted to encourage thought and try to understand devout believers better, I might ask:
“What do you think about neas, and sheum?”
Things to consider:
- “And we began to till the ground, yea, even with all manner of seeds, with seeds of corn, and of wheat, and of barley, and with neas, and with sheum . . .” (Mosiah 9:9, emphasis added).
- First of all, there was no wheat in the Americas at the time, and although barley may not have been a complete anachronism, it seems anachronistic to list it as a crop at the same level as corn (see my annotations for Mosiah 9:9 for more information on this). But, these anachronisms are just a side note in this post. The focus is on neas and sheum, why they’re mentioned, and what the implications might be.
- I cannot find any apologists trying to explain what neas may have been. Some apologists have speculated about the meaning of “sheum,” but their speculations make little sense given the fuller context of the Book of Mormon and provide no useful insight about why sheum is mentioned in the first place. Besides, why would apologists give us these speculations when prophets have warned not to teach, “the philosophy of men mingled with a few scriptures” (Apostle Ezra Taft Benson, cited here)?
- Furthermore, consider the rational implications of words like “neas,” “sheum,” (and “cureloms,” and “cumoms” from Ether 9:19) when it comes to some philosophies of apologetic men. Some apologists speculate that when Joseph used anachronistic words in the Book of Mormon (like “horse”), perhaps he was just using the anachronistic word he knew to refer to some other thing that he was unfamiliar with. This is called using a loanword. (See my “If I could ask them one question . . . Come Follow Me, Lesson 5” for more about this)
- But “neas,” “sheum,” “cureloms,” and “cumoms” are examples of plants and animals that no one can identify, so God clearly didn’t need loanwords, and using such loanwords has been the source of confusion and speculation for believers.
- The Church teaches to liken all scripture unto ourselves. How do you do that with neas, sheum, cureloms, and cumoms?
- And, am I the only one who thinks of heffalumps and woozles when they think of cureloms and cumoms?
Sung to the tune of “Heffalumps and Woozles”
♯ ♪ A Curelom or Cumom is very confusom!
Eating Neas and Sheum, they’re very sly ♮ ♫
If you could ask believers questions about the scriptures for this lesson, what would you ask?
Some other problems I see in this lesson’s reading:
- It refers to the Exodus, but the consensus is that it never happened (Mosiah 7:19).
- Barley is mentioned, and though there was a form of barley use pre-Columbian Americas, it seems anachronistic in this context (Mosiah 7:22).
- A seemingly trinitarian doctrine is taught (Mosiah 7:27).
- Rusty swords seem to be anachronistic (Mosiah 8:11, Mosiah 9:16, and Mosiah 10:8).
- It explains what seers are and that they used to do amazing things that current seers don’t seem capable of (Mosiah 8:13-17, 19).
- The dark side of the prosperity gospel (Mosiah 9:3
- Improbably large group of people (Mosiah 9:11).
Have fun studying!
« Previous
If I could ask them one question, Lesson 17
Next »