FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Question: Could ancient Americans have expanded the definition of "horse" to include new meanings?
Revision as of 14:53, 13 July 2017 by RogerNicholson (talk | contribs) (RogerNicholson moved page Question:Could ancient Americans have expanded the definition of "horse" to include new meanings? to Question: Could ancient Americans have expanded the definition of "horse" to include new meanings?)
FAIR Answers—back to home page
Question: Could ancient Americans have expanded the definition of "horse" to include new meanings?
Loan shifting: We must consider the possibility that the ancient author was applying familiar terms to unfamiliar animals that were encountered in the New World
Joseph Smith obviously knew what a "horse" looked like. It stands to reason, therefore, that when Joseph said "horse" that this is exactly what he meant. If we consider, however, that Joseph was receiving revelation that simply conveyed what was written by the ancient author, we must consider the possibility that the ancient author was applying familiar terms to unfamiliar animals that were encountered in the New World. It is important to remember that the Book of Mormon itself is not an ancient text—it is a nineteenth-century translation of an ancient text. Modern readers need to have an understanding of what the ancient author was attempting to convey. Some of the things that seem "plain" to us are not so "plain" upon further investigation or once we understand the culture that produced the text.
For a detailed response, see: Loan shifting: "Horses" as deer and tapirs
Notes