One of
the lamest arguments against the Book of Mormon is that of Alma 7:10. Speaking
of the then-future birth of the Messiah, the prophet Alma states:
And behold, he shall be born of Mary, at Jerusalem,
which is the land of our forefathers, she being a virgin, a precious and
chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy
Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God.
Since
the initial publication of the Book of Mormon, critics have focused on this one
text as “proof” that the Book of Mormon is uninspired, as it allegedly places
the birthplace of Jesus as Jerusalem, and not Bethlehem. However, this is based
on a superficial reading of the text; for instance, Alma 7:10 does not
reference the city of Jerusalem, but the land of Jerusalem. In
the Ancient Near East, the land of “x” would encompass, not just the city, but
the nearby area, and this has been confirmed from both biblical and non-biblical
sources. Furthermore, the argument necessitates that Joseph Smith was so
grossly ignorant of the Bible that he did not know where Jesus was born (which
is contrary to the claim of many critics who believe Smith knew the Bible
intimately when the Book of Mormon was translated!).
I read
a commentary on Isaiah this morning which seems to provide some additional
evidence that “Jerusalem” did not just encompass the city with that name, but
the local environs which would encompass the suburb of Bethlehem.
In Isa
66:7-8, a Messianic text, we read:
Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her
pain came, she was delivered of a man child. Who hath heard such a thing? Who
hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? Or
shall a nation be before at once? For as soon as Zion travailed, she brought
forth her children.
The
setting of this verse is that of Jerusalem, as seen in verse 6 (emphasis
added):
A voice of noise from the city, a voice from
the temple, a voice of the Lord that rendereth recompense for his enemies.
Andrew
Perry, in his commentary, Isaiah 58-66, pp.206-7 notes that (emphasis in
original):
The man-child is delivered before the “travail” of
Zion, which is an evident figure for the Assyrian invasion and particularly the
blockade of Jerusalem. Zion (feminine) was delivered of a male before she was
in labour . . . The best link is with the prophecy of the Rod of Jesse (Isa
11:1) who is predicted to “come forth” and be a “standard” for the people (Isa
11:10; 59:21).
In the
same work (p. 206 n. 3) Perry, commenting on the setting of the birth of this
Messianic figure being Zion, notes that, “This does not mean the child was born
in Jerusalem; it could have been a nearby village (cf. Mic 5:2).”
If critics (at least those from a Bible-believing [whether Protestant or Catholic] background) wish to critique the Book of Mormon based on (a misreading of) Alma 7:10, they will have to critique Isaiah 66 for placing the birth of the then-future Messiah in "Zion" (if they wish to be consistent, that is, which most critics never are).
