http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/sacrifice.html

This person suggests non-Levites could offer sacrifices away from the tabernacle.

Actually, he also lacked a temple for the sacrifices.

I researched this and my conclusion is this one is quite weak.

Sorry I don't remember the exact details but in the Old Testament:

1) There is precedence for non-Levites to perform the ceremonies in certain circumstances. Gideon (Judges 6:24-26) and Samuel (1 Samuel 7:9-10) are two examples.

2) There is precedence for performing the ceremonies while traveling.

3) If Lehi really was a prophet & God talked to him as directly as indicated it would make sense that the needed authority would be provided.

From the King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.):

"Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock."

[Other Bible versions of this verse are essentially the same in meaning.]

http://bible.cc/leviticus/1-2.htm


One Bible interpreter says this about the above verse:

"[Note] 27 Leviticus 1:2 makes it clear that only domesticated animals may be offered, and not wild game, which is (too) easily obtained."

Fetal Deity note--Birds could apparently be offered by the poor, but in my research I could find no indication that they could be of the non-domesticated variety. While traveling, as you have noted, accomodations could be made for sacrifice, but domesticated animals were still required:

"When Moses told Pharaoh that Israel must take their cattle with them into the wilderness to worship their God, it was because they needed them to offer burnt offerings (Exod. 10:25-26)."

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:WHN0yhc5BI4J:bible.org/seriespage/law-burnt-offerings-leviticus-11-17

[I am referecing the Google Cache site because my security sofwared red-flagged the original web site.]


The Book of Mormon says that Lehi's party took nothing with them into the wilderness except "provisions, and tents" (Book of Mormon | 1 Nephi 2:4). Could "provisions" include animals for later sacrifice? I don't think that's a reasonable interpretation of the word in this context, and besides, keeping animals alive that were not adapted to this kind of travel would be problematic and could have slowed them down in their escape into the wilderness. Additionally, when wild game was scarce for the group, there is no mention of any consideration of consuming animals they might have brought along on their journey.

Any thoughts?



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 03/09/2013 02:30PM by Fetal Deity.

Interesting - good point. That's definitely odd enough to be troublesome.

Not as odd as Alma the younger baptizing people out of nowhere, but still inconsistent with the Old Testament.

Actually, Samuel WAS a Levite. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel#Family

Thanks for the responses everybody.

It sounds like it's troublesome, but maybe not something you should mention if you're dealing with people who will consider you, and everything you said refuted if they can find an explanation for one point you make.

I would say that this is one of the more minor problems with the BoM. Believing Mormons could easily (in their own minds, anyway) dismiss this point by saying something like: "Well, the Lehites COULD have brought domesticated animals with them on their journey," or "God COULD have altered the rules of sacrifice for the Lehites," which of course, I suppose, COULD be true; however, to my knowledge, there is no mention of the special permission that woud have been required to alter the method of sacrifices under Mosaic Law (in fact, the BoM mentions many times that the Lehites/Nephites were bound by the "Law of Moses"--I Nephi 4:15, for instance [ http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/1-ne/4.15-16?lang=eng ]), nor is there any indication that the Lehites or Ishmaelites took domesticated animals with them when they departed into the wilderness from Jerusalem.

But, with the vast amount of other, more difficult-to-rebut problems in the BoM, I would agree with you that this particular argument not be given an excessive amount of weight or time when dealing with believing Mormons.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2013 12:37PM by Fetal Deity.