Meridian Magazine :: Answers to Critics: Jerusalem vs. Bethlehem

Jerusalem vs. Bethlehem
From FAIR, the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research

Critics point out that Alma 7:10 says Jesus would be born “at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers.” We all know that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. They say this mistake is evidence that Joseph Smith forged the Book of Mormon.

BYU professor Daniel C. Peterson pointed out the absurdity of this argument:

To suggest that Joseph Smith knew the precise location of Jesus’ baptism by John (“in Bethabara beyond Jordan” [1 Nephi 10:9]) but hadn’t a clue about the famous town of Christ’s birth is so improbable as to be ludicrous. Do the skeptics seriously mean to suggest that the Book of Mormon’s Bible-drenched author or authors missed one of the most obvious facts about the most popular story in the Bible — something known to every child and Christmas caroler?

Do they intend to say that a clever fraud who could write a book displaying so wide an array of subtly authentic Near Eastern and biblical cultural and literary traits as the Book of Mormon does was nonetheless so stupid as to claim before a Bible-reading public, that Jesus was born in the city of Jerusalem?

As one anti-Mormon author has pointed out, “Every schoolboy and schoolgirl knows Christ was born in Bethlehem.” Exactly! It is virtually certain, therefore, that Alma 7:10 was foreign to Joseph Smith’s preconceptions. “The land of Jerusalem” is not the sort of thing the Prophet would likely have invented, precisely for the same reason it bothers uninformed critics of the Book of Mormon.

Land vs. City

It is important to note what Alma’s words were. He did not claim Jesus would be born in the city of Jerusalem, but “at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers.”

Thus the Book of Mormon makes a distinction here between a city and the land associated with a city. It does this elsewhere. Alma refers to the land and the city of Zarahemla and the land and city of Nephi. This is consistent with the usage of the ancient Middle East. El Amarna letter #287 refers to “a town of the land of Jerusalem, Bit-Lahni [Bethlehem] by name, a town belonging to the king ...”

Thus, Joseph Smith gets it exactly right — the town of Bethlehem is in the “land of Jerusalem.” In fact, Bethlehem is only five miles south of Jerusalem — definitely “in the land,” especially from the perspective of Alma, a continent away. Even locals considered Hebron, twenty-five miles from Bethlehem to be in the “land of Jerusalem.”

We find corroboration for this designation in the Bible, itself. In 2 Kings 14:20 we read about the death of Amaziah. “And they brought him on horses: and he was buried at Jerusalem with his fathers in the city of David.” So, Bethlehem, the city of David, is at Jerusalem, according to the Bible.

Evidence For and Not Against the Book of Mormon

Critics have not proven anything in raising this point, except perhaps another literary evidence for the Book of Mormon. Although a forger would likely overlook this detail and include Bethlehem as the commonly-understood birthplace of Jesus, the ancient authors of the Book of Mormon use an authentic term to describe the Savior’s birthplace, thereby providing another point of authenticity for the Book of Mormon.

The full FAIR wiki article may be accessed here.

If you have any topic or question you would like to see addressed pleased contact Carolyn Wright at http://www.fairlds.org/contact.php. Just check the box for the Meridian Article Editor.

Return to Top of Article

Click here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.