A Dangerous Jesus

In the 19^th and 20^th century people were looking to explain their surroundings, and justify their right to America. As we have seen throughout this course Americans have taken some wild steps to justify the phrase “manifest destiny”. I see some pieces in the book of Mormon that appear ridiculous to me now but might have been accepted in the 19^th century and possibly the early 20^th century.

The first thing I find troubling is Joseph Smith saying that Jesus came to America after his resurrection. This is obviously ridiculous Jesus would have never been able to travel that far to visit the people of Nephi. However, it might have been a popular belief in the 19^th century. After all people had already attributed the Indian Mounds of Wisconsin to one of the lost tribes of Israel, and Jesus visiting the “new world” doesn’t seem that impossible if an entire lost tribe can get here.

            I find this thought very troubling almost a little bit freighting. Using Jesus and the lost tribes of Israel as a possible story to explain ones surroundings distracts Americans from the truth. The truth that Indians were here first and we should respect their territory. These stories give credit where credit is not due and they distract us from what actually happened in a way that harms others. The Indians suffered because Americans thought they could reintroduce spirituality and civility through assimilation. Americans claimed land that really wasn’t theirs through stories similar to this. 

            Another troubling thing that may have appealed to 19^th or 20^th century people is Jesus descending from the clouds in a white robe. This is a very captivating image, which also explains why the Nephi are such a special people. Jesus descended from the heavens to help them. In a way this ordains Americans as having a special blessing from Jesus and Europeans are just reintroducing a lost culture to the natives. It serves as an excuse to explain why Americans should “manifest destiny”. After all Jesus doesn’t just come down from the clouds for anybody.

            I don’t like to think of Jesus coming down from the clouds because the image of Jesus descending from the clouds goes against the founding principles of Christianity. Jesus was supposed to be a simple carpenter, not a drama queen (or king). This image goes against all conservative images of Jesus and in a way ruins what he stands for. I don’t like this image because it is not how I picture Jesus. I picture him as a wise man that people listen to because of his words, not because he can descend from the clouds like a UFO. I think this image ruins the modesty that should embody Jesus.

            These were the two details of Jesus that I found troubling one, because both of them seemed very impossible. But two because, I don’t think Jesus should be a symbol of ordaining a religion, while he may be a savior people should not look at him as something he isn’t to justify a wrongdoing. For example Americans can’t believe that since they were the chosen people of Jesus they can do whatever they want to other cultures and just explain that they are people of Jesus to and Natives simply need to return to his ways.