Book of Mormon Intro - "Principal Ancestors" wording changed

[_charity]

I don't know why this argument always makes me smile. The "testament" record was careful enough to talk about money and weights and measures, the kinds of clothes and armaments used, the horses and chariots of Lamanite kings, the kinds of crops and animals used, detailed battle descriptions, and meetings with other people, such as the Mulekites and Coriantumr. But for mention of interaction with vast numbers of indigenous peoples, we have to appeal to the "other" record, which, darn it, we just don't have.

Look at when the different prophets wrote. And how far they were from Nephi's initial intention to keep the record "pure." By the time Alma was writing, in 90 B.C. or so they had been in the New World for 500 years. That is longer than the colonization of America. If you were writing now, about your experience in say, California, would you talk about moving in somewhere and "discovering" there were people there?

Of course, they would be interested in Mulekites. They came from Jerusalem! And Jaredites had a similar founding story to theirs. Lead by God. Crossing the waters.

[_Runtu]

Look at when the different prophets wrote. And how far they were from Nephi's initial intention to keep the record "pure." By the time Alma was writing, in 90 B.C. or so they had been in the New World for 500 years. That is longer than the colonization of America. If you were writing now, about your experience in say, California, would you talk about moving in somewhere and "discovering" there were people there?

Of course, they would be interested in Mulekites. They came from Jerusalem! And Jaredites had a similar founding story to theirs. Lead by God. Crossing the waters.

They repeatedly said that the land would be reserved for those whom the Lord brought there. They mentioned the Mulekites and Jaredites for just that reason. But about the vast hordes of Olmecs and Mayas there is not even a mention (unless you accept Charles Dowis's interpretation of "goats and wild goats").

If I were writing about my experiences in California, it would be ridiculous not to mention my neighbors. I grew up in a predominantly Jewish neighborhood, so observance of Jewish holidays and ritual was part of my life for 18 years. Of course I would mention that.

Funny how no one in the 19th century felt the need to find "others" in the Book of Mormon. This is a modern apologetic development, nothing more. Apologists tell us to go by what's in the book, but not on this topic.

[_Ten Bear]

Look at when the different prophets wrote. And how far they were from Nephi's initial intention to keep the record "pure." By the time Alma was writing, in 90 B.C. or so they had been in the New World for 500 years. That is longer than the colonization of America. If you were writing now, about your experience in say, California, would you talk about moving in somewhere and "discovering" there were people there?

Of course, they would be interested in Mulekites. They came from Jerusalem! And Jaredites had a similar founding story to theirs. Lead by God. Crossing the waters.

Funny thing, I actually did move to California having been raised in the Utah/Idaho area. I look back in my journal (ya, I know, I actually keep one) and the first thing I flipped to is a mention of how I really liked the old missions that were built by the early Spanish settlers long before Europeans made their way there. They really are facsinating. But I'm a nobody. And yet, even in my little notebook, there you have it. Other people.

[_Chap]

I don't know why this argument always makes me smile. The "testament" record was careful enough to talk about money and weights and measures, the kinds of clothes and armaments used, the horses and chariots of Lamanite kings, the kinds of crops and animals used, detailed battle descriptions, and meetings with other people, such as the Mulekites and Coriantumr. But for mention of interaction with vast numbers of indigenous peoples, we have to appeal to the "other" record, which, darn it, we just don't have.

Look at when the different prophets wrote. And how far they were from Nephi's initial intention to keep the record "pure." By the time Alma was writing, in 90 B.C. or so they had been in the New World for 500 years. That is longer than the colonization of America. If you were writing now, about your experience in say, California, would you talk about moving in somewhere and "discovering" there were people there?

Of course, they would be interested in Mulekites. They came from Jerusalem! And Jaredites had a similar founding story to theirs. Lead by God. Crossing the waters.

You mean you can read all this from 2 Nephi 5, and remain convinced that (assuming the whole thing not to be fiction - which is what I think it is) if Nephi had met any other human groups in the "wilderness", in which he says they manufactured arms in fear of a Lamanite attack, sowed seed, built a temple, prospered exceedingly, raised great flocks and so on, he would not have mentioned it because he wanted to keep his record "pure"?

Come on! Really?

7 And we did take our tents and whatsoever things were possible for us, and did journey in the wilderness for the space of many days. And after we had journeyed for the space of many days we did pitch our tents.
8 And my people would that we should call the name of the place aNephi; wherefore, we did call it Nephi.
9 And all those who were with me did take upon them to call themselves the apeople of Nephi.
10 And we did observe to keep the judgments, and the astatutes, and the commandments of the Lord in all things, according to the blaw of Moses.
11 And the Lord was with us; and we did aprosper exceedingly; for we did sow seed, and we did reap again in abundance. And we began to raise flocks, and herds, and animals of every kind.
12 And I, Nephi, had also brought the records which were engraven upon the aplates of brass; and also the bball, or ccompass, which was prepared for my father by the hand of the Lord, according to that which is written.
13 And it came to pass that we began to prosper exceedingly, and to multiply in the land.
14 And I, Nephi, did take the asword of Laban, and after the manner of it did make many bswords, lest by any means the people who were now called Lamanites should come upon us and destroy us; for I knew their chatred towards me and my children and those who were called my people.
15 And I did teach my people to abuild buildings, and to bwork in all cmanner of wood, and of diron, and of copper, and of ebrass, and of steel, and of fgold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance.
16 And I, Nephi, did abuild a btemple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of cSolomon save it were not built of so many dprecious things; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon’s etemple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of fSolomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.
17 And it came to pass that I, Nephi, did cause my people to be aindustrious, and to blabor with their chands.

[_charity]

Nephi was keeping two sets of records. One was a history. The other was the"testament" or the record of the religious life of his people. May I suggest that he did keep a "we met some people of the land" kind of record with what he specifically states was a normal history. And since he already had done that, he didn't repeat himself.

Wouldn't it be fun to have that other record?

Just my thoughts.

Yep, all 116 pages of it.

I was referring to other records, you know the roomful of records. The 116 pages would have been part of the "testament" record.

[_Runtu]

I was referring to other records, you know the roomful of records. The 116 pages would have been part of the "testament" record.

Does it occur to you how weak your position is when you have to appeal to nonexistent records to substantiate your claim?

[_charity]

I wasn't aware of another record. That does sounds like a possibility. Like I said, my knowledge is limited. But I'm struggling with how we go 1000 years never mentioning anyone else, not even once. (Jaradites don't count - they're suspect too). But maybe that's it. Second record.

Hmmm. Maybe. Maybe not.

1 Ne. 19: 4 "Wherefore, I, Nephi, did make a record upon the other plates, which gives an account, or which gives a greater account of the wars and contentions and destructions of my people. And this have I done, and commanded my people what they should do after I was gone; and that these plates should be handed down from one generation to another, or from one prophet to another, until further commandments of the Lord."

[_Runtu]

1 Ne. 19: 4 "Wherefore, I, Nephi, did make a record upon the other plates, which gives an account, or which gives a greater account of the wars and contentions and destructions of my people. And this have I done, and commanded my people what they should do after I was gone; and that these plates should be handed down from one generation to another, or from one prophet to another, until further commandments of the Lord."

Not to derail this thread, but I wonder what is meant here. If the plates that Mormon abridged were concerned with spiritual matters, why is so much of the book dedicated to battles and tactics and fortifications? I used to think that maybe there was some sort of righteous analogy here, but it seems out of place.

[Guest]

Sorry to burst your little bubble, but that is what principal ancestor always meant. That among their pedigrees , Lehi was there, and because Lehi carried the covenant promise of Abraham to these people, he was the "principal ancestor" among the millions of their ancestors.

That has always been the meaning. But becasue people are so ignorant about genealogy, they changed it to make it more understandable to the less educated (in matters of genealogy) masses.

Charity, I have a small question, maybe you can shed some light. My knowledge is limited. Whenever I've read other journals, documents and books about one group of people visiting or traveling to another region or land, almost the first thing mentioned in the narritive is the native people they encounter. Maybe like, "we met some people of the land and they appeared hostile", or maybe "the people of this area seem very friendly and helpful." The text may even be rife with speculation of what the people may be like long before they reach their distination.

Why do you suppose there is no mention of another people - native or otherwise - by Lehi and his family?

Just a thought.

Nephi was keeping two sets of records. One was a history. The other was the"testament" or the record of the religious life of his people. May I suggest that he did keep a "we met some people of the land" kind of record with what he specifically states was a normal history. And since he already had done that, he didn't repeat himself.

Wouldn't it be fun to have that other record?

Just my thoughts.

So the information about the Natives was ONLY in the other record? That seems odd since other cultural and historic items like money, government, other immigrant groups like the Mulekites, animals, crops, etc. made their way into the testament record, but somehow the Natives are only in the history record. Nothing about preaching to the natives? Nothing about observing the Natives false religions? The natives don't even appear on the periphery, such as "Behold, I tried to pray but the chants of the savages as they commenced their buffalo hunt distracted me." Nothing about going to war with the natives. The wars were only between Nephites and Lamanites, but you would think over 1000 years the Native might want to fight someone. I mean come on. The Americas were densely populated with natives. They had to be a major part of both the history part, and the spiritual part of the Nephites and Lamanites.

[_Ten Bear]

1 Ne. 19: 4 "Wherefore, I, Nephi, did make a record upon the other plates, which gives an account, or which gives a greater account of the wars and contentions and destructions of my people. And this have I done, and commanded my people what they should do after I was gone; and that these plates should be handed down from one generation to another, or from one prophet to another, until further commandments of the Lord."

Not to derail this thread, but I wonder what is meant here. If the plates that Mormon abridged were concerned with spiritual matters, why is so much of the book dedicated to battles and tactics and fortifications? I used to think that maybe there was some sort of righteous analogy here, but it seems out of place.

Good point. Although it was really the only part of the Book of Mormon that kept me awake (back in the day), I have to admit that I always thought it odd that Mormon (Moroni) spent so much energy writing about every minute detail of war.

Now I'm wondering if it was a fascinating topic in Joseph Smiths day. I tend to believe he leaned towards hot topics of the day. After all, I can imagine that a lot of surviors of the Revolutionary War were still around and hamming up the "old war stories" (if they were teens or 20s when they fought). A lot of the stratagies and tactics, to me, sound like old battle stories rehashed. Would Joseph learned much about Roman times as well? Maybe some of that got dumped into the text.