Entire populations lost to war?

[_charity]

Two groups of Indians, the Chinookan and the Kalapyuan, in the Willamette Falls area of Oregon were estimated to number aobut 32,000 in the late 1700's when they first had contact with the whites. Diseases which the Indians called the "cold fever", (probably malaria) were catastrophic. By 1848 when they were censused by the territory, there were 60 left. Maybe that isn't killed off completely, but comes pretty close.

[_Inconceivable]

Moroni and Mormon still said their lineage came through the chief white guy (and not the black guy's lineage).
Not one writer of the Book of Mormon was a black man. Not one. They even left out Samuel the Lamanite's speach until Jesus called them to repentance.
Lamoni offered a cursed daughter to Ammon and was rejected (for whatever reason).
Nephites suggested to Ammon and the sons of Mosiah that it would be more viable to exterminate the cursed black people rather than teach them Mormonism (which, by the way, they were proved wrong).
Jershon was not inhabited by whites, only by blacks - segregated for whatever reason.
Jesus said Samuel was a prophet, but not the prophet. We do not know but that he became white because he was Mormon.
There is no specific account that Nephites married into the lineage of Lamanites unless they rebelled (like the priests of king Noah or Amalakiah).

God's primary purpose for the existance of the Lamanites (blacks) was to stir the whites up to repentance. If the whites would not repent but ripen in iniquity they would be wiped from the face of the earth by the cursed black Lamanites.

At the end of the Book of Mormon, there is no distinction between color, both groups were equally evil. Those last to call themselves Nephites (regardless of racial origin) were hunted down by the so-called Lamanites and exterminated. The begining of the book's prophesies are a contradiction to the actual fulfillments. 'ites meant nothing in the end - both were evil - it was a civil war, not a war over Mormonism.

Yet Mormon and Moroni made a point to infer they were of the lineage of non-cursed white men.

[_charity]

Moroni and Mormon still said their lineage came through the chief white guy (and not the black guy's lineage).

So, they were supposed to lie and say they were descended from Laman?

Not one writer of the Book of Mormon was a black man. Not one. They even left out Samuel the Lamanite's speach until Jesus called them to repentance.

The Book of Mormon is a compilation of books through a specific lineage. Nephi's. Not Laman's. So?

Lamoni offered a cursed daughter to Ammon and was rejected (for whatever reason).

So if you were to go into somebody's house and he said, "Here sleep with my daughter" you would clap your hands and jump into bed. Not very discriminating of you.

Nephites suggested to Ammon and the sons of Mosiah that it would be more viable to exterminate the cursed black people rather than teach them Mormonism (which, by the way, they were proved wrong).

I would like to see what lead you to think this. I can't find it. So please point me to chapter and verse on this one. thanks.

Jershon was not inhabited by whites, only by blacks - segregated for whatever reason.

Sort of brings to remembrance another people who were given a land they names Goshen. Or don't you read the
Bible?

Jesus said Samuel was a prophet, but not the prophet. We do not know but that he became white because he was Mormon.

Today we have the same conditions. We have THE prophet, or president of the Church. Then there are the other prophets the members of the Quorum of the Twelve.

There is no specific account that Nephites married into the lineage of Lamanites unless they rebelled (like the priests of king Noah or Amalakiah).

Again, arguing from ignorance. Not very bright.

God's primary purpose for the existance of the Lamanites (blacks) was to stir the whites up to repentance. If the whites would not repent but ripen in iniquity they would be wiped from the face of the earth by the cursed black Lamanites.

You presume to speak for God?

At the end of the Book of Mormon, there is no distinction between color, both groups were equally evil. Those last to call themselves Nephites (regardless of racial origin) were hunted down by the so-called Lamanites and exterminated. The begining of the book's prophesies are a contradiction to the actual fulfillments. 'ites meant nothing in the end - both were evil - it was a civil war, not a war over Mormonism.

???????

Yet Mormon and Moroni made a point to infer they were of the lineage of non-cursed white men.

You really do perseverate.

You really do not understand the Book of Mormom.

You really should learn what you want to talk about before you start typing.

[_silentkid]

You really do not understand the Book of Mormom.

What I've learned from this thread and others like it:

No one really understands the Book of Mormon. Apologists don't understand it. Critics don't understand it. Joseph Smith didn't even understand it. It's un-understandable. I'll read Finnegan's Wake instead.

[_Doctor Steuss]

Joseph Smith didn't even understand it.

In his person he is tall and slender -- thin favored -- having but little expression of countenance, other than that than that of dulness; his mental powers appear to be extremely limited, and from the small opportunity he has had at school, he made little or no proficiency, and it is asserted by one of his principle followers, (who also pretends to divine illuminations,) that Jo, even at this day is profoundly ignorant of the meaning of many of the words contained in the Book of Mormon.

The Reflector, "Gold Bible, No. 3," Palmyra, NY, February 1, 1831, Volume II, Series I -- No. 12 (Emphasis mine)

[_silentkid]

Joseph Smith didn't even understand it.

In his person he is tall and slender -- thin favored -- having but little expression of countenance, other than that than that of dulness; his mental powers appear to be extremely limited, and from the small opportunity he has had at school, he made little or no proficiency, and it is asserted by one of his principle followers, (who also pretends to divine illuminations,) that Jo, even at this day is profoundly ignorant of the meaning of many of the words contained in the Book of Mormon.

The Reflector, "Gold Bible, No. 3," Palmyra, NY, February 1, 1831, Volume II, Series I -- No. 12 (Emphasis mine)

Steuss...you are the quote wizard. I like that they spelled his name Jo. Jo-Jo. I think the most important parts of my last post are the use of the word "un-understandable" and the reference to Finnegan's Wake. As for the quote, I tend to believe (contrary to the quoter) that Joseph understood the meaning of the words contained in the Book of Mormon. In other words, he understood the words that were coming out of his mouth. To say he didn't understand it may be a mis-statement on my part. I think what I was trying to get at is that his interpretation of the text (based on many statements he made) seems to be at odds with some of the current apologetic interpretations of the text (i.e. LGT, white and delightsome v. pure and delightsome, the nature of the godhead, etc.). I think that's what I meant. I can never be sure. Sometimes I am a moron and/or an idiot. And I often start sentences with the word and.

[_charity]

You really do not understand the Book of Mormom.

What I've learned from this thread and others like it:

No one really understands the Book of Mormon. Apologists don't understand it. Critics don't understand it. Joseph Smith didn't even understand it. It's un-understandable. I'll read Finnegan's Wake instead.

You didn't understand my post. My comment was addressed to one poster who said he had never read it all the way through, just here and there, and then proceeded to go on and on about what it says and doesn't say.

There are hundreds of thousands of people who understand the Book of Mormon in doctrine and teachings. Then there are a smaller number who are really scholars, who study it, and don't just read it. Then there are some evern fewer who know it EXTREMELY well.

So Steuss, do you believe that first hand account of how dull and dimwitted Joseph was speaks to the issue of whether or not he could have written it himself? Doesn't that force the critics out of that position entirely? And I think it even shuts down the argument that he could have memorized huge passages of a previously written manuscript and merely repeated it to his scribes. The only thing left is translation of an ancient document through the power of God.

[_Doctor Steuss]

[...]
So Steuss, do you believe that first hand account of how dull and dimwitted Joseph was speaks to the issue of whether or not he could have written it himself?

I think it was a bit exaggerated (especially given the remainder of the article, and the obvious motivations). But even the greatest exaggerations are usually grounded in some form of truth; so, yes I believe it speaks to the issue somewhat.

Doesn't that force the critics out of that position entirely?

I remember when I first posted that quote (maybe a year ago?) in a thread with Dan Vogel. He seemed to have some interpretations of the article and the use of "ignorant" that helped him maintain a Joseph who could have created it. I don't recall what it was, but I didn't find it particularly impressive. In some of my (personal) conversations with Graham (i.e. structurcop), and from my own study/reading, I have kind of come to the conclusion personally that Joseph could not have been the sole author of the Book of Mormon. There are just some little bits that I can’t (in my mind) fathom him being 1)familiar with, or 2)gleaning from readings of the Bible. As a side note, he (Graham) is currently working on a form of Documentary Hypothesis for the Book of Mormon.

And I think it even shuts down the argument that he could have memorized huge passages of a previously written manuscript and merely repeated it to his scribes. The only thing left is translation of an ancient document through the power of God.

I don’t know that this particular newspaper article “shuts down” those arguments, but I don’t particularly think those arguments have merit to begin with.

[_Doctor Steuss]

Steuss...you are the quote wizard.

Considering the fact that I haven't had an original thought since my hippie days, I'm kind of forced to quote others.

I think the most important parts of my last post are the use of the word "un-understandable" and the reference to Finnegan's Wake

.
Brilliance is strong with you my young three-sheets-to-the-wind padawan.

[_Inconceivable]

You didn't understand my post. My comment was addressed to one poster who said he had never read it all the way through, just here and there, and then proceeded to go on and on about what it says and doesn't say.

22 times cover to cover begining at age 15.

Read it with my wife and children clear through twice.

Attended the Book of Mormon classes from Reid Bankhead - BYU

Studied extensively while serving a full time mission.

Memorized bits and peices

Seriously considered writing book of paradigms covering over 35 distinct topics derived specifically from the Book of Mormon

Taught the 1 year Gospel Doctrine Book of Mormon course 5 times over the past 22 years.

Wore out 2 books - literally.

I only reference it now and have left it alone for about 1 1/2 years.



Regardless Ch#$&ty, you are a poser. It doesn't matter to me how many times you have attempted to read it clear through. You emulate the man that did not understand what he said he translated.