Page 10 of 21

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 12:40 am
by _Maksutov
deacon blues wrote:
For a Mormon apologist, this is a massive understatement.


Hey deacon blues, tip of the hat to a Steely Dan man. :wink:

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 4:47 am
by _moksha
moksha wrote:Oh yeah? Like Dr. Peterson pointed out, biblical archeology did not have to contend with acid rain, object destroying vegetation, the Limit Geographical Theory area dropping off into the sea at the end of the Third Age or the strange compulsion of the Cureloms and Cumoms to hoard things in undiscovered places.


I wonder what Dr. Peterson's thoughts might be on sending out a team of forensic zoologists who might sleuth out the hiding places for these compulsive but extinct Cureloms and Cumoms. Send them out with the latest 3D holographic scanning equipment. The priceless art treasures that could be donated to the BYU art museum at a reasonable tax write-off would justify the project, plus it would make Dr. Peterson's job a heck of a lot easier. Why, he could justify nearly fifty columns of "I told you so" to his malevolent stalker alone.

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 10:21 pm
by _hagoth7
Maksutov wrote:Hagoth, for over a century the LDS church was clearly racist.

Can we please not change the topic, at least for now? The question was about a single passage in the Book of Mormon

...except for those who pretend it never existed or try to distort and whitewash it beyond recognition.

There is no doubt that racism has existed (and perhaps still exists) in portions of the LDS faith, as it has in several other American faiths.

I don't see "distortion" or "whitewashing" as part of the context. Others were taking offense over a single word, and were reading it through modern eyes. So that word was changed to remove the unintentional offense, or stumblingblock, and a parallel word was used that carried the same intent as the original meaning.

The passage from the book of Daniel should demonstrate that there is nothing shocking, offensive, or racist in the use of the word "white" in a sacred text. It's curious that many people overlook the more interesting and significant meaning in the rest of the context surrounding that single verse, and instead trip up on a misunderstanding over a single word.

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:06 pm
by _hagoth7
I'll offer this for clarity, since people repeatedly seem to be missing the point:

2 Ne 29
"And also, that I may remember the promises which I have made unto thee, Nephi, and also unto thy father, that I would remember your seed; and that the words of your seed should proceed forth out of my mouth unto your seed."

Nephi continued in 2 Ne 30
And now behold, my beloved brethren, I would speak unto you...And then shall the remnant of our seed know concerning us, how that we came out from Jerusalem, and that they are descendants of the Jews....and their scales of darkness shall begin to fall from their eyes; and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a pure and a delightsome people.

Note that the passage says that it was latter-day Nephites who would become a pure and delightsome people after they became converted to Christ through the testimony of their fathers.Why would changing the word from "white" to "pure" be in any way meant as an admission to being racist when Nephites were already fair-skinned? The reference to white or pure is meant there, as it is in the Book of Daniel, in the sense of spiritual purity, as in being purified by God.

In context, precisely how is the verbiage in 2 Nephi 30 even slightly racist? :rolleyes:

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:13 pm
by _fetchface
Brigham's speech to the Utah legislature in 1852 makes it perfectly clear that it was his understanding that God was in favor of slavery and that it should therefore be legal in Utah. I'm not sure that helps us sort out who the racist was but anyway...

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Mon Jun 08, 2015 11:23 pm
by _hagoth7
Hi again sock puppet,
sock puppet wrote:hagoth7, whose words were "white and delightsome" in 2 Ne 30:6?

Elohim/Jehovah's?

Nephi's?

JSJr's?

Please do identify the racist.

Now I'll answer your question more directly.

The original words were Nephi's, which I believe were inspired from God.
The translation of his words into English was provided by Joseph, through the inspiration and power of God.
The change from "white and delightsome" to "pure and delightsome" was made more recently by others, by inspiration in my opinion, in response to outspoken critics who couldn't see beyond more than one possible meaning for the word "white," in order to remove an ongoing stumblingblock.
(Perhaps for those who, in the words of Isaiah, prefer to make "an offender for a word".)

Is that helpful?

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:37 am
by _hagoth7
Hi fetchface,
fetchface wrote:Brigham's speech to the Utah legislature in 1852 makes it perfectly clear that it was his understanding that God was in favor of slavery and that it should therefore be legal in Utah. I'm not sure that helps us sort out who the racist was but anyway...

His understanding may be what it was. (We don't know how he was raised, so it can be hard to judge.)

This whole topic is a tangent, but I'll respond here for the record. If anyone wants to make more of this, it might be better suited to a separate thread.

Compare what you've said above to the 1833 revelation which said: "According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles; that every man may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, that every man may be accountable for his own sins in the day of judgment. Therefore, it is not right that any man should be in bondage one to another.."
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testa ... ang=eng#76

Compare that also to the much earlier Nephite record, "But Ammon said unto him: It is against the law of our brethren, which was established by my father, that there should be any slaves among them; therefore let us go down and rely upon the mercies of our brethren."
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/Book of Mormon/alm ... lang=eng#6

You're shifting the original argument.
If something racist was intended in 2 Nephi 30, as was first asserted in this thread, why was that passage directed towards Nephite descendants?
And what about the context of D&C 101 and Alma 27, provided above?
Is there no reply to 2 Nephi 30?

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 12:58 am
by _grindael
hagoth7 wrote:
Maksutov wrote:Hagoth, for over a century the LDS church was clearly racist.

Can we please not change the topic, at least for now? The question was about a single passage in the Book of Mormon

...except for those who pretend it never existed or try to distort and whitewash it beyond recognition.

There is no doubt that racism has existed (and perhaps still exists) in portions of the LDS faith, as it has in several other American faiths.

I don't see "distortion" or "whitewashing" as part of the context. Others were taking offense over a single word, and were reading it through modern eyes. So that word was changed to remove the unintentional offense, or stumblingblock, and a parallel word was used that carried the same intent as the original meaning.

The passage from the book of Daniel should demonstrate that there is nothing shocking, offensive, or racist in the use of the word "white" in a sacred text. It's curious that many people overlook the more interesting and significant meaning in the rest of the context surrounding that single verse, and instead trip up on a misunderstanding over a single word.


But the Book of Mormon is not speaking (in that instance) of someone's soul being white, vs. being black or stained with sin.

Dark skin as a sign of God's displeasure is taught in 1 Ne. 12:23; 2 Ne. 5:21-23; Alma 3:6-9; Morm. 5:15. In W. W. Phelps's version of Joseph Smith's 1831 revelation, verse 4, Smith envisioned inter-marriage with the Indians as a way of making them "white and delightsome": "For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome and just, for even now their families are more virtuous than the gentiles." Martin Harris, Oliver Cowdery, Brigham Young, Phelps, and apostate Ezra Booth all knew about the revelation. (Robert Hullinger, Joseph Smith's Response to Skepticism, p.148, n. 12).

This agrees with what Mormon "authorities" have said about those Book of Mormon passages:

Who are the Indians? Read the Book of Mormon, and you will learn that they are the literal descendants of Israel; they have been cursed through the transgressions of their fathers, and a skin of darkness has come upon them. This history tells us that they were once a white and delightsome people, and had great power on this land, but that they were degraded and cast down because of their sins. When we came here, we found them living upon crickets, grasshoppers, roots, and anything they could possibly eat, poor, miserable, degraded beings, though they have immortal souls, and are of the house of Israel. What is the Lord doing for them? He is stretching forth his hand over them, in remembrance of the promises made to their fathers. (Wilford Woodruff, Journal of Discourses Vol. 18, p.119)

The other branch of Lehi's colony, following the leadership of Laman and Lemuel were called Lamanites, and were a people devoted to hunting and living upon the natural products of a fruitful wilderness. They were idle and headed towards barbarism, which ultimately became their state. Also they were "cut off" from the presence of the Lord, and that they might not be enticing to the Nephites, they were cursed of God with a skin of blackness, that whereas before the curse "they were white and exceeding fair, and delightsome," they were now dark skinned and repulsive (II Nephi 5:21-23). They became the very antithesis, then, of the Nephites—the one civilized, the other barbarian. One of the Book of Mormon writers referring to the status of the two peoples, in the closing decades of the second century, after Lehi left Jerusalem, says of the Lamanites: "They were led by their evil nature that they became wild, and ferocious, and a blood thirsty people, full of idolatry and filthiness; feeding upon beasts of prey; dwelling in tents, and wandering about in the wilderness, with a short skin girdle about their loins and their heads shorn; and their skill was in the bow, and in the cimeter, and the ax, [p.167] and many of them did eat nothing save raw meat; and they were continually seeking to destroy us"—that is, the Nephites (Enos 1:20). (B.H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, p.167).

They were cursed of God with a skin of blackness, that whereas they had been "white and exceeding fair and delightsome," the "Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them," that they might be loathsome to Nephi's people. The curse was extended also to all those who should "mix with their seed." And because of the cursing which was upon them, "they did become an idle people, full of all mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey." And the Lord revealed it to Nephi thus early, that the descendants of his brethren should be a "scourge" to his seed, if the latter should fail to remember the Lord, yea, they should "scourge them, even unto destruction" (II Nephi 5:25). (B.H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, p.191).

EVER and anon throughout the Book of Mormon, we are reminded by the inspired historians of the beauty of the Nephite race, especially in the days when the glory of righteousness beamed in their eyes, and shone in their countenances; then they were fair, very fair--a white and a delightsome people.

And well might it be so, for were they not descended from that kindred couple, Abraham and his half-sister, whose great beauty has been proverbial in every generation, since they graced the earth with their comeliness? So lovely was Sarah, the fairest of womankind of her generation, that when she was sixty-seven years of age, the royal Pharaoh, disregarding the charms of the darker daughters of Egypt, desired her for his wife; and his admiration was doubtless in good taste, for the Bible tells us that she was then very fair. And still more remarkable, when yet another twenty-two years had passed away, and she had seen nearly ninety summers and winters come and go on this earth, another monarch, Abimelech, sought to take her to himself. Nor was her husband's manly beauty less striking; obedience to God, the observance of the laws of life, and the cultivation of the generous virtues so ennobled his existence, that strength and manhood tarried with him in its force, long after that age when the sons of modern generations are feebly tottering to their graves.

Of the commanding beauty of Abraham's descendants, we have many recorded instances, but none that exceed that of his great-grandson Joseph, whose surpassing manliness placed him in the greatest jeopardy, but whose uncompromising virtue and unaffected innocence brought him off conqueror over temptation, and raised him to the highest pinnacle of earthly splendor and heavenly favor. It was from this well-favored Joseph that the Nephites sprang.

God has set the mark of his displeasure on the Lamanites, whom he has cursed, because of the iniquities of their fathers, with a darkened skin, uncomely features, and straight, black, coarse hair. In the beginning it was not so with either Judah or Manasseh.

In confirmation of the testimony of the Book of Mormon, that the inhabitants of this continent were once a white and beautiful people, it may be stated that when very ancient burial places in North and South America have been opened, the remains of two races--one dark and the other fair--have been exhumed. The question may arise: How could this be told, when the skin had long rotted off the bones, and left only the skeleton behind, which fell in powder as soon as it was exposed to the action of the air? In this way: The dry, gravelly soil in which some of these bodies were buried, bad so little affected the mummy, that portions of the hair still remained in good preservation, and in numerous instances it was such as is only found on heads of light races. We will cite a few examples given by different inquirers in this field of research. (George Reynolds, The Story of the Book of Mormon, Ch.62, p.285).

History has repeated itself many times -- children of God who have followed his teachings have been preserved, and those who have refused, have gone into darkness and have been destroyed. Take the American Indians as another illustration. Their ancestors were a white and delightsome people, brought away by the Lord before the destruction of Jerusalem, in order that they might have an opportunity to develop upon this favored land. Because they refused to keep the commandments of God, because they disobeyed the law and determined to be a law unto themselves, they retrograded and were cursed with a dark skin and became the unfortunate race that wandered over this great western hemisphere for generations, before the coming of the white man.

The Lord has watched over this land, he directed Columbus to these shores, he led the Pilgrims here, he established the Constitution of the United States, and through the Prophet Joseph Smith, restored the everlasting gospel to bless the children of men, and if they will accept it and obey it, it will be the salvation of the human family. (George Albert Smith, Conference Report, October 1922, p.97).

The first missionaries went from this section around to another little town on the east side of the island, and there they gathered in a grass hut one hundred people to hear the message of these strange white men, As they all sat around the mat and heard the voice of this missionary from Utah, they were transfigured before George Q. Cannon, and he saw ninety-seven of them become white, and three of them remained dark. He did not understand. He did not know why it was that three of them would remain dark and all the rest should become light. He received a partial answer to this manifestation when it was learned that ninety-seven of those people in meeting at this time joined the Church, became devout members, lived and died Latter-day Saints, while three of them never did. It is said that they will become a white and delightsome people. They are delightsome at present, and I believe they are going to become white. They are growing whiter from year to year. I have said to myself and to some of my intimate friends that I thought the Hawaiian people would become white and delightsome, through intermarriage. I do not know whether that is according to the doctrines of the Church or not, but they have married the oriental races and married white people on the islands to such an extent that today there are more half casts than there are pure Hawaiians. (Eugene J. Neff, Conference Report, April 1927, p.50).

Just recently I received a letter from one of the missionaries in the Northwestern States mission in which he recounted this experience to me. He said: "President Sloan, we called on a man and left with him a Book of Mormon." I do not know why the missionary should have done this without any explanation whatsoever as to the contents of the Book of Mormon and as to its purpose. But he said the man took the book and as he read it he found that it spoke of a wonderful people which came from Jerusalem. They lived upon this continent for a few years and then they divided and subdivided, and conflicts arose, and a curse was placed upon some of these people and a dark skin was the result of this curse. This man thought to himself, "Can this be the Negro race of people?" Then as he read further along in the book he found that some day these people were to become white and delightsome again, and he could not imagine that this would be the Negro people. One day after reading from this book and thinking much about it he went to visit his daughter who lived just a half block distant from where he was then residing. He spent the afternoon and stayed all night at his daughter's home. During the night, after he had retired and fallen asleep, he had what you may call a dream or a vision, or what you will. He was taken into a valley through which a river of water was running. Trees were on both sides of the stream, and among the trees and on each side of the river were numerous tents of Indians, or tepees, or wigwams, as you wish to call them. The Indians were there in hundreds, going about their daily duties, etc. He saw nothing to this, however, except a large tribe of Indians. Then this part of the dream closed and he was carried over into his own home, into his own bedroom, and lying on a little center table near his bed was a copy of the Book of Mormon. He saw the book lying there and as he beheld the cover of it he saw a light emanating from the book, and it arose about twelve inches above the book. There it stood for a second or two and then gradually ascended clear into the heavens. He connected the two together and the next day he sought the elders. He said: "You did not tell me that the Book of Mormon was a history of the American Indians. Now I know it is. I know it is a record of God's dealings with those people, because he revealed it to me in my dreams last night." (William R. Sloan, Conference Report, April 1927, p.123).

The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as AngIos; five were darker but equally delightsome. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation. (Spencer W. Kimball, Conference Report, October 1960, p.34).

Great Spirit, Listen to the Red Man's Wail!
by Charles W. Penrose
. . .
Great Chieftain, save him from the palefaced foe!
His broad, green hunting grounds, where buff'loes roam
His bubbling streams where finny thousands play
The waving prairies, once his happy home,
Are fast departing to the Christian's sway.
With curs'd firewater's stupefying flame,
(Which lulled the senses of our chiefs to rest)
And soft-mouthed words, the cheating pale face came
And stole our lands and drove us to the west.
Our gray-haired med'cine men, so wise and good,
Are all confounded with the dread disease,
Which ne'er was known to flow in Indian blood
Till white men brought it from beyond the seas.
An angel replies with comforting promises:
Not many moons shall pass away before
The curse of darkness from your skins shall flee,
Your ancient beauty will the Lord restore,

And all your tribes shall dwell in unity.
The arts of peace shall flourish ne'er to die;
The warwhoop and the deadly strife shall cease;
Disease shall then depart, and every sigh,
And health and life shall flow in every breeze.

Songs of Zion, Charles Penrose, http://www.hymnary.org/hymn/SHSS1871/page/376

2 Nephi 5:21 as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them
Jacob 3:8 I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought before the throne of God.
3 Nephi 2:15 and their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites.
3 Nephi 2:16 and their young men and their daughters became exceedingly fair, and they were numbered among the Nephites.

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:03 am
by _grindael
Douglas Campbell*

In 1981 the First Presidency of the LDS church changed 2 Nephi 30:6 in the Book of Mormon from "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people" to "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a pure and delightsome people . . . " In the following essay I present five vignettes as background to the change from "white" to "pure" in official LDS scripture.

Vignette 1. Restoring a Plain and Precious Truth

Our story begins with the 1830 first edition of the Book of Mormon. After LDS missionaries had exhausted this first edition, Joseph Smith had Parley P. Pratt publish a second edition in 1837 in Kirtland, Ohio. Three things happened in 1839 that affect our story: (1) Joseph Smith sent the Quorum of the Twelve to England; (2) missionary work exhausted the second edition of the Book of Mormon by December 1839; and (3) on 29 December 1839 the Nauvoo, Illinois, High Council voted to publish a third edition of the Book of Mormon. After delays in fund raising, Ebenezer Robinson published the third edition in October 1840 in Cincinnati, Ohio. In this 1840 edition, for the first time, 2 Nephi 30:6 reported that the Lamanites became "a pure and delightsome people" rather than "a white and delightsome people."

Not knowing that a third edition was being planned 4,000 miles away (the trans-Atlantic telegraph was not in operation until 1866), the Twelve held their April 1840 conference in England and voted to publish the Book of Mormon in England by the end of the year. The Twelve faithfully reprinted the second (1837) edition. Due to delays, this edition did not appear until January 1841. The church thus had two different editions at the same time: the American 1840 Nauvoo and the English 1841 edition.

Based on the English 1841, not the American 1840 edition, three more major editions of the Book of Mormon followed: 1852, 1879, and 1920. A member of the Quorum of Twelve supervised each major edition: Franklin D. Richards, in 1852; Orson Pratt, in 1879; and James E. Talmage, in 1920. The 1837, 1841, 1852, 1879, and 1920 editions retained the 1830 "white" instead of the 1840 "pure" in 2 Nephi 30:6.

In the 1970s the First Presidency established the Scripture Publication Committee composed of some members of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles. Its charge was to produce printed materials to help members understand the Bible and to improve doctrinal scholarship in the church. Elders Thomas S. Monson, Boyd K. Packer, and Bruce R. McConkie were among its members. A group of faculty members from Brigham Young University carried out the project. Among its members was Ellis Rasmussen, dean of the College of Religion. During their work the committee reported the 1840 "pure" versus "white" variant. The First Presidency restored this 1840 change to the Book of Mormon in 1981. Dialogue, Vol.29, No.4, p.119

Re: Peterson explains why no Book of Mormon archeology found, yet....

Posted: Tue Jun 09, 2015 1:08 am
by _grindael
The 1837 edition is important because Jo worked on that one himself. He did not change "white" to "pure" in that edition.

The 1837 Edition

So why does Parley P. Pratt's 1837 Kirtland edition of the Book of Mormon have over 3,000 textual changes from the first edition? The 1837 preface explains: "Individuals acquainted with book printings, are aware of the numerous typographical errors which always occur in manuscript editions. It is only necessary to say, that the whole has been carefully re-examined and compared with the original manuscript . . . "11 Consider the following five reasons for the existence of textual variations in the second edition of any book having both a printer's manuscript and a printed first edition.

1. Time pressures. Scarce money-generating resources encourage quick proofreading. A sixteen-page signature takes up space in a small print shop; signatures consume the limited supply of each type face and font size. The sooner a printer finishes corrections, the sooner he can print a signature; the sooner he prints a signature, the sooner he can salvage the type; the sooner he salvages the type, the sooner he can accept additional print jobs; the sooner he accepts additional print jobs, the sooner he can make money; and time is money.

2. Complicated proofreading. Book of Mormon proofreaders were not able to line up old pages and new pages and compare line to line and word to word. The page height of the 1830 Book of Mormon is 15.5 centimeters. That of the 1837 edition is 12.5 centimeters. The 1830 edition has forty-three lines per page; the smaller 1837 edition has forty-seven lines. The page width of the 1830 edition is 9 centimeters; that of the 1837 edition is 6.5 centimeters. The 1830 edition averages sixty characters per line; the 1837 edition averages fifty-four. In addition, the greatly reduced font size of the 1837 edition hampered proofreading.

3. Precedence. When the 1830 edition differed from the 1830 printer's manuscript, which took precedence? Even more problematic, during the years after 1830, Joseph Smith recorded some grammatical and doctrinal corrections directly on the original printer's manuscript. Thus the printer's manuscript contained corrections made before the 1830 printing and corrections made after the 1830 printing. The 1837 text could differ from the 1830 printed version, from the printer's manuscript, from the pre-printing corrections to the printer's manuscript, from the post-printing corrections to the printer's manuscript.

4. Modernized language. Joseph Smith modernized some of the language of the 1837 edition, changing (1) "which" to "who" 707 times; (2) "saith" and "sayeth" to "said" 229 times12; and (3), after revising the Bible and deciding he had overused the term "and it came to pass," crossed-out that phrase on many pages of the printer's manuscript.13 Continuing Joseph Smith's trend to modernize the language of the Book of Mormon faces an uphill battle. Elder J. Reuben Clark of the First Presidency wrote the book Why the King James Version to discourage use of modernized Bible translations. In his April 1993 general conference address, Elder Dallin Oaks discouraged modernizing the language of prayer and encouraged the continued use of a "special language of prayer."

5. Doctrinal clarification. Joseph Smith had many additional revelations from 1830 to 1837. During these years his understanding of the nature of the Godhead developed. Some changes in the 1837 edition were made to clarify his concept of the Godhead. (Douglas Campbell, Dialogue, Vol.29, No.4, p.124).