Book of Mormon Intro - "Principal Ancestors" wording changed

[_Trevor]

I've got it. When it said they were ancestors it didn't mean DNA-like ancestors but rather spiritual ancestors. Kind of like Jesus is my older brother, but we aren't related even a little bit. Kind of like we were all brothers and sisters at church but we weren't related. Just in spirit.

Man, I have been raised by TBM idiots that had no idea what they were talking about at all. Hill Cumorah was in New York, we were going to be polygamous Gods in the hereafter and Native Americans were Lamanites. No wonder I've become an evil apostate.

Yep, it can be quite a challenge to keep up with new revelation, especially when it is mostly coming out of obscure apologetic discussions online and in the FARMS Review. If you can only get a testimony of Social Trinitarianism, LGT, and the unreliability of DNA evidence, there may be hope for you yet!

[_Maxrep]

After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.

Book of Mormon Intro in the year 2025:

The Book of Mormon is a volume of holy scripture comparable to the Bible. It is a record of God's dealings with a few people who lived among vast hordes of Mayans in some village of Mesoamerica, and it contains the fulness of the everlasting Gospel.

Although this book was written by prophets through the spirit of prophecy and revelation, they also exaggerated egregiously. So, whereas the Book of Mormon gives the impression of being written about all of the inhabitants of ancient America, at best we are talking about what took place over the course of a few days in a single neighborhood in a village in Mexico. The people in this village had two gangs called Nephites and Lamanites, who could not get along. Eventually the Lamanites exterminated the Nephite gang, and even their own DNA is lost in a giant wash of Mayans and other peoples.

The Lamanites are important among the ancestors of the American Indians, even though there may have been 20 of them at most, because they talked to a couple of Nephites who claimed to have seen Jesus. Through these few Lamanites, all of the Native Americans will be blessed. We have no idea why, but God tends to do things this way. Just consider Abraham. Can you find his DNA?

The last of the Nephites left a record of their gang war on some gold plates. And Moroni, one of these guys, appeared to a completely illiterate farmboy who could not even put his britches on without help from his mother named Joseph Smith. God tried to teach Joseph Smith to read the Nephite language, but because he was so incredibly stupid, God just gave up and read it to him.

In spite of his ignorance of all learning, Joseph declared that the Book of Mormon was the most correct book on earth, and we trust that testimony implicitly, even though Joseph apparently hardly read anything at all.

We invite all men (that's right ladies, your husbands do the reading, not you) everywhere to read the Book of Mormon and ponder its message, and not to submit it to any real rational scrutiny, and then pray to ask God to tell you it is true, because the answer will definitely be "yes!"

Trevor, you're killing me. I laughed a strong laugh!

[_charity]

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.

Now, wait just a minute, Charity. This issue has come up on FAIR/MADB and the apologetic answer was that "principal" means "most important"--not numerically largest.

But this change completely obliterates that apologetic line of reasoning. "Among the ancestors" doesn't mean, in any sense, "the most important ancestors."

You argue that "principal ancestor" has always meant merely "among the ancestors." And then you go to argue the same apologetic line referenced above. The problem is that "principal ancestor" has completely disappeared from the DoubleDay publication. It's not there, if Scott Lloyd is to be believed. So, the proposal in the DoubleDay edition is much more modest and much less falsifiable than the proposal in the official LDS edition.

It truly boggles the mind that you can seriously suggest that "among the ancestors" represents a dumbing down of the concept of "principal ancestors."

That doesn't even make any sense. It's a less controversial claim, pure and simple. Not an accurate gloss of a difficult concept.

CKS

You are neglecting the concept of the covenant race. Abraham was promised certain blessings that would go to his literal descendants. It was important in the days of the children of Israel and is still important. Today faithful LDS get patriarchal blessings. The major purpose of the blessing is to declare the lineage of the person. This is why it is important that ONE of the slots on the family tree is filled by a descendant of Abraham.

Most people don't really understand the numbers involved in a genealogy. Eveyr generation doubles, going back. By 20 generations back, which isn't even 1,000 years, the number of spaces on a family tree is in the millions. Pick out any one individual American Indian and how many of those slots will be filled by Lehite descendants and how many will be Asian?

But if there is only one descendant of Abraham, then the individual is part of the covenant. That is the principal ancestor.

[Doctor Steuss]

You are neglecting the concept of the covenant race. Abraham was promised certain blessings that would go to his literal descendants. It was important in the days of the children of Israel and is still important. Today faithful LDS get patriarchal blessings. The major purpose of the blessing is to declare the lineage of the person. This is why it is important that ONE of the slots on the family tree is filled by a descendant of Abraham.

Egads, do you have to say covenant race?

Most people don't really understand the numbers involved in a genealogy. Eveyr generation doubles, going back. By 20 generations back, which isn't even 1,000 years, the number of spaces on a family tree is in the millions. Pick out any one individual American Indian and how many of those slots will be filled by Lehite descendants and how many will be Asian?

Speaking of numbers. If you draw that out for each of the million projected ancestors you mentioned, so each of them has a million ancestors, then it's like a 1,000,000 x 1,000,000 people. Your model makes it sound like there were even more people living back then than are alive today. Something is wrong with this "understanding" of the numbers invovled in geneology.

But if there is only one descendant of Abraham, then the individual is part of the covenant. That is the principal ancestor.

gibberish

[_The Dude]

Is this yet another example of religion bending to fit with science?

No man, it's continuing revelation. It's just coincidental that it follows science.

[_Polygamy Porter]

You are neglecting the concept of the covenant race. Abraham was promised certain blessings that would go to his literal descendants. It was important in the days of the children of Israel and is still important. Today faithful LDS get patriarchal blessings. The major purpose of the blessing is to declare the lineage of the person. This is why it is important that ONE of the slots on the family tree is filled by a descendant of Abraham.

Most people don't really understand the numbers involved in a genealogy. Eveyr generation doubles, going back. By 20 generations back, which isn't even 1,000 years, the number of spaces on a family tree is in the millions. Pick out any one individual American Indian and how many of those slots will be filled by Lehite descendants and how many will be Asian?

But if there is only one descendant of Abraham, then the individual is part of the covenant. That is the principal ancestor.

You have got to be kidding me.

You honestly believe that drivel?

Show me where THAT is NOT the PERSONAL opinion of who ever started it. Honestly, if you have swallowed that, how did you expel Adam-God, or Briggies Racist teachings, or the cave in the NY Cumorah?

In a past question I posed to you about which happy pills you were taking. You said none. Charity, you really need some serious help.

[_Zoidberg]

I'm wonderng why no one has referred to my awesome aplogetic explanation about the Lamanites' DNA structure changing along with their skin color (I mean, how else is skin color supposed to be passed down, duh?) to make them appear Asian that I kindly offered on the black lineage thread.

What, it's not good enough for you people? Come on.

[_gramps]

Ah, MormonDiscussions. Come for the debate, stay for the comedy...

This is why I stay here.

Priceless stuff. Where can you get such a good laugh?

This can't be coming from a real person who admits to who they are? Can it?

This has got to be a sock-puppet. Otherwise, I think I need to check in for some meds. Wow!

And after some healthy herb (see Word of Wisdom), it only gets better.

A big thanks for all the laughs. Thanks, Charity. You are a doll!

[_guy sajer]

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.

So, Charity, if we polled 1,000 randomly selected rank and file believers unacquainted with the DNA issues and apologetic dismissals of it (which is, probably, the large majority of members), what % do you think would interpret "principle ancestor" similarly to the erst of us ignorant types and what % would intepret it similarly to you?

The context is clear, until recently, Mormon doctrine was that the American Indian was a direct blood descendent of Father Lehi. All, or almost all of us, who served missions taught this, prophets have taught it, the rank and file have believed it, and it's only in your apologetic mind (and those of your apologists in arms) that Mormons have historically taught and believed anything else.

What's the score by now? Something like Science 1,000-Mormonism 0?

[_guy sajer]

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.

Now, wait just a minute, Charity. This issue has come up on FAIR/MADB and the apologetic answer was that "principal" means "most important"--not numerically largest.

But this change completely obliterates that apologetic line of reasoning. "Among the ancestors" doesn't mean, in any sense, "the most important ancestors."

You argue that "principal ancestor" has always meant merely "among the ancestors." And then you go to argue the same apologetic line referenced above. The problem is that "principal ancestor" has completely disappeared from the DoubleDay publication. It's not there, if Scott Lloyd is to be believed. So, the proposal in the DoubleDay edition is much more modest and much less falsifiable than the proposal in the official LDS edition.

It truly boggles the mind that you can seriously suggest that "among the ancestors" represents a dumbing down of the concept of "principal ancestors."

That doesn't even make any sense. It's a less controversial claim, pure and simple. Not an accurate gloss of a difficult concept.

CKS

You are neglecting the concept of the covenant race. Abraham was promised certain blessings that would go to his literal descendants. It was important in the days of the children of Israel and is still important. Today faithful LDS get patriarchal blessings. The major purpose of the blessing is to declare the lineage of the person. This is why it is important that ONE of the slots on the family tree is filled by a descendant of Abraham.

Most people don't really understand the numbers involved in a genealogy. Eveyr generation doubles, going back. By 20 generations back, which isn't even 1,000 years, the number of spaces on a family tree is in the millions. Pick out any one individual American Indian and how many of those slots will be filled by Lehite descendants and how many will be Asian?

But if there is only one descendant of Abraham, then the individual is part of the covenant. That is the principal ancestor.

One problem with this. Abraham is not a real person. Your entire reasoning is based an assumption that a fictional character existed in reality.

Using one myth to support another myth is not demonstrative of high reasoning.