Lamanite only a political designation?

[_Mister Scratch]

I see a pretty big problem with Will's argument. As I understand him, he is saying that the bulk of "average members" were wrongheaded to believe that Lamanites=Native Americans, since folks in the Church were teaching that this "wasn't necessarily so" clear back in the 1920s and thereabouts. So, why's this problematic? For a couple of reasons. (1) The LDS Church operates according the the principle of Continuing Revelations. Thus, if any new teaching on this issue were to arise, it would Trump the old one. (2) The intro the to Book of Mormon, written by Elder McConkie circa 1980, pretty much blows apart these 1920s "teachings", both in terms of the "continuing revelation" principle, and in terms of doctrinal authority. "Average members", at least post-1980, certainly had good reason to think that Lamanites=Native Americans. I daresay that copies of the Book of Mormon had far wider circulation than these relatively obscure "teachings" from the '20s.

Sorry, Will, but you lose again.

[_Yoda]

Also, thank you for exemplifying the sexist attributes of Mormon Priesthood holders. I enjoy pointing out the sexism inherent in Mormonism, and your above post does nothing but prove me right.

Oh, let's not allow the fact that Will is a TBM get him off the hook that easily.

Somehow, I get the impression that Will would be a sexist, arrogant asshole in any given situation, Mormon or not.

I have little respect for someone who follows around Runtu's posts like a puppy dog, sends barely veiled threats his way, and then is in genuine wonderment when Runtu turns down his creepy invitation to lunch.

[_Who Knows]

Uh, duh! It wouldn't take an LDS expert in population genetics to support my argument. Any such expert would tell you that any man who had produced three or four generations of offspring 2500 years ago would now be the ancestor of almost every living human being.

Your claim was specific to Lehi, so try again.

I've watched you grow dumber over the course of the past two years.

I hope, at least, that you're happier now. What with your wife wearing her tanktop and panties to bed and everything.

My wife just wears the tanktop -- at least for 45 minutes or so. She likes to sleep in her soft flannel jammies.

If you can't deal with the argument, resort to ad-hom. Typical. You're not baiting me though.

Again, if you want to deal with what I actually wrote, feel free to try again.

[_The Nehor]

I see a pretty big problem with Will's argument. As I understand him, he is saying that the bulk of "average members" were wrongheaded to believe that Lamanites=Native Americans, since folks in the Church were teaching that this "wasn't necessarily so" clear back in the 1920s and thereabouts. So, why's this problematic? For a couple of reasons. (1) The LDS Church operates according the the principle of Continuing Revelations. Thus, if any new teaching on this issue were to arise, it would Trump the old one. (2) The intro the to Book of Mormon, written by Elder McConkie circa 1980, pretty much blows apart these 1920s "teachings", both in terms of the "continuing revelation" principle, and in terms of doctrinal authority. "Average members", at least post-1980, certainly had good reason to think that Lamanites=Native Americans. I daresay that copies of the Book of Mormon had far wider circulation than these relatively obscure "teachings" from the '20s.

Sorry, Will, but you lose again.

How does Will's statement make Lamanites not equal Native Americans. As he said, if there was a Lehi he is probably an ancestor of everyone in the Americas. Most likely this is true of Laman and Nephi as well. In 2000 years every human alive will likely be my descendant if I ever have children. Yours too.

[_Ten Bear]

In retrospect, I have no idea if you even have a “pretty little head.” You see, I am as handsome as my avatar suggests, but I have serious doubts that you are as good looking as your avatar would lead us believe. I’ll bet you’re a wrinkled middle-aged woman with varicose veins and more good years behind you than ahead of you. Right? ;-)

Not cool. This whole time I thought I was in conversation with someone of substance.

Game over.

[_William Schryver]

Go away, Lizzie. This conversation is over your pretty little head. You want to moderate my comments, go right ahead. Put some bite in your bitchiness.

What an unwarranted display of hubris! Will Schryver, I doubt anything you could come up with is over Liz's head, and I can assure you it wouldn't be over mine.

I'm going on a fifteen year old memory, but I believe you're still off by sixty or so years with Charlemagne. He may be called by some the "Father of Europe", but his progeny numbered around twenty, if I remember correctly (and I usually do), so I doubt that should be taken literally.

Also, thank you for exemplifying the sexist attributes of Mormon Priesthood holders. I enjoy pointing out the sexism inherent in Mormonism, and your above post does nothing but prove me right.

KA

I'm quite well known for my "unwarranted display of hubris."

But it's nothing my 15-year-old daughter's sharp tongue can't rip to shreds.

Charlemagne (Charles I) lived in the second half of the 8th century A.D. And I think you're right that he had about 20 children. And I'll bet we're distant cousins because we both descend from him and several of his posterity. He's back about 50 generations for me. I can go back another 25 or so from him to a Roman ruler of Gaul who died in 6 A.D.

Oh, and by the way, my "sexist attributes" are not the exclusive province of the "Mormon Priesthood holder." I'm just a normal man. Well, probably a whole lot more manly than many of the "men" I see posting on this board. Most of them have been so utterly emasculated by our oppressive modern feminazi culture that they are only a couple of testosterone molecules shy of being eunuchs.

Now get your fat ass back in the kitchen and whip up a batch of cookies before I slap you silly.

<grin>

I like you KA. I'll bet you'd look good in a tanktop, too. ;-)

[_Brackite]

There is an Article titled, “Who Are The Lamanites?" on one of the Web Site Pages Zarahemla City Limits . Here is a part of this Article, where the author of this Article, quotes from LDS President Spencer W. Kimball, the 12th President of the LDS Church:

Indeed, the development of what is today known as the Limited Geography Theory, has never been embraced by those sustained as "prophets, seers and revelators". Spencer W. Kimball, for instance, made these very clear remarks:

"With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea. [...] Now the Lamanites number about sixty million; they are in all of the states of America from Tierra del Fuego all the way up to Point Barrows, and they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand. The Church is deeply interested in all Lamanites because of these revelations and because of this great Book of Mormon, their history that was written on plates of gold and deposited in the hill. [...]

"The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. It is a large group of great people.

"[...] [Addressing the Lamanites of the Church] My brothers and sisters, you belong to a great race. Your father is Joseph who was sold into Egypt, the virtuous man who went to prison rather than yield to the seduction of a queen. Your father was Jacob, the father of twelve sons. You came through one of them. One of the great prophets of all times, your father, was Isaac. Another great prophet, your father, was Abraham, than whom there were no greater ones. Abraham was a great man who walked and talked with God. He is your father back those many generations. Be proud of him and know that you are of royal blood; with your royal blood you can achieve, rising to the top. ... You are of royal blood, the children of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Lehi." (Spencer W. Kimball, "Of Royal Blood," Ensign, July 1971)


* * * * * * * * * *

"Our Lamanite work has been going forward. The American Indians and others of the Lamanites, 60 million or more of them in South and Central America and Mexico and the islands, are accepting the gospel. [...] We are told that there are some thirty-six missions directed largely toward the Lamanite people. There are sixty stakes, with more being organized, which have large Lamanite memberships. [...] The Book of Mormon prophecy which promises 'nursing fathers and nursing mothers' for the Lamanites is being fulfilled. Some 10,000 or 15,000 Indian students are being taught in the seminaries and other instructional institutions of religion, and hundreds of the more mature students are receiving their degrees from Brigham Young University, probably the greatest benefactor of Lamanite students among all higher learning institutions... We are very proud of our Lamanites." (Spencer W. Kimball, "A Report and a Challenge," Ensign, Nov. 1976)


( http://zarahemlacitylimits.com/essays/M ... ites3.html )

[_Yoda]

In retrospect, I have no idea if you even have a “pretty little head.” You see, I am as handsome as my avatar suggests, but I have serious doubts that you are as good looking as your avatar would lead us believe. I’ll bet you’re a wrinkled middle-aged woman with varicose veins and more good years behind you than ahead of you. Right? ;-)

I would tell you to kiss my ass, but you would enjoy it too much.

[_Yoda]

In retrospect, I have no idea if you even have a “pretty little head.” You see, I am as handsome as my avatar suggests, but I have serious doubts that you are as good looking as your avatar would lead us believe. I’ll bet you’re a wrinkled middle-aged woman with varicose veins and more good years behind you than ahead of you. Right? ;-)

Not cool. This whole time I thought I was in conversation with someone of substance.

Game over.

Thanks, Ten Bear. You're sweet.

;)

[_William Schryver]

I see a pretty big problem with Will's argument. As I understand him, he is saying that the bulk of "average members" were wrongheaded to believe that Lamanites=Native Americans, since folks in the Church were teaching that this "wasn't necessarily so" clear back in the 1920s and thereabouts. So, why's this problematic? For a couple of reasons. (1) The LDS Church operates according the the principle of Continuing Revelations. Thus, if any new teaching on this issue were to arise, it would Trump the old one. (2) The intro the to Book of Mormon, written by Elder McConkie circa 1980, pretty much blows apart these 1920s "teachings", both in terms of the "continuing revelation" principle, and in terms of doctrinal authority. "Average members", at least post-1980, certainly had good reason to think that Lamanites=Native Americans. I daresay that copies of the Book of Mormon had far wider circulation than these relatively obscure "teachings" from the '20s.

Sorry, Will, but you lose again.

Scratchy, you're the single biggest idiot that posts on this board. And, believe me, that's saying something.

And I am utterly certain that you are incapable of grasping the simple arguments I have advanced. So why don't you go back to watching youporn and your self-administered carpal-tunnel therapy?

Ten Bear:

Not cool. This whole time I thought I was in conversation with someone of substance.

I don't know what I could have said that would have given you that idea.

Who Knows:

Your claim was specific to Lehi, so try again.

??? You really are getting more dense with each passing day.