Lamanite only a political designation?

[_Who Knows]

- Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas, and that native americans came exclusively from them.

No, he didn’t.

What? Are you serious? Ever heard of the wentworth letter?

- In 2007, the phrase 'principal ancestors' is removed from the Book of Mormon.

The phrase “principal ancestors” was never in the Book of Mormon.

Oh jeez. It's in the intro to the Book of Mormon written by one of your 'apostles of god'.

Are you going to pick on my spelling next?

And you believing and making those two statements is a prime example of how poorly informed you are on this entire topic.

Well, why don't you enlighten me then? Prove me wrong.

The whole “DNA analysis disproves the Book of Mormon” argument is the weakest critical argument formulated since the book first appeared 178 years ago. Yet that doesn’t keep fools from continuing to lean on what they consider “science” to justify their apostasy.

Strawman, red herring, whatever the hell it is. Seems like the only ones asserting this are the apologists (or poorly informed critics). What DNA does, is disprove the original (re: Joseph Smith's) Book of Mormon teachings (concerning the origin of NAs).

Anyway, I have to go now folks. It’s been fun . . .

Coolio. Can't wait...

[_beastie]

The larger point is that "Inspiration" and "Personal Revelation" have been revealed, once again to be dismal failures. It doesn't matter what was or was not an "official" doctrine. These past leaders, I'm sure, prayed to Heavenly Father prior to addressing the body of the church in their functions as prophets, seers, and revelators, and simply got it completely wrong. Even today, the church's website talks about a complete destruction of a "nation", an idea that is incompatible with LGT. They, once again, got it completely wrong.

by the way, Will could never be a lawyer. Not enough applause.

[_Chap]

Here is the relevant bit of the Wentworth letter; for the whole text see:

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Wentworth_Letter

Joseph Smith says that AN ANGEL TOLD HIM the story of the "the aboriginal inhabitants of this country [America], and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people was made known unto me: I was also told where there was deposited some plates on which were engraven an abridgment of the records of the ancient prophets that had existed on this continent." He says with the utmost clarity that "The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country."

Surely anyone who doubts those words of the prophet is an apostate?

On the evening of the 21st of September, A.D. 1823, while I was praying unto God, and endeavoring to exercise faith in the precious promises of scripture on a sudden a light like that of day, only of a far purer and more glorious appearance, and brightness burst into the room, indeed the first sight was as though the house was filled with consuming fire; the appearance produced a shock that affected the whole body; in a moment a personage stood before me surrounded with a glory yet greater than that with which I was already surrounded. This messenger proclaimed himself to be an angel of God sent to bring the joyful tidings, that the covenant which God made with ancient Israel was at hand to be fulfilled, that the preparatory work for the second coming of the Messiah was speedily to commence; that the time was at hand for the gospel, in all its fulness to be preached in power, unto all nations that a people might be prepared for the millennial reign.

I was informed that I was chosen to be an instrument in the hands of God to bring about some of His purposes in this glorious dispensation.

I was also informed concerning the aboriginal inhabitants of this country [America], and shown who they were, and from whence they came; a brief sketch of their origin, progress, civilization, laws, governments, of their righteousness and iniquity, and the blessings of God being finally withdrawn from them as a people was made known unto me: I was also told where there was deposited some plates on which were engraven an abridgment of the records of the ancient prophets that had existed on this continent. The angel appeared to me three times the same night and unfolded the same things. After having received many visits from the angels of God unfolding the majesty and glory of the events that should transpire in the last days, on the morning of the 22d of September, A.D. 1827, the angel of the Lord delivered the records into my hands.

These records were engraven on plates which had the appearance of gold, each plate was six inches wide and eight inches long and not quite so thick as common tin. They were filled with engravings, in Egyptian characters and bound together in a volume, as the leaves of a book with three rings running through the whole. The volume was something near six inches in thickness, a part of which was sealed. The characters on the unsealed part were small, and beautifully engraved. The whole book exhibited many marks of antiquity in its construction and much skill in the art of engraving. With the records was found a curious instrument which the ancients called the "Urim and Thummim," which consisted of two transparent stones set in the rim of a bow fastened to a breastplate.

Through the medium of the Urim and Thummim I translated the record by the gift, and power of God.

In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem, about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country. This book also tells us that our Savior made his appearance upon this continent after his resurrection, that he planted the gospel here in all its fulness, and richness, and power, and blessing; that they had apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, and evangelists; the same order, the same priesthood, the same ordinances, gifts, powers, and blessings, as was enjoyed on the eastern continent, that the people were cut off in consequence of their transgressions, that the last of their prophets who existed among them was commanded to write an abridgment of their prophecies, history, &c., and to hide it up in the earth, and that it should come forth and be united with the Bible for the accomplishment of the purposes of God in the last days. For a more particular account I would refer to the Book of Mormon, which can be purchased at Nauvoo, or from any of our travelling elders.

[_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.

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

Will---

What did I get wrong? Earlier in the thread, you said:

What "claims" are you talking about? Let's see you assemble a small collection of these "claims" that you say were made "repeatedly" over the course of the last century and a half. I'm really interested to see what was "claimed" that you think is now being "revised."

Am I somehow wrong to think that you are arguing in this quote that certain "claims" didn't exist? (I.e., claims that Lamanites=Native Americans?)

In a separate post, you state your position rather clearly:

All I've done is argue (and you've tacitly agreed with me) that the Book of Mormon makes it clear that "Lamanite" is a purely political, not an ethnic, designation.

Fair enough, I guess, though other "official" pronouncements from the Brethren, including the Book of Mormon intro, and the quote posted by Brackite, demonstrate that the Brethren (the highest and most important of all doctrinal interpreters) obviously disagree with your views. Tell me, Will: Is your Power of Discernment somehow more powerful than that of Bruce McConkie and Spencer Kimball?

Here's another one of your silly boasts (again, torn to shreds by Brackite):

I'll bet you can't find a single instance of a "prophet" or "apostle" using the phrase "principal ancestors", whether in a temple dedicatory prayer or a conference talk, or whatever.

Oops! Next, take a look at this bit of sophistry:

I have no doubt that some people, including prophets and apostles, may have believed in extreme notions of the origins of native Americans -- that they were all 100% descended from Lehi. But I am aware of no formal dogma to that effect; no "teachings" per se along those lines. Yes, when Spencer W. Kimball speaks of the Navajo, his language may convey his assumption that they are 100% descendants of Lehi. But, again, I know of no "teachings" along those lines.

Why did you feel the need to put "teachings" in scare quotes? Huh, Will?

This part is interesting, too:

I challenge you to find something, anything, that will prove your assertion that "the Lord's mouthpieces ... consistently taught over the last 150 years that the Lamanites are the principal ancestors of the American Indians."

Well, I think you've made your case that the "teachings", as it were, on this subject, have been all over the place. The folks who seem most sure on this subject appear to have been SWK and BRM. There doesn't seem to have been any doubt in their minds as to who/what the Native Americans "are," and if anything, it seems that we should be relying on the Brethren for doctrinal clarity, and not on some wonk named Will Schryver. In any case, the fact that many rank-and-file LDS would think and feel the same way on this subject as two of the most important Church leaders of the past 30 years hardly seems surprising.

At base, Will, I'm left with the impression that your entire argument hinges on some rather shaky semantic re-imagining of the word "teaching." (Perhaps this is due to the uncomfortable-for-TBMs fact that "teaching" and "doctrine" are synonymous.) You seem to want to utilize this tactic because, for whatever reason, you are bothered by the fact that this "teaching" has changed---i.e., that the Church now seems to disagree with what was "taught" by SWK and BRM, among others.

Nothing in the story about the "6 women" conflicts with anything I have argued on this thread. But harmony posting it here, under the obvious impression that it is relevant, is another typical example of the ignorance of those who think they understand the essentials of this discussion.

The "essentials" of your argument has to do with interpretation of doctrine. Right? So, let me ask again: What makes you think that *you* are in a better position to declare doctrine that the Lord's Anointed? You've got your quotes from the 1920s, but, as I've already pointed out, these get "trumped" by the more recent SWK and BRM interpretations. Checkmate again, Will.

[_harmony]

Nothing in the story about the "6 women" conflicts with anything I have argued on this thread. But harmony posting it here, under the obvious impression that it is relevant, is another typical example of the ignorance of those who think they understand the essentials of this discussion.

Oh, well, I don't expect that to stop people from uttering stunningly-misinformed non sequiturs like: "No mention of a Jew anywhere."


No kidding . . .

I don't think you understand the topic of the discussion, Will.

[_silentkid]

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.

Ha. I will, from now on, refer to you as XYY. Thanks for the laugh.

[_beastie]

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.

I'm sure being a Drama Queen results in the exaggerated need to prove one's maleness, too, as in referring to how females would look in tank tops.

[_antishock8]

Which is my word to the Gentile, that soon it may go to the Jew, of whom the Lamanites are a remnant, that they may believe the gospel, and, look not for a Messiah to come who has already come.

Is this a rebuttal? Are you suggesting that the Lamanites would not be a remnant of the House of Israel in this case?

No. It's a statement of canon. Please provide a reference for your earlier supposition.

I tried, you told me I was ignorant about war without explaining why. In addition, you have Mormon bragging about being a pure Nephite, the quick absorption of foreign elements (Zoramites picked up new religion very quickly), and the boast of enemies not having power over the Nephites when the Lamanites and Nephites were under one government (I.e. there was someone else out there).

Reference for your earlier supposition, please.

->

That the Lehite family quickly mingled genetically with pre-existing inhabitants and the Mulekites (a mutt breed themselves) and that genetically their descendants would be indistinguishable from earlier migrant groups.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

- Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas, and that native americans came exclusively from them.

No, he didn’t.

What? Are you serious? Ever heard of the wentworth letter?

I'm going to pretend to be an apologist and say that since the Wentworth letter was "updated" in the new Joseph Smith manual, that's the only official version and it says nothing about NAs being the original inhabitants of the americas. Besides, joseph Smith was like 15 Prophets ago. The living prophets and apostles are above the dead ones in the prophet org chart.

[_Chap]

- Joseph Smith asserted that the Book of Mormon peoples were the original inhabitants of the americas, and that native americans came exclusively from them.

No, he didn’t.

What? Are you serious? Ever heard of the wentworth letter?

I'm going to pretend to be an apologist and say that since the Wentworth letter was "updated" in the new Joseph Smith manual, that's the only official version and it says nothing about NAs being the original inhabitants of the americas. Besides, joseph Smith was like 15 Prophets ago. The living prophets and apostles are above the dead ones in the prophet org chart.

Are you serious about the bits in bold? You mean they have actually changed the text of a letter written by Joseph Smith to a newspaper?

Of course we already know about the live prophets trumping the dead ones ... though another way of putting it would be to say that modern LDS would be apostates so far as 19th C. LDS would have been concerned.

But it is very odd if live prophets actually have the power to make dead ones say or write things they did not actually say or write when they were alive. That is scary.