Who are the Lamanites now?

[_The Nehor]

Sir,

Would you be kind enough to point out in the Book of Mormon where it states the Jaredites, or Nephites mixed with other inhabitants?

Ether 15: 2

2 He saw that there had been slain by the sword already nearly two millions of his people, and he began to sorrow in his heart; yea, there had been slain two millions of mighty men, and also their wives and their children.

1 Ne. 12: 1

7 The whole face of the land had become covered with buildings, and the people were as numerous almost, as it were the sand of the sea.

So on and so forth...

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

Post Script- When did the Mormon church change the introduction's description of the Lamanites to "among" rather than "principle" ancestors?

Sure, the Mulekites who were most likely a mutt race. Corinatumr of the Jaredites. As destruction in the Book of Mormon doesn't mean the death of every man, woman, and child there were undoubtedly still Jaredites around who could very easily be the predominant DNA source for the natives. There is also of course the incredible speed with which both sides multiplied and with which the sign of the curse spread. The meeting is not explained in detail because the writers did not seem to think it was that important. They mention the Jaredites because their history is important. They mention the Mulekites because they brought some news from the Old World. To show the brevity with which even these are mentioned the story of the encounter with the Mulekites doesn't even mention that they brought Zedekiah's son with them. This isn't mentioned until much, much later in a reference to them in passing.

Don't care about the wording change. I see no significance to it beyond principal rarely being used in the sense it was used in the intro. I see no shift in meaning. I still think they were the principal ancestors (i.e. most influential, important, etc.).

[Guest]

Mr. Nehor,

How do you treat the information the Book of Mormon provides reference numbers of Jewish peoples populating ancient America?

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_Daniel Peterson]

The DNA matter has changed absolutely nothing about the identity of the Lamanites today.

The current apologetic stance is that . . . yes, Joseph Smith and the prophets didn't know what they were talking about; they were just sharing their opinion and had a "superficial" understanding of all things Mormon.

Ah, the irresistible gratification of the straw man caricature!

[_The Nehor]

Mr. Nehor,

How do treat the information the Book of Mormon provides reference numbers of Jewish peoples populating ancient America?

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

Dr. CamWhore,

I know understand the words you specified. Please clarificate.

Hugs and Kisses,

The Nehor

[_Ten Bear]

Unless people are seriously suggesting that a group of about twenty people mixing into a gene pool would leave obvious genetic evidence I don't see what DNA has to do with it. The Lamanites are the natives of the American continents.

The thing here that trips me up is that you have a small band of "about twenty people mixing into a gene pool" but somehow manage to get major cities, rivers, lands and such named after them. And quickly too. They must have had an amazing amount of influence to have such an impact on an existing society so quickly .... for just a small band of 20 or so. And to boot, no mention of existing cities or other geography that would have already had names and such.

Then, after all is said and done, I think it would be near impossible to find, anywhere in the world, ever, any documentation, any journal, any book, any written history concerning a group of people traveling from one land to another where one of the very FIRST subjects in the text isn't talk of the people they encounter. Speculation before hand of who they may find would find space in the text.

And after arriving maybe it would read, "we met the native population and found them to be friendly" or " we have found the people here hostile and are taking action" so forth and so. Even a lack of people would be mentioned. But there would never be a lack of text on the subject of "other" people.

Except for the Book of Mormon.

Maybe it's technically possible to find such a text without "others" being mentioned, but it stands far beyond reason to me. Saving space because it wasn't important is not an answer. It's a desperate grasp and an ugly one at that.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Dan,

The DNA matter has changed absolutely nothing about the identity of the Lamanites today.

So are you saying that Native Americans ARE the Lamanites spoken of in the Book of Mormon? Or, the Native Americans never were the Lamanites?

I wrote, The current apologetic stance is that . . . yes, Joseph Smith and the prophets didn't know what they were talking about; they were just sharing their opinion and had a "superficial" understanding of all things Mormon.

Dan replied,

Ah, the irresistible gratification of the straw man caricature!

No straw man. I think I pretty much summed up where the current apologetic view lies. According to LDS apologists, Joseph Smith and other prophets had a "superficial" understanding of the Book of Mormon. SWK and others were just sharing their opinions thinking the "Indians" skin would turn white, and all that.

To what land, specifically do you think the Book of Mormon is referring, when it states it was saved for Lehi? You know, the promised land that would be uninhabited and saved for his family?

When Christ came and converted EVERYONE... do you think all the Maya were converted? How many people do you think Nephi ruled over? If I recall correctly Brant is going with 1,000 max, (or about as many children in my neighborhood elementary school). One thousand people which includes the elderly, women, and children. Not quite the huge army of millions described in the Book of Mormon.

If you disagree with my summation, please explain.

I'm open to learning here.

~td~

[_The Nehor]

Unless people are seriously suggesting that a group of about twenty people mixing into a gene pool would leave obvious genetic evidence I don't see what DNA has to do with it. The Lamanites are the natives of the American continents.

The thing here that trips me up is that you have a small band of "about twenty people mixing into a gene pool" but somehow manage to get major cities, rivers, lands and such named after them. And quickly too. They must have had an amazing amount of influence to have such an impact on an existing society so quickly .... for just a small band of 20 or so. And to boot, no mention of existing cities or other geography that would have already had names and such.

Then, after all is said and done, I think it would be near impossible to find, anywhere in the world, ever, any documentation, any journal, any book, any written history concerning a group of people traveling from one land to another where one of the very FIRST subjects in the text isn't talk of the people they encounter. Speculation before hand of who they may find would find space in the text.

And after arriving maybe it would read, "we met the native population and found them to be friendly" or " we have found the people here hostile and are taking action" so forth and so. Even a lack of people would be mentioned. But there would never be a lack of text on the subject of "other" people.

Except for the Book of Mormon.

Maybe it's technically possible to find such a text without "others" being mentioned, but it stands far beyond reason to me. Saving space because it wasn't important is not an answer. It's a desperate grasp and an ugly one at that.

I'm sure this was covered in depth in the large plates of Nephi. When Nephi came back to write his short abridged history it got left out. I have a few theories about this:

1) Save space, you say this is ridiulous but the Book of Mormon is not primarily a historical text. If some puritan had decided to write a religious history of his colony on landing in America with the intent of conversion he would have included stories about prominent leaders doing good things, some stories that warn about bad people, interpretations of scripture, and any spiritual communication he thought was relevant. He might leave out entirely the encounters with natives unless he thought them worth mentioning.

2) He forgot, assuming it was obvious. It was a reality he'd lived with for so long it may not have even occured to him that someone would think otherwise.

I see nothing odd about a small group of people achieving dominance culturally and politically very fast. Think British Empire. A few settlers show up, marry the natives, and run the area. They had a more advanced culture, literacy, and military (with Laban's sword and any other weapons they brought). If they didn't come as conquerors and mistreat those they found I can see them becoming dominant within a generation.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Mr. Nehor,

What do you make of the information the Book of Mormon provides reference numbers of Jewish peoples populating ancient America?

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

[_The Nehor]

Mr. Nehor,

What do you make of the information the Book of Mormon provides reference numbers of Jewish peoples populating ancient America?

Very Respectfully,

Doctor CamNC4Me

Nothing, there is no census in the book with which to make anything of. We have the sizes of a few armies a few times but until the end they are small.

[_harmony]

Dr. CamWhore,

Uncalled for, Nehor. Don't embarrass the believers any more than normal, okay?