Current LDS Apologetic position on Native Americans pre-Lehi

[_ldsfaqs]

It's not a "spin"..... It's how it's always been with anyone that's "educated" of the Book of Mormon and with a basic grasp of the sciences.

Hang on, have to wipe the coffee out of my keyboard.

This pathetic lie started with Daniel Peterson and has been propagated on this board for years.

Nope.... It's the truth, and I knew it long before the internet and long before Murphy DNA.

The typical apologetic response is that the member is crappy, stupid, uneducated, ignorant. The gospel remains true, even if you don't understand what the apologists have now revealed (even when the leaders of the cult haven't revealed the same thing).

Nope..... The only one who is stupid is the anti-mormon "child" interpretations of what most believers know and understand.

Again, Dr. Shades's dichotomy of the Internet Mormon vs the Chapel Mormon rings true.

His theory has always been a joke. The only "close" thing about it's that accurate is that like in all things there are the well educated and their are those who tag along, and it has NOTHING to do with the Internet.

The truth, which Mormons will twist to fit their own logic (in order to remain Mormon) is that the North and South American Indians (or native peoples) ARE Lamanites. Joseph Smith said so. The Book of Mormon said so (until recently when it was scrubbed). Only the apologists will tell you otherwise. There is so much evidence on the Internet about how the Cult of Mormonism propagated Joseph's idea of the Lamanites that the apologists can't squirm out of it.

Now you change the subject.... There's Lehi, and then there are Lamanites. Pick one.
When it concerns Lamanites, they were ALWAYS in referrence to EVERYONE of the America's who were non-Nephite. Thomas Murphy's "child" interpretation that Lamanites were ONLY those descended from Lehi is classic anti-mormon stupidity.

Both the Book of Mormon itself and most members have always known that "Lamanite" was primarily the Book of Mormon's version of the Bibles "Gentile". Thus, yes, when both the Title page and most Mormons believed natives of the America's, the Islands, etc. were "Lamanites", that's because they were.

There are many other issues, but even if we take the anti's interpretation at face value, they are STILL wrong. Because, Lehi being a small group inserting itself into a larger population, GENETIC DRIFT alone will by this time in fact mean that Lehi's DNA WOULD in fact be in nearly every single Native American.

So, either way you cut the cheese, the anti-'s are the usual ignorant liars they have always been.

[_Patriarchal gripe]

Wait a minute LDSFAQs, when did lamanite equal gentile, or not descended from Lehi? I remember being taught my whole life that native americans, pacific islanders, etc, were Lehi's descendents? When did a prophet change that teaching?

[_ldsfaqs]

LDSFAQs, thank you for your reply, and the others as well.

I am still unclear regarding the apologetic consensus out of BYU regarding pre-lehite residents in the americas. I have searched the Maxwell Institute site, but I am not good at finding the information there. I have seen the FAIR pages on wiki, but I am unclear on whether or not FAIR is credible to the BYU guys, and exactly how much they are a loose cannon to LDS.

Many who write for FAIR actually work for BYU and/or are other respected LDS scholars. So yes, FAIR is well respected.

My bishop told me the other night that he doesn't recommend FAIR/Maxwell to doubters. I was a bit baffled by that, and couldn't understand that shift in credibility, and if it came from training he had received.

It's possible he's just trying to focus on the Gospel itself, rather than other issues.
Unfortunately, while there is nothing wrong with such a position, it's NOT right for many people. Many people want to understand and want answers to perceived problems. Thus, FAIR etc. does good work in helping in that.

I would still like to see the latest information on this topic and specifically how apologists get around the flood theory in relation to asiatic settlers.

Thanks for any information!

Well, Maxwell Institute and FAIR is where you will find most of the good articles from scholars of various fields, especially those who actually understand and know the Book of Mormon and LDS theology.

As to the Flood.... Most people of religion don't really hold to a "literal" interpretation of the "years" as recorded in scripture, as well as other theory's, such as the Flood actually either only being a local flood, or a "flash flood" that both came and receded pretty quickly. For example, a flood that only hung around for 40 days and 40 nights or whatever over the whole earth, really wouldn't show any signs of it in the archeological record. It's like a ran creating a puddle. That puddle will go away in couple of months, and will never show up years later.

Anyway, science is easily compatible with religion, but especially Mormonism. It just depends on how objective one is to considering other possibilities. More scientists per capita don't come out of Utah than other state for no reason.

[_DarkHelmet]

Wait a minute LDSFAQs, when did Lamanite equal gentile, or not descended from Lehi? I remember being taught my whole life that native americans, pacific islanders, etc, were Lehi's descendents? When did a prophet change that teaching?

It's revisionist history. It's what ldsfaqs thinks prophets should have been teaching. What ldsfaqs doesn't understand is we were all Mormons at one point, and we know what we were taught.

[Guest]

It's not a "spin"..... It's how it's always been with anyone that's "educated" of the Book of Mormon and with a basic grasp of the sciences.

I know because I actually laughed when Thomas Murphy DNA came out. In fact, I laughed in his face when I met him and talked with him about it briefly at the FAIR conference years ago.
First he misrepresents the Book of Mormon and leaders words creating his strawman to tear down.
And he also misuses the DNA.

Educated LDS have long known that natives of the America's were primarily of Asiatic decent.
And we've always read the Book of Mormon and known what it actually says. And we also understand the "context" of most of our leaders words, in contrast to anti-mormon ignorance and misrepresentation.

Hopefully the uneducated buffoon who authored this tract published and distributed by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints got fired. Right, ldsfaqs?

[_ldsfaqs]

Wait a minute LDSFAQs, when did Lamanite equal gentile, or not descended from Lehi? I remember being taught my whole life that native americans, pacific islanders, etc, were Lehi's descendents? When did a prophet change that teaching?

In most cases they teach that they are "Lamanites".... In special cases such as those of the Islands and certain areas, it's believed there IS a special connection to Lehi, that there is a direct lineage.

Further, when one actually gets down to the DNA, everyone ultimately IS a descended from Lehi due to Genetic Drift.

As to the term Lamanite, I'm simply referring to how it's most often used in the Book of Mormon. It never was a term that only meant those descended from only Lehi.

Also, you shouldn't confuse the naïveté of youth with being the whole truth of a subject.
Too many leave the Church in their late teens and early 20's (a smaller number later), when they never intellectually matured into really knowing the Church.

[_ldsfaqs]

Brade..... Nothing in that article debunks anything I said.

More truth and fact is not debunking truth and fact. You think that's all it does, but not to LDS.

[_Morley]

Further, when one actually gets down to the DNA, everyone ultimately IS a descended from Lehi due to Genetic Drift.

Seriously? Please explain this. I'm trying to remember... is 'genetic drift' when genes are picked up by the wind to be carried other places?

[Guest]

Brade..... Nothing in that article debunks anything I said.

First, it's not a mere article - it's a pamphlet published by the Church as missionary material. Second, sure it does. One of the main points of the tract is that the Book of Mormon is a history of "native Americans who are called Indians". Among the book's great spiritual truths it tells us that the "forefathers [of native Americans who are called Indians] came from Jerusalem".

The point is that not only are there quotes a plenty from Church leaders suggesting many of them believed Native Americans were primarily descended from Lehi and his tribe, but the Church published and distributed materials which also made that suggestion. The further point is that lots of educated LDS believed that the Book of Mormon revealed the origin of Native Americans.

[_Morley]

More truth and fact is not debunking truth and fact. You think that's all it does, but not to LDS.

Truly, a wonderful line.