LDS: Which are misconceptions, and what is the truth?

[Fiat_Lux]

These are points from Chris-WA’s post in another thread. I would appreciate an LDS going point by point, to help me understand which of these are not typically Mormon beliefs, and if they aren’t, (i) whether it was once a common belief, and (ii) what the correct, or most common/current belief is, concerning the issue.

(1) the Nephites (Native American Christians) were wiped out by the Lamanites (Native American anti-Christians) in a climatic battle in present-day upstate New York before the pilgrims arrived.

(2) This battle wiped out Christianity in the Americas, and the only record left of it was the Book of Mormon which the Nephites hid away towards the end of their existence.

(3) The forward of the BoM claims that the Lamanites are the principle ancestors of the present-day Native Americans.

(4) The Lamanites passed on no oral or written history of either themselves nor the Nephites nor of the climatic battle.

(5) The Nephites wrote the BoM upon golden plates in a language Joseph Smith called “reformed Eyptian.”

(6) Joseph claimed that the plates were taken off the earth by God after he finished the translation.

(7) The Nephites produced a 600+ page BoM.

(8) No original scrap of writing by the Nephites has ever been found.

(9) No oral or written history by any ancient American culture has ever mentioned the Nephites, Lamanites, or any person, place, or event recorded in the BoM.

 

[Chris_Jodrey]

The following are my own beliefs, and may not represent the official doctrine of the LDS Church, as much is speculation only, even if it is held generally true by most Church members; if it is more than MHO I will point it out.

1. Needs to be broken up into two parts. The Nephites were indeed destroyed by the Lamanites. But where this was done is the subject of scholarly debate. I believe it happened in Mesoamerica and that the plates were carried by Moroni afterwards to New York. The BoM seems to indicate that this was the case, actually. I would concede that most LDS think that the battle did indeed occur in New York, and this has been common in the Church for a long time, although there is no actual evidence that this is the case.
2. One of two things happened there. Either Christianity had already been dying out (meaning serious apostasy and distortion in the last Nephite years except among Mormon and his disciples), or it continued on among the Lamanites, gradually being twisted and changed. Either way, it was gradual, not sudden, but I vote for the former, since it does have support in the BoM. Both could be the case.
3. True.
4. Unknown. They might have had written documents, but I think that the plate-enscribers were elite when it came to such things. Oral traditions certainly would have gone on, but those can be distorted and forgotten fairly quickly.
5. True, although it strikes a mock tone. “Joseph Smith called…” seems to indicate heavily that this was his own invention.
6. True, but again with the attitude.
7. I’m not sure of the actual length of the original 1830 Book of Mormon, but it was around that big in English.
8. Except for the BoM and whatever things Joseph Smith and company may have seen, this is true.
9. True.

It’s truth mixed with misrepresentation and misinformation, and provided in such a way as to discredit and even scorn. It’s a form of common anti-Mormon literature. It provides open ends without proper explanation, therefore misrepresenting Mormon belief. For example, number nine is true, but the way in which it is presented and the lack of explanation really seem to imply, “Hey, the BoM-believers have nothing going for them and they’ll admit it!” While number nine may be true, it deserves being expounded on so that the reader does not ignorantly come to the wrong conclusions about how such information is to be interpreted.

 

[edmondhall]

(9) No oral or written history by any ancient American culture has ever mentioned the Nephites, Lamanites, or any person, place, or event recorded in the BoM.

While number nine may be true, it deserves being expounded on so that the reader does not ignorantly come to the wrong conclusions about how such information is to be interpreted.

The floor is yours–have at it. How do LDS interpret #9?

 

[amgid]

Fiat Lux:

These are points from Chris-WA’s post in another thread. I would appreciate an LDS going point by point, to help me understand which of these are not typically Mormon beliefs, and if they aren’t, (i) whether it was once a common belief, and (ii) what the correct, or most common/current belief is, concerning the issue.

(1) the Nephites (Native American Christians) were wiped out by the Lamanites (Native American anti-Christians) in a climatic battle in present-day upstate New York before the pilgrims arrived.

Approximately correct, but not entirely accurate. Before the Nephites were “wiped out” in the “climactic Battle,” many of them had dissented away to the Lamanites; so that the Lamanites of today are a mixture of both groups.

(2) This battle wiped out Christianity in the Americas, …

That is correct.

… and the only record left of it was the Book of Mormon which the Nephites hid away towards the end of their existence.

The Nephites had kept extensive accounts of their history, which were much larger than the current Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon is an abridgement of that account made by the hand of Mormon, who was one of their last prophets.

(3) The forward of the BoM claims that the Lamanites are the principle ancestors of the present-day Native Americans.

That is correct.

(4) The Lamanites passed on no oral or written history of either themselves nor the Nephites nor of the climatic battle.

Not any that has survived in a fully recognizable form to the present day, as far as I know.

(5) The Nephites wrote the BoM upon golden plates in a language Joseph Smith called “reformed Eyptian.”

Actually, the Nephites themselves called it “reformed Egyptian”.

(6) Joseph claimed that the plates were taken off the earth by God after he finished the translation.

The plates were handed back to the angel Moroni who had given them to Joseph Smith in the first place.

(7) The Nephites produced a 600+ page BoM.

The Nephites had produced a much larger set of records than the 500+ BoM. The BoM is an abridgement of that record made by Mormon (and finished off by his son Moroni).

(8) No original scrap of writing by the Nephites has ever been found.

I am sure they have been found. Many hieroglyphs and other inscriptions of the ancient American civilizations have been discovered, although to my knowledge not yet properly deciphered.

(9) No oral or written history by any ancient American culture has ever mentioned the Nephites, Lamanites, or any person, place, or event recorded in the BoM.

As I said before, to my knowledge their languages have not yet been fully discovered; and as far as I know a direct link with the BoM has not yet been discovered.

May I ask what was the purpose of your questions?

amgid

 

[Brad_Haas]

1) Needs to be broken up into two parts. The Nephites were indeed destroyed by the Lamanites. But where this was done is the subject of scholarly debate. I believe it happened in Mesoamerica and that the plates were carried by Moroni afterwards to New York. The BoM seems to indicate that this was the case, actually. I would concede that most LDS think that the battle did indeed occur in New York, and this has been common in the Church for a long time, although there is no actual evidence that this is the case.

Have you seen the Watson letter?

 

[Jerusha]

geocities.com/WestHollywood/Park/6443/America/columbian.html

**Pre-Columbian Muslims in the Americas **

Here is an interesting article, I included the title in case the link doesn’t take you directly there. Notice that there is no mention of Lamanites or Nephites.

 

[Chris_Jodrey]

The floor is yours–have at it. How do LDS interpret #9?

Frankly, I wouldn’t. For someone who knows little about archaeology and is not familiar with apologetics, this could be put up in a negative light, and the connection instantaneously made, “no evidence = no faith”. However, #9 doesn’t actually imply anything extraordinary. It may be true but rationally does not contribute to proving Mormonism wrong. Basically, what amgid said.

No, I had not seen that letter, Brad. I am aware that that stance is very common in the Church, as I previously stated; however, the opinion that the battle-site Cumorah is in Mesoamerica is growing rapidly. Although I can’t pull up exact citations, I seem to remember several statements from general authorities to the effect that the Church takes no official position in such matters. Also, I don’t know what the context of the letter was; often, the target audience affects the way something is addressed. I’m not sure I would agree so readily to the Hill Cumorah mentioned in the BoM being the one in New York, but I am also very aware that I may be wrong. In either case, the matter is debated, and it is taking a firmer foothold among Church members. To simply say that it is one way and not the other (especially if you are not a GA) is to misrepresent the issue.

I’m not sure what the Islam in America site has to do with the topic… Care to explain?

 

[Jerusha]

Just pointing the way towards a more open-minded approach on both sides. Diffusionist, neither Mormon nor Columbian.

crystalinks.com/olmec.html The Olmec civilization, with (black) West African roots, planted the seed for the MesoAmerican civilizations.

newadvent.org/cathen/01416a.htm The Viking invasion of North America may have been more extensive than the account presented here. The Hill Cumorah story may have been derived from Indian legends of driving off the Viking invasion.

newadvent.org/cathen/02758c.htm There is a certain plausibility to the voyages of St. Brendan, placing him in the Americas.

And, of course, none of these sources say anything about Lamanites and Nephites, either.:nope: Just can’t buy it. No substantiation from other sources.

 

[Chris_Jodrey]

There is a certain plausibility to the voyages of St. Brendan, placing him in the Americas.

Actually, my professor mentioned this a while back: that Catholics were actually first in making the Quetzalcoatl / Christianity connection, saying that it was some apostle that had travelled very far and taught the native mesoamericans, but they rejected him (total apostasy). It surprised me since I was only aware at the time that we More-man held that kind of belief.

 

[ben_dy]

Brad Haas:

Have you seen the Watson letter?

Brad,

In fairness, that notion has been retracted and the possibility of a second Hill Cumorah - where all Nephites but the 24 (?) and those whom ‘defected’ to the Lamanites were destroyed (those who fled south are said to have been tracked and killed) - seems to be the prevailing opinion of LDS apologists just now and I believe that there is a much more recent statement by a GA (maybe even a member of the FP?) which states that it’s perfectly O.K. for LDS members to believe in, and scholars to pursue, the possibility of a second Hill Cumorah.

Were I at home I could find the source sanctioning the belief in another Hill Cumorah - perhaps one of our LDS friends can supply a link?

I have to tell you - typing with one hand is like wrestling with a bear! Excuse the misspelling!

 

[Jerusha]

This is what gripes me-- the Columbian vs. Mormon problem. Teachers tend to say that “there is no pre-Columbian American history, because nothing was written.” This gap, probably because of a fear of substantiating anything Mormon, actually gives Mormonism a boost. The parallels between the BOM and the four links I posted are so thin that any resemblances can be due to contributions of Indian legends to the BOM. All other is accidental.

The BOM and the works of Carl May are equally based on truth.

Actually, my professor mentioned this a while back: that Catholics were actually first in making the Quetzalcoatl / Christianity connection

Have you then read Handley’s book, “The Man who Led Columbus to America”? He presents a very pursuasive argument.