Mormans - nicest folks ever!

[Marie5890]

some people may have believed that all Native Americans are descended from Lehi, but even as a youth I never had that belief personally, .

Many if not all of the Presidents of the LDS church are amongst those “some” you mentioned. Taught it too. The “prophets of God” taught that Native Americans were decendents of Laman (lets not forget that after the “appearance of Christ” to the inhabitants of the Americans after His resurrections there were no divisions for some time according too the BoM

Spencer Kimball was a big teacher of this.

speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6059

(This is one among many of his comments/talks concerning this issue.)

If I recall correctly, Gordon B Hinkley at the ground breaking ceremony back in the late 80’s/early 90’s also referred to this unique teaching.

So even if you personally didnt believe it, Parker, and I take you at your word, the PRESIDENTS (Prophets) of the LDS church very much indeed believe and teach it from the pulpit.

No way getting around those facts.

Have they back off? Sure. Of course. But what they say now is very very different from even what they taught just a few decades ago.

And missionaries sent to South American missions and even Polynesia also stressed this teaching back then.

Please be at least honest that the “some” you are referring too, really was “most” and was the teaching for the vast majority of the LDS Church since 1830.

Please, let’s be honorable about the main beliefs held for the majority of the LDS Churches history.

Thanks.

 

[ParkerD]

Many if not all of the Presidents of the LDS church are amongst those “some” you mentioned. Taught it too. The “prophets of God” taught that Native Americans were decendents of Laman (lets not forget that after the “appearance of Christ” to the inhabitants of the Americans after His resurrections there were no divisions for some time according to the BoM.)

Spencer Kimball was a big teacher of this.

speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6059

(This is one among many of his comments/talks concerning this issue.)

If I recall correctly, Gordon B Hinkley at the ground breaking ceremony back in the late 80’s/early 90’s also referred to this unique teaching.

So even if you personally didnt believe it, Parker, and I take you at your word, the PRESIDENTS (Prophets) of the LDS church very much indeed believe and teach it from the pulpit.

No way getting around those facts.

Have they backed off? Sure. Of course. But what they say now is very very different from even what they taught just a few decades ago.

And missionaries sent to South American missions and even Polynesia also stressed this teaching back then.

Please be at least honest that the “some” you are referring too, really was “most” and was the teaching for the vast majority of the LDS Church since 1830.

Please, let’s be honorable about the main beliefs held for the majority of the LDS Churches history.

Thanks.

Marie,
No doubt that President Kimball believed the Native Americans he had had experience with were descendants of Laman and Lemuel. That belief never felt “right” to me, so I didn’t go along with the prevailing view of his time.

I have no idea about the ancestral origins of the Polynesians. I take the Bible at its word that the Israelite remnants would be spread throughout the entire world, and particularly on the islands of the sea. I simply don’t care whether the Israelite remnants are also “Lamanite” remnants or are remnants of another of the many “scatterings” of the Israelite people.

I agree with your underlying message that there has been a “backing off”, and I have thought “it’s about time.” They made an assumption that needed to be looked at more carefully using the text itself.

Like I had said, the Book of Mormon itself has a clear picture that included many other nations taking over the Ancient Americas after 400 AD and well before 1492 AD.

 

[ParkerD]

Are you 12? Just kidding.

I think ParkerD, you have made up something that enables you to “keep it together”. It is, of course, all nonsense to me. To begin with, the case can be made that ancient Judaism was matriarical…ie, if your mom was Jewish, so were you.

Essentially, you have made the BoM nothing but an adoption, which, is something that as far as I remember was never taught.

I think it supports my case that you’ve made your own religion…a very mormon thing to do.

I honestly have no idea what this post means. If Asenath was from Egypt and was a non-Israelite, then that makes her a non-Jew even though she married Joseph. Her DNA didn’t change, of course. I just don’t get what you mean by your post.

Everything I have brought out in this particular discussion is from either the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or current mtDNA findings. I have no idea why that makes you think it is a case of a “made up” religious belief.

But, whatever, RebeccaJ.

 

[SANxJONERO]

I wouldn’t worry about the Bible your friends father threw away. I maybe wrong but I view the Bible as a book which can be used for good and evil. If the LDS has footnotes in it to warp your understanding of it, then that is not a true bible of our Lord. It would do you more harm then good.

Thanks, I’m happy with my NAB!

 

[RebeccaJ]

I honestly have no idea what this post means. If Asenath was from Egypt and was a non-Israelite, then that makes her a non-Jew even though she married Joseph. Her DNA didn’t change, of course. I just don’t get what you mean by your post.

Everything I have brought out in this particular discussion is from either the Bible, the Book of Mormon, or current mtDNA findings. I have no idea why that makes you think it is a case of a “made up” religious belief.

But, whatever, RebeccaJ.

Book of Mormon = fiction. It’s like discussing the science that supports the genetic ancestry of the creatures in “Where the Wild Things Are”. Oh, I know, maybe the Na’vi are a lost tribe of Israel.

I’m not trying to be disrespectful, just illustrating how your posts read to me.

 

[Marie5890]

ParkerD,

I appreciate your respectful and honest reply.

I just wanted people who read this thread to be clear that whatever your personal understanding and thoughts have been during your lifetime when it comes to the “Lamanite” issue, that the official stance and teachings of the General Authorities, including the Prophets, have been different and has been what I have posted previously.

Only recently have their teachings on this come into alignment with what you have believed all along.

You may have not changed, but the LDS leadership, including those who are sustained in the Quorum of the 12 and the First Presidency as prophets, seers, and revelators, have indeed changed when it comes to this teaching.

I think that is a fair clarification for anyone who doesnt know much about Mormonism to fully understand.

I thank you again for your respectful replies.

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD,

I appreciate your respectful and honest reply.

I just wanted people who read this thread to be clear that whatever your personal understanding and thoughts have been during your lifetime when it comes to the “Lamanite” issue, that the official stance and teachings of the General Authorities, including the Prophets, have been different and has been what I have posted previously.

Only recently have their teachings on this come into alignment with what you have believed all along.

You may have not changed, but the LDS leadership, including those who are sustained in the Quorum of the 12 and the First Presidency as prophets, seers, and revelators, have indeed changed when it comes to this teaching.

I think that is a fair clarification for anyone who doesnt know much about Mormonism to fully understand.

I thank you again for your respectful replies.

Marie,
Thanks. I suppose that it would be well to add two further points:

1–Lehi prophesied that the land “for the inheritance of my seed” was covenanted “to my children forever, and also to all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord,” (2 Nephi 1:5) and “there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.” (v. 6)

So when the leaders of the LDS church have referred to some groups as being modern-day descendants of the Lamanites (who would be intermingled with many different peoples but with merely slight trace ancestral lines, not predominant ancestral lines), then since those verses are specific about the Lord doing the guiding and the “bringing” (even if many people didn’t realize they were being guided by the hand of the Lord), then the descendants of all such people are the descendants of someone who came to the Americas by a guiding influence, and there is a purpose to their having been “brought” to the Americas, no matter what people or nation they originated from.

2–The descendants of Israel were prophesied to be spread among all nations on the earth in Bible prophecies that I believe are true. God loves the people of Ancient America (no matter their country of origin) just as much as He loves the people of all the world, and had a plan that encompassed them regardless of whether they are Lamanite descendants, other Israelite descendants, or not.

I’m agreeing that for one to been identified as a Lamanite descendant when that might have been conjecture is a misleading outcome, but God had a covenant purpose for every group who was led to the Americas, and someday we’ll perhaps know the full story that will include many such groups that became nations and tribal groups in the Americas.

 

[KathleenGee]

The Americas aren’t prominent in Sacred Scripture…

 

[ParkerD]

The Americas aren’t prominent in Sacred Scripture…

Hi, Kathleen,
You might as well become aware of the following verse in Amos:

Amos 9:9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.

God would have had a purpose for doing that, no?

He does some things that are very prominent, and some things that are hidden and will eventually be understood, but His hand has been in them.

Have a good day.

 

[why_me]

Prior to this, the Mormon church taught the Lamanites were the principle ancestors of all Native Americans and Pacific Islanders. Your D&C confirms this, as Smith sends missionaries to the land of the Lamanites…do you think he was wrong?..maybe didn’t read the mind of the BoM prophets well enough?

The word principle was in the introduction to the book of mormon which was included in the 1981 edition. And to my understanding the inclusion of the word principle was not accepted by all the committee members who introduced the introduction in the book of mormon. I think that it was Bruce R. McConkie who spearheaded its inclusion.

There has always been a debate within the lds church about the people who inhabited the book of mormon. Limited Geographical Theory was accepted among some lds leaders or scholars. And the hemispheric model among others. However, the word lamanite was used loosely to describe all the remaining people in the book of mormon and the indian were included within the lamanite group.

en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Lamanites/Referenced_in_the_Doctrine_and_Covenants

fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/Who_Are_the_Lamanites.pdf

I think that the above should cover your misunderstanding.

 

[RebeccaJ]

The word principle was in the introduction to the book of mormon which was included in the 1981 edition. And to my understanding the inclusion of the word principle was not accepted by all the committee members who introduced the introduction in the book of mormon. I think that it was Bruce R. McConkie who spearheaded its inclusion.

There has always been a debate within the lds church about the people who inhabited the book of mormon. Limited Geographical Theory was accepted among some lds leaders or scholars. And the hemispheric model among others. However, the word lamanite was used loosely to describe all the remaining people in the book of mormon and the indian were included within the lamanite group.

en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Lamanites/Referenced_in_the_Doctrine_and_Covenants

fairlds.org/FAIR_Brochures/Who_Are_the_Lamanites.pdf

I think that the above should cover your misunderstanding.

So, you’re approach is that it was never taught, only printed in LDS scripture? Okee dokee.

 

[why_me]

In fact, I once asked you to provide me with something uniquely good about Mormonism and you never responded. You prefer to attack Catholics in some irrational attempt to attack the Catholic Church as follows:

Unique is a loose word. However, what is uniquely good about mormonism is that it seems to have a uniquely wonderful impact on mormon teenagers as their youth and young adult programs testify. And its stress on family seems to have had a wonderful effect on their family life.

 

[why_me]

So, you’re approach is that it was never taught, only printed in LDS scripture? Okee dokee.

Oh, I remember it being taught. There were two strands of thought inside the lds church and the hemispheric model held sway for a number of years. But the LGT was also batted around too.

en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Geography/Models/Limited

See my point?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Oh, I remember it being taught. There were two strands of thought inside the lds church and the hemispheric model held sway for a number of years. But the LGT was also batted around too.

Oh, but what about the men from outer space model? (seriously heard that one)

 

[why_me]

Oh, but what about the men from outer space model? (seriously heard that one)

I proved my point with the links that I have posted. Of course, one liners are just one liners. But addressing what is in the links is another matter.

 

[RebeccaJ]

But addressing what is in the links is another matter.

Been there. Done that.

 

[why_me]

Been there. Done that.

I must have missed it. However, as you know, mormons are nice people. You still live among them and that speaks volumes just how nice they are since you still chose to do so.

 

[RebeccaJ]

I must have missed it. However, as you know, mormons are nice people. You still live among them and that speaks volumes just how nice they are since you still chose to do so.

So, you think if I move it would because mormons are great big meanies?

 

[Stephen168]

Unique is a loose word. However, what is uniquely good about mormonism is that it seems to have a uniquely wonderful impact on mormon teenagers

That is unique. No other religion has as much impact on Mormon teenagers as the Mormon Church.

as their youth and young adult programs testify.

testify? I don’t think vandalism is taught in Mormon youth programs or at least it wasn’t 40 years ago.

And its stress on family seems to have had a wonderful effect on their family life.

That is not unique.

 

[Marie5890]

Hmmmm…

Now that is a real stereo-type…

Ive met great teens from all kinds of denominations whose Christian family and church have had great impact…

Esp those who come out of the south…Very Christian, well-mannered and clean living…

A solid look at the various Christian colleges and universities is a good place to see that Mormons dont have a monopoly on good teens…