Simon Southerton, who is struggling hard to be a critic of the Church in a long-since dead area is back again. Maybe his book had low sales last year, so he is trying to drum up some more buyers.
Anyhow, The Age had this, in part, to say:
Last year he published a rebuttal of the Book of Mormon teachings that Native American and Polynesian ancestors came from ancient Israelite tribes who had migrated to the Americas centuries before Christ.
In all the years I’ve read the Book of Mormon?¢‚Ǩ‚Äùin all the times I’ve read it from cover to cover?¢‚Ǩ‚ÄùI must have entirely skipped over the part where it teaches “Native Americans” and “Polynesians” are descended from Israelite tribes.
Maybe if Southerton focused more on what was in the Book of Mormon and less on how members of the Church have traditionally extrapolated the Book of Mormon, it wouldn’t be an issue that he “is facing possible ex-communication”.
I wonder why didn’t wait another week. If he had, he could have done double duty by bringing about press for his new book, and celebrating the first anniversary of the last time he brought this up.
This is a real-life happening of a sugar Beet article.
http://www.thesugarbeet.com/issue17/topstories/mmm.html
Ben S.
No kidding (about this being a Sugar Beet article).
Well, my wife didn’t make it to Seattle, but she is just north of Spokane visiting her folks.
I’m thinking fond thoughts of that entire area of the world right now.
“In all the years I’ve read the Book of Mormon—in all the times I’ve read it from cover to cover—I must have entirely skipped over the part where it teaches ‘Native Americans’ and ‘Polynesians’ are descended from Israelite tribes.”
I don’t want to play devil’s advocate but this is pretty unequivocal:
“The record gives an account of two great civilizations. One came from Jerusalem in 600 B.C., and afterward separated into two nations, known as the Nephites and the Lamanites. The other came much earlier when the Lord confounded the tongues at the Tower of Babel. This group is known as the Jaredites. After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.”
Obviously, there is plenty of wiggle room for pre-existing populations, but let’s not pretend that he is coming completely out of left-field.
The problem, Ned, is that isn’t the Book of Mormon. At least not any more than the table contents, index, pronunciation guide or the testimonies of the witnesses are.
I’m not saying he is coming from left field. I am saying his arguments are based on how members (old and new) have used the Book of Mormon to explain the history of the indigenous peoples of the Americas and Pacific islands, not what the Book of Mormon actually teaches.
What evidence do you have that this is a concerted publicity effort on his part? I know you said “maybe”, but that’s a highly cynical motive to ascribe to Brother Southerton.
His book isn’t selling, so he approaches the church so they’ll try him for adultery? HUH?
More like “his book isn’t selling, so he approaches the media about the Church trying him for adultery”.
I would think it’s a remarkable thing for a church to attempt to discipline a non-attending member of seven years. That’s rather newsworthy and he has the right to tell whomever he wants about this irregularity (anad possibly warn people who are similiarly situated but haven’t yet formally left the church). If the church is starting to discipline inactives, the public has the right to know. If the church is playing dirty pool, the public has the right to know too.
It’s not that remarkable. He is criticising the Church (even if his premises are unfounded), and the Church disciplines its members for criticising it, attending or not.
I don’t see how it is dirty pool.
This wasn’t just a few members with errant ideas about the BoM. From Joseph Smith to Gordon Hinckley, the leaders of the church have always taught that the Native Americans are descendants of the Lamanites. They still include language about the “children of Lehi” in temple dedicatory prayers in South America. Whether the BoM itself claims the Lehites account for all Native Americans today (and I’m not sure how it would, since it’s supposed to deal with the ancient inhabitants) everyone from Moroni onward seems to think so.
Did someone say it was just a few members?
I’d be interested to read where Gordon B. Hinckley taught all indigenous peoples of the Americas are descended from Lehi. I know Spencer W. Kimball taught contrary to this.
How widespread this tradition was is irrelevant. Southerton claims the Book of Mormon teaches it, and it clearly does not.
I’ve read Southerton’s book, and I don’t recall him saying that somewhere in the BoM it actually says “Hello. This book is about all modern Native Americans.” Indeed, if the BoM is an ancient book, how could it possibly do so? Does the text itself even say the events take place on the American continent? (Other locations have been proposed.) Is it not doctrine that the Lehites/Jaredites lived in the Americas? The only way we know these things is because Moroni, Smith, and all successive prophet have revealed them.
I have not read his books, so I can only base my comments on what the media states and public letters/responses he has written, such as “DNA Genealogies of American Indians and the Book of Mormon”.
I agree that Moroni revealed to us that the Book of Mormon as a bout an ancient people upon the American continent. I agree that Smith and others have declared that revelation. Yet, I cannot find a statement by Moroni to the effect that the Cree, the Navajo, the Aymará or an endless host of other indigenous peoples are descended from Lehi.
I have to agree. Simon appears to have tried to manipulate the press into promoting his book with the AAP release of his pending disciplinary council. I notice he has been very unsuccessful so far in releasing the details of his excommunication on Sunday. The facts are simple – why believe a man who has openly lied in the press on 2 accounts and yet claims to tell the truth about supposed scientific DNA proof that discredits the BOM. The 2 lies he has told are that he had an affair 5 years ago – in fact it was 2. Maybe he has had more than 1 affair! The 2nd is that both parties are back with their spouse trying to get life back to normal. He may be back with his wife but the other party isn’t – their family has been left in a mess. I also note with interest the comments made by Simon about apostasy being a more serious charge than adultery. The fact that he served a mission, was married in the Temple and served as a Bishop indicates he should know that willful breaking of Celestial Marriage covenants is up there with murder in the levels of serious transgression. He is obviously unrepentant as indicated by his downplaying the seriousness of the affair. I feel very sorry for his wife and the husband of the other family (who is an active member of the Church and was a high profile leader at the time). It seems that Simon is trying to bring down as many other good people and particularly leaders through this process. I have seen nothing in his articles that is uplifting and encouraging and offering an alternative way to happiness. This shows what happens when people bow to Satan’s influence and become self-centred and want to cover their sins by lies and excuses. Maybe if he had spent more time reading the BOM and understanding it’s glorious principles and less time trying to disprove it he would be a happier man enjoying life with his family.
While I was attending the Mormon church I was taught that the Native Americans were the decendants of Israelites. How thw Polynesians got into the picture I don’t have a clue. I left the church long ago because of the I don’t really believe in Science Fiction and Fantasy especially when it comes to a con man looking into a hat and making up a book.
A lot of Mormons were (and some still are) taught the same thing. Unfortunately, it’s nothing but a bunch of assumptions, conjecture and tradition.
I’m still waiting for any archeological proof of the BOM or the battles on Hill whatever in NY. Any shread of evidance that the magic plates ever existed. Don’t go to the you must have faith card and God or some Angel took them away. Most religions do not have secrets and secret names ect. Most religions allow it’s people to openly participate and not use the carrot and stick method like good ole Joe. Might as well be a Scientologist. At least they admit to taking your money to get aboard the space ship. Can’t understand why supposed intelligent people believe this hog wash.
“I’m still waiting for any archeological proof of the BOM or the battles on Hill whatever in NY.”
Why?
Kevin Mathie has put together a paper that I think is useful in the question about where Lehi and his descendance are.
http://home.comcast.net/~zarahemla/lamanites.pdf
First, to argue that the Church hasn’t promoted and advanced the Book of Mormon as the history of the Ancient Americans and principal ancestors of the Native Americans is ludicrous. The Church’s position, until DNA evidence showed up, is that the American Indians are the Lamanites. The Church has used the terms interchangeably.
Second, the Book of Mormon does implied state that the Book of Mormon is for the American Natives. Nephi clearly describes the Indians and Lamanites in 1 Nephi 13: 33-35, which states:
33 Wherefore saith the Lamb of God: I will be merciful• unto the Gentiles, unto the visiting of the remnant of the house of Israel in great judgment.
34 And it came to pass that the angel of the Lord spake unto me, saying: Behold, saith the Lamb of God, after I have visited the remnant of the house of Israel—and this remnant of whom I speak is the seed of thy father—wherefore, after I have visited them in judgment, and smitten them by the hand of the Gentiles, and after the Gentiles do stumble exceedingly, because of the most plain and precious parts of the gospel of the Lamb which have been kept back by that abominable church, which is the mother of harlots, saith the Lamb—I will be merciful unto the Gentiles in that day, insomuch that I will bring forth unto them, in mine own power, much of my gospel•, which shall be plain and precious, saith the Lamb.
35 For, behold, saith the Lamb: I will manifest myself unto thy seed, that they shall write many things which I shall minister unto them, which shall be plain and precious; and after thy seed shall be destroyed, and dwindle in unbelief, and also the seed of thy brethren, behold, these things shall be hid up, to come forth unto the Gentiles, by the gift and power of the Lamb.
Moreover, Mormon indicated that the Native Americans are Lamanites in the fifth chapter of Mormon.
Additionally, Moroni specifically spoke to the latter-day descendants of the Lamanites in the tenth chapter of Moroni.
In the title page of the Book of Mormon, which was written by Moroni, Moroni teaches that the Book of Mormon is for the Lamanites.
Even the Lord, through Joseph Smith, stated that the purpose of the preservation of the plates was so the message therein could be given to the Lamanites. See D&C Section 3.
Later, in Section 54 , the Lord, through Joseph Smith, specifically identified the Lamanites as Indians living along the Missouri River.
The quotes from every single prophet since and including Joseph Smith through Gordon B. Hinckley are too numerous to cite.
It would be extremely disingenuous to now pretend that the Book of Mormon was not held out to be a religious document of Native Americans!
However, if the Native Americans are not Lamanites, would someone please tell me who they are so I can know to whom I should share the Book of Mormon. After all, so many Nephite prophets sacrificed so much as did Joseph Smith to preserve this sacred record of the seed of Lehi. Please tell me who they are.
“to argue that the Church hasn’t promoted and advanced the Book of Mormon as the history of the Ancient Americans and principal ancestors of the Native Americans is ludicrous.”
Absolutely. Anyone who says such is simply being naïve and is unfamiliar with statements of past leaders.
“the Book of Mormon does implied state that the Book of Mormon is for the American Natives.”
Only if you interpret it that way. You must have missed the thread we had here on 1 Nephi 13.
“Mormon indicated that the Native Americans are Lamanites in the fifth chapter of Mormon.”
Will you please be more specific? I cannot find anywhere in that chapter where Mormon indicates all indigenous peoples in the Americas are Lamanites.
“Even the Lord…stated that the purpose of the preservation of the plates was so the message therein could be given to the Lamanites. See D&C Section 3.”
So?
“in Section 54 , the Lord…specifically identified the Lamanites as Indians [whose borders were in or near the land of] Missouri”
Let’s assume the Lord is not simply using language the Saints had not already being using themselves and so was familiar with them. Let’s assume that the Lord is speaking literally. Does this mean that all indigenous peoples outside of Missouri are/were not Lamanites?
“The quotes from every single prophet since and including Joseph Smith through Gordon B. Hinckley are too numerous to cite.”
It should not be overlooked that several of those prophets believed and taught (Kimball being the foremost) that others had/could have populated the Americas beside the Lamanites.
SO…
My question remains unanswered:
“Where are the Lamanites?” Who are they?”
The literal Lamanites, as in the direct descendents of Lehi? Beats me.
Mormons aren’t interested in actual history, particularly their own.
So why bother them with it?
Let them “put their shoulders to the wheel” in peace, because they’ll never listen to truth or historical fact if it contravenes their worldview.
Ha ha. Surely you are not suggesting that Mormons refuse to listen to Southerton because his statements are truthful or historical.
The reason Mormons refuse to listen to him is because he’s beating a dead horse. Mormons, for the most part, have long ago dropped the tradition that all peoples indigenous to the Americas are descended from Lehi.
We’re not saying Southerton is wrong in claiming there is no DNA link between Jews and indigenous peoples of South America. We’re saying, so what? We’ve been saying the same thing for years.
Unless of course you’re talking about something completely unrelated to the topic at hand and are a simple troll.
“He said there was a book deposited, written upon gold plates, giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent, and the source from whence they sprang. He also said that the fulness of the everlasting Gospel was contained in it, as delivered by the Savior to the ancient inhabitants”
( http://scriptures.lds.org/js_h/1/34 )
“…giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent…”
I’m not sure what your point is.
And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance. Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper• upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever.
( http://scriptures.lds.org/2_ne/1/8-9 )
Do you have a point to this mystical scripture posting?
Kim Siever said…
“…giving an account of the former inhabitants of this continent…”
I’m not sure what your point is.
Kim, it’s not my point but one supposedly made by the Angel Moroni, a resurrected being. What’s an honest person supposed to make of it? Was Moroni a confused resurrected angel? Or was Joseph Smith confused about what Moroni told him? Or was Joseph Smith confused about whether or not an angel appeared to him? Or something else? Care to explain?
The point is “… this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land …” (2 Ne 1:8-9)
See http://scriptures.lds.org/1_ne/13/10-15 for a closely related scripture on this topic of the separation of the people of Lehi & Mulek from the gentiles (i.e. those not of Hebrew origins).
This is like watching a Spiritual Special Olympics. The amazing abilities include: being able to talk a lot without saying anything, and the ability to deny truth even when it hits right between the eyes.
This whole Southerton thing was never about the BoM – this was all about a smear campaign to discredit a man of science who found his faith by telling the truth.
The hypocrisy of the LDS church regarding Southerton – will they posthumously excommunicate Joseph Smith for his many fallings and committed adulteries?
-Sideon
A few other LDS scriptures on this topic.
http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/28/8 – A revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet to Oliver Cowdery.
http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/54/8 – A revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet to Newel Knight.
http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/57/4 – Another revelation – be sure to checkout the footnote.
http://scriptures.lds.org/dc/32/2 – Revelation through Joseph Smith to Parley P. Pratt and Ziba Peterson
http://scriptures.lds.org/mosiah/2/2 – A large civilization of Nephites
Doesn’t LDS doctrine teach that revelations come through the Lord, and not just the confused, limited mind of men? May the Lord help us all to be humble and have no fear of the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Kim,
I’m surprised at your comments. The Book of Mormon states right in its introduction that the Lamanites or Nephites which (according to the BOM) emigrated across the ocean from an area around Jerusalem are the principal ancestors of modern American Indians. I’ll note that this introduction was written and approved by the highest church leaders.
Obviously, much more research involving mDNA testing needs to be done. However, tests involving maternal mDNA are showing that 99.6% of all Indians tested in Central America, South America, and North America can be excluded as having any ancestral connection with Jews in the Middleast.
Any sensible person who knows about the BOM and the claims it makes understands the challenge this poses for the LDS Church. The Book of Mormon may not say so, but church leaders have claimed or insinuated for decades that Polynesians are people who sailed to these islands from America. This accounts for tremendous focus the church has placed on these islands in terms of missionary work, educational funding, and temple building. The problem is that the same mDNA testing shows these people to be descendants of Asian peoples living in Southeast Asia. In other words, the migratory pattern was west to east, not east to west.
Southerton’s research shows that if one wants to continue to believe in the BoM one can do so. However, it truly is a question of doing it on the basis of spirit and faith. There is no hard science to support it all. None.
If the LDS Church does not teach that Native Americans (Indians) are not Laminites, then the LDS Chuch President needs to be told this. I happened to be at a gathering of Navajos about 7 years ago when Hinkley said that we were decendents of Nephi, and he called us Lamanites. He also said the Laminites would blossom. I know it’s been a while since I heard the speach, but those things I remember clearly!
Some Quotes from the Prophets:
The Indians or Lamanites—The Lamanites or Indians are just as much the children of our Father and God as we are. So also are the Africans. But we are also the children of adoption through obedience to the Gospel of his Son. As we have here an assemblage of the people from other settlements, I wish to impress them with the necessity of treating the Indians with kindness, and to refrain from harboring that revengeful, vindictive feeling that many indulge in. I am convinced that as long as we harbor in us such feelings toward them, so long they will be our enemies, and the Lord will suffer them to afflict us. I certainly believe that the present affliction, which has come upon us from the Indians, is a consequence of the wickedness which dwells in the hearts of some of our brethren. If the Elders of Israel had always treated the Lamanites as they should, I do not believe that we should have had any difficulty with them at all. This is my firm conviction, and my conclusion according to the light that is in me. I believe that the Lord permits them to chasten us at the present time to convince us that we have to overcome the vindictive feelings which we have harbored towards that poor, downtrodden branch of the House of Israel. (Discourses Of Brigham Young, pg 122-123)
“We now have some half million Indian or Lamanite members in the Church…” (Spencer W. Kimball, “The Lamaniteâ€; an address delivered at Regional Representatives’ Seminar, 1 Apr. 1977)
“The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. Millions of you are descendants of Spaniards and Indians, and are termed mestizos, and are called after your countries, for instance: Mexicans in Mexico; Guatemalans in Guatemala; Chilianos in Chile. You Polynesians of the Pacific are called Samoan or Maori, Tahitian or Hawaiian, according to your island.” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 596.)
“It has been a very interesting thing to see the descendants of Father Lehi in the congregations that have gathered in the [Guayaquil Ecuador] temple. So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins and it is just an intriguing thing to see their tremendous response and their tremendous interest.” (Quote from President Gordon B. Hinckley; Aug 7, 1999 Church News – Guayaquil Ecuador Temple dedication: ‘A wondrous day’ for members)
“AN ANCIENT RECORD – Three years later was revealed to him, in a similar way, an ANCIENT RECORD, a book of metallic plates having the appearance of gold, and CONTAINING A HISTORY OF AMERICA ages prior to its discovery by Columbus. The revealer of these plates, who proclaimed himself a messenger from God, gave his name as Moroni, and stated that he was one of many prophets who, when in mortality, had ministered to a people called Nephites, a branch of the house of Israel, formerly inhabiting this land. The NEPHITES were the CIVILIZED ANCESTORS OF the DEGENERATE LAMANITES, OR AMERICAN INDIANS. The writings of these prophets, compiled and abridged by Mormon, the father of Moroni, had been buried in a hill anciently called Cumorah, in which place of deposit the youthful prophet, directed by the angel, discovered them. By means of interpreters Urim and Thummim found with the plates, he translated the hieroglyphic characters of the Nephite record, and the result was the Book of Mormon, published to the world early in 1830. The title page of the volume contains the testimony of three witnesses, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris, who solemnly aver that an angel showed them the plates after Joseph Smith had translated them, and that they heard a voice from heaven declare that the translation was by the gift and power of God. Eight other witnesses testify that they saw the plates and handled them while they were in the prophet’s possession, prior to being reclaimed by the angel.” … “In conclusion, let us say, as representing the body of religious worshipers over whom we have the honor to preside: We cherish none but sentiments of good will toward mankind. We regard all men as our brothers, children of the universal Father, and for their benefit and for his honor and glory we and our fellow servants are laboring, and expect to labor to the close of our mortal lives; passing hence to continue, in the world of spirits, the work of salvation inaugurated here. Peace be unto all, in the name of our Lord and Savior! (JOSEPH F. SMITH, ANTHON H. LUND, JOHN HENRY SMITH, Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1833-1964.; Introd., notes, and index, by James R. Clark)
“With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea… Now the Lamanites number about sixty million; they are in all of the states of America from Tierra del Fuego all the way up to Point Barrows, and they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand.” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Of Royal Blood,” Ensign July, 1971)
The Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western tribes of Indians; having been found through the ministration of an holy angel, and translated into our own language by the gift and power of God, after having been hid up in the earth for the last fourteen hundred years, containing the word of God which was delivered unto them. By it we learn that our western tribes of Indians are descendants from that Joseph who was sold into Egypt, and that the land of America is a promised land unto them, and unto it all the tribes of Israel will come, with as many of the Gentiles as shall comply with the requisitions of the new covenant. (TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH, pg 17)
It has been said by many of the learned and wise men, or historians, that the Indians or aborigines of this continent, are of the scattered tribes of Israel. It has been conjectured by many others, that the aborigines of this continent are not of the tribes of Israel, but the ten tribes have been led away into some unknown regions of the north. Let this be as it may, the prophecy I have just quoted “will fetch them,” in the last days, and place them in the land which their fathers possessed. And you will find in the 7th verse of the 30th chapter, quoted, “And the Lord thy God will put all these curses upon thine enemies, and on them that hate thee, which persecuted thee.” (TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH, pg 85)
Much has been said and done of late by the general government in relation to the Indians (Lamanites) within the territorial limits of the United States. One of the most important points in the faith of the Church of the Latter-day Saints, through the fullness of the everlasting Gospel, is the gathering of Israel (of whom the Lamanites constitute a part) that happy time when Jacob shall go up to the house of the Lord, to worship Him in spirit and in truth, to live in holiness; when the Lord will restore His judges as at the first, and His counselors as at the beginning; when every man may sit under his own vine and fig tree, and there will be none to molest or make afraid; when He will turn to them a pure language, and the earth will be filled with sacred knowledge, as the waters cover the great deep; when it shall no longer be said, the Lord lives that brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt, but the Lord lives that brought up the children of Israel from the land of the north, and from all the lands whither He has driven them. That day is one, all important to all men. (TEACHINGS OF THE PROPHET JOSEPH SMITH, pg 92)
So, Kim, which of the following applies to you? Pick all that apply.
A) You’re less than 30 years old
B) You were a convert less than 30 years ago
C) You suffered sever head trauma that made you forget anything earlier than 30 years ago
D) You haven’t read the D&C very closely
E) You put the speculations and excuses of FARMS, FAIR and their ilk ahead of the pronouncements of the Prophets
If you were in the church a few years back, and had your wits about you, you wouldn’t make the laughable claim that the idea ALL native peoples of the New World are literal and direct descendants of Lamanites is just a traditional extrapolation of the BoM.
No, if you were a sentient being in the church during, say, the Kimball administration, you would be sitting enraptured while the Lord’s Anointed Prophet, Seer and Revelator preached that Lamanites he met on the Navajo reservation were actually turning white and delightsome.
Or you would have stood in line for a performance of the Lamanite Generation, featuring talented Native Americans and Polynesians.
Or, like me, you might have been sent on a mission dedicated to preaching the Gospel to the Lamanites (in my case, western Canada), where you would present lessons, prepared by the missionary department and approved by the First Presidency themselves, that claimed over and over that the Indians of North and South America were descendants of Book of Mormon people and entitled to the same royal birthright — which is perfectly in line with what Joseph Smith and every prophet until the past few decades taught.
But let’s look at the Scriptures — you know, the True Word of the Lord. Check out D&C 28:8-9, 14 where Oliver Cowdery and Hiram Page are sent to preach the Gospel to the Lamanites. Wow, actual Lamanites! And were were they? In some remote yet-to-be discovered region of Mesoamerica? No.
Or let’s look at D&C 54:8 where the Saints are instructed by the Lord himself to flee “unto the land of Missouri, unto the borders of the Lamanites.” Notice that the Lord didn’t say, “unto the borders of people who are so intermixed with other prehistoric populations that I’m only using ‘Lamanite’ figuratively.”
No, the idea that modern native peoples of the Americas ARE NOT direct, literal, blood descendants of the Lamanites is an excuse invented recently in an attempt to weasel out of the lack of confirming evidence and the growing pile of disconfirming evidence.
I have been in the church for 40 years. I went on a mssion, and to the temple etc. I am educated (Ph.D). I know the doctrine and have read the Book of Mormon many times.
If native Americans aren’t the principal decendants of the Lamanites then the Book of Mormon is false and Joseph Smith was a fraud. Period.
Go read the Book again! Have the personal integrity to admit you are wrong.
“it’s not my point”
I wasn’t referring to the point made by the scripture. I was referring to the point made by using the scripture in your comment.
“closely related scripture on this topic of the separation of the people of Lehi & Mulek from the gentiles”
And of those already inhabiting the promised land?
“this was all about a smear campaign to discredit a man of science who found his faith by telling the truth.”
Huh? I think you’re forgetting you was behind the campaign. First of all, it was Souherton who had developed the exposé. We’re not saying what he claimed wasn’t truth; we’re saying he’s thirty years too late.
“A few other LDS scriptures on this topic.”
None of the first four scriptures you cited state that all indigenous peoples of the Americas are descended from Lehi.
“A large civilization of Nephites”
How large? Larger than New York City? Larger than India? Larger than St. George, Utah?
“The Book of Mormon…introduction [states] that the Lamanites or Nephites which (according to the BOM) emigrated across the ocean from an area around Jerusalem are the principal ancestors of modern American Indians.”
So? Like I said, many people believed that all indigenous people in the Americas were descended from Lehi. Just because a lot of people believe something doesn’t magically create a new passage in the book of Mormon. Again, Simon Southerton claimed the Book of Mormon taught that all indigenous peoples of the Americas are descended from Lehi. The Book of Mormon never makes this claim.
“I’ll note that this introduction was written and approved by the highest church leaders.”
Do you have a source for this claim?
“tests involving maternal mDNA are showing that 99.6% of all Indians tested in Central America, South America, and North America can be excluded as having any ancestral connection with Jews in the Middleast.”
Okay. I am not disagreeing with that.
“Any sensible person who knows about the BOM and the claims it makes understands the challenge this poses for the LDS Church.”
Sigh. The Book of Mormon does not claim what Southerton says it claims.
“There is no hard science to support it all.”
Exactly the point of the post I made on this topic last year.
“If the LDS Church does not teach that Native Americans (Indians) are not Laminites, then the LDS Chuch President needs to be told this.”
Habits are hard to break when you’re 95.
“When Columbus came, these descendants of the Book of Mormon peoples and those with whom they had mixed numbered in the millions and covered the islands of the Pacific and the Americas from Point Barrow to Tierra del Fuego. …There are nearly 130 million Lamanites worldwide…I rejoice that it has been my privilege to carry the gospel to the Lamanites from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic, from the reaches of Canada to southern Chile, and in the islands from Hawaii to New Zealand.” – Spencer W. Kimball, “Our Paths Have Met Again, Ensign, Dec. 1975
“With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem some 600 years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of ALL of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North AND South AND Central America and in the islands of the sea, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea.”—Spencer W. Kimball, “Of Royal Blood,” Ensign, July 1971.
So, you’re right but somehow Pres. Kimball, prophet, seer and revelator, missed the obvious? Really?
If you believe the Prophets of the church are actually prophets and that the Ensign prints the word of God by the prophets then you can’t argue about American Indians being Lamanites. Here are some quotes.
“We now have some half million Indian or Lamanite members in the Church…” (Spencer W. Kimball, “The Lamaniteâ€; an address delivered at Regional Representatives’ Seminar, 1 Apr. 1977)
“The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. Millions of you are descendants of Spaniards and Indians, and are termed mestizos, and are called after your countries, for instance: Mexicans in Mexico; Guatemalans in Guatemala; Chilianos in Chile. You Polynesians of the Pacific are called Samoan or Maori, Tahitian or Hawaiian, according to your island.” (Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 596.)
“It has been a very interesting thing to see the descendants of Father Lehi in the congregations that have gathered in the [Guayaquil Ecuador] temple. So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins and it is just an intriguing thing to see their tremendous response and their tremendous interest.” (Quote from President Gordon B. Hinckley; Aug 7, 1999 Church News – Guayaquil Ecuador Temple dedication: ‘A wondrous day’ for members)
“AN ANCIENT RECORD – Three years later was revealed to him, in a similar way, an ANCIENT RECORD, a book of metallic plates having the appearance of gold, and CONTAINING A HISTORY OF AMERICA ages prior to its discovery by Columbus. The revealer of these plates, who proclaimed himself a messenger from God, gave his name as Moroni, and stated that he was one of many prophets who, when in mortality, had ministered to a people called Nephites, a branch of the house of Israel, formerly inhabiting this land. The NEPHITES were the CIVILIZED ANCESTORS OF the DEGENERATE LAMANITES, OR AMERICAN INDIANS. The writings of these prophets, compiled and abridged by Mormon, the father of Moroni, had been buried in a hill anciently called Cumorah, in which place of deposit the youthful prophet, directed by the angel, discovered them. By means of interpreters Urim and Thummim found with the plates, he translated the hieroglyphic characters of the Nephite record, and the result was the Book of Mormon, published to the world early in 1830. The title page of the volume contains the testimony of three witnesses, Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Martin Harris, who solemnly aver that an angel showed them the plates after Joseph Smith had translated them, and that they heard a voice from heaven declare that the translation was by the gift and power of God. Eight other witnesses testify that they saw the plates and handled them while they were in the prophet’s possession, prior to being reclaimed by the angel.” … “In conclusion, let us say, as representing the body of religious worshipers over whom we have the honor to preside: We cherish none but sentiments of good will toward mankind. We regard all men as our brothers, children of the universal Father, and for their benefit and for his honor and glory we and our fellow servants are laboring, and expect to labor to the close of our mortal lives; passing hence to continue, in the world of spirits, the work of salvation inaugurated here. Peace be unto all, in the name of our Lord and Savior! (JOSEPH F. SMITH, ANTHON H. LUND, JOHN HENRY SMITH, Messages of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 1833-1964.; Introd., notes, and index, by James R. Clark)
“With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea… Now the Lamanites number about sixty million; they are in all of the states of America from Tierra del Fuego all the way up to Point Barrows, and they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand.” (Spencer W. Kimball, “Of Royal Blood,” Ensign July, 1971)
“which of the following applies to you?”
Actually, Al, none of them.
“Check out D&C 28:8-9, 14 [see also D&C 54:8] where Oliver Cowdery and Hiram Page are sent to preach the Gospel to the Lamanites.”
Sigh. Ok. I guess people aren’t going to read previous comments I made regarding this scripture, so I’ll post it again.
Let’s assume the Lord is not simply using language the Saints had not already being using themselves and so was familiar with them. Let’s assume that the Lord is speaking literally. Does this mean that all indigenous peoples outside of Missouri are/were not Lamanites?
“the idea that modern native peoples of the Americas ARE NOT direct, literal, blood descendants of the Lamanites is an excuse invented recently in an attempt to weasel out of the lack of confirming evidence and the growing pile of disconfirming evidence.”
Despite your labelling it an excuse, I agree with this idea. Past members (including leader) believed and taught this idea that was not based on scripture. Now that science has shown it is not possible, more members are realising the ridiculousness of such a stand.
Oh, and do you think we can withhold on name calling here. I enjoy a good debate, but I prefer the civil type.
“If native Americans aren’t the principal decendants of the Lamanites then the Book of Mormon is false and Joseph Smith was a fraud. Period.”
Huh? I honestly fail to see how this would cause Joseph Smith to be a fraud. It certainly wouldn’t make the Book of Mormon false since the book doesn’t assert this. Southerton thought the same way you are speaking, and now he isn’t a member of the Church.
“So, you’re right but somehow Pres. Kimball, prophet, seer and revelator, missed the obvious? Really?”
“If you believe the Prophets of the church are actually prophets and that the Ensign prints the word of God by the prophets then you can’t argue about American Indians being Lamanites.”
First of all, what I have been saying is nothign new. It has been maintained by many members for years. It has nothign to do with me being right.
Second, we need to realise that not every word that leaves the mouth of a prophet is scripture. Just because someone becomes a prophet does not mena they are no longer entitled to personal opinion, to hold on to long-held traditions. It does not mean they are in constant communication with God and every word they speak is God’s word.
Can you establish that when President Kimball made those comments he was speaking as a prophet, a seer, or a revelator?
“So very many of these people have the blood of Lehi in their veins and it is just an intriguing thing to see their tremendous response and their tremendous interest.”
Intersting that President Hinckley did not say that every one of them was descended from Lehi. Perhaps at 89, his traditions are starting to soften as well.
Kim said:
Can you establish that when President Kimball made those comments he was speaking as a prophet, a seer, or a revelator?
Kim, in all honesty, I find the mental gymnastics you have to go through to maintain your faith exhausting and sadly, ridiculous. Having said that, I must confess that I was as you now are. Another, and more plausible explanation, is that Joseph Smith did not write a history of a real people. The evidence, which faith cannot ignore, is overwhelming against the proposition. Is it possible that the Book of Mormon speaks of a real and historic people? Yes, its is possible, but not probable. Do you understand the difference? Faith cannot ignore real facts. Sometimes the things people believe are wrong. What you are trying to do now is spit hairs. You know that don’t you? It’s just not the DNA, its everything, the horses, the grapes, the nineteenth century approach to life, the plagarisms, the poor grammar, the changes in doctrine, the lack of credible witnesses, etc.
You will be happier once you can accept real truth and not the fictional faith promoting fantasy you are clinging to. Your time will come.
Members such as you can only accept that a prophet speaks as a prophet when those words conform to your sense of truth. When a prophets words cease to have relevance, suddenly that stop speaking as a prophet. You see how convenient that is for people like you? But it isn’t honest in any true meaning of that term.
You don’t know me at all then. You see, for me, the importance of the Book of Mormon isn’t about whether it is about real people or not. It’s not about whether the horses and elephants it refers to are the horses and elephants we know or some other entirely different animals.
For me, the Book of Mormon is nothing more than a second witness of Christ. For me, I get very little out of the zealousness of Captain Moroni or the colonialistic/self-righteous nature of the Nephites. For me, what I get out of the Book of Mormon is how to be a better person, how to accept Jesus as my Saviour, how to understand the pains Jesus went through to save my soul, and how to rejoice in the potential I have to one day live in the presence of God.
Could the Book of Mormon be complete fiction? Maybe. Do I care? Not really. It has changed my life; made me a better person. I have seen it change the lives of many others.
You’re right. I don’t know you, but just by the comments you have made. So it sounds like you largely agree with Dr. Southerton. He came to the conclusion that the Book of Mormon was a fictional work from the 19th century. However, for him, it was difficult, impossible, to continue serving as a bishop because, has Pres. Hinckley has so often said, if the Book of Mormon isn’t true then Joseph Smith was a fraud. Why do you think Pres. Hinckley keeps throwing down that challenge? I would be curious as to your thoughts as you struggle to find meaning in a book that is largely irrelevant and outdated. I will agree with you somewhat. There are passages in the Book of Mormon which are inspiring, such as King Benjamin’s address but most of it is irrelevant, difficult to read and warlike. There are other fictional works that reach me more completely than the Book of Mormon.
If the Book of Mormon is a work of fiction, then what about other teachings and claims by Joseph Smith.
This bizarre “we never taught that”-athon that now constitutes mormon doctrine is outrageously disingenous.
The idea that Native Americans were Lamanites has always been a central belief of mormonism and everybody knows that.
To deny this is reprehensible.
Who’s denying that it was a central belief in Mormonism?
I agree with Southerton in that I beleive the claim that the Book of Mormon states all indegenous peoples of the Americas are descended from Lehi is false.
Do not get me wrong. I do not believe the Book of Mormon to be a work of fiction. I sincerely beleive it was written by ancient prophets and translated by the power of God through Joseph Smith.
In addition, though I get less out of the wars and such statements as “my father dwelt in a tent”, I still think there is value in the stories of the Book of Momon, as well as the sermons.
I do not find it at all difficult to read. Maybe it has to do with how many times I have read it; I don’t know.
Kim:
You sound like a decent person. So I hope you haven’t taken some of the comments here harshly. I have read the Book of Mormon numerous times and it was even key to my learning Spanish as a missionary. Currently I am serving in the Bishopric of my ward. But it has been impossible for me to bury my head in the sand and proclaim the divinity of a book which is so plainly not what it has been purported to be. Coming to the realization was a painful experience for me. Now days, I am much more at ease with that knowledge. I am afraid that many members of the chuch are in for a painful journey as they are presented with real evidence that will force them to question the unquestionable – that the church isn’t what it claims to be.
Some will go through depression, other will remain in denial as is often the case of persons suffering from cognitive dissonance. It sounds as if you have begun that journey. You put more stock in the ideas of “scholars” at FARMS and FAIR than the words of men we sustained as prophets, seers and revelators. Doesn’t that make you question yourself at all? Since when did we sustain Dan Peterson as a prophet? I have been dissappointed that our church leadership hasn’t spoken about these challenges in a direct manner. But what I think is that they are taking a wait and see approach. In the end, as more DNA is tested and confirmed to be Asian in origin, there will be no people left who can be of Hebrew descent. At some point the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve will be forced to receive a revelation which will state that Joseph Smith’s word was not a literal translation, but an inspired story. Maybe that same revelation will address Section 132 and polygamy as well.
“You sound like a decent person.”
Thank you.
“I hope you haven’t taken some of the comments here harshly.”
Not at all.
“But it has been impossible for me to bury my head in the sand and proclaim the divinity of a book which is so plainly not what it has been purported to be.”
This is precisely why I do not regard it to be more than what it is. For example, at one point I used to regard it as a record of the ancestors of all the indigenous peoples of the Americas. I found myself trying to defend criticism of the Book of Mormon based on archaeology, sociology, biology, etc. I also found it to be a never ending battle. Several years ago, I came to the realisation that the Book of Mormon is not a book of science. It is a testament of Jesus Christ and His gospel. I no longer try to use the Book of Mormon to link our religion to the Incas, or discredit the Bering Strait theory because of conflicts with the Book of Mormon. I no longer try to reconcile.
I find my life to be far less stressful because of that decision. In addition, this realisation has helped to analyse my beliefs and determine which ones were based on popular traditions and which were based on actual scripture. To me, the gospel has become far simpler than it was when I served my mission years ago.
Now, through my blog, I try to get other members of the Church to critically analyse their own beliefs. I hope others are able to clear their minds as I have been able to.
I am not on a journey to question what the Church claims itself to be. I’ve been through my questioning stage, but it was not something as trivial as whether the way the Church portrays itself or the way members portray it is correct. I questioned something much more foundational and fundamental.
Years ago, I went through a very faith-trying experience that lasted for a very long time. I won’t go into specifics, but I will say that as a result of this experience, I questioned the existence of God. My prayers were not being answered, and I felt abandoned and very alone. My actions at church were just that: actions. I went through the motions every Sunday, yet finding myself growing ever more agnostic.
At some point, I had another experience. This one helped to realise that I was not abandoned and that God was very real. His existence had become very clear to me.
It was a very difficult time for me emotionally and mentally and caused my wife a lot of worry. The entire experience, however, helped to realise my religious priorities. what became most important to me was God and Jesus. Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon, the Church, et al became very secondary; they became vehicles for me to become closer to God and to exemplify more the life of our Saviour.
I became less intent on pleasing priesthood leaders and more intent on pleasing God. I placed less importance on outward signs of obedience (like wearing white shirts, shaving, yadda, yadda) and more about inward allegiance (home teaching sincerely, prayerfully preparing talks, etc). I shed all the fluff of popular Mormonism and became attracted to the core principles of it. I became less interested in Church-produced goals (like the current BOM reading one by President Hinckley) and more interested in personal ones.
Interestingly enough, it was this experience that helped me to get more out of the scriptures.
I do not put any more stock in the words of scholars than I do the leaders of the church. I take all I read and use it to determine how it affects what I believe. I find truth in the prophets, in some of the words of scholars, in science journals and other sources.
One of the reasons I do so is because it helps me to weed out the opinions of prophets and their revelations. It seems ludicrous to us in 2005 that anyone would believe, for example, that people live on the moon. Yet that is precisely what Joseph Smith taught. We know now that ti was his personal opinion. If we get too caught u in trying to reconcile every word that comes from the mouth of the prophet we will either fall away or dilute our beliefs to the point where we don’t know what we believe.