Quotes From Lds Senior Leaders Affirming Church Teachings About The Hill Cumorah In Ny, Nephites Living Throughout North America, And More

[duane42]

Joseph Fielding Smith

10th President of the Church and Apostle for 60 years

Doctrines of Salvation 3: 239-240

â??In the face of this evidence coming from the Prophet Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and David Whitmer we cannot say that the Nephites and Lamanites did not possess the territory of the United States and that the Hill Cumorah is in Central America. Neither can we say that the great struggle which resulted in the destination of the Nephites took place in Central America â?

Ezra Taft Benson

13th President of the Church and Apostle for 42 years

Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson pp. 587-588

â??Consider how very fortunate we are to be living in this land of America . The destiny of this country was forged long before the earth was even createdâ?¦This was the place of three former civilizations: that of Adam, that of the Jaredites, and that of the Nephitesâ?

Spencer W. Kimball

12th President of the Church and Apostle for 30 years

â??Of Royal Blood,â? Ensign, July 1971

This article was adapted from an address delivered at the Lamanite Youth Conference in Salt Lake City on April 24, 1971. Peter MacDonald, chairman of the Navajo Tribal Council, was also one of the speakers at the conference. The beginning reference is to him.

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.

Not until the revelations of Joseph Smith, bringing forth the Book of Mormon, did any one know of these migrants. It was not known before, but now the question is fully answered. 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. The Church is deeply interested in all Lamanites because of these revelations and because of this great Book of Mormonâ?¦The descendants of this mighty people were called Indians by Columbus in 1492 when he found them here.

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. It is a large group of great people.

Today we have many Lamanite leaders in the Church. For example, in Tonga , where 20 percent of all the people in the islands belong to the Church, we have three large stakes. Two of them are presided over wholly by Lamanites and the other almost wholly by them. There are three stakes in Samoa and another is to be organized in those small Samoan islands. Four more stakes with Lamanite leaders!

There are three stakes of Zion in Mexico City with Mexican leadersâ??Lamanite leaders. The stake presidencies, the bishops, the high council, the auxiliary leadersâ??everybody, with one or two exceptionsâ??are Lamanites. In Monterrey , Mexico , in Guatemala , in Lima , in New Zealand , and elsewhere we have stakes of Zion with all their appropriate leaders.

There must be about one hundred thousand Polynesians in the Church, so that we have now approximately a quarter million Lamanites. I suppose a rough guess would give us only a few thousand twenty years ago. Now we have a quarter million in this short period of two or three decades. We have been doing missionary work with some of the Polynesians for a hundred years and more.

It might be interesting to know that of nearly one hundred missions, the four highest of all are Lamanite missions. That is, the Mexico North Mission, the Guatemala-El Salvador Mission, the Mexico Mission, and the Tonga Mission . These are the four highest in the world.

My brothers and sisters, you belong to a great race. Your father is Joseph who was sold into Egypt, the virtuous man who went to prison rather than yield to the seduction of a queen. Your father was Jacob, the father of twelve sons. You came through one of them. One of the great prophets of all times, your father, was Isaac. Another great prophet, your father, was Abraham, than whom there were no greater ones. Abraham was a great man who walked and talked with God. He is your father back those many generations. Be proud of him and know that you are of royal blood; with your royal blood you can achieve, rising to the top.

There are no blessings, of all the imaginable ones, to which you are not entitledâ??you, the Lamanitesâ??when you are righteous. You [the Native Americans being addressed by Pres. Kimball] are of royal blood, the children of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and Lehi.

From â??The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimballâ?, p. 601:

â??About twenty-five centuries ago, a hardy group left the comforts of a great city [ Jerusalem ], crossed a desert, braved an ocean, and came to the shores of this, their promised land. There were two large families, those of Lehi and Ishmael, who in not many centuries numbered hundreds of millions of people on these two American continentsâ?

So far, I've heard back from two senior anthropologists from two major U.S. universities, both of whom stated that they are unaware of any archaeological or other type of evidence supporting the BoM. I'm waiting to hear back from several more.

[cksalmon]

These are not official Church teachings. They are merely the opinions of men. With regard to their factuality, they're not worth the paper on which they were originally printed.

Best.

CKS

[Marvelous]

How about the temple dedicatory prayers in which prophets have made statements similar to those posted? Are we to question their inspiration and validity?

[Teancum]

These are not official Church teachings. They are merely the opinions of men. With regard to their factuality, they're not worth the paper on which they were originally printed.

Best.

CKS

Wow. Pretty harsh words for those you support as prophets of God. Why is this their opinion and other things they say not?

[Gillebre]

Because although they are Prophets of God, they are ultimately mortal men.

I am not questioning their prophetic calling, but no matter how they are called, they are not immune to mistakes, or the like.

Would they be? What do you think?

Many people view the Pope as God's man on the Earth, well....is he infallible? Can they completely rely on him to never misspeak, or make a mistake of some sort?

Hm?

[cksalmon]

Wow. Pretty harsh words for those you support as prophets of God. Why is this their opinion and other things they say not?

Hi Teancum--

Good question. Why indeed?

(BTW, I'm a nevermo, "anti-Mormon" who edits an "anti-Mormon" newspaper based in Oklahoma... )

Best.

CKS

PS. I'll take your mistaken identity of my affiliation as an indication of my objective posting style.

[Duncan]

First off its"quotations" not quotes-that is what you do with quotations. Second if you think Book of Mormon Archaeology particularly where the Hill Cumorah is located is foundational then you have completely missed the mark.

[Cold Steel]

How about the temple dedicatory prayers in which prophets have made statements similar to those posted? Are we to question their inspiration and validity?

I don't think so. It doesn't pay to get too worked up over these things. I suspect that regardless of whether a tribe's origin is in South America, Mesoamerica or North America, they're probably all "Lamanites" as far as the Lord is concerned. All those who come into the church, after all, are either naturally born into the House of Israel or they're grafted in. We all end up as tame olives.

Olives, olives, everywhere, and not a martini in sight!

A shame, isn't it?

[jadams_4242]

I don't think so. It doesn't pay to get too worked up over these things. I suspect that regardless of whether a tribe's origin is in South America, Mesoamerica or North America, they're probably all "Lamanites" as far as the Lord is concerned. All those who come into the church, after all, are either naturally born into the House of Israel or they're grafted in. We all end up as tame olives.

Olives, olives, everywhere, and not a martini in sight!

A shame, isn't it?

one hundred percent agree!

[thesometimesaint]

duane42:

http://www.jefflindsay.com/BMEvidences.shtml

[aaronshaf]

Be careful around here. It can be mighty dangerous to quote Mormon leaders to Mormons.

Might be perceived as hateful.

[thesometimesaint]

aaronshaf:

I'll hold by everything LDS leaders have said. When you are held to everything your leaders have said.

[jadams_4242]

aaronshaf:

I'll hold by everything LDS leaders have said. When you are held to everything your leaders have said.

now yer talking my language!!!!!!

im gonna remember that one!

[Hacedor Costoso]

If all you apologists know that the Prophet(s) is/are wrong - why don't you correct him/them?

It seems to me that if you know something that the Prophet doesn't know, it is your moral and righteous obligation to tell him. After all, he is merely speaking as a man - and you know it! Why not settle this issue once and for all and tell him?

Could it be that you really don't know? Could it be that you use the crutch of "speaking as a man" when it is necessary for you as an apologist?

Legitimate questions me thinks.

Hacedor

[Log]

Could it be that you really don't know? Could it be that you use the crutch of "speaking as a man" when it is necessary for you as an apologist?

Prophets don't know everything, and can be just as dogmatic in the upholding of unexamined or insufficiently attested information as any non-believer. I'm not really sure why this should be controversial.

[Duncan]

It could also be that the Prophet has other things to do then set the record straight when it comes to BOM Archaeology like preach the gald tidings of the Gospel? these things are interesting but at the end of the day if you don't repent you don't get in or stay in.

[cksalmon]

It could also be that the Prophet has other things to do then set the record straight when it comes to BOM Archaeology like preach the gald tidings of the Gospel?

This is certainly the case with recent prophets, most notably GBH. I don't know that he has issued a single dogmatic statement (in excess of what one would expect from a traditionally-Christian leader) during his tenure as Prophet.

It would seem (and I could be wrong) that the current Prophet really has nothing revelatory to divulge--about BoM locale or other disputed topics that bear on LDS claims.

Correction welcome, though, seriously. I don't get the Ensign.

Best.

CKS

[Duncan]

One thing too if the whole cumorah thing is foundational then has every prophet commented on it and not just a select few with a few quotations?

[Olavarria]

Be careful around here. It can be mighty dangerous to quote Mormon leaders to Mormons.

Might be perceived as hateful.

Here here.

Remember, we mormons are automata who have absolutly no right to think for ourselves. The bretheren do the thinking for us.

â??I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self security. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not.

( Discourses of Brigham Young, sel. John A. Widtsoe [1954], 135.)

[cksalmon]

One thing too if the whole cumorah thing is foundational then has every prophet commented on it and not just a select few with a few quotations?

Hi Duncan--

You don't have to believe that "the whole cumorah thing is foundational," you just have to believe that true prophets pronounce things as truth that are simply false. This is not a far step for LDS, though, I wouldn't think. McConkie taught that BY's twenty-year-long teaching on Adam-God was utterly false, and actually a ploy by the devil to obtain converts to cultism. He also taught that BY's belief that God progresses in knowledge was heretical ("There is not one sliver of truth in it"). Of course, BRM was never a prophet. So, I'm not sure I should take his word on it.

Best.

CKS

[Log]

Hi Duncan--

You don't have to believe that "the whole cumorah thing is foundational," you just have to believe that true prophets pronounce things as truth that are simply false. This is not a far step for LDS, though, I wouldn't think. McConkie taught that BY's twenty-year-long teaching on Adam-God was heretical. He also taught that BY's belief that God progresses in knowledge is a damnable heresy. Of course, BRM was never a prophet. So, I'm not sure I should take his word on it.

Best.

CKS

BRM modified his stance on BY's A-G teachings afterward, and I think he was palpably incorrect on God's not progressing in knowledge. I actually addressed that in my first blog post. I can't help but think your first statement is intentionally inflammatory, though.

And yes, BRM was actually a prophet.

[cksalmon]

BRM modified his stance on BY's A-G teachings afterward, and I think he was palpably incorrect on God's not progressing in knowledge. I actually addressed that in my first blog post.

Hi Blog--

I haven't read your blog, Log. But, I will look for it now. What was the modification?

I can't help but think your first statement is intentionally inflammatory, though.

We in the biz prefer to label it "provocative."

Best.

CKS

[Log]

Hi Blog--

I haven't read your blog, Log. But, I will look for it now. What was the modification?

We in the biz prefer to label it "provocative."

Best.

CKS

The modification was that BRM acknowledged that Brigham was actually correct in what he was teaching, which was on the genesis of Adam, the man, and not in the interpretation commonly laid on what he taught, which was that Adam, the man, is the same being as God the Father.

[cksalmon]

BRM modified his stance on BY's A-G teachings afterward, and I think he was palpably incorrect on God's not progressing in knowledge. I actually addressed that in my first blog post. I can't help but think your first statement is intentionally inflammatory, though.

And yes, BRM was actually a prophet.

Hi Logâ??

To take your last point first: you say that BRM was actually a prophet. I guess I meant that BRM never served in the capacity of Prophet, Seer, and Revelator (and President) of the LDS Church. I think you mean something along the line of everyone in the Q12 is a prophet. I would be glad to know if that is your understanding.

Second, I did look up your blog. Kudos to you for actually creating one and posting to it. Mine is still currently blank!

You wrote in your first post (and I think this is where you addressed the matter in question):

I think libertarian free will in fact resolves the tension between Bruce R.'s view of God's omniscience, and Brigham Young's teaching that God is eternally advancing in knowledge. Of course, strictly speaking, this reconciliation comes by negating Bruce R.'s view of omniscience, which included infallible foreknowledge of future free actions, but every omelette comes at the price of breaking a few eggs.

I would like to have it spelled out for me (a committed determinist) specifically how this resolves the tension, per your view.

Best.

CKS

[Duncan]

I appreciate your words CKSalmon.