Book Of Mormon's Intro Changed

[structurecop]

I often wondered if I could come on a site like this and talk about my feelings and concerns with what some call Internet-Mormons. There is a broad difference between the two.

Why do you assume I am not a member simply because I am not standing lock-step with this "change" in the introduction. Do you think all active LDS are simply going to accept and not question?

I was hoping that new light would be shed concerning perhaps new revelation, so that the changed information would make sense to me.

What I got instead was heaped-up abuse and name calling. I can see that the Lord is making it clear that the internet and apologetics is no place for me to be. I threatens my testimony.

Come off of it, AR. We're not stupid here. Your posting style and breadth of knowledge regarding Internet apologetics is totally out of character for some innocent "Chapel Mormon" (you must have been spending time on TBTSNBN, eh?). To come out swinging on here representing your caricature of Mormon Orthodoxy shows that your identity is a false one.

[thesometimesaint]

Lachoneus:

"Principle" is not limited just to the DNA. Within LDS thought is the idea that Blessings take precedence over genetics.

[ed2276]

From the SL Trib, http://www.sltrib.com/ci_7403990. The article is not too bad for the SL Trib. Our own Kevin Barney also is quoted as well.

The word change is welcomed by me. While the introduction is not scripture, I am happy to see that the word "principal" has been replaced, so that the phrase reads "and they are among the ancestors of the American Indian".

I don't have a problem with the change. Growing up in the Church , I had believed that all Native Americans were Lamanites , that is they were the direct offspring Laman , that there was no Nephite blood among them , since all the Nephites had been wiped out in the last great battles between the Nephites and Lamanites.

It wasn't until much later in life , when I first came to this site in fact , where I was exposed to the probability that the great Nephite and Lamanite populations didn't arise solely from the reproductive prowess of Lehi's little band and the likelihood that there were already other populations of people present when Lehi and his family arrived , with whom the people of Nephi and Laman mixed.

One of the benefits I have realized in coming here is that my narrow views have enlarged considerably , for which I am grateful to you all.

[structurecop]

God is currently revealing many plain and precious truths. He is correcting our misunderstanding of the story of the inhabitants of this continent. We were under the false assumption that Lamanites were pure descendants of Lehi, when in actuality there were other people previously living on the Americas.

I thank the Lord for our living Prophet who guides us in these Latter Days.

Why do you assume I am not a member simply because I am not standing lock-step with this "change" in the introduction. Do you think all active LDS are simply going to accept and not question?

I was hoping that new light would be shed concerning perhaps new revelation, so that the changed information would make sense to me.

You're flip-flopping more than Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney combined.

[Lachoneus]

"Principle" is not limited just to the DNA. Within LDS thought is the idea that Blessings take precedence over genetics.

Principle has nothing to do with DNA (as discussed in this thread).

[Mike Reed]

This post Mike shows that you have very little understanding of the debate about BOM geography that has been ongoing for quite a few decades.

Er... um... How on earth can you determine from my post what I know about the BoM Geography debate? <chuckle> Reread my post. I said nothing about official doctrine. I said nothing explicitly about BoM Geography either. My comments were directed at the mere fact that McConkie is getting the axe again... he is getting the axe again for believing what the prophets of the past have (officially or not) taught... that's all. I feel for the guy.

--Mike Reed (Ex-Mopologist member of the FAIR list, who actively debated the topic of DNA and the BoM YEARS ago when Tom Murphy first published his "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics." Heck... I even ATTENDED the 2001 FAIR conference! Where were YOU then, WhyMe? Were you on the FAIR list, FAIR boards, at the FAIR conference, or on ZLMB debating this topic?)

[katherine the great]

I guess the really question is, why backpedal? Can't we just trust that when God separated the Lamanites form the Nephites he changed their DNA as well? 2 Nephi 5:23 even hints that he did:

Did he also plant fake archaelogical evidence tracing Native American history back over 12,000 years, change their language, and change the dna in their dogs as well? If the Lord magically changed the Lamanite's DNA, he made it identical to the indigenous people who had already been in the New World for thousands of years. Wouldn't it be more logical to conclude that intermarriage was immediate and widespread?

[Aurelia Rozella]

You're flip-flopping more than Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney combined.

I don't view that as a flip flop. I said new revelation from our Prophet is exciting and to be expected. So when will we hear about this particular "revelation."

Or is this too another erroneous addition to our scriptures that will be changed whenever it becomes politically expedient?

I want the official Church to stand up and make some official explanation. I am tired of being made fun of everytime there is a change and all I can point to is a site with this declaration:

The views expressed in this article are the views of the author and do not represent the position of the Maxwell Institute, Brigham Young University, or The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Is it official now. Was it official when Elder McConkie wrote it, will it be official later? I simply want to know that it is indeed "official revelation."

The anti-Mormons at the sites where I post are making me look like a stupid old fool. I'm beginning to think that I indeed fit the bill.

[structurecop]

The anti-Mormons at the sites where I post are making me look like a stupid old fool. I'm beginning to think that I indeed fit the bill.

Oh yeah? What sites are those?

[LifeOnaPlate]

I'm beginning to think that I indeed fit the bill.

[structurecop]

Or is this too another erroneous addition to our scriptures that will be changed whenever it becomes politically expedient?

It's not an addition to your scriptures. Do you cite the introduction to the Authorized King James Version as part of your scriptures? It's inside of the Intellectual Reserve printing of the Holy Bible, after all.

[juliann]

Er... um... How on earth can you determine from my post what I know about the BoM Geography debate? <chuckle> Reread my post. I said nothing about official doctrine. I said nothing explicitly about BoM Geography either. My comments were directed at the mere fact that McConkie is getting the axe again... he is getting the axe again for believing what the prophets of the past have (officially or not) taught... that's all. I feel for the guy.

--Mike Reed (Ex-Mopologist member of the FAIR list, who actively debated the topic of DNA and the BoM YEARS ago when Tom Murphy first published his "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics." Heck... I even ATTENDED the 2001 FAIR conference! Where were YOU then, WhyMe? Were you on the FAIR list, FAIR boards, at the FAIR conference, or on ZLMB debating this topic?)

Mike does, indeed, know his stuff and was everything he says.

[Tchild2]

God is currently revealing many plain and precious truths. He is correcting our misunderstanding of the story of the inhabitants of this continent. We were under the false assumption that Lamanites were pure descendants of Lehi, when in actuality there were other people previously living on the Americas.

I thank the Lord for our living Prophet who guides us in these Latter Days.

Indeed he is.

It seems that God is now allowing the respective scientific disciplines to teach us about the inhabitants of the Americas, and he is allowing so called "revelation" and scriptural books to be modified accordingly. That is the way it always works with religions and their religious "truths".

God does work in mysterious ways.

[structurecop]

Indeed he is.

It seems that God is now allowing the respective scientific disciplines to teach us about the inhabitants of the Americas, and he is allowing so called "revelation" and scriptural books to be modified accordingly. That is the way it always works with religions and their religious "truths".

God does work in mysterious ways.

Don't get too excited. Aurelia is just a sockpuppet.

[Aurelia Rozella]

It's not an addition to your scriptures. Do you cite the introduction to the Authorized King James Version as part of your scriptures? It's inside of the Intellectual Reserve printing of the Holy Bible, after all.

I don't think the introduction is scripture, but it is contained IN the scriptures. It really did cause me some consternation when the intro to D&C 132 was changed. This change is really quite innocuous in comparison.

I simply want to know who I can point to as the "reason" for the change. What is the process? Like I said, the anit's on the chat sites I visit are asking me some very difficult questions. I tried answering them yesterday with "living prophet and new revelation." Now there asking me why the Church seriptiously changed it with no "official" stance regarding the change.

It used to be that these changes were generally not seen nor discussed even within the Church, now it seems that everyone, everywhere wants answers!

I came here searching for answers. All I got was this lousy T-shirt. (That too is a joke, son)

[structurecop]

Like I said, the anit's on the chat sites I visit are asking me some very difficult questions. I tried answering them yesterday with "living prophet and new revelation."

Really, Aurelia? Maybe you'd like to provide the addresses to some of these sites so some more experienced apologists can come to your aid.

[Aurelia Rozella]

Indeed he is.

It seems that God is now allowing the respective scientific disciplines to teach us about the inhabitants of the Americas, and he is allowing so called "revelation" and scriptural books to be modified accordingly. That is the way it always works with religions and their religious "truths".

God does work in mysterious ways.

Thank you Tchild.

That was a post worth regarding. I appreciate your tone.

[Aurelia Rozella]

Really, Aurelia? Maybe you'd like to provide the addresses to some of these sites so some more experienced apologists can come to your aid.

Do you do that? I didn't know. Most of them are geneology sites and you have to register, but if you'd like. This is one: Ancestry.com most of the anti conversations happen in personal mail.

[ed2276]

ed2276:

Lost in history. That is why I said improbable, and not impossible. They probably came over from Europe some 700,000. Long before the Tribes of Israel even existed.

Maybe , maybe not.

It could be that the blood of Israel was to be found in the British Isles sometime after the scattering of the 10 Tribes around 700 B.C. and Judah around 600 B.C. There are some who believe , based on perceived Hebrew language influences on European languages after the scattering of the tribes , that some , if not many , of those of Israel and Judah migrated into Europe and from there into the British Isles , bringing the blood of Jacob to the Isles. Also , the Cymri (Welsh) are thought to be descendants of the tribes of Israel resettled into the Caspian Sea area.

So , even if there were others not of Israel inhabiting the British Isles long before there were any tribes of Israel in existence , these House of Israel migrations into the British Isles sometime shortly after 700 B.C. might make it not as improbable for blue-faced folks with Israelite genes to be fighting Romans , etc. as it might seem.

[Aurelia Rozella]

Really, Aurelia? Maybe you'd like to provide the addresses to some of these sites so some more experienced apologists can come to your aid.

You can come to genebase.com but you'd have to register for my specific group. There seems to be a lot of anti-mormons in certain family groups.

[juliann]

most of the anti conversations happen in personal mail.

Nice dodge!

Meanwhile, out from under the bridge....

Murphy/Metcalfe made a very embarrassing mistake that I see a few making here. There have always been opinions expressed from high levels alllowing for other inhabitants. It was not the majority view but it was there in black and white. It is a huge mistake that will come back and bite you on the butt if it isn't at least acknowledged in the stampede to impugn the church for not being fundamentalistic like every good Mormon should be (we make easier targets that way).

[auteur55]

I personally think this is a non-event. As further knowledge on the subject comes to light our initial assumptions can change. It's not like they are saying the American Indians are NOT ancestors of Lehi.

My bigger concern is we have Prophets, Seers and Revelators who appear to be as clueless as we are. I know they are fallible men and form their own opinions on many subjects but when Joseph Smith was confused about something he went to the Lord and asked?

Are the Bretheren just not asking?

[ed2276]

Do you do that? I didn't know. Most of them are geneology sites and you have to register, but if you'd like. This is one: Ancestry.com most of the anti conversations happen in personal mail.

How convenient!

I had no idear Ancestry.com was such a hotbed of anti-Mormon discussion and debate! Who'd thunk it!

[structurecop]

You can come to genebase.com but you'd have to register for my specific group. There seems to be a lot of anti-mormons in certain family groups.

Which group is it?

[SolarPowered]

My Patriarchal Blessing has me as from a tribe of Israel. It is genetically improbable for me to be that. My tribe painted themselves blue, worshiped trees, and fought the Romans in what was to become England nearly 2000 years ago.

Some historians have some of the Ten Tribes that escaped from the Assyrians going into Northern Europe, and into the British Isles. (Unfortunately, that's something I read in passing somewhere, and I don't have a reference for it.) If this is the case, then you easily could be descended from one or more of the Ten Tribes.