Mormons and Israelite Lineage

[Lamanite]

In an effort to "capsulize" progressively changing Mormon teaching on an Israelite lineage, Mauss provides these three epigraphic quotes from Apostles:

The sons of Ephraim are wild and uncultivated... The spirit in them is turbulent and resolute; they are the Anglo- Saxon race... bearing the spirit of rule and dictation.

-- Brigham Young, 1863

[We] are a branch of the house of Israel... a portion of that martyred nation, chosen of God and sent upon the earth to suffer and endure for His sake... a preexistent race, ordained before the world was, to perform [a] great and important mission, the gathered children of Ephraim.

-- Orson F. Whitney, 1905

I have learned to admire, respect, and love the good people from every race culture, and nation... no race or class seems superior to any other in spirituality and faithfulness.

-- James E. Faust, 1995

(Mauss 2003, 17)

Some may accuse Mauss of proof texting; I think not. I would contend that he has identified-- with these three quotes-- a shift in focus from the early church to the modern one.

My question is, why? I can't say I've ever heard a good sermon in this decade regarding Israelite lineage. I haven't heard anyone talk about Anglo Saxon specific qualities like "resolute[ness]", "rule", or "dictation." Nor have I heard anything about "martyred nation", "preordained races", or missions of Ephraim.

Come to think of it...I haven't heard anyone speak about millennialism like the Saints ca. 1835-44. Is the millennium still as close as it was in the 19th century?

Thoughts?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[volgadon]

You need to remember that from the mid-19th century was when ideas of race were crystallised and became very prevalent. Each people had certain qualities which defined it. The anglo-Saxons were a warlike race, eastern people were indolent, Arabs were shifty, etc.

[Lamanite]

You need to remember that from the mid-19th century was when ideas of race were crystallised and became very prevalent. Each people had certain qualities which defined it. The anglo-Saxons were a warlike race, eastern people were indolent, Arabs were shifty, etc.

But why abandon those lovely teachings and doctrines from the pulpit and publications today?

Big Up!

Lamanite

[volgadon]

Because it was a cultural thing.

[Lamanite]

Because it was a cultural thing.

Our Israelite lineage is a key doctrine of the Church. So much so that it os perpetuated through every patriarchal blessing given throughout the Church.

This is much more than cultural IMO

Big UP!

Lamanite

[volgadon]

I meant the Anglo-Saxon aspect. I think two issues are being conflated here.

[Lamanite]

I meant the Anglo-Saxon aspect. I think two issues are being conflated here.

We could probably conflate several doctrinal teachings that have faded out of the public discourse over the life of the modern Church. I'm just curious as to why these seemingly relevant topics go out of style.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Ariarates]

Is the millennium still as close as it was in the 19th century?

From a recent fireside by Elder Ballard:

Excerpting entire passages of scripture from Matthew 24, 2 Nephi 28 and Mormon 8, Elder Ballard firmly established that ancient prophecies regarding the last days preceding the Savior's second coming aren't just being fulfilled but are coming to pass at an accelerated rate.

"I'm telling you what the Savior said would be the signs of the acceleration towards that day when He shall come," he said. "We could stay here for a couple of hours talking about all of the prophecies of what will occur in the last days. We're in the last days

[erichard]

...

The sons of Ephraim are wild and uncultivated... The spirit in them is turbulent and resolute; they are the Anglo- Saxon race... bearing the spirit of rule and dictation.

-- Brigham Young, 1863

...

I have seen Mormons on Stormfront argue that Mormons were the first Christian Identity religion. This quote supports that claim.

Of course, Mormons never believed that certain races are the seed of the adversary, as many CI do today. And Mormons believe that salvation is available for all races. Yet the idea that the Anglo-Saxons and other Northern Europeans are the lost tribes of Israel was definitely taught from the early Mormon pulpit.

Richard

Richard

[Lamanite]

From a recent fireside by Elder Ballard:

Excerpting entire passages of scripture from Matthew 24, 2 Nephi 28 and Mormon 8, Elder Ballard firmly established that ancient prophecies regarding the last days preceding the Savior's second coming aren't just being fulfilled but are coming to pass at an accelerated rate.

"I'm telling you what the Savior said would be the signs of the acceleration towards that day when He shall come," he said. "We could stay here for a couple of hours talking about all of the prophecies of what will occur in the last days. We're in the last days

[cinepro]

Thanks for the link, an Eschatological gem!

I would still contend that Millennialism as taught by Joseph Smith and with the same frequency has diminished. But, I'll concede the point and remove it from the equation.

We can easily use Israelite lineage et al.

Big UP!

Lamanite

Perhaps the risks of millennial teachings outweigh the benefits?

[Lamanite]

Perhaps the risks of millennial teachings outweigh the benefits?

I'll bite...what are the risks v. benefits?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[sethpayne]

I'll bite...what are the risks v. benefits?

Risks: Cultural isolation, government harassment, an "us v. them" attitude.... Waco

Benefits: None that I can see. Focusing on day-to-day Christ-like love seems more practical and the "second coming" , so to speak, comes to all of us at death in any case.

[Lamanite]

Risks: Cultural isolation, government harassment, an "us v. them" attitude.... Waco

Benefits: None that I can see. Focusing on day-to-day Christ-like love seems more practical and the "second coming" , so to speak, comes to all of us at death in any case.

Risks: I could probably make the same case against the Lords commandment to "cry repentance." Isn't the removal of this doctrine from our sermons a type of pandering?

Benefits: Abrahamic lineage is of utmost importance to Mormon theology. How could the teaching of this spiritual and national identity be of no benefit?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[sethpayne]

Risks: I could probably make the same case against the Lords commandment to "cry repentance." Isn't the removal of this doctrine from our sermons a type of pandering?

Well, Isaiah walked around naked for years in an effort to cry repentance. I don't think President Monson would be very successful employing a similar tactic today. Different times require different types of outreach to the public.

Benefits: Abrahamic lineage is of utmost importance to Mormon theology. How could the teaching of this spiritual and national identity be of no benefit?

I agree that it was important in the 19th century as Mormons were building a unique identity. Today, however, I believe it would only serve to unnecessarily divide us from our communities.

Remember, God could raise up stones that are the Children of Abraham. Ultimately, lineage doesn't matter. What matters is how we individually emulate Christ.

[David T]

Here's a legitimate question:

I've seen scholars present the idea - convincingly - that the 'Twelve Tribes from Twelve Sons' concept is faulty historically, and that what became the tribes of Israel were a band of geographically located (and named) territories that eventually gathered together into the coalition of Israel.

In this case, the blessings ascribed to the tribes would not have been placed from a Father to his Son, and then from genetic lineage from a son to his descendants, but of those who became, in one way or another, associated with that territory/tribal unit. Ephraim/Manasseh/Benjamin all seem to have been closely allied throughout Israelite history, and distinct from the Judahites.

The question is this: If such a scenario was shown to be historically accurate, is there a reason why the understanding of Lineage by Adoption could not still have efficacy? Could the main body of the Church be fulfilling similar roles to the political nations associated therein in building up a modern Israel? Could Judah, Reuben, Ephraim, Benjamin, etc as Sons of Israel have been used as personified symbols of the nations or roles they represented?

[Lamanite]

Well, Isaiah walked around naked for years in an effort to cry repentance. I don't think President Monson would be very successful employing a similar tactic today. Different times require different types of outreach to the public.

I agree that it was important in the 19th century as Mormons were building a unique identity. Today, however, I believe it would only serve to unnecessarily divide us from our communities.

Remember, God could raise up stones that are the Children of Abraham. Ultimately, lineage doesn't matter. What matters is how we individually emulate Christ.

I think you have a plausible argument.

Let me just say that in the parallel between Isaiah and Monson, it was not that the doctrine was no longer taught, but that the method of teaching the doctrine had changed. If that were the case we would still be seeing the same things taught in the 21st century as they were in the 19th.

Moreover, it is essential that we emulate Christ in our developing discipleship, but also that we understand our tribal responsibilities. This is always linked to Abraham, Issac, and Jacob-- and articulated in our Patriarchal blessings. I can't see why we would disassociate ourselves from this crucial doctrine. Remember, the great and spacious building will always mock. On second thought, we do have a public relations department now...

random thoughts,

Big UP!

Lamanite

[Lamanite]

Well, Isaiah walked around naked for years in an effort to cry repentance. I don't think President Monson would be very successful employing a similar tactic today. Different times require different types of outreach to the public.

I agree that it was important in the 19th century as Mormons were building a unique identity. Today, however, I believe it would only serve to unnecessarily divide us from our communities.

Remember, God could raise up stones that are the Children of Abraham. Ultimately, lineage doesn't matter. What matters is how we individually emulate Christ.

In fairness to you Seth, Mauss does admit that lineage was a unique Old Testament idea compared to the Universalism taught by Paul and the Book of Mormon. Mormon leaders wavered in emphasis and frequency regarding this doctrine. (Mauss, 2003 20-24) However he never retracts the central theme of a diminishing emphasis that he presents at the beginning of the chapter and which I summarized in my OP.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[cinepro]

I suspect it was emphasized much more by Church leaders in the 1800's because it was much closer then.

I'll bite...what are the risks v. benefits?

Big UP!

Lamanite

The risk is you end up on this page. Although the JW's appear to have learned to manage that risk handily.

The benefits...? Other than instilling a sense of urgency into the believers, I'm not sure.

[Lamanite]

The benefits...? Other than instilling a sense of urgency into the believers, I'm not sure.

I actually think this urgency was a cultural phenomenon of the time. I'm sure its presence in Mormonism is no accident. Bushman deals with this quite well in RSR.

On the right track. But does this religious and cultural fervor of the early 1800's preclude the possibility of its truthfulness as taught by the Mormonites?

Big UP!

Lamanite

[cinepro]

On the right track. But does this religious and cultural fervor of the early 1800's preclude the possibility of its truthfulness as taught by the Mormonites?

Big UP!

Lamanite

It's truthfulness can certainly be proven anytime.

Whether or not its untruthfulness could ever be proven over any period of time, that is for each individual believer to determine.

[Lamanite]

It's truthfulness can certainly be proven anytime.

Whether or not its untruthfulness could ever be proven over any period of time, that is for each individual believer to determine.

Well put.

The evolution of doctrinal emphasis and de-emphasis within Mormonism is quite interesting to me.

Happy Day...All is well

Big UP!

Lamanite