Infant Baptism and the Nephites

[Uncle Dale]

... data to support these assumptions?

Only to old Reorganized LDS Sunday School lessons, in which

were were assured that Hebrew was a democratic language, and

that a great many more Israelites and Jews were literate than

were most of their ANE neighbors (save for Phoenicians & Greeks).

But I do not know that to be true -- or even the Book of Mormon

to be true. In The RLDS Church we saw the D&C sections added

every few years, from the First Presidency, compared to a set of

gold plates, held together on rings. Just as the plates were

"loose-leaf," so was our RLDS D&C, etc. etc.

At the time, I held these Sunday School teachings to be superior

to worldly knowledge --- and to actually attend World Conference,

and hear the Prophet give Divine counsel, equivalent to truth itself.

Now I cannot hold on to those more innocent perceptions. If there were

thousands of "Nephite bibles," then at least a couple of their pages

ought to have been uncovered in the Americas by now. In Israel some

of the earliest specimens of Hebrew writing are comprised in tiny

fragments of metal engravings. If such things were commonplace in

preColumbian America, for many centuries, then at least a few of

them ought to have turned up by now.

At this point, all I can ask, is what does the book itself say?

I used to presume that the Nephite Christians were born-again

members of the Body of Christ, who had the continuing presence

of the Holy Ghost with them through out their devout lives. But

perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps I was not taught the truth.

Uncle Dale

[noel00]

Only to old Reorganized LDS Sunday School lessons, in which

were were assured that Hebrew was a democratic language, and

that a great many more Israelites and Jews were literate than

were most of their ANE neighbors (save for Phoenicians & Greeks).

But I do not know that to be true -- or even the Book of Mormon

to be true. In The RLDS Church we saw the D&C sections added

every few years, from the First Presidency, compared to a set of

gold plates, held together on rings. Just as the plates were

"loose-leaf," so was our RLDS D&C, etc. etc.

At the time, I held these Sunday School teachings to be superior

to worldly knowledge --- and to actually attend World Conference,

and hear the Prophet give Divine counsel, equivalent to truth itself.

Now I cannot hold on to those more innocent perceptions. If there were

thousands of "Nephite bibles," then at least a couple of their pages

ought to have been uncovered in the Americas by now. In Israel some

of the earliest specimens of Hebrew writing are comprised in tiny

fragments of metal engravings. If such things were commonplace in

preColumbian America, for many centuries, then at least a few of

them ought to have turned up by now.

At this point, all I can ask, is what does the book itself say?

I used to presume that the Nephite Christians were born-again

members of the Body of Christ, who had the continuing presence

of the Holy Ghost with them through out their devout lives. But

perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps I was not taught the truth.

Uncle Dale

Dale, those passages that discuss baptism, are they attributed to Rigdon or Spalding?

[J Green]

Only to old Reorganized LDS Sunday School lessons, in which

were were assured that Hebrew was a democratic language, and

that a great many more Israelites and Jews were literate than

were most of their ANE neighbors (save for Phoenicians & Greeks).

In that context, your questions make more sense.

If there were thousands of "Nephite bibles," then at least a couple of their pages

ought to have been uncovered in the Americas by now. In Israel some

of the earliest specimens of Hebrew writing are comprised in tiny

fragments of metal engravings. If such things were commonplace in

preColumbian America, for many centuries, then at least a few of

them ought to have turned up by now.

Which might be an indicator that they weren't commonplace.

I used to presume that the Nephite Christians were born-again

members of the Body of Christ, who had the continuing presence

of the Holy Ghost with them through out their devout lives. But

perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps I was not taught the truth.

Well this thought doesn't have to predicated on the assumptions above.

Cheers.

[J Green]

Dale, those passages that discuss baptism, are they attributed to Rigdon or Spalding?

Hi, Noel.

I believe that Moroni attributes them to his father Mormon.

[noel00]

Since I accept the S/R theory I was just curious. Since it's about theology I would guess it would be Rigdon's wordprint

[Brant Gardner]

If such were truly the case, perhaps a Nephite branch could be fully

orthodox one year, and a stench upon the face of the earth, the very

next year --- with once faithful priesthood leaders sinking so low as

to be raping Lamanite women, killing them, and devouring their dead bodies.

If such is a true record of Nephite Christianity, it would not be surprising

that a branch, or ward, or stake, or entire mission field resorted to baptizing

infants --- even when their engraved metal scriptures clearly stated Divine

commands for faith, repentance and restitution, prior to a baptismal request.

I sincerely doubt that any population of humans made such dramatic swings so quickly. The nature of the way many ancient documents were written create higher contrasts than we would see if we could observe the situation that was being described in the documents that were written for didactic purposes.

The next interesting issue, however, is the extent to which any Nephites had access to scripture, and what was considered scripture. There is no indication that I have seen that copies of scripture existed outside of narrowly defined sets of people. Noah's priests clearly have copies, but the poor Zoramites clearly do not. That restriction of access means that there is less opportunity to have a Nephite Church Handbook of Instruction. They, as did the early church in the Old World, were more heavily reliant upon human interpretation of tradition. It seems logical to me, at least, that they would therefore also be subject to the same kinds of syncretization influence (particularly since I see evidence of that process throughout the Book of Mormon -- Mark Wright and I have a paper on that subject that is supposed to hit a book someday, though it has already been a couple of years. . . .).

The final question is what Nephites considered scripture. That is complicated because our interpretive lens tends to color the way we perceive the situation. We who see the Book of Mormon as scripture assume that it was scripture for the Nephites. First, it could not have been, because it was being written at the time. Second, the small plates that it contained were apparently unknown (Mormon stumbles upon them in his searching of the records--he was an official record-keeper and didn't know they were there). Finally, the large plates were kept as a regnal record, not as scripture. When the "scriptures" are cited, it is always the brass plates. It doesn't appear that there is any clear indication that the large plates were kept as scripture.

I agree that it is difficult to believe that Christ's teachings were not considered scripture, so that set of information must have been included. Still, as we have learned from early Christianity in the Old World, no matter what Christ's original teachings, the need to adapt those teachings to new situations resulted in some interesting interpretations. There is every reason to expect that this kind of normal human model existed in the New World as well.

[Uncle Dale]

...

The next interesting issue, however, is the extent to which any Nephites had access to scripture

...

Seems that the Lamanites, at least, had such access:

And behold ye do know of yourselves, for ye have witnessed it, that as many of them as are brought to the knowledge of the truth, and to know of the wicked and abominable traditions of their fathers, and are led to believe the Holy Scriptures, yea, the prophecies of the holy prophets, which are written, which leadeth them to faith on the Lord, and unto repentance, which faith and repentance bringeth a change of heart unto them, therefore as many as have come to this, ye know of [yourselves], are firm and steadfast in the faith, and in the thing wherewith they have been made free...

UD

[Brant Gardner]

Seems that the Lamanites, at least, had such access:

Actually, that verse speaks of converting Lamanites to believe in the scriptures. It is unclear whether or not copies would have been available for that purpose. Although Abinadi must have had and been able to read a copy of scriptures, his citations were all oral. There is no reason to believe that typical preaching would have been anything different. If the missionaries taught from the scriptures, but from memory, it would still be a conversion to the scriptures--to the content/meaning, not the physical presence.