Could The Lamanites Really Have Disappeared

[ERayR]

We do know how they would respond because they do have the same information we have. Unless you believe they've (and still are) been unaware of the overwhelming evidence that has been known for decades detailing the migration from Asia to the American continent.

To my knowledge there is no statement from our prophets correcting this errant belief and plenty in support of it. If one does eventually come (which I believe it will) why is it that our apologists are leading this change instead of our prophets?

It was a scholar and apologist, Hugh Nibley that put forth the proposition that the Jaradites came by way of the steppes of Asia.

[omni]

It was a scholar and apologist, Hugh Nibley that put forth the proposition that the Jaradites came by way of the steppes of Asia.

Of course he did, the idea of America's original inhabitants coming from Asia has been widely accepted since the 1930's. However, Nibley's not the one I'm concerned about here.

[canard78]

If he did have a vision of the arrival (do you have a reference for that, by the way, if you think he did?), nobody as far as I know is arguing there was a welcoming party on the coast, waving them in.

True enough. It's just a little odd that Joseph had visions and heavenly instruction about the people of the Book of Mormon and was left with the distinct impression that they were the sole origin of the continent's population. Maybe the celestial satellite dish was a bit fuzzy.

[guerreiro9]

To my knowledge there is no statement from our prophets correcting this errant belief and plenty in support of it. If one does eventually come (which I believe it will) why is it that our apologists are leading this change instead of our prophets?

To my knowledge there is no statement from our prophets that there were no migrations anciently to the Americas outside of the Lehites, Mulekites and Jaredites. They appear to not have been preoccupied with this subject in the past. Is our understanding of early american history better now than it was in the past? Sure, we have more light and knowledge now than they did in the past. You seem to be expecting an apology from the brethren that they had less knowledge in the past than we do now. There are many recent official statements indicating that the Church recognizes that there were other migrations to the Americas anciently including the change to the introduction of the Book of Mormon. Apparently this is not sufficient?

-guerreiro9

[canard78]

It was a scholar and apologist, Hugh Nibley that put forth the proposition that the Jaradites came by way of the steppes of Asia.

I've read some of Nibley's analysis of this. It's an impressive extrapolation from a few verses. It has some merit, but it's still a detailed conclusion from a limited source.

The Book of Mormon people's origins have been rewritten in the last 50 years or so when compared to what was written by Joseph and the group of people who published it and first shared it with the world. At least one group is barking up the wrong family tree.

[canard78]

To my knowledge there is no statement from our prophets that there were no migrations anciently to the Americas outside of the Lehites, Mulekites and Jaredites. They appear to not have been preoccupied with this subject in the past. Is our understanding of early american history better now than it was in the past? Sure, we have more light and knowledge now than they did in the past. You seem to be expecting an apology from the brethren that they had less knowledge in the past than we do now. There are many recent official statements indicating that the Church recognizes that there were other migrations to the Americas anciently including the change to the introduction of the Book of Mormon. Apparently this is not sufficient?

-guerreiro9

None? Except for the man who translated the book:

In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

http://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/07/the-wentworth-letter?lang=eng

[Gervin]

You seem to be expecting an apology from the brethren that they had less knowledge in the past than we do now.

I don't think that (church) knowledge is the problem. The Book of Mormon's overarching themes of declaring God/Christ, falling away, war, kingdom building, etc., presuppose cultures of complexity and power. We know of Meso-American cultures that fit based on what what people are finding all of the time (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/08/pictures/130807-maya-frieze-discovered-holmul-guatemala-archaeology/). They aren't, however, to be found in the Book of Mormon. Any LDS explanation of why this is, takes a backseat to the evidence at hand, IMO.

[guerreiro9]

None? Except for the man who translated the book:

http://www.lds.org/e...letter?lang=eng

I do not see a conflict between what I have written and the mentioned quote. This was a summary given by Joseph to the best of his knowledge. It does not state that there were no other migrations, he probably never even thought about it. No one else in his time period thought about it either. What do you think his answer would have been if he had been asked "Is it possible that other people were brought to the Americas by the hand of the Lord outside of those indicated in the Book of Mormon?" I know what I believe he would have answered, but I find it telling that the question was never asked.

-guerreiro9

Edited August 9, 2013 by guerreiro9

[guerreiro9]

I don't think that (church) knowledge is the problem. The Book of Mormon's overarching themes of declaring God/Christ, falling away, war, kingdom building, etc., presuppose cultures of complexity and power. We know of Meso-American cultures that fit based on what what people are finding all of the time (http://news.national...la-archaeology/). They aren't, however, to be found in the Book of Mormon. Any LDS explanation of why this is, takes a backseat to the evidence at hand, IMO.

I apologize, I don't quite understand what you are saying here. Could you elaborate?

-guerreiro9

[Calm]

True enough. It's just a little odd that Joseph had visions and heavenly instruction about the people of the Book of Mormon and was left with the distinct impression that they were the sole origin of the continent's population. Maybe the celestial satellite dish was a bit fuzzy.

I just think it was focused on what was specific to the peoples of the Nephites and not the general population. An extreme example would be that a documentary on the Amazon isn't going to show pictures of the Arctic....

Did the 'camera' pull back to take a more panoramic shot of the surroundings or did it focus on closeups of the individuals?

[Calm]

They aren't, however, to be found in the Book of Mormon.

Have you read much of Brant Gardner's stuff? For example:

http://www.fairlds.org/fair-conferences/2001-fair-conference/2001-a-social-history-of-the-early-nephites

[nealr]

A new study, relevant to the OP and the blog post by Southerton linked therein, maybe of interest to some:

http://phys.org/news/2012-08-esearch-modern-humans-neanderthals-interbred.html#inlRlv

Apparently, the traces of Neanderthal DNA Southerton's argument is dependent on may not be evidence of interbreeding after all. Not sure what the implications of that might be for the Book of Mormon (I am not qualified to make such judgments), but thought it might be of interest to some here.

[Helen47]

http://biologos.org/blog/was-adam-a-real-person-part-i

Did Adam really exist?

[canard78]

http://biologos.org/...l-person-part-i

Did Adam really exist?

Thanks for the link. The article kicks off with: "The historicity of Adam and Eve is a critically important topic in the discussion of Christianity and human origins."

I would suggest that the historicity of Adam and Eve is interesting, but far less critically important than the lessons their story teaches us about the purpose of life and our relationship with God.

Although I enjoy discussing the historicity of the Lamanites, I consider it to be a similar conversation. Interesting, but not critical. The lessons the Book of Mormon teaches us through the Lamanites and other characters exist independently of their place in history.

[Helen47]

The historicity of Adam and Eve might not be critical to yourself but its the thing that here in Australia is in politics. A conservative party, Family First held the balance of power in the South Australian Upper House. They insisted that they would not pass any Labor Party legislation unless it introduced creationism in school science curriculum.That is Adam and Eve, a young earth and a universal flood. A number of Evangelical scholars do not accept this, but in Pentecostal churches they are in a minority How is it that in Gen 1 Adam is used and in Gen 2 Ish is used?

[ZelphtheGreat]

This line of thinking seems to ignore the statements of lands preserved just for Nephi and company. It seems to go against what Joseph and the brethren taught for decades. It really looks like someone bringing in an outside argument because they have no answer to the questions asked.

[Calm]

This line of thinking seems to ignore the statements of lands preserved just for Nephi and company.

Under what conditions were they preserved for Nephi and company and were they fulfilling the conditions and for how long.

[canard78]

This line of thinking seems to ignore the statements of lands preserved just for Nephi and company. It seems to go against what Joseph and the brethren taught for decades. It really looks like someone bringing in an outside argument because they have no answer to the questions asked.

How much land needed to qualify?

"The lands of... (XYZ)" can be big or small. It doesn't have to be the entire North and South American continent. A valley or two would still qualify as "preserved and prepared."

I recently let go of the binary obsession with insisting Joseph and his successors had to be right all the time or a false prophet. It's a much nicer place to view the world from. Come join me

[cdowis]

Not sure what the implications of that might be for the Book of Mormon (I am not qualified to make such judgments), but thought it might be of interest to some here.

He is bringing up the phoney argument that if we can detect neanderthal DNA in humans, then we should be able to detect "Jewish DNA" in Amerindians. Of course it ignores the fundamental issue of the DNA characteristics of Lehi,et al, but he hopes we will not notice it. We simply don't know what to look for when we are talking about "Jewish DNA".

Edited August 11, 2013 by cdowis

[thesometimesaint]

True enough. It's just a little odd that Joseph had visions and heavenly instruction about the people of the Book of Mormon and was left with the distinct impression that they were the sole origin of the continent's population. Maybe the celestial satellite dish was a bit fuzzy.

I don't believe that can be justified from the text. Ancient documents, and even modern ones seldom, if ever, talk about characters/events not directly involved in the story. The Bible doesn't talk about the Chinese, but it would be counterfactual to claim that because they weren't mentioned they didn't exist.

Edited August 11, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[canard78]

I don't believe that can be justified from the text. Ancient documents, and even modern ones seldom, if ever, talk about characters/events not directly involved in the story. The Bible doesn't talk about the Chinese, but it would be counterfactual to claim that because they weren't mentioned they didn't exist.

I wasn't aware that the Chinese spent much time in Palestine during the first century AD. I suppose you might have had a few people on the Silk Road passing nearby.

[ERayR]

This line of thinking seems to ignore the statements of lands preserved just for Nephi and company. It seems to go against what Joseph and the brethren taught for decades. It really looks like someone bringing in an outside argument because they have no answer to the questions asked.

The operative words here are "seems to". It seems to because that is the way you interpret it.

[ERayR]

He is bringing up the phoney argument that if we can detect neanderthal DNA in humans, then we should be able to detect "Jewish DNA" in Amerindians. Of course it ignores the fundamental issue of the DNA characteristics of Lehi,et al, but he hopes we will not notice it. We simply don't know what to look for when we are talking about "Jewish DNA".

Detecting Neanderthal DNA in humans is not as cut and dried as some would like to portray:

http://cogweb.ucla.edu/Abstracts/Goodwin_00.html

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/aug/14/study-doubt-human-neanderthal-interbreeding

[brightpath]

"Lamanites are not Asians and when The Jaredites, Lehi, and Mulekites landed in The Americas they were no Asians here. " CFR

"After Israel rejected the gospel in America the Gentile invasion started. God allowed the Gentiles to invade The Americas after 421 AD." CFR (do you consider Vikings to be Gentiles?)

(Am I just wasting my time...?)

CFR? Read the BofM my friend. When Lehi landed he did not record he found anybody! When the Mulekites landed in a different part of America they recorded they found the last Jaradite, the ruins of the Jaradite nation and the 24 plates. This was big news to them a mystery. When the Nephites found the Mulekites it was recorded and it was big news. If there were Asians running around the americas then Lehi, the Mulekites, and the Jaradites would have recorded it. The BofM makes no mention of Asians. Asians are Gentiles and were not permitted to come to America until after Israel rejected the gospel. After 421 AD then God allowed for the Gentile invasion. Vikings are Gentiles! They are from Europe and white skinned.

[brightpath]

And what is the geography of the Promised Land where the prophecies will take place?

Again if the Lamanites have disappeared the Book of Mormon will cease to be true. The BofM was written to the Lamanites and it is their history. Jesus Christ visited their ancestors! Geographic location doe not matter. The Lamanites are alive and well waiting to Build the New Jerusalem.

Edited August 12, 2013 by brightpath