Calm Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocahontas#Descendants_and_legacy Quote Pocahontas and her husband, John Rolfe, had one child, Thomas Rolfe, who was born in January 1615. The following year, Thomas's parents travelled to London. Pocahontas has many descendants through her son Thomas, including members of the First Families of Virginia , American Western actor Glenn Strange, and astronomer and mathematician Percival Lowell, whose achievements include helping discover Pluto. Born and raised in Virginia, First Lady Edith Wilson was a descendant of Pocahontas. Descendants of many First Families of Virginia trace their roots back to Pocahontas and her father, Chief Powhatan, including Edith Bolling Galt Wilson, wife of Woodrow Wilson; George Wythe Randolph; Admiral Richard E. Byrd; Virginia Governor Harry F. Byrd; fashion-designer and socialite Pauline de Rothschild.[68][unreliable source?] Two descendants of Pocahontas have become First Ladies of the United States, Edith Wilson and Nancy Reagan. Edith Wilson was very proud of her heritage. She was born and raised in Virginia, and through her father, William Holcombe Bolling, was a ninth-generation descendant of Pocahontas.[69] Her "blood" was introduced to the Randolph family of Virginia via the marriage of her great-great-granddaughter, Jane Bolling, to Richard Randolph. In July 2015, the Pamunkey Indian Tribe, descendants of the Powhatan chiefdom, of which Pocahontas was a member, became the first federally recognized tribe in the state of Virginia.[70] 2
PeterPear Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 10 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Deseret News article says , "It is also a place of rich Latter-day Saints history and activity. Two stakes (the Chinle Arizona Stake and the Tuba City Arizona Stake) and several other units from surrounding stakes operate within the Navajo Nation. Dozens of missionaries from the New Mexico Farmington Mission serve in its many wards and branches. Many of the members are renowned for their dedication and devotion, said Elder Neil L. Andersen of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. “They are the children of Lehi and they readily embrace the Savior and the teachings of the Book of Mormon"" http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865645895/Church-strengthens-ties-to-Navajo-Nation.html?pg=all I know it is not official doctrine, but that is going to make the meldrumites happy. Why? The Navajo and Apache migrated to the Southwest from Alaska. Both are of Athabascan descent. So how does this support a Mesoamerica Theory that allegedly claims Lehi's descendants migrated out of a 500 x 200 mile area in Mesoamerica (per that goofy F.A.R.M.S. theory) to the rest of the Americas? http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/navajo.htm You don't present yourself as knowing much - other than a simplistic and fallacious view that since Arizona is closer to Mesoamerica than to The Hill Cumorah in New York, that Native Americans living in Arizona came from Mesoamerica. The Athabascan language has Asian connections. Read the link and wail about it in your reply. Since the Navajo and Apache are children of Lehi then they intermarried with Lehi's descendants who were in the NORTH. I know a Navajo member of the Church, BYU grad, returned missionary. Her Navajo mother can converse with a Native American Athabascan friend in Alaska in their native tongues.
mapman Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: On one occasion, President James E. Faust gave a talk about patriarchal blessings. He responded to a question some might have as to why people in the same family group on occasion are declared in patriarchal blessings to come from different Israelite lineages. He responded that, just like inherited traits, the promises and blessings in a particular lineage might be more dominant in one family member than in another. I imagine it's the same with the groups of people you identify above. One person may come from two or more lineages, but the promises and responsibilities in one of those lineages might be dominant for that person. That makes sense to me. Patriarchal blessings assign you a lineage in the 12 tribes of Israel, which name brings with it blessings and responsibilities. The Book of Mormon seems to be working with a different scheme since it doesn't really distinguish between tribes other than that Lehi came from Joseph, but it seems to me to be teaching the same principle: that God has different blessings and responsibilities for different groups of people. Regardless of who our ancestors actually are, when we choose to follow Christ and be baptized into his church, we become part of the House of Israel. If I'm reading the Book of Mormon right, we also become part of the same people (spiritually, not culturally or genetically) as the Lamanites: "But if they [the Gentiles, referred to in verse 14] will repent and hearken unto my words, and harden not their hearts, I will establish my church among them, and they shall come in unto the covenant and be numbered among this the remnant of Jacob, unto whom I have given this land for their inheritance; And they shall assist my people, the remnant of Jacob, and also as many of the house of Israel as shall come, that they may build a city, which shall be called the New Jerusalem." (3 Nephi 21:22-23) This verse seems to be saying that the Lamanites ("remnant of Jacob") will build the New Jerusalem, assisted by Gentiles and Jews ("as many of the house of Israel") that join them. Gentiles that are converted become Lamanites ("numbered among this the remnant of Jacob"), and will thus inherit the promises given to them that they will inherit the land (Americas). I think it would be proper to refer to any member of the church as a "child of Lehi."
PeterPear Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Then you fail to understand the nature of a commercial entity. Before the building was gutted and converted into the Joseph Smith Memorial Building, it was the Hotel Utah, the largest and swankiest hotel in the entire state. Hotel Utah was also owned by the Church. Many people stayed there, including celebrities, such as Ethel Barrymore, James Stewart, William Jennings Bryan, John F. Kennedy. Elvis stayed there. Are you arguing that because Elvis stayed in the Church-owned Hotel Utah that the Church endorsed Elvis? Your reasoning doesn't make sense, Johnnie Cake. Using your logic, then why would the Church endorse a Mesoamerica Theory that claims the Prophet Joseph Smith was a liar? Meldrum doesn't claim Joseph Smith did not understand or was ambiguous about geography. It's the LGT crowd: "What may startle some about this situation is that most of what Joseph Smith said or implied about geography indicates that he did not understand or was ambiguous about the fact, as it turns out, that Mesoamerica was the particular setting for Nephite history. Until he encountered the Stephens’s book, Joseph gave no hint that he was aware that such a limited area with a distinctive civilized culture even existed in the Americas. Even with Stephens’s material in mind, he made no more than a passing attempt to relate the Book of Mormon’s story to the newly-found ruins. And in the long run, the little blip on the Latter-day Saints’ mental screen caused by the explorer’s book faded as the mistaken folk view reasserted its dominance." http://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1099&index=19 Maybe you could book the Hotel Utah aka JSB with a Mesoamerica Lecturer who claims Joseph Smith learned the geography of the Book of Mormon from a travel book. Then you can also claim Elvis still lives.
rodheadlee Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 3 hours ago, rockpond said: I have a degree in Statistics. Math is not at issue here. Great so you manipulate math to make it say what you want it to say. Well I have 25,000 offshore ocean miles on and I say when Hagoth's sailors hit the beach there was some procreating going on.
Calm Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 Quote Meldrum doesn't claim Joseph Smith did not understand or was ambiguous about geography. He just implies the rest of the prophets don't have a clue or are hiding the info. 1
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Then you fail to understand the nature of a commercial entity. Before the building was gutted and converted into the Joseph Smith Memorial Building, it was the Hotel Utah, the largest and swankiest hotel in the entire state. Hotel Utah was also owned by the Church. Many people stayed there, including celebrities, such as Ethel Barrymore, James Stewart, William Jennings Bryan, John F. Kennedy. Elvis stayed there. Are you arguing that because Elvis stayed in the Church-owned Hotel Utah that the Church endorsed Elvis? Your reasoning doesn't make sense, Johnnie Cake. So I'm guessing that Planned Parenthood shouldn't have any difficulty booking a room from this church owned commercial entity for their next meeting then, right? Yeah kinda dumb of me to think the church would put restrictions on who can or can't rent a room in their commercial Joseph Smith Building. Just chalk it up to my not understanding the nature of a church owned commercial entity.
rockpond Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 26 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: So I'm guessing that Planned Parenthood shouldn't have any difficulty booking a room from this church owned commercial entity for their next meeting then, right? Yeah kinda dumb of me to think the church would put restrictions on who can or can't rent a room in their commercial Joseph Smith Building. Just chalk it up to my not understanding the nature of a church owned commercial entity. I think the church would quietly decline hosting an event at JSB that was a clear contradiction of Church values (a Planned Parenthood meeting or a gay wedding/reception, for example). But I also agree with Scott (I know, pigs are flying)... The church rents space to all kinds of businesses across the street in City Creek Mall and I don't think anyone considers the church to be endorsing those businesses. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: So I'm guessing that Planned Parenthood shouldn't have any difficulty booking a room from this church owned commercial entity for their next meeting then, right? Yeah kinda dumb of me to think the church would put restrictions on who can or can't rent a room in their commercial Joseph Smith Building. Just chalk it up to my not understanding the nature of a church owned commercial entity. I don't know what the JSMB would do about a Planned Parenthood meeting, but I agree with rockpond that this is a different proposition. The Church doesn't oppose Meldrum and his devotees. Officially, at least, it is neutral about them. Edited January 28, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
stemelbow Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 15 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: What I remember clearly from the Book of Mormon is abundant prophecy about the descendants the Lamanites in the last days receiving the gospel. If you believe the Book of Mormon is true (which I do), then you know the Lamanites (and thus, Lehi's descendants) did not go extinct. If you don't believe the Book of Mormon is true, then we really don't have much to talk about. The arguments regarding Lamanites often suggest that in the text Lamanite refers to those who aren't Nephites. With the presumption of others, it's possible Lehi's descendant line was gone. We simply wouldn't know because, as it turns out, the text doesn't say much about them. You are reading way way too much into the text, in my estimation.
stemelbow Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 15 hours ago, Calm said: https://thewildpeak.wordpress.com/2012/03/04/how-many-ancestors-do-you-have/ Hey Calm, not sure if you noticed the quote I offered from this, this all presumes that lines don't die out. But we have an example in the BoM where lines die out. So we can't go with that presumption in this case. Make sense?
stemelbow Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 15 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Much of the Joseph Smith Memorial Building in Salt Lake City is a commercial enterprise (although a relatively small portion of it serves as meetinghouse space for one or more of the wards downtown and most of it is, of course, offices for various Church departments). So I don't see anything particularly remarkable about Meldrum and Co. renting one of the conference rooms in the building, any more than I would some other corporate or private entity renting space in the building to hold, say, a seminar or a wedding reception or whatever. For example, the high school I graduated from almost held its centennial reunion there a few years ago. They opted to go elsewhere for, I think, reasons of cost. So long as the Meldrumites pay the money and they don't trash the place, they have as much right as anybody else to hold an event there. And no, there would be no presumption of endorsement, any more than there would be of your business if you happened to buy a book from Deseret Book Co. I don't think your presumption that he rented out space there is correct in this case. As I understand it he's there as an invited guest--invited by those who work for the Church or the Church organization--which is, officially, the Church.
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: 8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: I don't know what the JSMB would do about a Planned Parenthood meeting, but I agree with rockpond that this is a different proposition. The Church doesn't oppose Meldrum and his devotees. Officially, at least, it is neutral about them. I don't know what the JSMB would do about a Planned Parenthood meeting, but I agree with rockpond that this is a different proposition. The Church doesn't oppose Meldrum and his devotees. Officially, at least, it is neutral about them. Why the heck do you think Meldrum is renting space at the JSB instead of say Little America??? Seriously? You are not a dumb person Scott, I know you do not want to concede a point to the likes of me but for gosh sakes..Really? This point hasn't slipped past Meldrum... By allowing Meldrum to rent space it gives tacit agreement to his agenda and allows the uninformed people who believe in his crap to form an impression at least that the church somehow approves of his message...Meldrum while wrong in his worldview is no dummy...he's using the JSB as a cloke of tacit approval to his rubbish...Why am I the only one that can see this? You are smart people...and this is so freaking obvious... (end of rant) IF as you seem to agree the owners of the JSB do have some standard where by they would deny Planned Parenthood a rented room in their commercial enterprise...then it would suggest that they do have some vetting process...so failing to deny Meldrum does give tacit approval Edited January 28, 2016 by Johnnie Cake
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 1 hour ago, stemelbow said: I don't think your presumption that he rented out space there is correct in this case. As I understand it he's there as an invited guest--invited by those who work for the Church or the Church organization--which is, officially, the Church. If true, even more disturbing
ksfisher Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 As we are contemplating whether or not Lehi still has living descendants, we do have this from the Book of Mormon: 2 Nephi 3:3 And now, Joseph, my last-born, whom I have brought out of the wilderness of mine afflictions, may the Lord bless thee forever, for thy seed shall not utterly be destroyed. and this 2 Nephi 4:9 And he spake unto them, saying: Behold, my sons and my daughters, who are the sons and the daughters of my second son; behold I leave unto you the same blessing which I left unto the sons and daughters of Laman; wherefore, thou shalt not utterly be destroyed; but in the end thy seed shall be blessed. and this 2 Nephi 3:23 Wherefore, because of this covenant thou art blessed; for thy seed shall not be destroyed, for they shall hearken unto the words of the book. and this 1 Nephi 13:31 And it came to pass that I beheld the remnant of the seed of my brethren, and also the book of the Lamb of God, which had proceeded forth from the mouth of the Jew, that it came forth from the Gentiles unto the remnant of the seed of my brethren. Lehi and Nephi clearly believed that Lehi would have descendants who would one day embrace the gospel. 1
stemelbow Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 24 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: If true, even more disturbing Everyone's voice can be considered. I don't see how this is disturbing. Honestly. If the Church sponsored an event for John Sorenson I'd feel similarly.
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 57 minutes ago, stemelbow said: Everyone's voice can be considered. I don't see how this is disturbing. Honestly. If the Church sponsored an event for John Sorenson I'd feel similarly. Only difference is that Meldrum's world view is indefensible and built on ignoring reality, cherry picking and bending the laws of physics. While Sorenson's worldview is at least built on a scientific foundation through which he has moved the church kicking and screaming from a hemispheric BoM setting to a limited geographic setting...
rockpond Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 3 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said: Only difference is that Meldrum's world view is indefensible and built on ignoring reality, cherry picking and bending the laws of physics. While Sorenson's worldview is at least built on a scientific foundation through which he has moved the church kicking and screaming from a hemispheric BoM setting to a limited geographic setting... That's funny. Oh wait, are you really arguing that one of the BoM geography theories is based on a scientific foundation? Um, okay. 1
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 10 minutes ago, rockpond said: That's funny. Oh wait, are you really arguing that one of the BoM geography theories is based on a scientific foundation? Um, okay. My point being that at least Sorenson is trying to build a case for the existence of the Nephites within the science of archaeology that actually exists... although he had to make the Nephites completely disappear in order to do so. Its why we even have a limited geographical model vs a hemispheric model which was unsupportable from a scientific perspective 1
stemelbow Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Only difference is that Meldrum's world view is indefensible and built on ignoring reality, cherry picking and bending the laws of physics. While Sorenson's worldview is at least built on a scientific foundation through which he has moved the church kicking and screaming from a hemispheric BoM setting to a limited geographic setting... Sure, not a problem, though. If people want to hear it, might as well let him speak.
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Its why we even have a limited geographical model vs a hemispheric model which was unsupportable from a scientific perspective Sure, it couldn't possibly be because a careful, critical reading of the text itself demands it -- something other Latter-day Saints had noticed long before Sorenson... 1
Johnnie Cake Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said: Sure, it couldn't possibly be because a careful, critical reading of the text itself demands it -- something other Latter-day Saints had noticed long before Sorenson... yeah kinda like Joseph Smith right?
Scott Lloyd Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) On 1/28/2016 at 7:39 AM, stemelbow said: I don't think your presumption that he rented out space there is correct in this case. As I understand it he's there as an invited guest--invited by those who work for the Church or the Church organization--which is, officially, the Church. CFR. My colleague held her wedding reception there by contacting the business office in advance, scheduling the banquet room and paying for it. She did not have to be "invited by those who work for the Church or the Church organization." If somebody from the Church invited Meldrum et al, who was it? Edited January 29, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 On 1/28/2016 at 8:51 AM, Johnnie Cake said: If true, even more disturbing It's not true. Save your indignation until stemelbow responds to the CFR. The Joseph Smith Memorial Building is, among other things, a reception and business meeting center where facilities can be rented.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 29, 2016 Posted January 29, 2016 On 1/28/2016 at 9:16 AM, stemelbow said: Everyone's voice can be considered. I don't see how this is disturbing. Honestly. If the Church sponsored an event for John Sorenson I'd feel similarly. Um, the Church is not sponsoring an event for Meldrum. Here's another CFR. Now, there are two on the table.
Recommended Posts