What caused you to leave the church?, This one is for all my anti's out there. —Her Amun

Almost everyone goes thru a period of doubt or questioning, regardless of their religious faith. Ive noticed that many anti's on this board have mormon roots. What made you leave? Was it a set of doctrines or practices? Which ones?

White shirts in church.

Scott Woodward.

Google.

QUOTE (The Dude @ Aug 12 2006, 12:01 AM)

QUOTE Scott Woodward. You too, huh?

QUOTE (beamer @ Aug 10 2006, 07:36 AM)

QUOTE Scott Woodward. I'm curious--what about him or his research caused you to leave the church?

Yeah, the mods asked for brevity but that one deserves explanation. I'd hate to think Bro. Woodward would see that and think he ushered in the great latter-day apostacy. I actually like Scott and really enjoyed an early presentation he did at BYU Education Week one year. I also, still as a TBM, appreciated his FAIR presentation on DNA a year or two ago. I don't know if that link is still active here, but that was also my introduction to FAIR.

The point of including him here is not that his findings were so damning to the church or its claims. He just represents in my mind the whole episode of jarring my consciousness to the point where I really asked, "What if it's not all true?" His significance in the whole process came from the fact that this was BYU saying this about Native American DNA. I suspect I would have discounted it had it come from any other source.

QUOTE (Christian)

Over time, this led to the church ceasing to be an important institution in my life over the matter of about 1.5 years as my study and new exploration of the "truth" continually lessened my basis for belief (thus proving the point of many prophets that when you are not doing all the things that a valiant member does, you risk losing your testimony).

Yeah, you gotta love proving their point, huh? That's powerful marketing, second only to "They leave the church but they can't leave it alone."

WHO, WHERE, WHEN ,WHY and HOW of BoM, Anti mo's explain yourselves —Her Amun

Since the we "TBM"s are in agreement as to the who what where and why of BoM translation and the plates. Could the non-mo's please give us their account of the who, what were and why of the BoM translation and gold plates?

I hope what's obvious here, Her Amun, is that the non-mo's don't have an account of who, what, where, and why. Some speculate and conjecture about what may have happened, but I've never met an exmo who left the church because they gained a testimony of the Spalding theory, the Golden Pot theory, or any other. In most cases I think the conclusion is that I don't need to know how it happened, I just don't believe it happened like Joseph said.

Unfinding Christ, How do people do it? —hondo

I am reading a bloody fascinating book entitled, "God the Evidence:The Reconciliation of faith and reason in a post-secular world" by Dr. Patrick Glynn. He basically argues how he was atheistic growing up and then learned the hows and the why's of atheism as he completed his studies at Harvard, including a PH.D. He says he found God after various life experiences and presents his arguments against atheism and thats as far as I got. I can see how people "find God", my question is how do you go the other way? How you unfind Christ? If you found something how do you lose it and does losing Christ mean he was never there in the first place?

QUOTE (hondo @ Jul 17 2006, 06:40 PM)

If I lose faith or unfind something does that equal I had never really it in the first place? Example If I found ten bucks and then through whatever experience decided I never did find it does that mean that ten bucks was imaginary or just some weird event that I decided never happened. Do people say to themselves that they never really believed in Christ or that there is no Christ-but How do you find him and then decide you lost him?

You're not talking about finding a tangible thing here, are you? When you say "finding Christ," aren't you referring to some internal acknowledgment of your own belief in what you've been taught about Christ? It's not like finding ten bucks. Find a less ambiguous verb and I suspect you'll have your answer. It seems to me you're just asking, "How do people change their minds about Christ?" Well, they just do. Is there something more I'm missing?

Creation vs. Taxonomy, Relevance of biological classification —ElGuapo

Just sharing a random thought here. If one does not believe in the common descent of living things, if we instead believe God independently created each creature, then scientific classification is kind of meaningless, isn't it? I mean, we speak of mammoths and elephants as being closely related, but if each was brought to earth separately, that "relationship" is nothing more than coincidental.

I'm thinking here of statements from some early church leaders. B. H. Roberts said that each life form was

QUOTE (from The Gospel and Man's Relationship to Deity)

brought from some other and older sphere, with power to propagate their kind. [Eventually] the changed conditions of the earth became unfavorable to them [and] they became extinct and were replaced by other species of a higher type.

Similarly, Joseph Smith in the History of the Church talks about "beasts which had lived on another planet and not ours" (HC 5:324), "strange beasts of which we have no conception" (HC 5:343).

Parley P. Pratt likewise seemed to believe these creatures were brought from another sphere:

QUOTE (from The Key to Theology)

When lo! from yonder world is transferred every species of animal life. Male and female, they come, with blessings on their heads.

The same kind of ideas pertain to the plant kingdom. (There's that taxonomy creeping in again.) Brigham Young said that Adam

QUOTE (from JD 1:50)

arranged in their order the herbs of the field, the trees, the apple, the peach, the plum, the pear, and every other fruit that is desirable and good for man; the seed was brought from another sphere, and planted in this earth.

Of course, however you believe each species has arrived at where it is today, classification is still useful as a descriptive tool. But for those who believe in a literal creation of independent species as referenced above, do you still think of different species as being somehow related? Are tigers and lions and bears and fishes all equally related in your view?

What tribe are you from? Restoration of the 12 tribes —ElGuapo

OK, so I know everyone is from Ephraim. But once in a while you hear of someone having a different lineage in their patriarchal blessing. You get some Manasseh, some Benjamin. On my mission in Korea a companion once told me (who knows where he heard this) that Korean members' blessings generally say they're from the tribe of Dan.

Well, I was just gonna ask the question, but then for kicks I went ahead and set up a Frappr map. If you've never used that site before, it's just an online map where you can mark your location. You do not have to give out any IRL information (just use your FAIR username as your name there). You will have to enter a real email address, but you could use a throw-away address. That's just for registration, the address isn't viewable publicly.

Let's see if we get any non-Ephraimites. But please, Ephraim, stand up and be counted. (And please, everyone, don't ruin the fun by pretending to be from Issachar or something.)

12 Tribes map

Guap

* * *

All Ephraim so far it looks like. By the way, I forgot to mention that location info is only viewable to others at the zip code level, even if you pinpoint your actual address.

And "Guapititos?" What's that about?

QUOTE (Doctor Steuss @ Jul 10 2006, 12:58 PM)

ElGuapo, This site has a couple of stories about different people, their ancestry, and their tribe. If you find it trustworthy, you could probably plug in a couple of the different tribe stories and where the people are from: Beyond Arsareth: The Twelve Tribes of Israel Today

Interesting reading, Doctor Steuss, thanks. Sounds like some lineage declarations are not so clear--"tribe of Joseph," "lineage of Abraham," "mostly Asher."

QUOTE (Tarski @ Jul 10 2006, 01:52 PM)

QUOTE (Antley @ Jul 10 2006, 01:48 PM) QUOTE (Tarski @ Jul 10 2006, 02:38 PM) Given how populations interbreed and how many g-g-g-g-g-g- great grandparents we each have, I don't see how this being from a particular tribe thing can even make any real literal sense. To the extent that the ideas surrounding the so called Tribes of Israel are actual, I would say I likely have ancestors in every single tribe and so do you all. I think most LDS are well aware of that. Ten to one odds that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were not aware of it.

QUOTE (Number 9 @ Jul 10 2006, 03:21 PM)

To confirm your Korea/Dan theory - my niece is Korean, and she is from Dan.

That's great, Number 9. Did you also notice in the link Doctor Steuss provided they mention full-blooded Irish members tend to be from Dan as well?

QUOTE

(sailgirl7 @ Jul 10 2006, 07:31 PM) I'm part Korean and I'm from Ephraim- same as my Dad and full Korean Grandma.

Word of Wisdom, for non LDS and Exmos —elect lady

We all know the LDS have the Word of Wisdom. I am not here to criticize it, it makes sense to me. I was just curious if any of the non or ex LDS here avoid alcohol, tobacco, or certain kinds of foods, as a matter of religious practice.

Also, what is your take on the LDS Word of Wisdom? Is drinking alcohol a sin? What about tobacco? Etc....

QUOTE (sob76 @ Jun 30 2006, 11:59 PM)

yes, I consider drunkeness a sin. But "Wine that makes the heart glad" as the psalmist call it is ok.

Loved this! Reminds me of the famous congressman response when asked, "Where do you stand on whiskey?"

QUOTE

If, when you say whiskey you mean the Devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty . . . takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacles of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation and despair, shame and helplessness and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it with all of my power. But, if, when you say whiskey, you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty morning; if you mean the drink that enables a man to magnify his joy and his happiness and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and the heartbreaks and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm, to build highways, hospitals, and schools, then certainly I am in favor of it. --author unknown, told in the early 1960s

Guap

Why Nephi and not Nefi?, Consonant blends in BofM names —ElGuapo

OK, just so we can finally say we've discussed every conceivable aspect of the Book of Mormon, I'm curious about the spelling of Nephi's name. Why Nephi and not Nefi? I am aware that John Gee has traced the current pronunciation of the name among Latter-day Saints as "nee-fi" back to at least 1837, so I don't think we're pronouncing it wrong. (Note, by "wrong" I mean pronouncing it differently from how Joseph and other original LDS members pronounced it, not how Lehi and his family pronounced it. Daniel Ludlow has remarked that we are "ninety-nine percent sure that we do not pronounce such names as Lehi and Nephi correctly.")

So if it's just a romanization of an ancient name, wouldn't a simple phonetic transliteration make more sense? I mean, the name's not Greek, right? I know the name is attested in the apocryphal book of Maccabees, so maybe Joseph had it written to match that spelling? David Whitmer and Emma do mention that proper names were often spelled out in the translation process; or, alternatively, Royal Skousen has found instances in the original manuscript where names are spelled phonetically on first appearance but then crossed out and corrected. So I don't think you'd attribute the name spellings to whoever was acting as scribe.

Any thoughts?

QUOTE (Familyof4 @ Jun 29 2006, 09:34 PM)

Wait, I thought the BoM translation was word for word from God. And that JS could not proceed until the correct word-sentence was written down. This is the first I have heard of this. Nephi must be the correct translation and spelling...otherwise God would have not proceeded.

Familyof4, when I first read this I thought you were just being facetious. Now I'm not sure, but you didn't add a wink at the end, so I take it as a sincere question. No, I don't think every word-sentence had to be correct right down to spelling before Joseph would proceed. If you've never seen one before, you might enjoy reading a first edition copy of the Book of Mormon, available at Deseret Book. Hugh Nibley preferred this edition, feeling most of the later changes were unwarranted. He also liked the folksy way it read, with words like "a-going" and so on. And frankly, perfect spelling would have been an odd requirement anyway at the time the book was written.

Publishing info on anti books? —Joshu

I sometimes wonder who reads anti-mormon literature, is there anyway to find out how many copies of a book have been sold?

Most LDS-related books are available on Amazon.com, which at least gives the book's rank in sales. See, for example, Guns, Germs, and Steel. Under Product Details you'll find the book's Amazon.com Sales Rank.

Letters to General Authorities, How are they handled? —Sparrowhawk

Suppose a hypothetical member wrote a letter to the GA's expressing dismay or opposition to their unequivical endorsement of the Federal marriage amendment. What would happen? I was curious if anyone here knows how such letters are handled. I have heard anecdotally that they are just skimmed and then sent back to local leaders? Is this the case? Or do they just get ignored. I was surprised that the church website has absolutely no button for contacting church leaders. Even the president of the United states takes letters... This seems a little strange and dissapointing to me.

I think that's the most common response, Sparrowhawk. Like you, I've only heard anecdotally about such things. There have also been instances, though, where an answer is given. The protocol seems to be to send the response not to the individual, but to the local leader, who reads the letter verbally to the questioner. A written copy is not given.

Nephi's Mysterious Vanishing Temple, why didn't he talk about it? —ElGuapo

Even as a kid I remember thinking this was odd. I had studied Old Testament in 9th grade seminary, so I knew what a big deal the building of the temple was in the Bible. So here's Nephi, saying,

QUOTE (2 Ne 5:15-16)

15 And I did teach my people, that they should build buildings; and that they should work in all manner of wood, and of iron, and of copper, and of brass, and of steel, and of gold, and of silver, and of precious ores, which were in great abundance. 16 And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it after the manner of the temple of Solomon, save it were not built of so many precious things: for they were not to be found upon the land; wherefore, it could not be built like unto Solomon's temple. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceeding fine.

And then nothing more. I wrote more in my journal about my new Tuff Shed, and the Small Plates of Guapo are exceedingly small. Jacob brings it up later, but by this time it seemed—to me at least—like an afterthought. 'Where to teach the people? Well, we've got this temple here.' (My words, not his.)

QUOTE (Jacob 2:11)

11 Wherefore, I must tell you the truth, according to the plainness of the word of God. For behold, as I inquired of the Lord, thus came the word unto me, saying, Jacob, get thou up into the temple on the morrow, and declare the word which I shall give thee, unto this people.

The next mention of temples is in the land of Zarahemla (Mosiah 1:18). Different temple, right? And this is something like 400 years later, right? So what do you all make of this? Was it too sacred (not secret) to talk about? So much a part of daily life that it's implicit in the story? Covered more fully in the Lucy Harris Translation?

To be clear, I'm not suggesting it should have come up later. After Jacob, only Enos and Jarom stand between Nephi's day and the Time Warp of Omni. I'm curious why Nephi didn't talk about it more.

QUOTE (Bill Hamblin @ May 9 2006, 10:39 PM)

I notice the critics have fallen silent about the supposed absence of references to the temple in the BOM.

Nephi built a temple like unto Solomon's and then never mentioned it again in the small plates. There's not much more to say from a critical POV, is there?

QUOTE (Bill Hamblin @ May 10 2006, 10:58 AM)

I find such a claim utterly astonishing.

Then I must not have expressed it very well. My comment wasn't meant as a refutation to all the implicit "temple talk" that believing members may find in the book. I was only saying that, on the surface at least, Nephi's temple occupies only one verse in his record on the small plates.

What's been amply demonstrated to me so far in this thread is that, for the believers, there are enough implicit temple references to satisfy you concerning the matter. That being the case, though, didn't you at least find this odd at first? I'm just not hearing anyone yet acknowledge that they would have expected more to be said directly about Nephi's temple, its construction, its use, or its fate. Why is that?

Speaking in tongues in LDS Church, Has anyone seen this recently? —Corky Wallace

I remember from my childhood the AOF position on LDS belief in speaking in tongues, but I haven't heard of it occuring in an LDS church setting anytime recently. Has anyone else? I now attend a Baptist congregation with my family and have observed speaking in tongues, a couple of times. While that was pretty rare, the general atmosphere in our church is pretty "lively", at least compared to what I remember from going to Mormon church or occasionally attending Catholic church. Today there is an article in the SL Tribune about the Pentacostals, certainly even more "lively" than just about every other congregation. http://www.sltrib.com/faith/ci_3786010 Is there any significance to the fairly quiet, somber, "reverent" atmosphere in LDS churches vs a more expressive atmosphere in some of the protestant faiths? I always thought it was interesting that the Article of Faith mentions speaking in tongues when it almost never happens, at least in LDS (and certainly other) groups.

QUOTE (Freedom @ May 6 2006, 11:40 AM)

As far as I am aware, speaking in tongues has never been babbling in some unknown language. ... Yes, in the early church there were magnificent outpourings of the spirit when people spoke remarkable things but it was was not common. Usually it was accompanied by angelic ministrations as far as I am aware.

You may be surprised how common this was. My best suggestion would be to read Mormon Midwife, a transcript of Patty Bartlett Sessions's diaries. Her daily entries are filled with mundane mention of speaking in tongues.

QUOTE (14 February 1847)

we prayed sung in toungues spoke in toungues and had a good time

QUOTE (28 February 1847)

Br and sister Leonard and sister Buel was here last night we spoke in toungues and had a good time

QUOTE (13 April 1847)

visited sister E R Snow with sister Leonard had a good time spoke in toungues and prophesied the spirit of the Lord was with us

QUOTE (23 April 1847)

we had a good time we prayed propesied and spoke in toungues and interpreted and were refreshed

QUOTE (1 May 1847)

Sylvia and I went to a meeting to Sister Leonards none but females there we had a good metting I presided it was got up by E R Snow they spoke in toungues I interpreted some prophesied it was a feast

These references continue throughout her life.

QUOTE (5 November 1851)

went to the female meeting had a good time sister Angel sung a song in toungues I interpreted have wrote it off

QUOTE (10 March 1852)

I went to the counsel of health Heber gave us a lecture Dr Sprague spoke in toungues I interpreted it was great

QUOTE (19 February 1855)

went to Br Birches to the party they sent a carriage after me we had a good dance a good spirit prevailed many speeches were spoke songs sung speaking in toungues interpretations and thus we spent the time good order and the Spirit of God which caused peace goverened the party and truly it was a good time

QUOTE (29 April 1886)

I have finished another Pair of stockins the Releif Society met here today they had a good meeting speaking in toungues & proffcing &c &c

Speaking in tongues, a sure way to have a good time.

구아포/Guap

Error in BoM Index, Fix in the next edition? —Bernard Gui

Jeneum was one of the Nephite commanders in the final battles of his people (Mormon 6:14). In the index on p. 173, his name is spelled Jeneam.

Bernard

Here are two more irrefutable proofs of Joseph's incorrigible character:

BofM Index, p. 321, s.v. SECT, SECTARIAN
—Quotes D&C 123:12 incorrectly: know not "when" to find it

Bible Dictionary, p. 692, first column
—Misspells "greatest": The "greatist" is to minister

I challenge the Mopologists to refute this one.

What do you say to missionaries?, Exmo encounters with mishies —ElGuapo

I have a good friend and coworker who is a self-proclaimed "Bible-thumping born-again Christian" from Iowa. So the missionaries knocked his door this week, and he invited them in. He didn't have time to visit, but offered to take them to dinner tonight instead. He doesn't have a snowball's chance of becoming a Mormon, but he loves to talk about the Bible and feels like he's being a good Christian by showing these two young men the light.

I asked my friend what he has planned for the elders, and he said he wants to show them a video and ask them what they think of it. Any guesses? It's the Bible vs. BofM video. OK, so my friend firmly believes in "the infallibility of the Bible" and somehow thinks his "even more true" message is gonna help these guys. But setting aside the sales pitch, that video could still open a naive young elder's eyes to many of the challenges to BofM historicity. I told him I wasn't sure it was a good idea.

If you no longer believe in Mormonism, how do you feel about discussing the reasons with missionaries?

QUOTE (suem @ May 4 2006, 02:00 PM)

There was (and probably still is) a family in my mission that was not LDS but were what we all liked to call "dry mormons" (only because we were totally blind). My guess is that they helped more missionaries out of the church than I would have dreamed possible at the time. I am grateful to them for that. I am grateful for everyone who has tried or helped along the way.

QUOTE (Pahoran @ May 4 2006, 03:24 PM)

Yes, we should all be "grateful" to deceitful scumbags who want to "help" us out of our birthright. Did they do it by ambushing the missionaries like El Guapo's so-called "Christian" friend plans to do? Regards, Pahoran

OK, so I'll call Pahoran a vote against.

FWIW, my friend isn't a deceitful scumbag, and his desire to help is quite genuine. Also not following the "ambush" comment, but I guess it's a matter of perspective.

QUOTE

He won't succeed in "helping them out of Mormonism" of course, but he may send them away feeling dejected, which will in turn give him a feeling of unearned and unrighteous triumph. Which is what he's after, of course. Regards, Pahoran

Do you ever wish you could hear Korihor's side of the story?

QUOTE (Alma 30:50)

Now when Alma had said these words, Korihor was struck dumb, that he could not have utterance.

Don't know why that just came to mind.

QUOTE (cjcampbell @ May 7 2006, 07:04 PM)

I doubt very much that anyone could expose experienced missionaries to any anti-Mormon media that they have not seen before. All of our missionaries have probably seen or heard just about every anti-Mormon argument that there is.

Was this actually true for you, cj? Where would they have heard/seen it all before? Maybe things are different now because of Al Gore's great invention but the closest I ever came to having my faith challenged on my mission was meeting with the JWs. And that only consisted of them showing us their favorite scripture chain and their interpretation. There was nothing said of any specific Mormon history or beliefs. Anyway, in Elder Guapo's case at least, this statement doesn't ring true.

QUOTE (cjcampbell @ May 7 2006, 07:04 PM)

Frankly, the virulence, dishonesty, and violence of the anti-Mormon movement is almost as valuable in advertising the church as anything put out by the church itself. The typical missionary looks at this garbage and says, "This is all they've got? Hatred, violence, weird distortions of our beliefs? Frothing bigots? Punk rockers with purple mohawk haircuts in wife-beater T-shirts and pins in their noses? Miserable, lonely, bitter old men who have nothing better to do than tell people we are secretly worshipping the devil? Give us a break. If these are the kind of people who hate the church, then I am all the more motivated to spread the word."

Well ... that about sums it up then. All you frothing purple-hair punk rockers can take your nose pins and leave. Wow, quiet in here all of a sudden.

QUOTE (cjcampbell @ May 9 2006, 12:22 AM)

My guess is that if you did not encounter any anti-Mormon literature while you were in your mission you probably were not working very hard.

Cute.

Brigham Young, Best book about him? —Maestrophil

Hi all!

I don't expect this post to get too contoversial or anything, or to have a long shelf life.

I just finished reading Rough Stone Rolling, and found it to be a very intersesting book about Joseph Smith. I really enjoyed the effort the author made to give a framework of Joseph's family, surroundings and era to help better understand some of his actions. I also felt that the book was quite objective, coming from a believing LDS member, and did not shy away from some of the more "difficult" instances of Joseph's life (without drawing conclusions and Joseph-bashing)

I would love to find a book/books of similar caliber about Brigham Young, whith whom I am not as familiar. Does anyone know of any such works?

Thanks

Phillip

Arrington's is probably the best-known biography of Brigham Young, and he's of course a very well respected historian. For a more off-beat look at Brigham's life, here's another suggestion:

Brigham Young's Homes, ed. Colleen Whitley.

On the surface it's a heavily illustrated book about all the places Brigham lived, but it's also full of real-life info about Brigham and his families--and it's quite readable. From the amazon.com abstract: "The authors discuss, in addition to the buildings themselves, what went on within their walls, looking especially at the lives of Young's plural wives and their children. Their emphasis is on Young's residences as homes, not just structures." I found it interesting, but then I worked for the press at the time and worked on this book, so I'm probably a bit biased.

Why Did God Make It So Difficult?, He does, indeed, move in mysterious ways —Rumination

Reading the give-and-take on this message board, including the wide range of positions/opinions expressed by various posters, leads me to ask, Why did God make it so difficult to believe in him? It's a spectacle, really (no offense intended) to see TBMs and other people of faith try to explain readily observable facts that strongly suggest that if there is a God, he is AWOL. What real evidence exists that God is "up there," let alone one of the LDS variety? If he is "up there," why does he take culturally driven forms (a fact that does much to account for humankind's many different belief systems)? One philosopher said (sorry, I do not recall his name), "A thing is neither good nor bad, but thinking makes it so." Isn't there good reason to believe that humankind has "thought" God into existence? (This is not what I want to believe, but--for me--it's a highly tempting conclusion.)

I don't think it's so difficult to believe in God, per se. But when it comes to a specific religion, in this case Mormonism, I agree with you. In that case, we're left to believe that God has, whether deliberately (to test our faith?) or passively (concerned with more important things?) allowed observable reality to seemingly conflict with religious teachings. Literal belief in Joseph Smith's mission and stories paints an interesting picture of deity in my mind.

Puns, Word Play in the Book of Mormon, Any? —grego

As a believer that a pun is (one of) the highest form of humor:

Have you found any puns or word play in the BoM? I can only remember one:

QUOTE

Alma 52:20 ...desiring him that he would come out with his armies to meet them upon the plains between the two cities. But behold, Jacob, who was a Zoramite, would not come out with his army to meet them upon the plains. Alma 52:21 And it came to pass that Moroni, having no hopes of meeting them upon fair grounds, therefore, he resolved upon a plan that he might decoy the Lamanites out of their strongholds.

Does this count as word play?

QUOTE

Alma 43:38 While on the other hand, there was now and then a man fell among the Nephites, by their swords and the loss of blood, they being shielded from the more vital parts of the body, or the more vital parts of the body being shielded from the strokes of the Lamanites, by their breast-plates, and their armshields, and their head-plates;

I guess Mormon didn't have an eraser, huh? You gotta love the imagery of dodging the vital body parts being flung by the Lamanites.

DNA and the Book of Mormon, What Exactly Has Been Proven? —Cold Steel

Although I've read a bit on both sides of this issue, I don't really know where things stand. What, exactly, can be proven to date? Does anyone maintain that we presently know enough to say that North American Indians and the South and Middle American Mayan and Aztec tribes are demonstrably not of any stock that could have been from a people living in Jerusalem?

Does anyone take into account, or suggest that it should be taken into account, the curse that the Lamanites were put under? Nephi said: "And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity."

"Sore" means to cause misery, sorrow, distress, embarrassment and/or irritation -- so if this were a sore curse, it might very well entail many of these things. "Wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair...the Lord God caused a skin of blackness to come upon them...that they shall be loathsome unto [my] people...." Furthermore, "cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done."

The curse went beyond skin coloring -- that seemed to be merely a marking, for Nephi continued: " And because of their cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people, full of mischief and subtlety, and did seek in the wilderness for beasts of prey."

So this miserable, sorrowful and distressing curse changed the skin color of the Lamanites as well as their very natures. Could it, too, have changed the DNA markers, causing the new, dominant DNA to overwrite that of any Nephites with whom they mixed their seed? In other words, does today's research depend on those markers being preserved through the "cursing" process?

Do BoM DNA critics go so far as to say that genetic research is a clear showstopper or are they willing to concede it's not quite to that point? And finally, what, if any, link exists between South and Middle American and North American Indians? Do they all appear to be from the same stock?

Thanks for any comments!

Do you really want to know? Or are you looking for reassurance that what you already believe is at least plausible? (Could dictate the kind of responses you see here.)

QUOTE (Cold Steel @ Apr 30 2006, 08:15 PM)

What, exactly, can be proven to date? Does anyone maintain that we presently know enough to say that North American Indians and the South and Middle American Mayan and Aztec tribes are demonstrably not of any stock that could have been from a people living in Jerusalem?

Even Simon Southerton acknowledged recently that there was "plenty of room to park your faith" in some aspect of mDNA--I forget which. Whether he or others in the field (waiting for the backlash about whether he's actually "in the field" ...) believe there's any likelihood of Hebrew ancestry is a different matter of course.

QUOTE (Cold Steel @ Apr 30 2006, 08:15 PM)

Does anyone take into account, or suggest that it should be taken into account, the curse that the Lamanites were put under?

Yes, it's been suggested, but please consider the implication--that God didn't just change their DNA: he made it Asian. Seems rather racist, doesn't it?

Some questions if I may. This could probably be its own thread, but here goes:

QUOTE (Great King Peter @ Apr 30 2006, 11:34 PM)

I know next to nothing about DNA. In my 45 years I have learned that what is fact to day might not be fact tomorrow.

So are facts irrelevant then? Is it conceivable that the facts could become clear enough to convince you that Joseph Smith's stories weren't factual?

QUOTE (Great King Peter @ Apr 30 2006, 11:34 PM)

The church is not true or untrue because of mans CURRENT understanding of DNA.

We agree that's not the reason the church is ... whatever it is. So is there a relevant example you're thinking of where the prevailing scientific thought on something as big as Native American ancestry did a 180 because of some new discovery? I'm having trouble picturing this.

QUOTE (Great King Peter @ Apr 30 2006, 11:34 PM)

I would not want to base my beliefs on what science says is fact.

Is it safe to say, though, that you would want your belief to be based on fact? I guess I'm trying to decipher whether you think the current scientific understanding of Native American ancestry is altogether wrong, or just doesn't tell the whole story. From the points you made it's obvious you're not comfortable with the conclusions reached thus far. Others have found ways of reconciling their faith with the emerging scientific story; does your view of the Book of Mormon allow for such latitude?

"You're not really a Mormon.", On the accuracy of labels. —Tsuzuki

An anti on another message board told me that I didn't really count as Mormon because of my penchant for embracing other religions and occult practices. My question is, how far can one push the envelope, while remaining faithful in the church, before the label of "Mormon" stops being descriptively accurate?

QUOTE (BMD @ Apr 30 2006, 01:09 PM)

A letter to the bishop, a letter to the stake president, a phone call to SLC, a letter to SLC, all over the past seven months now--and all I have to show for it is a form letter from SLC telling me my resignation is a "matter that must be handled by local priesthood leaders" which I received about three months ago. It's the complete lack of respect that gets to me. What's the matter with these people? Why won't they honor my request to have my name removed from the records?

QUOTE (tag @ Apr 30 2006, 12:39 PM)

Some times this action is complete respect, not lack of respect. Membeship is sacred to the active members and not only for this life, but for all life. I really don't want to be responsible for bloting out a recod in this life (Read here Matthew 16:19) for a member who in the next life comes to himself and realized he wants the membership after all. You have to work for it to get your name off, and be sure it is your decission. They may actually be honoring you in this (although this is not your perspective).

Huh? Tag, I assume this was a serious response? If so you have a seriously warped view of respect, and I hope it's not widely shared by others, LDS or not. You're also factually wrong about having "to work for it to get your name off." At least in the U.S., you're no longer a member upon notifying them of such.

Cureloms and Cumoms —Joseph Antley

It is generally believed that the elephants mentioned by Moroni were actually lingering North American mammoths or mastadons. Considering the clues in the text, the mammoths, cureloms, and cumoms were not domesticated or used in a manner like the oxen, sheep, swine, or goats, or like the horses and asses. The text doesn't say they had elephants, cureloms, and cumoms, but just that there were elephants, cureloms, and cumoms, and they were especially useful to man.

The reign of Emer, the only time elephants, cureloms, and cumoms are mentioned, was probably sometime between 2500 and 1500 BC.

Could either the cureloms or cumoms have been giant ground sloths, such as the mylodon? Some ground sloths living in Hispianola and Cuba didn't become extinct until the 16th century, and Indian oral legends of ground sloths suggest that they coexisted among Native Americans during some point. Some even speculate that they may exist today in the unexplored regions of Argentina.

And if the giant sloth was a curelom or cumom, perhaps it starts a pattern in the text. Going on this theory, verse 19 would group elephants (mammoths), cureloms (giant sloths), and cumoms together, giving rise to perhaps an etymological theory that the Jaredite or Nephite prefix cu- meant "large; huge".

Any ideas on other candidates for cureloms and cumoms?

Dinosaurs.