LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
No worries, Empress!
It's all part of being part of the global village.
Anyway, I've been rootling about without much luck, other than sites taking the mickey.
Back to the search!

ETA
Bingo.
http://www.myjewishlearning.com/his...ntier_Judaism/Native_Americans_and_Jews.shtml
"One of the first books to suggest the Native American Lost Tribe theory was written by a Jew, the Dutch rabbi, scholar, and diplomat Manasseh ben Israel. In The Hope of Israel (1650), Ben Israel suggested that the discovery of the Native Americans, a surviving remnant of the Assyrian exile, was a sign heralding the messianic era. Just one year later, Thomas Thorowgood published his best seller Jewes in America, Or, Probabilities that those Indians are Judaical, made more probable by some Additionals to the former Conjectures. The Lost Tribe idea found favor among early American notables, including Cotton Mather (the influential English minister), Elias Boudinot (the New Jersey lawyer who was one of the leaders of the American Revolution), and the Quaker leader William Penn."
 
Last edited:
This probably should have been addressed long ago in this thread, but I forgot it wasn't common knowledge outside the US. Much like pretty much everything in the LDS, you can trace the origins of the church beliefs to common ideas at the time. Seer stones, hot drinks, American Indians being the descendants of one of the Lost Tribes--all ideas regularly bandied about and having a degree of popularity. JS was no doubt charismatic, and even highly imaginative in a certain sense of the word, but his ideas were not original.


This is a whole fascinating new insight into the subject of LDS to me and apparently it's been right under my nose for some time. I've been concentrating too much on the ancient Egyptian stuff, I think.

Many thanks for the tips, my knowledgeable friends.
 
Last edited:
From the conclusion of that link
"...From a historical and scientific point of view, the Native American Lost Tribe claim is clearly narishkeit. But even a brief exploration of it--who was making it and why, who was refuting it and why, reveals important insights about American Jewry. Popular thought about who Jews were--their place in America, with whom they could or should be associated--helps us understand how Jews negotiated their place in American society. Theories about Ancient Israelite Indians should not be dismissed as mere fantasy. Rather they are important precisely because they are fantasy."

ETA
Interesting.
Apparently the idea of identifying the American natives with the lost tribes of Israel started with Cristóbal Colon
"Christopher Columbus, the man credited with "discovering" the New World, proclaimed that these newly discovered "Indians" were, in fact, of Jewish origins. Columbus even suggested that Spain could, "recruit their bodies and their wealth to assist Europeans in a final crusade to crush Islam and reclaim Jerusalem" (Alan Taylor, American Colonies: The Settlement of North America, 33)."
Christopher Columbus, the man credited with "discovering" the New World, proclaimed that these newly discovered "Indians" were, in fact, of Jewish origins. Columbus even suggested that Spain could, "recruit their bodies and their wealth to assist Europeans in a final crusade to crush Islam and reclaim Jerusalem" (Alan Taylor, American Colonies: The Settlement of North America, 33).
 
Last edited:
Ooh, I hadn't realised that. Thanks for the information.

For more on that and other contemporary parallels, see post #770:

The idea of American Indians being one of the lost tribes of Israel had been promoted as a (supposedly) scientific theory of origin by James Adair in the late 18th century and was of widespread interest and speculation into the early 19th. A good summary: http://americancreation.blogspot.com/2008/07/native-americans-and-lost-tribes-of.html
 
Seer stones, hot drinks, American Indians being the descendants of one of the Lost Tribes--all ideas regularly bandied about and having a degree of popularity. JS was no doubt charismatic, and even highly imaginative in a certain sense of the word, but his ideas were not original.

It sounds like he was a religious version of Alex Jones or David Icke.
 
For more on that and other contemporary parallels, see post #770:

From the link:

The fervor over the possibility of American Indians being of Jewish descent was only furthered when Barbara Simon published her book, The Ten Tribes of Israel Historically Identified with the Aborigines of the Western Hemisphere in 1836. Aside from quoting a plethora of biblical sources to defend her thesis, Simon also claims that early Mexican paintings found by Spanish conquistadors contain "allusions to the restoration of the dispersed tribes of Israel."

I
n addition to Simon's work, other books emerged during the early part of the 19th century in support of the Native American/lost tribes of Israel theory. Books like A View of the American Indians by Israel Worsley in 1828, American Antiquities and Discoveries in the West by Josiah Priest in 1835, and the before mentioned View of the Hebrews by Ethan Smith in 1825. All of these works combined to create a spirit of enthusiasm that deeply favored the Native American/lost tribes of Israel connection.

Perhaps the most popular -- and most controversial -- interpretation on the origins of Native Americans comes from Mormon founder and prophet Joseph Smith. During his youth, Smith claimed to have received a revelation from a heavenly messenger, who related to Smith the location of a hidden record of an ancient people:



There is nothing new under the sun.
 
If it helps explain things, maybe there was a typo?

Might it be that the word "barley" was used instead of the more correct "barely"?

Therefore the sense is "barely cultivated".

OK -I'll get my coat....
 
If it helps explain things, maybe there was a typo?

Might it be that the word "barley" was used instead of the more correct "barely"?

Therefore the sense is "barely cultivated".

OK -I'll get my coat....

That at least rates a courtesy laugh... heh heh.
 
From the Guardian:
Mormons can finally say 'we got it wrong' over black priest ban
A new edition of the Latter Day Saints scriptures acknowledges that the ban overturned in 1978 was never proclaimed by God

...
In the new edition of the scriptures Official Declaration 2 is now preceded by an explanatory paragraph. In part it reads: "During Joseph Smith's lifetime, a few black male members of the church were ordained to the priesthood. Early in its history, church leaders stopped conferring the priesthood on black males of African descent. Church records offer no clear insights into the origins of this practice. Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to alter this practice and prayerfully sought guidance."

It would be surprising for any organisation in this day and age to admit to racism. But still, in this statement there is finally an acknowledgment of history, that this ban was not ever revelation despite the desire to end it with one, and that even men ordained to speak the word of God can be blinded by their own prejudice. With this statement printed in the scriptures, we no longer have to say, "We don't know why God wanted it this way," as we perpetuate racist apologetics. Instead, we can say, "We got it wrong."


(If the writer's perspective seems odd, that's because she is apparently Mormon herself. "Tresa Edmunds writes about faith and feminism under the name Reese Dixon at Feminist Mormon Housewives.")
 
Much like pretty much everything in the LDS, you can trace the origins of the church beliefs to common ideas at the time. Seer stones, hot drinks, American Indians being the descendants of one of the Lost Tribes--all ideas regularly bandied about and having a degree of popularity. JS was no doubt charismatic, and even highly imaginative in a certain sense of the word, but his ideas were not original.

And all the LDS symbolism borrowed from the Masons. I remember touring the Salt Lake City Temple as a teen with a group of Masonic affiliates, and being shown all the symbols there with Masonic origins.
 
From the Guardian:
Mormons can finally say 'we got it wrong' over black priest ban
A new edition of the Latter Day Saints scriptures acknowledges that the ban overturned in 1978 was never proclaimed by God

So I wonder how that squares with Janadele's hope in this post that "It is not yet the time to bring forth clarification of the advanced knowledge and understanding that President Brigham Young possessed." Looks like the church is moving farther from rather than nearer to bringing forth that advanced knowledge.
 
And all the LDS symbolism borrowed from the Masons. I remember touring the Salt Lake City Temple as a teen with a group of Masonic affiliates, and being shown all the symbols there with Masonic origins.

Definitely.

Prior to JS becoming a Mason, the ordinances in the church were what one would expect: laying on of hands, anointing with oil, washing of feet, etc. After he became a Mason, he liked that stuff so well he incorporated it. There must have been enough people questioning him that he came up with some ridiculous explanation about the Masons having God's original rituals, but they had been corrupted over time. Or something like that. Of course, it couldn't possibly be that JS just liked the Mason stuff and pinched it. And yes, at least some Mormons do still believe this explanation today, as my mother firmly believes it.

There are Masonic symbols on the religious garments as well. There's the square embroidered on one breast and the V on the other.
 
From the Guardian:



(If the writer's perspective seems odd, that's because she is apparently Mormon herself. "Tresa Edmunds writes about faith and feminism under the name Reese Dixon at Feminist Mormon Housewives.")

All I can say is..............O........M........G!

As with every church on the Earth, it is just made up of people. There is NO god.
 
Definitely.

Prior to JS becoming a Mason, the ordinances in the church were what one would expect: laying on of hands, anointing with oil, washing of feet, etc. After he became a Mason, he liked that stuff so well he incorporated it. There must have been enough people questioning him that he came up with some ridiculous explanation about the Masons having God's original rituals, but they had been corrupted over time. Or something like that. Of course, it couldn't possibly be that JS just liked the Mason stuff and pinched it. And yes, at least some Mormons do still believe this explanation today, as my mother firmly believes it.

There are Masonic symbols on the religious garments as well. There's the square embroidered on one breast and the V on the other.

Well it worked the first time.
 
If it helps explain things, maybe there was a typo?

Might it be that the word "barley" was used instead of the more correct "barely"?

Therefore the sense is "barely cultivated".

OK -I'll get my coat....

It makes as much sense as finding inspiration in a hat with stones in it.
 
Pixel42, I am not the one asking nor do I have any enquiries :)

I initiated this thread to correct misinformation and to ANSWER genuine questions regarding the ACTUAL beliefs and teachings of the LDS Church which were being asked off topic in another thread.

Any other matters should be the subject of other threads.

Honest question, How do you go about discerning whats misinformation when its seems that anything that sheds even the smallest of negative light on LDS, you consider propaganda?
 
Honest question, How do you go about discerning whats misinformation when its seems that anything that sheds even the smallest of negative light on LDS, you consider propaganda?
Easy. Anything which sheds negative light on LDS, is, by default, anti-mormon propaganda.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom