So I have been doing more reading on the topic of Mormonism, thus the all posts about it. This is another. The question is as follows:
Who Speaks for the Truth that is in Mormonism? Why should any Mormon believe the unofficial view LDS Apologists and BYU profs. or what has been said by Joseph Smith?
Lets examine this question in light of the peoples in the Americas.
Joseph Smith says - That all American Indians are "Literally descendants of Abraham." Ohio Journal 1835-1836, Nov 9.
The BOM supports Him.
Mormon 1:7 - The whole face of the land had become covered with buildings, and the people were as numerous almost, as it were the sand of the sea.
This is Echoed by Previous Prophets also, " The Term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as Polynesians, the Guatemalans, The Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo and others." - Spencer W. Kimball
But LDS Apologists and BYU Profs. are saying something different in light of what is found by DNA tests that Show that Native Americans are Asiatic. (Thomas W. Murphy, "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy and Genetics" ; Michael Crawford, "The Origins of Native Americans" ; D.C. Wallace et, al., "Dramatic Founder Effects in Amerindian Mitochondrial DNAs" And Others)
LDS Prof. Jeffery Meldrum says this, " The necessary experiment simply cannot be designed that would rufute the historicity of the Book of Mormon as the record of a small population ( small intermingled population ) on the basis of DNA studies and population genetics. [emphasis added]"
Modern day Mormon scholars see the problem and are trying to get around the issue. They are saying it is a small group of people, that this group of people that both the BOM and LDS prophets said are very large, are small.
So who do you put your trust in as a Mormon? Prophets or Scholars? There is only one truth and each side is opposing the other. The Secular evidence is against the Prophets. So who is your trust in?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Why should any mormon believe the unofficial view of an LDS apologist over the words of a prophet? They don't have to. I know of no LDS Apologist who argues such a thing. This scenario does not exist.
What LDS Apologists do is to defend the Church against attacks by NON-MORMONS. LDS Apologists do not deal with believing Mormons, that isn't the nature of their job. So, you have erred in your understanding of what an apologist does.
Furthermore, the example you gave is not correct. First of all I would like to see a link or at least a better description of where the quote from Smith comes from. You have two years (1835-1836), but the story certainly was not run on Nov 9th of both years.
Secondly, you fail to mention that Joseph Smith also taught "that a prophet is only a prophet when he is acting as such." It has loooooong been a basic LDS belief that prophets of God are only mortal men, and that they are subject to error. In fact, it is evidence of the truth of the Book of Mormon that Joseph Smith didn't actually know the contents of the Book of Mormon which he had dictated. The Book of Mormon describes a civilization that was restricted in size, a fact that is no longer debated. Facts like that have only become obvious in the last 100 years when tools of textual criticism were beginning to be applied. That Joseph didn't know that is evidence that he is not the author.
Your quote from Mormon 1:7 is just silly, as similar passages can be found in the bible which also do not imply what you want this passage to.
James
Post a Comment