Take aborigines out of the Book of Mormon

[SeattleUte]

and I think you eliminate much of what made the Book of Mormon resonant, even justified its existence. The idea that you had this entire race of people on a vast continent for millenia seemingly outside the scope of God's primary doings on earth, at the same time mysteriously excluded from the fruits of human material progress, then trampled and annihilated by the posterity of the original Bible bearers, that in reality was among God's "chosen people," and God had not forgotten, to whom he paid a personal visit, was a story not without charms. What people has suffered more injury to their physical and spiritual well-being the past 300 years than Western aborigines? The Book of Mormon's message of redemption to Western aborigines was marvelous. I know it was a story that was very meaningful to the many Otavalanios who received the big lie I helped propagate. (The story is so appealing that I bet someone had to arm wrestle BRM to get him to add that word "principal" to the original introduction, because that is not what was being taught in 1981.)

I think this one word change in the Introduction is of enormous consequence. I rate it as not far removed from the "revelations" eliminating the priesthood ban or polygamy in significance. The mullahs who try to minimize it are just telling more lies. Moromonism has lost a major feature of its distinctive branding.

[MikeWaters]

What shall I do?

[creekster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

and I think you eliminate much of what made the Book of Mormon resonant, even justified its existence. The idea that you had this entire race of people on a vast continent for millenia seemingly outside the scope of God's primary doings on earth, at the same time mysteriously excluded from the fruits of human material progress, then trampled and annihilated by the posterity of the original Bible bearers, that in reality was among God's "chosen people," and God had not forgotten, to whom he paid a personal visit, was a story not without charms. What people has suffered more injury to their physical and spiritual well-being the past 300 years than Western aborigines? The Book of Mormon's message of redemption to Western aborigines was marvelous. I know it was a story that was very meaningful to the many Otavalanios who received the big lie I helped propagate. (The story is so appealing that I bet someone had to arm wrestle BRM to get him to add that word "principal" to the original introduction, because that is not what was being taught in 1981.)

I think this one word change in the Introduction is of enormous consequence. I rate it as not far removed from the "revelations" eliminating the priesthood ban or polygamy in significance. The mullahs who try to minimize it are just telling more lies. Moromonism has lost a major feature of its distinctive branding.

Are you contending that you think it likely that BRM would prefer to say that Lamanites are the exclusive ancestor of the American Indians? If so I wonder if you have actually read the BOM all the way through. As to your point about the redemption of the 'aborigines', I fail to see how this change alters the message at all. Nothing in the BOM says that Christ's visit (let alone his redemptive message) was limited to genetic descendants of those who sailed to the new world.

[Ace Tomato Co.]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I think this one word change in the Introduction is of enormous consequence.

Nice try. This one word change is of zero consequence. Are you so far removed from reality that you believe this change will result in any perceivable difference in any remotely important church statistic?

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by creekster

Are you contending that you think it likely that BRM would prefer to say that Lamanites are the exclusive ancestor of the American Indians? If so I wonder if you have actually read the BOM all the way through. As to your point about the redemption of the 'aborigines', I fail to see how this change alters the message at all. Nothing in the BOM says that Christ's visit (let alone his redemptive message) was limited to genetic descendants of those who sailed to the new world.

I have read it twice cover to cover, but not since my mission. What I recall was taught in 1981 is that Book of Mormon peoples (peoples about whom stories were told) were the exclusive ancestors of American Indians, as well as all aborigines in the South Pacific (hence in the Islands aborigines fell down and worshiped Captain Cook in remeberance of "white" Jesus' visit). Maybe you can point me to some tell-tale reference to Asiatics who came over the land bridge that I have forgotten.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

I have read it twice cover to cover, but not since my mission. What I recall was taught in 1981 is that Book of Mormon peoples (peoples about whom stories were told) were the exclusive ancestors of American Indians, as well as all aborigines in the South Pacific (hence in the Islands aborigines fell down and worshiped Captain Cook in remeberance of "white" Jesus' visit). Maybe you can point me to some tell-tale reference to Asiatics who came over the land bridge that I have forgotten.

The BOM itself refers to other peoples that were present and were mixed into the pool. THus, even your parody of BRM would never say the exclusive ancestors were lamanites.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by creekster

The BOM itself refers to other peoples that were present and were mixed into the pool. THus, even your parody of BRM would never say the exclusive ancestors were lamanites.

Cite?

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by Ace Tomato Co.

Nice try. This one word change is of zero consequence. Are you so far removed from reality that you believe this change will result in any perceivable difference in any remotely important church statistic?

I don't agree with Seattle here, but if it were of zero consequence then why make the change. The change was made. It was made for a reason. Apparently the reason is the church is no longer comfortable with the idea that the Lamanites were the principle ancestors of native peoples in this hemisphere.
I think it is fair to ask how this conclusion was reached, though we may not get an answer.

My guess is that far from being of zero consequence, a great deal of thought was put into how it would be reworded and then how that would be presented.

I for one am always happy to see appropriate adjustments get made even if sometimes they are made in response to external pressures.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Cite?

The people of Zarahemla.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

The people of Zarahemla.

They're B of M characters and also Jews.