The Wentworth Letter

[Tex]

This Sunday's Priesthood/RS lesson in our ward is #38, the Wentworth Letter. The letter is reprinted in full in the manual, with the following omission:

In this important and interesting book the history of ancient America is unfolded, from its first settlement by a colony that came from the Tower of Babel, at the confusion of languages to the beginning of the fifth century of the Christian Era. We are informed by these records that America in ancient times has been inhabited by two distinct races of people. The first were called Jaredites, and came directly from the Tower of Babel. The second race came directly from the city of Jerusalem, about six hundred years before Christ. They were principally Israelites, of the descendants of Joseph. The Jaredites were destroyed about the time that the Israelites came from Jerusalem, who succeeded them in the inheritance of the country. The principal nation of the second race fell in battle towards the close of the fourth century. The remnant are the Indians that now inhabit this country.

Discuss.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Tex

This Sunday's Priesthood/RS lesson in our ward is #38, the Wentworth Letter. The letter is reprinted in full in the manual, with the following omission:



Discuss.

the best part is the articles of faith.

[Tex]

Wow, an impressive discussion!

I guess no one much cares that this portion of the Wentworth letter was edited out of the JS manual.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Tex

Wow, an impressive discussion!

I guess no one much cares that this portion of the Wentworth letter was edited out of the JS manual.

well, if you have an opinion, then express it.

[MikeWaters]

We are adapting to the evidence.

Just like we are anti-polygamy, don't espouse theosis, apologize for doing proxy ordinances for Jews, etc.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

We are adapting to the evidence.

Just like we are anti-polygamy, don't espouse theosis, apologize for doing proxy ordinances for Jews, etc.

The only part of the wentworth letter that is canonized is the Articles of Faith. Still, it seems a little odd to print the whole thing in the manual except one paragraph. I guess when the church decides to print something for use in priesthood meeting it's hard because of our culture to say it's there just for discussion and isn't necessarily doctrine. We're not trained to think that way about what comes out in church manuals. Maybe that's why they left out the piece they don't necessarily espouse as doctrine.

I'm still not sold on the idea that events in the BofM had to take place in Meso America. Why not among a small group of people in the northeast and perhaps Great Lakes? That's certainly what JS seemed to believe.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by BlueK

The only part of the wentworth letter that is canonized is the Articles of Faith. Still, it seems a little odd to print the whole thing in the manual except one paragraph. I guess when the church decides to print something for use in priesthood meeting it's hard because of our culture to say it's there just for discussion and isn't necessarily doctrine. We're not trained to think that way about what comes out in church manuals. Maybe that's why they left out the piece they don't necessarily espouse as doctrine.

I'm still not sold on the idea that events in the BofM had to take place in Meso America. Why not among a small group of people in the northeast and perhaps Great Lakes? That's certainly what JS seemed to believe.

Until recently, the church taught that Native Americans, by and large, were descendants of Lehi. Period.

This belief is now being dumped.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Until recently, the church taught that Native Americans, by and large, were descendants of Lehi. Period.

This belief is now being dumped.

The BofM doesn't really make that claim, so maybe questioning that idea isn't that far off base.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by BlueK

The BofM doesn't really make that claim, so maybe questioning that idea isn't that far off base.

Until recently the introduction of the BoM made that claim.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by BlueK

The BofM doesn't really make that claim, so maybe questioning that idea isn't that far off base.

Well, that's not entirely true. While the Book of Mormon doesn't explicitly say "Native Americans are Lamanites," it leaves the clear impression that the book is intended to come forth and convert the descendants of that civilization to the religion of their ancestors. Now we can dicker over who that is exactly intended to be (in modern terms), but it's a fair assumption made by many over the years, including JS, that it includes the Native Americans.

Personally, I'm confused by the deletion from the manual. None of that is problematic in my view, with the possible exception of the last sentence (which ties the book to today's Indians). The rest ... Jaredites, descendants of Joseph ... are all claims made in the Book of Mormon. So what's the big deal?

Perhaps it was edited out not so much for doctrinal purposes, but to focus the lesson on the important things.