Major Book of Mormon change?

The book of Mormon just changed. Before anybody says it was ones persons opinion its something that the church has been teaching for decades. This is what I was taught before I was baptized. Here is the change.



';After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of the American Indians.';



The new BOM will state this?



';After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are among the ancestors of the American Indians.';



What does this change? Everything every missionary has taught. For the first time the LDS church is quietly agreeing they were not in America first. They are admitting others were here first. They just joined in.



What does it mean? I don檛 know. What does it mean to you? Why did they just change it without any announcement to a major change in how we were taught to believe, they just had General Conference. Why did the publisher know before the members?Major Book of Mormon change?
Bruce R. McConkie, a now deceased world-wide leader of the Mormon Church, said this in 1966: ';The American Indians, however, as Columbus found them also had other blood than that of Israel in their veins. It is possible that isolated remnants of the Jaredites may have lived through the period of destruction in which millions of their fellows perished. It is quite apparent that groups of orientals found their way over the Bering Strait and gradually moved southward to mix with the Indian peoples. We have records of a colony of Scandinavians attempting to set up a settlement in America some 500 years before Columbus. There are archaeological indications that an unspecified number of groups of people probably found their way from the old to the new world in pre-Colombian times. Out of all these groups would have come the American Indians as they were discovered in the 15th century.';



It's easy to ';debunk'; Mormon beliefs when you simplify those beliefs and/or misrepresent them. The truth is many Mormons have been speculating for decades that ';Israelites'; were not the principal ancestors of the American Indians.



It is not true that ';every Mormon missionary'; teaches that Israelites are the principal ancestors of the American Indians. I did not teach it, for I did not believe it.



To learn more about Mormonism, visit my site at http://www.allaboutmormons.com .Major Book of Mormon change?
If you are still LDS and questioning something like this is going to cause you to question your beliefs then you are looking for a reason to get out. If you are solid in what you believe then you should not have a desire to put others down for theirs. Go find the truth for yourself. Pray about it.

Report Abuse

This was done because of the recent DNA evidence that proves that original statement FALSE.



So after enough buzz got round the leaders ears and members started to get curious or wonder,etc....they changed it and now act as if its always been that way.



Another way to keep the members ';happy and unquestioning the doctrine';.
Intro or BOM, does it matter? So you argue that one was translated by God, the other just thrown in by man? If this is the case, what other doctrines are just doctrines of men and not of God? If they are merely of men, why have prophets (are they not supposed to be the mouthpiece for God)? Not trying to be argumentative, just trying to open discussion. How does one know which doctrines are correct and which ones are not?



I've been taught to believe there is right and there is wrong. I do not believe right and wrong change. Yet doctrines/statements seem to change on a regular basis.



The problem is, one can either argue that the works are inspired of God, or that man has made a mistake (in his works). But it is very difficult to argue that the works are God's, but man made a mistake. Why would God allow a mistake in doctrine, when the very salvation of everyone is reliant on these principals?



Finally, to argue that the change is made because of our new knowledge does not make sense. These works are supposed to be inspired of God. Are you saying that God is not all knowing? The understanding of man should not matter if that man is a mouthpiece for God.
WE all knew that the Asian people was here and exchanging gods with the first group that came over 3500 years before Christ.

You can see it all the Statutes in South America, that Asian eyes and smiles
This is more a response to other answers than the question. To the Mormons on here. I was one of you for 29 years. I was the most stalwart seminary student. I served a full time mission. I was in the Elders Quorom Presidency and I taught sunday school. You can't honestly tell these people that the church never taught that the American Indians descended from the Lamanites, because you and I both know that is exactly what the church has taught. And the Introduction to the BoM is not the only place. Go to LDS.org and search the word Lamanite among Ensign articles. You will find several talks given at General Conference by General Authorities that refer to Native Americans as Lamanites. You will find other articles in the Ensign that do the same. If you look in the D%26amp;C you will find several times when Joseph Smith calls people to serve a mission ';among the Lamanites'; and he wasn't talking about going back in time. So not only have several prophets referred to the Native Americans as Lamanites. They also approved other people teaching the same thing. Everything in the Ensign is printed ';Under the Direction of the First Presidency'; The intro was written by Bruce R. McKonkie ';Under the Direction of the First Presidency'; not to mention that as an apostle, Bruce R. McKonkie was ordained as a ';Prophet, Seer, and Revelator.'; If he was a prophet, and given the task of writing an intro to ';The most true book on the face of the Earth'; then why wouldn't he have the revelation needed to know that the Lamanites were not the ';Primary Anscestors'; of the American Indians? Why were we taught in Seminary that the intro was also considered scripture, along with anything the General Authorities say today? This is not a small change. It is a huge change in taught doctrine, that the church was hoping to just slip in without people noticing.

Trust me, I understand what it is like to keep trying to defend your religion all the while thinking to yourself that maybe it doesn't make sense afterall. Only when you TRULY open your mind and look at ALL the evidence out there, and not just that which the church approves for you to look at, can you know the truth. And it will be easy to pick out the stupid people who attack the church with ignorant myths, from the real inconvenient TRUTH about the church. Real truth can withstand any criticism. The Mormon church's ';truth'; cannot. I truly believe that many Mormons out there can't let go because they are affraid like I was that the church they gave so much to is a fraud. They are also affraid of how they will be treated by their friends and family who are still in the church. They are affraid they will be labeled sinners, and apostates for leaving. But I hope they realize someday as I have, that being true to yourself is far more important than how others see you. Mormons, please take this as an oppurtunity to really research your faith. To do that you MUST read more than just what the Mormon church gives you. If the church really is true, there isn't anything out there that you can read, that would disprove it. If there is even one thing that disproves it, then the church is not true. Please open you mind, and learn for yourself.
The publisher got directions from the angel Moroni of where to find a set of amended gold tablets, along with a brand new Urim and Thumim with which to translate them, obviously.
Principal means most important.



http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/principal
What does it change? Nothing... does the new version say that they aren't the principle ancestors, no? It could simply as be seen as taking as backing away from something that has lead to contention, so people can focus on the main teachings of the Book of Mormon which are teachings about Christ. I do not know if this is officially why the LDS church made the change, but it makes sense to me.



It is VERY important to note that the change is to the cover page NOT the Book of Mormon itself which was translated by the power of God.
First, it's not the Book of Mormon that changed, it's the introduction or whatever.



Second, it's changed to reflect new light and knowledge that we have. Joseph Smith didn't know for sure, and now we know that the Lamanites were not the only people that the native American Indians could have descended from. And careful study of the Book of Mormon itself shows this. The Book of Mormon itself does not say that the Lehites were the ONLY people in the entire western hemisphere, and iti does not say that the Lamanites were the ONLY people that the current native American Indians could have descended from.
It's not the Book of Mormon. It's the intro and it's not major. GET YOUR HATE STRAIGHT!
Asked and Answered -- however this version makes more sense and it is not part of the translated text -- it was McConckies addition that is being revised (changed, updated, corrected).



Not a problem.





D
First of all you need to know a couple of things. This change is in the introduction of the BOM. This was written in 1981, based on what what known at the time. The church has never had the official position that Lehi and his family were the only people (or the first) that came to the America's. Heck the BOM talks about 2 other groups that came over. No doctrine or principles of the gospel changed. really its a correction that clarifies the churches position. FYI, there have been grammatical changes over the years that most people haven't noticed.



The Book Of Mormaon is still Another Testament of Jesus Christ





To the asker: The BOM does not make the point that everyone was killed off except the Lamanites. Its referring to the two different nations that came off from Father Lehi. The writers in the Book of Mormon knew nothing of other people in the western hemisphere so when it says they were all destroyed it was talking about the people in the book of mormon not the other unknown peoples. All this change does is more clearly show the churches position.
I'm Native American (among other things); the notion that Mormons were my ancestors is just plain laughable.