RE: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
Dear Zionisti, For a long time I held to the idea that the Amerindians where, as described in the Book of Mormon, solely the descendants of the Jaredites and Lehites. I have had to change my thinking of late. Not because of the DNA or any other feeble attempt by man to assign broad definitions to scanty data, but because of what is in the book itself. In 2nd Nephi, Chapter 1 this is found: "5 But, said he, notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord." In this verse, the Lord not only promises this land as an inheritance to Nephi but also to others that would be led here. So who are those who came here from other countries? That could broadly apply to East Asians coming across a land bridge or many other possible originations. We do not have their records now but will someday, based on our righteousness, receive them. Until then, I no longer mentally debate the originations of the various peoples who greeted the Gentiles. Noel // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
Could mean that this is where all our principals came from. Our principal was Seminole. *jeep! --Chet Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > > > Probably due to the statement in the introduction to the BoM which > > states that they are the "principal ancestors" . . . So Kent wondered: > So does that mean that only the indians in New York are their > descendents, > or that the Araucano indians in Southern Chile are also their > descendents, > or that all Indians of whatever lineage are their descendents, or > that > early Church leaders were making a gross generalization? // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
Kent wonders: So does that mean that only the indians in New York are their descendents, or that the Araucano indians in Southern Chile are also their descendents, or that all Indians of whatever lineage are their descendents, or that early Church leaders were making a gross generalization? Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 08:52 PM 8/12/03 -0600, R. Kent Francis wrote: Kent Francis writes: If we look at the Bible as history, the distances involved are less than 500 miles by 100 miles and the area was inhabited by Phoenesian, Philistines, Syrians, Egyptians and other peoples in addition to the Israelites... who were at various times in their history politically fractionated. Why have we subscribed to the concept that all the native americans were Nephite/Lamanites? Probably due to the statement in the introduction to the BoM which states that they are the "principal ancestors" . . . -- Ronn! :) // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
At 08:52 PM 8/12/03 -0600, R. Kent Francis wrote: Kent Francis writes: If we look at the Bible as history, the distances involved are less than 500 miles by 100 miles and the area was inhabited by Phoenesian, Philistines, Syrians, Egyptians and other peoples in addition to the Israelites... who were at various times in their history politically fractionated. Why have we subscribed to the concept that all the native americans were Nephite/Lamanites? Probably due to the statement in the introduction to the BoM which states that they are the "principal ancestors" . . . -- Ronn! :) // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
While the statement quoted is the problem it is never the less the fact that for many, many years the idea of other peoples being there first has been a part of the belief of many people. A careful reading of 1st Nephi would lead you to believe that they were interacting with native people from the very first day of their landing in the New World. George - Original Message - From: "Ronn! Blankenship" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 11:26 PM Subject: Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C. > At 08:52 PM 8/12/03 -0600, R. Kent Francis wrote: > >Kent Francis writes: > > > >If we look at the Bible as history, the distances involved are less than 500 > >miles by 100 miles and the area was inhabited by Phoenesian, Philistines, > >Syrians, Egyptians and other peoples in addition to the Israelites... who > >were at various times in their history politically fractionated. > >Why have we subscribed to the concept that all the native americans were > >Nephite/Lamanites? > > > > Probably due to the statement in the introduction to the BoM which states > that they are the "principal ancestors" . . . > > > > -- Ronn! :) > > // > /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// > /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// > / > > // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
Kent Francis writes:
If we look at the Bible as history, the distances involved are less than 500
miles by 100 miles and the area was inhabited by Phoenesian, Philistines,
Syrians, Egyptians and other peoples in addition to the Israelites... who
were at various times in their history politically fractionated.
Why have we subscribed to the concept that all the native americans were
Nephite/Lamanites?
The various tribes of the Americas (from both genetic and language
groupings) are divided into groups:
1. The Eskimo-Aleut groups (10 languages & 85,000 speakers)
2. The Na-Dene - (not related to groups 1 or 3-8)
North-Western Na-Dene - Haida, Tlingit, & Athabaskan (30 languages)
Southern Na-Dene - Apache, Cree, & Navaho (130,000 speakers) - arrived
in SW from the north about 1200 AD
583 Amerind languages and groups:
3. Northern Amerind
a1. Almosan - includes Kutenai, Algonquian, Cree, Ojibwa, and 3 other
languages - Canada & NewEngland
a2. Keresiouan - includes Keres, Liouan, Iroquoian, Caddoan - Midwest to
Atlantic coast - Cherokee
b. Penutian - Oregon and Calif, SouthEast , Gulf group - Pima, Papago,
Nahua,
SouthernMexico group (Huava, Mixe-Zoque, Totonacan),
and the Maya in Yucatan and Guatamala same group in NewMexico = Zuni
c. Hokan - calif & parts of Az
4. Central Amerind
a. Chibchan sw Mexico, central america south of Yucatan, Venezual &
North Brazil includes Yanomame & Guaymi.
b. Paezan (north Florida, Colombia coast, Ecuador, Chilean Andes/coast
5. 20 Andean languages (Quechua and Aymara - Inca empire) Mapuche =
Araucanians
6. Equatorial - Tucanoan 9 groups in western Brazil
7. Eqauatorial Caribbean islands, Uraguay, Venezuala, Ckolombia, Ecuador,
Peru, Central & Eastern Brazil
8. Ge-Pano-Carib - Southern Brazil
By looking at the different distributions of blood allele's in the native
populations sampled, there is a high correlation with both geographical and
lingusitic factors that allow separations into distinct (non-related) groups.
Perhaps when someone dives into the data, we could identify a group that
might in fact qualify for the Nephites that we are looking for... if only
one of the three Nephites would drop by for a blood test {8^)...
well let me digress to a former posting I made:
First of all I am NOT claiming that Bolivia is the site for Zarahemla {8^).
I am like everyone else urging caution in jumping to conclusions - however,
I am looking for parallels and hints as a way of trying to understand who
the Book of Mormon Peoples might have been and where they might have lived.
I don't believe (as many of my ancestors did) that all indians are Lamanites.
I believe that the Book of Mormon may have been a localized account rather
than the history of all of North, Central, and South America. The rise of
the Olmec and Mayan civilizations do correlate to Book of Mormon Histories
of the Jaredites and Nephites/Lamanites; hence the attempt by many to build
a geographical correlation in Guatamala. What pointed me in the direction
of Bolivia is a chance statement from the Genome project which I have been
studying.
First of all, a related article in the popular press which some have reacted
to by stating that "there are no Lamanites here".
(My research is a few years old so there may have been some advances in this
area)
Native Americans may be able to trace heritage to rare gene
Copyright (c) 1996 Nando.net
Copyright (c) 1996 San Francisco Examiner
SAN FRANCISCO (Jan 10, 1996 11:04 a.m. EST) -- All Native Americans
may be able to trace their heritage back to a rare genetic mutation
in one man, passed on about 30,000 years ago to his son and future
descendants, according to new Stanford University research.
A search of more than 500 DNA samples from populations around the
world revealed a mutation on the Y chromosome found only in Indian
populations in North and South America and in Eskimo groups.
This one-time mutation is a genetic footprint of our forebears'
prehistoric wanderings across the Americas -- and is still imprinted
in the genetic code of today's native Americans.
"We think that somewhere back in human history, there was this
unique mutation event," lead researcher Peter Underhill, a research
associate in genetics at Stanford University, said Monday. "It
probably happened only once, on one Y chromosome, and a faithful
copy (of the mutation) was passed on from this father to his son,
and all future offspring."
The mutation is found in samples of blood and hair of people
representing all three far-flung language groups of native
Americans, thought to have split up and gone their separate ways
long ago: Amerind, represented by South American Indians; Na-Dene,
represented by groups such as the Navajos; and Eskimo-Aleut.
Researchers say this suggests that the genetic mutation may have
occurred before the split and subsequent language differentiation --
perha
Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C.
You might think of how Lamanites were described in the BofM. It was not based on race or lineage, rather on the state of righteousness. The membership of the group was constantly changing from one time to another. We recognize in the church the principle of adoption. We give the blessing and all else to the adopted person. In the same way many of the descendants of the the orginal group*S* of people found themselves aligned with either the Nephites or the Lamanites. I think that the statement "principal" ancestors has more to lead to confusion than is necessary, but it can be read in an entirely different way, than most people understandablly read it, to allow for it to be entirely correct. At any rate it is clear that there were a great deal more of the "native" populations involved in the current "native" populations that just direct desendants of Lehi. George - Original Message - From: "R. Kent Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [ZION] Caral, Peru 2627 B.C. > Kent wonders: > So does that mean that only the indians in New York are their descendents, > or that the Araucano indians in Southern Chile are also their descendents, > or that all Indians of whatever lineage are their descendents, or that > early Church leaders were making a gross generalization? > > Ronn! Blankenship wrote: > > > At 08:52 PM 8/12/03 -0600, R. Kent Francis wrote: > > > >> Kent Francis writes: > >> > >> If we look at the Bible as history, the distances involved are less > >> than 500 > >> miles by 100 miles and the area was inhabited by Phoenesian, > >> Philistines, Syrians, Egyptians and other peoples in addition to the > >> Israelites... who were at various times in their history politically > >> fractionated. > >> Why have we subscribed to the concept that all the native americans were > >> Nephite/Lamanites? > > > > > > > > > > Probably due to the statement in the introduction to the BoM which > > states that they are the "principal ancestors" . . . > > > > > > > > -- Ronn! :) > > > > // > > > > /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// > > /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// > > / > > > > > > > > > > > > // > /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// > /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// > / > > // /// ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at /// /// http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html /// / --^ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^
