The Book of Mormon DOES say "others" where there.....

[_ldsfaqs]

Further, you are ignoring the fact that the Nephites being inserted into native populations, Laman and Lemual joining those populations, there's going to be some general skin color differences.

There is absolutely not any evidence that the Nephites were inserted into "native" populations.

Jacob 7:

[26] And it came to pass that I, Jacob, began to be old; and the record of this people being kept on the other plates of Nephi, wherefore, I conclude this record, declaring that I have written according to the best of my knowledge, by saying that the time passed away with us, and also our lives passed away like as it were unto us a dream, we being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem, born in tribulation, in a wilderness, and hated of our brethren, which caused wars and contentions; wherefore, we did mourn out our days.

You know, it never ceases to amaze me how much anti-mormons love their ignorant bigotry over actual facts and truth.
Here's several articles which shows likely around a 100 clear evidences that "others" existed in Book of Mormon lands, even according to the Book of Mormon itself.

When Lehi's Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Others There?
http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1378&index=2

Before DNA
http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1402&index=2

Book of Mormon Basics, and "Others" in the Land
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/dna1.html#basics

A Strange People to the North
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/dna1.html#north

"Others in the Land": Not a New Position!
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/dna1.html#others

What is a Lamanite?
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/dna1.html#lamanite

Lehi's DNA is likely in ALL Natives of the Americas
Non LDS-writer Steve Olson (an expert in population genetics) wrote:

"If anyone living today is descended from Jesus, so are most of us on the planet. That absurd-sounding statement is an inevitable consequence of the strange and marvelous workings of human ancestry...Say you go back 120 generations, to about the year 1000 B.C. According to the results presented in our Nature paper, your ancestors then included everyone in the world who has descendants living today... If Jesus had children (a big if, of course) and if those children had children so that Jesus' lineage survived, then Jesus is today the ancestor of almost everyone living on Earth. True, Jesus lived two rather than three millenniums ago, but a person's descendants spread quickly from well-connected parts of the world like the Middle East...In addition to Jesus...we're also all descended from Julius Caesar, from Nefertiti, from Confucius...and from any other historical figure who left behind lines of descendants and lived earlier than a few thousand years ago. Genetic tests can't prove this, partly because current tests look at just a small fraction of our DNA. But if we're descended from someone, we have at least a chance—even if it's a very small chance—of having their DNA in our cells...People may like to think that they're descended from some ancient group while other people are not. But human ancestry doesn't work that way, since we all share the same ancestors just a few millenniums ago."

Thus, when LDS leaders have spoken about Natives of the America's being of Lehi, they literally are.
All anti-mormon DNA does is show that not everyone in the Americas came from Juda, a position that almost no-one has ever taken, it's simply an anti-mormon strawman. Lehi's DNA, would in fact be in every native of the America's, but anti-mormons ignore that little fact.

Asiatic Origins Taught by the Book of Mormon?
http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/dna1.html#asia

[_Tobin]

The fact of the matter is we KNOW human-beings have been present continuously on the North and South American continents for over the past 10 thousand years. It is a simple fact that IF the Book of Mormon has a historical basis, THERE WERE others here when the Lehites arrived. There is no other realistic view of the Book of Mormon than that. Mormon critics attempt to discredit the Book of Mormon by claiming it doesn't mention these others. However, I really don't think there is any other realistic way to account for the division of the Lehites into Nephites and Lamanites without intermarriage with "darker" skinned peoples obviously already here.

[_ldsfaqs]

Yep, population #'s in the Book of Mormon simply don't support there "not" being others there.

Joseph was so smart doing so many things, yet he was somehow so "dumb" to not realize that he was indicating populations in the Book of Mormon that Lehi's party couldn't have created. Doubt that seriously.... LOL
But, we don't have to rely on that clear and reasonable "assumption".... there are more direct facts that make it clear there were others.

Now the question is..... will anti-mormons stop lying about this issue, when the facts are clear as day?
Not likely.... never really seen them stop promoting other lies that have been well debunked, lies that are over a 100 years old even, and long debunked some 30 years ago.

[_moksha]

You know, it never ceases to amaze me how much anti-mormons love their ignorant bigotry over actual facts and truth.

Hopefully those anti-mormons will now pay attention to the facts uncovered by the Jeff Lindsay Laboratories.

[Guest]

Faqs,

When attempting to prove the historicity of the Book of Mormon with FACTS, please keep in mind that there are ZERO secular and/or non Mormon archeologists who agree.


If these facts are so "LOL" obvious as you state, tell us why the real world archeological society has not embraced them?

Please refrain from using worlds associated with faith and believing.

[_Brackite]

When Lehi's Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Others There?
http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1378&index=2

From That Sorenson Article:

There are statements in the Nephite record that positively inform us that "others" were on the scene and further passages that hint at the same thing. One of these statements occurs during the visit by Alma and his seven companions to the Zoramites. "Now the Zoramites were dissenters from the Nephites" (Alma 31:8). As Alma prayed about this group, he said, "O Lord, their souls are precious, and many of them are our brethren" (Alma 31:35). We may wonder about those whom they considered not their "brethren." Apparently he was speaking of those who were neither Nephites, Lamanites, nor "Mulekites." People in all those three categories are referred to in the text by Nephites as "brethren" (see, for example, Mosiah 1:5 and 7:2, 13 and Alma 24:7–8).

However, Both the printer's manuscript and the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon instead reads, “. . . and many of them are our near brethren.” The word "near" from Alma 31:35 doesn't become absent from that passage until 1837. (Did Sorenson not know that?) And the word "near" is still in the RLDS Edition of the Book of Mormon of that passage.
Here is Alma 31:35 within the RLDS Edition of the Book of Mormon:

115 Behold, O Lord, their souls are precious, and many of them are our near brethren, therefore, give unto us, O Lord, power and wisdom, that we may bring these, our brethren, again unto thee.

http://www.centerplace.org/hs/Book of Mormon/alma.htm

http://www.restoredgospel.com/scripture ... tID=Submit




And Here is the Link to that Passage from the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon:

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... 1830?p=319




Here is Alma 10:7:

[7] As I was journeying to see a very near kindred, behold an angel of the Lord appeared unto me and said: Amulek, return to thine own house, for thou shalt feed a prophet of the Lord; yea, a holy man, who is a chosen man of God; for he has fasted many days because of the sins of this people, and he is an hungered, and thou shalt receive him into thy house and feed him, and he shall bless thee and thy house; and the blessing of the Lord shall rest upon thee and thy house.






The LDS Apologist Lindsay has stated:

For example, 2 Nephi 5:5,6 lists people in Lehi's group who went with Nephi as he split from Laman and Lemuel and their followers. Nephi lists his family, Sam and his family, Zoram and his family, Jacob and Joseph, his sisters, "and all those who would go with me." He then explains that "all those who would go with me were those who believed in the warnings and revelations of God; wherefore, they did hearken unto my words" (2 Nephi 5:6). It appears that Laman, Lemuel, and the sons of Ishmael, who had been antagonistic to Nephi, are those left behind. The group of unnamed "others" seems by necessity to have included people other than those who came with Nephi from Jerusalem. If there were only one or two others, we would expect Nephi to list them. It's hard to say how many there might have been, but perhaps members of a local hamlet or group of hamlets may have allied with the technologically superior Old World group, helping the latter to learn how to survive in the New World while benefiting from their technology (particularly knowledge of metals).

[Does DNA evidence refute the Book of Mormon?]




However, there were Not any "members of a local hamlet" that joined with the people of Nephi. All we really need to do to find out that there were not "members of a local hamlet" that joined with the people of Nephi is just go to the next Chapter in the Book of Mormon. Here is 2nd Nephi Chapter 6 verses 2 and 5:

[2] Behold, my beloved brethren, I, Jacob, having been called of God, and ordained after the manner of his holy order, and having been consecrated by my brother Nephi, unto whom ye look as a king or a protector, and on whom ye depend for safety, behold ye know that I have spoken unto you exceedingly many things.

[5] And now, the words which I shall read are they which Isaiah spake concerning all the house of Israel; wherefore, they may be likened unto you, for ye are of the house of Israel. And there are many things which have been spoken by Isaiah which may be likened unto you, because ye are of the house of Israel.



There would Not have been a group of Non-Israelites that joined with the Nephites in 2nd Nephi Chapter five verses five and six, because the Book of Mormon Character Jacob referred to the Nephites as being of the House of Israel in 2nd Nephi Chapter six verse five. Plus then we have the Book of Mormon Character Jacob referring to his people, the Nephites, as "being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem" towards the end of his life in Jacob Chapter seven verse 26.

[_tapirrider]

Here's several articles which shows likely around a 100 clear evidences that "others" existed in Book of Mormon lands, even according to the Book of Mormon itself.

It is not necessarily "clear evidences". It is just as likely that Joseph Smith fabricated a story full of holes and now he has to be thrown under the bus to try to make it work.

"The Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western Tribes of Indians, having been found through the ministration of an holy Angel translated into our own Language by the gift and power of God, after having been hid up in the earth for the last fourteen hundred years containing the word of God, which was delivered unto them, By it we learn that our western tribes of Indians are desendants from that Joseph that was sold into Egypt, and that the Land of America is a promised land unto them"
http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... y-1833&p=4

Perhaps John L. Sorenson should be recognized as an apostate.

"a commonly heard statement is that the Book of Mormon is “the history of the American Indians.” This statement contains a number of unexamined assumptions"
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1984/09/digg ... 78_000_016

Those "assumptions" came from Joseph Smith. And he allegedly met with Moroni many times, but that so-called resurrected ancient inhabitant of the Americas never bothered to tell Joe about others.

Sorenson said "Latter-day Saints generally have supposed that the "other nations" were the Gentile (Christian) nations of Europe who began to reach the New World only 500 years ago. To believe so requires limited imagination."
http://publications.maxwellinstitute.by ... 78&index=2

LDS members have "supposed" that because it was taught to them from Joseph Smith and the prophets and apostles after him. Sorenson shouldn't speak evil of the Lord's anointed, saying they had "limited imagination".

[_SteelHead]

I love it. The Book of Mormon is about the jaredites who arrive at a post flood western hemisphere that is devoid of any other people. They all kill themselves off. The nephites arrive to a hemisphere that is described as devoid of people, so the apologists come up with some hack ideas to show the necessity of other people (cuz we know they were there duh) that is not consistent with the obvious reading of the text. But what more can you expect from the folk who brought us west = north, and horse = tapir?

[_DarkHelmet]

I love it. The Book of Mormon is about the jaredites who arrive at a post flood western hemisphere that is devoid of any other people. They all kill themselves off. The Nephites arrive to a hemisphere that is described as devoid of people, so the apologists come up with some hack ideas to show the necessity of other people (cuz we know they were there duh) that is not consistent with the obvious reading of the text. But what more can you expect from the folk who brought us west = north, and horse = tapir?

And ldsfaqs opinions = Obvious Facts that anti-mormons, and secular scientists, and 99.98% of the world refuse to accept.

[_DarkHelmet]

The fact of the matter is we KNOW human-beings have been present continuously on the North and South American continents for over the past 10 thousand years. It is a simple fact that IF the Book of Mormon has a historical basis, THERE WERE others here when the Lehites arrived. There is no other realistic view of the Book of Mormon than that. Mormon critics attempt to discredit the Book of Mormon by claiming it doesn't mention these others. However, I really don't think there is any other realistic way to account for the division of the Lehites into Nephites and Lamanites without intermarriage with "darker" skinned peoples obviously already here.

Or, we can accept the text of the Book of Mormon when it says the Lamanites were cursed with a dark skin. It's easy to change the meaning of the Book of Mormon when evidence emerges that challenges the plain reading of the text. You can do it with pretty much anything. Star Wars and Star Trek fans do it all the time when someone points out a blooper with the science, they come up with a plausible explanation that makes sense and satisfy their need for a fictional universe free from writers errors. Apologists do the same thing with the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham when the obvious goofs are pointed out.