Talk:Lamanite

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of Latter Day Saint movement WikiProject, an attempt to provide comprehensive and detailed information about the Latter Day Saint movement and Mormonism on Wikipedia. To participate in the project, edit this article, visit the List of articles about the Latter Day Saint movement, the project page, and/or join the discussion. For writing guidelines about contributing to the project, you may want to read Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Latter Day Saints) and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Latter Day Saints)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

Why is it that someone has removed the reference to 3 Nephi 2:12-15? That verse provides key background for the statment in the article that some interpret Book of Mormon passages to mean that Lamanites will turn white. Wschiess 14:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Skin of blackness The current section on "skin of blackness" says "Several [italics mine] Book of Mormon passages have been interpreted [italics mine] by some Latter-day Saints as indicating that Lamanites would revert to a lighter skin tone . . ." But the text gives as the only example the verse in which "white" was changed to "pure."

A thorough description of the topic "skin of blackness" should include an example of a passage in which Lamanites were reported as turning white, thus giving context to the earlier statement that several passages have been so interpreted. One such passage would be 3 Nephi 2:12, 15: "Therefore, all the Lamanites who had become converted unto the Lord did unite with their brethren, the Nephites . . . And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites".

--Wschiess 17:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This citation must be wrong: 2 Nephi 5:21-21 Perhaps 21-22 is meant?

Hey, you need a paragraph on this: Q. Did the Mormon Church teach that black folks followed Lucifer in the War in Heaven, or were 'fence sitters', or were 'less valiant' in that War? See: Black Mormons & The Priesthood-ban http://www.angelfire.com/mo2/blackmormon/BMPB.html

This is irrelevant for this page. The discussions for Mormon's policy and teachings about Blacks and Native Americans/Lamanites are completely different topics and not viewed the same. Leave a comment at Blacks and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. -Visorstuff 00:27, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] NPOV

I suppose that the NPOV problem could be solved with citations for the linguistic connections. Otherwise, this isn't quite as bad as the Nephite article. 69.51.153.203 21:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I think this article is as bad - it fails to mention the most obvious point which is that the existence of the Lamanites have never been independantly verfied, and that no scholar outside the LDS accepts this story as historical. --Salimfadhley (talk) 23:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually I've changed my mind - I think this article is quite good. --Salimfadhley (talk) 21:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

What does everyone think about merging this article with the Nephite one? (The latter has been updated since the comment by 69.51.153.203). My rationale is that you can't understand Lamanites without understanding the Nephites and that they should be presented together.--Cassmus 07:40, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose - as per my comments on the Talk:Nephite page. Matatigre36 02:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Oppose as well -Visorstuff 02:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Oppose as well. see Talk:Nephite Mrmcgibby 04:59, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
The consensus is obviously not on my side, so I've removed the merge tag from both articles.--Cassmus 02:13, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 2 Nephi 30:6 - "white and delightsome" vs "pure and delightsome"

I've added a line noting that even though some claim that the 1840 edition of the Book of Mormon used the word "pure," later editions until 1981 did not. I think that's important. I'd also point out that many dispute the claim that the 1840 edition ever used the word "pure" in that verse, and that a number of testimonies from prominent LDS Churchmen (including the Prophet himself) and official Church publications do include the idea that Lamanite converts will see their skin turn white in, at most, a generation or two. I would like to add a line questioning that claim, but I can't find a reliable cite at the moment. I'll try to come back to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.100.187.250 (talk) 13:53, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Dear Unsigned - if you can do this it sounds relevant and interesting. I approve. --Salimfadhley (talk) 21:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] LDS and Racism =

Could whoever added the section which starts 'Statement of LDS Prophet Gordon B. Hinckley concerning racism:' - this is simply not relevant to the article. It is not clear from how this was cited that Hinckley was refering specifically to the LDS doctrine of the Lamanites. --Salimfadhley (talk) 23:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Among

I just noticed this news article: [1] - I'm not sure how to factor it into the article (or if we even should), however it at least shows that the questions surrounding the Mormon doctrine of the Lamanites is still in the public eye. --Salimfadhley (talk) 09:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] NPOV tag

I'm thinking of removing the NPOV tag from the "Skin of Blackness" section? This section consists entirely of relevant quotations and references to mormon texts, and I see no reason why this should be considered NPOV, unless of course some mormons here feel that the modern understanding of the text is being mis-represented. I will return in 1 week's time to remove the NPOV tag unless somebody here objects! --Salimfadhley (talk) 12:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, the paragraph reads quite apologetically. I am re-adding the tag. --Descartes1979 (talk) 07:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
One example of NPOV problems in the "Skin of Blackness" section:
      • "Dark skin is never referred as the curse itself; rather, the dark skin was only a mark of the curse which God had placed on the Lamanite people." -- this is an interpretation that is more modern in the church. This should have the clause, "today, mormons believe that.." with a citation from one of the more recent prophets (there are sure to be a bunch of quotes). Then there should also be a quote showing that historically this interpretation was different (there should be a bunch of quotes by Brigham Young on this count too if I am not mistaken. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Descartes1979 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)