Did Christ appear to other nations?

[benjosh]

I'm not sure what that means. If you're asking whether there's a connection between American Christian millenial fantasies and American Christian fantasies about the Hebrew origins of Native Americans, probably so.

I only attended my first meeting for worship about a month ago, and am not a member of any local meeting, but I'm studying Quakerism and attempting to live in a Quaker manner, and I think I'll probably formally join the society at some point.

What this means is that cultures are shaped by the hopes and desires of its people and religious institutions.

For your information there was a sizable portion of well respected men who taught that the Indians were of the tribes of Israel. That knowledge has been buried in a barrage of lies against the Native Americans, Blacks, and Mormons.

Treating Indians as worthy people was not a popular stance to take when the government had a manifest destiny that didn't need Indians in the way. If they had inherent value this would make their slaughter appear mmore consistent to what it actually was. . . . . murder, genocide.

When I bring up references to social science or history, your reaction is like don't bother me with the facts, I will just call what I don't understand fantasy.

I hope you apply yourself more in the study of Quakerism. I know many Quakers and graduated from a Quaker college. Do you know their history with the Native Americans?

You are reacting to my posts as though I am saying you're dumb. I'm not. Do you have a lack of information, mis-information?

Maybe I'm just old school. I thought we were supposed to have knowledge about the subjects we talk about.

When you call things fantasies you are actually putting up a smoke screen for your lack of knowledge.

If this is not the case then say what you know.

BenJosh

 

[benjosh]

James Adair?
James Adair

Born: 1709
Died: 1783
Ethnicity: Caucasian
Hometown: County Antrim, Ireland
Career: Indian trader
Genres: History, Other Nonfiction
??????????????????????????? Is this the particular James Adair you mean? If so, he was not privy to any knowledge of genetics in his opinions.
----------------------
Elias Boudinot?
Elias Boudinot
a North Georgia Notable

Born 1800, Pine Log, Cherokee Nation East (now Georgia)
Died June 22, 1839, Park Hill, Cherokee Nation West (now Oklahoma)

[font=helvetica,arial]Editor of the Cherokee Phoenix, Leader of the Treaty Party

​

This the one in particular???????????? If so, same objection.​

---------------------​

Right up through Brigham Young and his immediate successors they had no knowledge of modern genetics and Y Chromosome and maternal mytochondrial genetic research.​

​

If these large cities from the times described in the BoM existed why have we found no archeological evidence of them??????? We have at least some archeological reference to the Norsemen in North America. Why not the cities of the BoM?​

​

Surely it is easier to track the lost tribes to Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Asia Minor than to the new world.​

​

Regards,​

Scott[/font]​

yes, that the James Adair I am talking about his journal of his encounters with the tribes was anthropological in nature (though the term was not in use at the time) The History of the American Indians,

Adair's insightful and often rollicking account of the eighteenth-century southeastern backcountry is actually two volumes in one. The first, devoted to a discourse on the origin of the American Indians, presents twenty-three arguments aimed at supporting the theory that the Indians are descended from the Lost Tribes of Israel. Even the earliest of Adair's readers dismissed his Hebrew theory, but the concept provided the author a unique and insightful comparative framework upon which to build his cultural analysis of southeastern Indians.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4113/is_200410/ai_n9464308#continue

What people buy into is that everything they read is accurate. . . . . you have to dig deeper when a government and society cover up the deeds they are ashamed of.
The conventional wisdom says,

Even the earliest of Adair's readers dismissed his Hebrew theory, but the concept provided the author a unique and insightful comparative framework upon which to build his cultural analysis of southeastern Indians.

If you want to dig deeper, you will find that this statement is not true. There were many who did believe it. The most notable was a US President, the first director of the Mint, the founder of the American Bible Society, a friend of the Jewish people (donated several thousand acres of land in Philadelphia for the Jewish people. should they want to gather and colonize Jerusalem). He wrote three books. One was The Age of Revelation as counterpoint to Paines Age of Reason. The Second Advent a look at the Hebrew prophets and the advent of Messiah to a regathered Israel. And, a Star in the West, a compilation of observation from Adair and many others who had a vast knowledge of the Native Americans.
The Elias Boudinout you've listed was a Cherokee that Elias Boudinout raised and educated in his home. The purpose was for him to help his Native people. The boy out of respect asked if he could bear his name among the white men.

I assume you think genetics are the key to everything. I don't follow that line too much. But I have a friend conversant on that and he has studied it out. I don't know if he has a paper on it yet, but should in the near future.

I would submit that much of this nations history is not known because people are trying to gain a little bit of knowledge on everything and wind up being intellectually 3,000 miles wide and an inch deep.
Discussion boards/forums foster that kind of thinking.
This subject of the origins of the Indians and the cultural forces at play at the beginning of this nation is a subject I know.
So, I sometimes just pop in and say, Hey, stop these drive by posts. Slow down and plant some roots.
I'm thin on some subjects, but this is not one of them.

Thanks for your time.
Respectfully yours, BenJosh

 

[Smoke]

What this means is that cultures are shaped by the hopes and desires of its people and religious institutions.

But ancestry is not.

For your information there was a sizable portion of well respected men who taught that the Indians were of the tribes of Israel. That knowledge has been buried in a barrage of lies against the Native Americans, Blacks, and Mormons.

Treating Indians as worthy people was not a popular stance to take when the government had a manifest destiny that didn't need Indians in the way. If they had inherent value this would make their slaughter appear mmore consistent to what it actually was. . . . . murder, genocide.

For your information, I'm well aware of the claims of people like Adair and Boudinot, which are without merit and are not taken seriously by real scholars. Also for your information, Native peoples don't need to be descended from the Hebrews to be worthy people. It doesn't honor my ancestors to deny who they were and pretend they were Jews.

When I bring up references to social science or history, your reaction is like don't bother me with the facts, I will just call what I don't understand fantasy.

You've made no mention of social science of history, just the writings of Adair and Boudinot, which were debunked years ago. I'd be happy to have you "bother me" with some facts, but so far you haven't produced any.

I hope you apply yourself more in the study of Quakerism. I know many Quakers and graduated from a Quaker college. Do you know their history with the Native Americans?

I do indeed, and I also know that Quakers value the truth.

You are reacting to my posts as though I am saying you're dumb. I'm not. Do you have a lack of information, mis-information?

Maybe I'm just old school. I thought we were supposed to have knowledge about the subjects we talk about.

I'm not saying you're dumb. I am saying that if writings of the like of those and Adair and Boudinot are the best you've got, you haven't got a leg to stand on. You haven't produced any facts at all -- just alluded to two very poor sources.

When you call things fantasies you are actually putting up a smoke screen for your lack of knowledge.

If this is not the case then say what you know.

I know that I don't have time to make a systematic rebuttal of Adair, and I know that you haven't advanced the first bit of evidence for your claim.

 

[painted wolf]

well some thought that the Cherokee were "a lost tribe of Isriael"... Based in part on our language.
We speak a dialect of the Iriquoian language family which when you study the whole language group is very dissemiler to Hebrew.
All evidence based on language is very superfical at best.... slanted interpretation at worst.

Genetics shows we are not a "lost tribe" of anyone. We are however, closest to certen groups from Asia, such as the Ainu of Japan.

here is a site with helpful factual information about the subject.
http://www.native-languages.org/iaq9.htm

I'm sure if Jesus showed up, some tribe would have mentioned it... it would be in the oral history... heck the Mikmak remember the Norse... as do the Inuit.

wa:do

 

[mormonman]

Well, I guess the bottom line is that in the Bible it says that Christ was born, died for our sins, and was resurrected. After he was resurrected he was w/ the Apostles, IN FLESH, for 40 days. I just don't get how you guys think that Christ who has power over Heaven and Earth can only come to Earth once. What about the second coming? Is He not going to show up for His own second coming. The truth is He can come to the Earth as many times as He pleases. I know w/o a shadow of a doubt that He ministered to other nations and that everything in the Book of Mormon is true.

 

[greatcalgarian]

LDS Church the fastest growing religion in the WORLD?

Is that in terms of percentage growth or increase in absolute number of believers?
Christanity formed only 33%, and LDS is just a branch in that category. See http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html for your statistical claim.

 

[nutshell]

I'm not sure if it's in the World or US, but the LDS Church is commonly reported as the fastest growing in terms of percentage. I expect the birth rate alone of massive denominations like the Catholic church is greater than total LDS growth, but as a percentage, LDS is faster.

Is that in terms of percentage growth or increase in absolute number of believers?
Christanity formed only 33%, and LDS is just a branch in that category. See http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html for your statistical claim.

 

[Katzpur]

Is that in terms of percentage growth or increase in absolute number of believers?

It doesn't really matter, because the statement is not accurate in the first place. I know that Islam is growing at a remarkable rate, though I can't give you any exact numbers. But a lot of studies do indicate that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the fastest growing (in terms of convert baptisms) Christian Church in the world. Our membership currently stands at a little over 12 million, and we have roughly 300,000 new converts each year. This, of course, doesn't really have anything to do with whether Christ visited any other nations after His resurrection. How'd we get off on this tangent anyway?

 

[greatcalgarian]

It was after He was resurrected, so He was in physical body form. He came to Saul in the Book of Acts and Paul in for the Book of Revelation, so it was after cricifiction and resurrection. After He went to the Apostles for forty days then he went to the other Jewish nations to bring them His Gospel.

He did not appear to Saul in physical form, Saul/Paul only 'dreamed' or have a spiritual contact with Jesus.

 

[Popeyesays]

Well, I guess the bottom line is that in the Bible it says that Christ was born, died for our sins, and was resurrected. After he was resurrected he was w/ the Apostles, IN FLESH, for 40 days. I just don't get how you guys think that Christ who has power over Heaven and Earth can only come to Earth once. What about the second coming? Is He not going to show up for His own second coming. The truth is He can come to the Earth as many times as He pleases. I know w/o a shadow of a doubt that He ministered to other nations and that everything in the Book of Mormon is true.

I doubt that Christ was in the flesh of Jesus for forty days after the Resurrection. That flesh was a spiritual manifestation. The Apostles did not even recognize Jesus at first and only Thomas saw the wound (because that is what he wanted to see to reassure himself).

Anyway: Second Coming? Actually, in my estimation there have been three manifestations of the Spirit of God since Jesus: Muhammed (Declaration about 620 CE), the Bab (Declaration, May 23rd, 1844 CE), Baha`u'llah(The second of the Twin Manifestation, Declaration April, 1863 CE).
Same Christ spirit, different fleshly vessels.

Regards,
Scott

 

[Katzpur]

I doubt that Christ was in the flesh of Jesus for forty days after the Resurrection. That flesh was a spiritual manifestation.

Jesus specifically called to the Apostles' attention the fact that He was a being of "flesh and bones" and not merely a spiritual personage. At what point do you believe the flesh and bones ceased to exist and that He became an unembodied spirit?

 

[benjosh]

To Painted Wolf,

I am glad to see you are Native American (and if that's offensive, let me know).
I am of Cherokee descent through my father but most of the family denies or doesn't care about its roots. I believe my great - great grandmother came from the union of a Cherokee who escaped from the Trail of Tears in southern Missouri.
I say this from what I know of my great-grandmother who was born in about 1855. I only knew her as a small child and she was around 100 years old when she would tend to me. She was blind and could watch us children. We were left with her to watch and I loved it. I think because of her I loved all things Indian. The arrowheads we found on my grandfathers farm when we were supposed to be chopping cotton helped fan this flame of desire in me.
I have come to realize that I have been in many ways, an Indian, in a European based culture. That European based culture viewed my Indian ancestors as savages. They started scalping becasue they were paid for them as a bounty. It was an efficient way to make sure the killing of Indians went well.
My posts here and my spiritual views are not for intellectual pursuits apart from respect and nurture of Mother Earth. She is not here for me to take of her and lift myself up as though I can possess her and treat her like merchandise.
You make observations in your post that I think are consistent with the "conventional wisdom" that has buried the truth about NA's ancestry and the content and intent of the Book of Mormon. I assume your following statement addresses the context of what Midnight Blue has set up (show me the genetics).

Genetics shows we are not a "lost tribe" of anyone. We are however, closest to certen groups from Asia, such as the Ainu of Japan.

I know a little about genetic studies and I frankly do not put a lot of stock in conventional wisdom on Native American genetics because this nation, it's dominant religion and government would have shame placed upon its head if the results of genetics came up with a different result. And, there are different results, by the way. It all comes down to which results are we going to accept.
If the Native Americans are of Hebrew, (not necessarily Jewish genetically, but of another tribe) then the expulsion of Mormons from the northern part of Missouri in their "trail of tears" would be understood in its true light.
The Mormons were trying to bring the NA their sacred history. And, this would follow the reason for the expulsion of Mormons from Indpendence, Missouri. They tried to bring the book to the tribes the government were herding into Kansas. The Mormons, having been denied entrance into Kansas with the book they believed belonged to the NA's fathers, were settling on the border of Kansas and Missouri.
The government policies under President Andrew Jackson, the famed Indian killer, were carrying on the nation's Manifest Destiny. So, the answer to keeping the Book away from the Indians was to keep all Mormons out and license Christian churches to go to the Indians. In other words, they could take the Bible but not a book that made them aware of any hebrew ancestry.
These church missionaries were bringing a Chrsitianity to civilize the NA. This was just another part of the of civilizing that removed them from their land. The Mormons were saying, here is your book.

You said,

well some thought that the Cherokee were "a lost tribe of Isriael"... Based in part on our language.
We speak a dialect of the Iriquoian language family which when you study the whole language group is very dissemiler to Hebrew.
All evidence based on language is very superfical at best.... slanted interpretation at worst.

There were many Christian friends of the NA before Andrew Jackson. But it was Jackson who took the tide of Indian hatred to the point that their voices were buried in the shout of a mob of white savages. The white savages were Scotch -Irish mercenaries who became the governments Indian fighting machine. Jackson was the ultimate White Savage and the Smoky Mountains. Georgia, the Carolinas, etc. were lands where his white savage ancestors had fought the Indians for many years. Ben Franklin warned against them and said many NA were more civilized than them.
The writings of Boudinout and Ethan Smith, as well as others were saying that the NA were of the Hebrews and that they were not savages. Franklin was supportive of the NA and is said to have learned much about government from the Iroquis Confederacy. Jefferson made treaties with the Indians that he intended the US government to keep. Jackson broke them all, the first thing in office.
I am merely pointing this out to say that the evidences regarding the ancient ancestry of the NA and their languages are found in documents pre-dating what conventional wisdom says.

Also how do you handle the Los Lunes Stone in New Mexico? The ten commandments in pre-babylonian Hewbrew.

http://asis.com/~stag/americab.html



BenJosh

 

[greatcalgarian]

Well, I guess the bottom line is that in the Bible it says that Christ was born, died for our sins, and was resurrected. After he was resurrected he was w/ the Apostles, IN FLESH, for 40 days. I just don't get how you guys think that Christ who has power over Heaven and Earth can only come to Earth once. What about the second coming? Is He not going to show up for His own second coming. The truth is He can come to the Earth as many times as He pleases. I know w/o a shadow of a doubt that He ministered to other nations and that everything in the Book of Mormon is true.

You said it yourself, "What about the second coming?". So all Christians are patiently waiting for the second coming (This could then be in FLESH). So Jesus could not have come to earth again, in physical form before the second coming and after the 40 days with the Apostles in FLESH. The appearance in spirit to Paul is perhaps the final recorded 'history' of Christianity, since it is recorded that only the Holy Spirit will be around to help human being prior to the second coming. (Paul was the exception, as there is always exception in everything).

All things said, if LDS claimed that Jesus has appeared to Joseph, fine. Perhaps Jesus feels that the followers of Paul is not doing a good enough job to spread the gospel, and Jesus needs another new apostle to lead the way.

But appearing to many other nations? Has Jesus lost faith in those he has chosen to spread the word? Or is the Holy Spirit getting lazy and is not carrying out the effective work required of the Holy Spirit?

What is the reason that Jesus has to appear to many other nations?

 

[greatcalgarian]

Jesus specifically called to the Apostles' attention the fact that He was a being of "flesh and bones" and not merely a spiritual personage. At what point do you believe the flesh and bones ceased to exist and that He became an unembodied spirit?

After he ascended to Heaven in front of the apostles and many others??

As Paul never said he touched the hand and the scar to ensure that Jesus has resurrected in body and soul.

 

[Katzpur]

After he ascended to Heaven in front of the apostles and many others??

And what happened to His body since then? He's going to return with it someday. Where is it in the meantime?

As Paul never said he touched the hand and the scar to ensure that Jesus has resurrected in body and soul.

So do you believe Christ was actually physically resurrected from the dead or not? Based on your comments, I'm not quite sure what you believe.

 

[nutshell]

You said it yourself, "What about the second coming?". So all Christians are patiently waiting for the second coming (This could then be in FLESH). So Jesus could not have come to earth again, in physical form before the second coming and after the 40 days with the Apostles in FLESH. The appearance in spirit to Paul is perhaps the final recorded 'history' of Christianity, since it is recorded that only the Holy Spirit will be around to help human being prior to the second coming. (Paul was the exception, as there is always exception in everything).

All things said, if LDS claimed that Jesus has appeared to Joseph, fine. Perhaps Jesus feels that the followers of Paul is not doing a good enough job to spread the gospel, and Jesus needs another new apostle to lead the way.

But appearing to many other nations? Has Jesus lost faith in those he has chosen to spread the word? Or is the Holy Spirit getting lazy and is not carrying out the effective work required of the Holy Spirit?

What is the reason that Jesus has to appear to many other nations?

Do you have any scriptural support that Jesus would not appear in the flesh to others after the 40 days and before the second coming?

I think Jesus is busier than you give him credit for. Did John not write, "And there aer also many other things which Hesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen" (John 21:25).

 

[nutshell]

As Paul never said he touched the hand and the scar to ensure that Jesus has resurrected in body and soul.

No. Thomas did that.

 

[benjosh]

Hi, midnight,
Here's some info on Adair from Ethan Smith
You said

But ancestry is not.

For your information, I'm well aware of the claims of people like Adair and Boudinot, which are without merit and are not taken seriously by real scholars. Also for your information, Native peoples don't need to be descended from the Hebrews to be worthy people. It doesn't honor my ancestors to deny who they were and pretend they were Jews.

You've made no mention of social science of history, just the writings of Adair and Boudinot, which were debunked years ago. I'd be happy to have you "bother me" with some facts, but so far you haven't produced any.

You haven't produced any facts at all -- just alluded to two very poor sources.

I know that I don't have time to make a systematic rebuttal of Adair, and I know that you haven't advanced the first bit of evidence for your claim.

This info is not for rebuttal purposes. By the way, are you Native American?

http://www.irr.org/mit/Books/View-Hebrews/viewhe3b.html

Relative to the Hebraism of their figures, Mr. Adair gives the following instance, from an address of a captain to his warriors, going to battle, “I know that your guns are burning in your hands; your tomahawks are thirsting to drink the blood of your enemies; your trusty arrows are impatient to be upon the wing; and lest delay should burn your hearts any longer, I give you the cool refreshing word; join the holy ark; and away to cut off the devoted enemy!”
A table of words and phrases is furnished by Doct. Boudinot, Adair, and others, with several added from good authority, to show how clearly the Indian language is from the Hebrew. Some of these Indian words are taken from one tribe, and some from another. In a long savage state, destitute of all aid from letters, a language must roll and change. It is strange that after a lapse of 2500 years, a single word should, among such a people, be preserved the same. But the hand of Providence is strikingly seen in this, perhaps to bring that people to light.
The following may afford a specimen of the evidence on this part of the subject.
English. Indian. Hebrew, or Chaldaic.
Jehovah Yohewah Jehovah
God Ale Ale, Aleim
Jah Yah or Wah Jah
Shiloh Shilu Shiloh
Heavens Chemim Shemim
Father Abba Abba
Man Ish, Ishte Ish
Woman Ishto Ishto
[beginning of page 64]
Wife Awah Eweh, Eve
Thou Keah Ka
His Wife Liani Libene
This man Uwoh Huah
Nose Niehiri Neheri
Roof of a house Taubana-ora Debonaour
Winter Kora Korah
Canaan Canaai Canaan
To pray Phale Phalac
Now Na Na
Hand part Kesh Kish
Do Jennais Jannen
To blow Phaubac Phauhe
Rushing wind Rowah Ruach
Ararat, or high mount Ararat Ararat
Assembly Kurbet Grabit
My skin Nora Ourni
Man of God Ishto allo Ishda alloah
Waiter of the high priest Sagan Sagan
PARTS OF SENTENCES.
English. Indian. Hebrew.
Very hot Heru bara or hala Hara bara
Praise to the First Cause Halleluwah Hallelujah
Give me food Natoni boman Natour bamen
Go thy way Bayou boorkaa Boua bouak
Good be to you Halea tibou Ye hali ettouboa
My necklace Yene kali Vongali
I am sick Nane guaete Nance heti
Can a rational doubt be entertained whether the above Indian words, and parts of sentences, were derived from their corresponding words and parts of sentences in Hebrew? If so, their adoption by savages at this distant time and place, would appear miraculous. Some one or two words might happen to be the same, among distant different nations. But that so many words, and parts of sentences too, in a language with a construction peculiar to itself, should so nearly,


BenJosh

 

[greatcalgarian]

Do you have any scriptural support that Jesus would not appear in the flesh to others after the 40 days and before the second coming?

I think Jesus is busier than you give him credit for. Did John not write, "And there aer also many other things which Hesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen" (John 21:25).

The proof is a negative way, that Jesus never said he will ever be around before the second coming. He has told the 11 chosen disicples that he is going back to be with the father to prepare for all you Christians. So he is too busy to come for these visits to earth.

You are correct in quoting John 21:25, but that is actually applied to the life time when he was around alive before he went back to the heavenly Father, and is not referring to the Jesus is busy business visiting us after he has gone back up there.

 

[greatcalgarian]

And what happened to His body since then? He's going to return with it someday. Where is it in the meantime?

So do you believe Christ was actually physically resurrected from the dead or not? Based on your comments, I'm not quite sure what you believe.

Sorry to give you the wrong impression. All fundamental Christians believed that Christ was actually physically resurrected from the dead. Liberal Christians may have different degree of believing that or explaining that part of the gospel. Currently I believe there may be the existence of a Jewish teacher who later a group of Jews worshipped as the messiah after Paul effective convinced a large group of Jews and Gentiles. I am of the position that it is a myth applied to this teacher in the period around AD50 to AD400, which finally formed the first version of the NT.

Anyway, if Jesus was resurrected bodily, that body simply turned back into atoms and molecules upon his ascend to heaven (ie, the commonly accepted notion is that heavenly life does not involve any physical form, and is only spiritual), and the body Jesus will be reformed with atoms and molecules again (though not necessarily from the original same number of atoms and molecules) upon the return during the second coming. That is my scientific way of looking at the death, resurrection, and second coming if these events ever took place.