Faithful Latter-day Saint exploration of Native American history and connecting it to The Book of Mormon. Uncovering Nephite and Lamanite sites. Investigating the geography, culture, DNA evidence and Native American accounts. Promoting faith in the historicity of The Book of Mormon and in the historicity of Biblical accounts.
Super informative. Thank you! I find it unlikely that the Michigan relics are all fake as well. 10,000-30,000 pieces found over 100 years in multiple states all frauds? Unlikely.
@jaredvaughan1665 I think it's incorrect to assume that they would talk about weather. The crops and animals in the Book of Mormon better match a North American climate than Central America (there's no mention of tropical plants or animals), but to me the DNA evidence which points toward the Algonquin - Hopewell connection is really what matters as that is much more important and more definitive.
The Book of Mormon took place during the Middle Woodland Period of North America. It's believed the climate was milder, likely with greater precipitation, and the water level of the Great Lakes was about 13 feet higher, which would cause more and larger swamps and marshes. The average temperature would be cooler than today. However, the milder climate would produce warmer winters with cooler summers. Therefore, snow would occur less often and farther north. There used to be parrots as far north as Maine and Michigan. Assuming the Heartland Model is correct, the lands controlled by the Lamanites would get almost no snow, if at all, since the parrots likely couldn't have survived below freezing temperatures. The land of Desolation was probably the only place to regularly get snow, and the Nephites controlled that. The Lamanites often only wore loinclothes, and the Nephites wore full coverage and thick clothing. The text supports the Nephites regularly experiencing snow and the Lamanites not.
9:14 - I am looking at these characters and they appear to be a mixture of Phoenician and Carthaginian/Punic. There are a few that bear resemblance to the "Caractors" document, as well. I am working on a "translation" now. Hopefully I can get something from them. The first line, at first glance, looks like it might say something like, "You got up" or maybe interpreted as "You arise". If this is in a burial mound, then this could have allusions to the resurrection. Needless to say, I think you're on to something with this being Mulekite, since theories paint a picture of them palling up with the Phoenicians and some legend of one of the sons of Zedekiah ending up in Carthage.
There’s evidence that the Phoenicians made it to Australia. - a Phoenician style boat was found buried near the coast- possibly a shipwreck that settled and sank into the coastal sand
The Lamanites likely mixed with Mesoamericans, explaining how the Lamanites outnumbered the Nephites so heavily, but the Nephites and Mulekites followed the Mosaic laws that forbade intermarriage with other peoples, and would have kept themselves separate. The genetics, timelines, artefacts and even Joseph Smith suggest they would have been in the Ohio/Michigan area.
Well except for their breastplates and head plates, use of swords, heaped fortifications, worship in temples, forged iron tools, obvious ties to Hebrew iconography, use of silver, DNA matches, oral and written history of Indian tribes, shipping anchors, their knowledge of astronomy and constellation’s, etc. etc. and you’d have to ignore Joseph Smith’s comments on location itself.
@@skyflight99 are you really going to question the knowledge of astronomy from the natives in Mesoamerica? you have a lot to learn about them. breastplates and head plates were obviously not going to be laying around a hillside, probably melted down for other purposes. Yes they knew metallurgy so don't even go there. Joseph Smith said NOTHING. Your only quote is hearsay, a third party friend of a friend quote. If JS ever said anything it would be in other literature such as Times and Season or Journal of Discoures. That quote from JS is fake hearsay. Drop it. Mesoamerica provides sunken cities, Quetlcoatl, massive cities, climate, warring groups, oral traditions, Tree of Life, and so much more. Meldrum and May are frauds.
@@thealternativecontrarian9936 The Four Cardinal Seas and the Narrow Strip of Wilderness: The Mesoamerica Model and the internal models make huge assumptions in their interpretations of the scriptural text that I believe gives them the wrong conclusions regarding the four cardinal seas and the narrow strip of wilderness. - Sea North and Sea South are not mentioned by name in Alma 22. They're mentioned a generation later in Helaman 3:8 when there was a mass migration from Zarahemla to settle the land of Desolation. When it is talking about the people covering the land from Sea South to Sea North, and from Sea West to Sea East, I believe it's referring to the land of Desolation, not the Book of Mormon lands as a whole. - It is assumed the narrow strip of wilderness is a natural feature of geography that happens to correspond to the borders between the Nephites and Lamanites. It is a wilderness bordering other wildernesses which tells me it's a wilderness where nobody lives as compared to the east, west, and north wildernesses where Lamanites dwell. I believe it's simply a "no-man's-land" or "buffer zone" between two groups who are regularly in conflict. - The narrow strip of wilderness also has a specific shape which helps us understand the extent of the land of Nephi as well. It is seen by the words "round about", which means: on all sides or in all directions; surrounding someone or something; in or to the opposite direction. In Alma 22:27, the King of the Lamanites is sending a Proclamation from all sides of the city of Nephi in every direction even to the sea, on the east and on the west. It is an assumption that it's referring to Sea East and Sea West. It could simply be directional and refer to a body of water in that direction which could be different than Sea East and Sea West. When tied in context with the term "round about" in Alma 22:27, the seashore would extend from directly east of the city if Nephi, then southward and around until it is longitudinally west of the city of Nephi. It doesn't extend directly west of the city of Nephi because that's where the land of Nephi borders the west wilderness. The land of Nephi would then have seashore to the east and south, and land to the west and north. - The narrow strip of wilderness has two ends. One end touches both the borders of the north wilderness and the seashore of sea west. The other end touches the seashore of sea east. Therefore, it starts north of Zarahemla and runs south. Because it needs to end up going in or to the opposite direction, it needs to start turning around. I believe it turns east at the city of Manti, then continues east passed the head of the river Sidon, then back northward after reaching the east wilderness unil it runs into sea east. Therefore, you end up with the narrow strip of wilderness in a "U" shape with both sea west and sea east to the north, with the narrow strip of wilderness going "round about" the Nephites, or surrounding them on all sides in every direction aside from the way north into the land of Desolation.
The sad part about these kinds of evidences is that Almost every time native american WRITING evidence was sent to the Smithsonian it was 'disappeared', and lost. There have been people that have talked about this quite a bit in other videos. Probably tens of thousands of pieces, AT the MINIMUM, were lost and destroyed when sent there. It seems like that is also the standard procedure they did also. I actually think pieces like the bat creek stone as you call it in this video probably used to be all over the place. There were probably thousands of them recovered from Michigan alone. For some reason TONS of that stuff was found in both Michigan and Ohio. And naturally most of it was destroyed.
Very true. The Smithsonian archaeologists who found the bat creek stone are well documented as being very hostile against the idea of Hebrew influence among native Americans. They didn't realize what they had discovered at the time so that stone survived. They destroyed many many others, however.
@@FalconFastest123 WHERE is your evidence Smithsonian is aware of any such Hebrew artifacts/influences and that they have “destroyed” examples/artifacts?
The fact that these types of artifacts are still turning up in farmers' fields, construction sites, and burial mounds like this and that none of these things are on display at the Smithsonian tells everything we need to know about the close-minded establishment. Where is the evidence? It's in the ground and not in the museum because they're afraid of what they don't know.
Hey there... you know I did a lot of research over the years trying to figure out, how would you track the diasporas of the captivity and Exile of Israel from the periods of the Assyrian and Babylonian captivity periods. And for years I couldn't get anywhere with those questions. UNTIL I came across the idea that before the period of King David the script in Israel was mostly a form similar to how negev writing and phoenician alphabet was. This also shows how badly the people were mixing with Baal worship also because the writing system in phoenicia and the phoenician writing or PALEO HEBREW script would have been what most of them used and were mostly the same. So when you are trying to figure out where captives from the exile period went you are looking for what looks like PALEO-HEBREW script and not really the modern blocky script. The modern blocky script if you translate it is 'SYRIAN script' (post captivity). The word for Syria in Hebrew was 'Aram'. (Aram-aic = Syrian-ite). So people using the blocky 'SYRIAN' script would have been people that were assimilated into Syrian cultures instead of abandoning their old script. (The transition period of the scripts changing was a period of over a century more or less between King David's time and including the Captivity/Exile period.) You also find references to historical incindences where a couple centuries after the captivity started there were priests trying to promote the blocky (modern Jewish) script. (Aramaic, aka 'Syrian'). (Sorry I forgot the year on this event but you can find it somewhere). Supposedly Nebuchadnezzar burned the Torah manuscripts in the old script, and there's a story that Ezra had to use revelation to redo the scripts in the newer script. Anyway this idea will help you and others. Maybe some people know this. This also helps because it explains why when people are looking at native american writing (Yes there is some!) they find alphabets that look paleo-hebrew! And this explains why you only find a few instances of the blocky 'Aramaic' blocky script. You have this idea that not 100% of 1 population may be entirely only using their script. You have carry overs and people resisting change or embracing it also. Actually at first, after realizing this idea I used to think wait you shouldn't find ANY Aramaic blocky script in the Americas because Lehi and also the Jaredites left before the captivity period. But then You remember that the Mulekites came from a post-captivity source. So its possible when you find Aramaic script here you are looking at Mulekite evidence. Well, there also is going to be some carry over and both. Like there would have been a few people that resisted changing to Aramaic from Paleo-Hebrew. There's evidence of that, such as the Samaritans didn't change. There's also possibilities that small groups or others but not a lot of people may also have had some contact with Aramaic script. You can also still use a certain script and have had your verbal, oral language change also (such as because of war and captivity). The Grave Creek Stone looks somewhat Paleo-Hebrew. Or similar. But there's also tricky things where someone could be kicking around family heirlooms for years. And then it ends up in a grave and it might have been created years before that person was buried. (grandma or grandpa want to be buried with something their grandparents gave them when they were a child, for example). Its also interesting that norse, Scandinavian Runic looks very much like 'modified' paleo hebrew. And when you research something called the Jelling Stone you find some very cool things that link them to their past. ... Thanks for the video. And also hope this comment helps you in some way.
Absolutely the Phoenician came here to the Americas. There are enough different places that have evidence that strongly suggests this. I’m tired of playing apologetic so I’ll just go out and say that I absolutely believe this. There are a number of different places in the Americas that have evidence if you know what to look for and make the connections. Some things are hidden in plain sight. I do think that the people of Mulek came into contact with the Phoenician merchants and some of the ancient religious iconography and mound building practices rubbed off on them. Also the symbology and use of letters previously used by the Phoenicians.
Genesis 49:25 Shows who Shaddai is Even by the God of thy father, who shall help thee; and by the Almighty(Shaddai), who shall bless thee with blessings of heaven above, blessings of the deep that lieth under, blessings of the breasts, and of the womb: First Joseph is blessed by the God of his father who shall bless him, and then by Shaddai who shall bless him with blessings of the breast and womb. This is not the only passage where Shaddai who’s name is literally a pun on breasts give fertility blessings nor is it the only time Shaddai is distinct from the God of Israel. The Exodus account saying Jehovah appeared as El Shaddai is anachronism because A Jehovah appears under his own name multiple times in Genesis and in the Book of Abraham and is a case of Deuteronomist revisions. And B at that time period El and Jehovah were not the same deity yet. The burning bush was likely an appearance of the Mother and the Son since the Catholics to this day swear Moses was shown a vision of the Lord with his mother. Just like how the Catholics say Moses was translated which lines up with the Book of Mormon but goes against Deuteronomy.
The perpetual idea that the Americas were only populated by asiatic people is becoming medieval. The people around the Mediterranean were very skilled navigators. Not only did Hebrew but everyone on this planet came here over the millennia. The story that only brown people are indians was a creation of the US government based on racist worldview so it could take possession of the land. The "Native Americans" (colonial term) were black, white and brown. If you are in the Southeast check your autosomal DNA on Gedmatch, or other autosomal DNA tests. Do not rely on 23andme or ancestry ( you'll find only your colonizer. The white people are mostly Mediterranean. The black people are the same with a little more Sub Saharan African. Please don't trust me....test your AUTOSOMAL DNA.
Autosomal DNA shows most people in the Southeast (black, white and brown) all have substantial Jewish DNA and Native American alleles. Ironically those same individuals have no British DNA notwithstanding the the fact that the British sample they don't was a sample of over 3000 living individuals who are historically from the British Isles. Our history is wrong.
Mormon 9:33 - just like their Egyptian was modified enough to be unreadable without "translators", their Hebrew was modified too - if you take the BoM text at it's word. So to Mormon sects, Bat Creek stone proves nothing and might even put a believing person in a position of concluding it's a fake because it's the _wrong_ _kind_ of Hebrew - in other words, it's readable Hebrew.
Honestly there are verying opinions on this topic. I think it is okay to share your point of view. That being said it is important to put our focus on Christ, covenants, and the doctrine. Study but be centered on Christ.
*The scriptural evidence seems to strongly imply that (God, Jesus & Mary) were all hermaphrodites. And that Jesus born via full hermaphrodite parthenogenesis*
LOL. Mormons are so humorous. Asherah is one of like 5 wives of (El'Elyon or El'Shaddai or "EL") who Mormons call Elohim or El'Ohim. Asherah is mother of Yahweh. Lucifer is half brother of Yahweh by a different wife. This is all pre-Jewish mythology of the Levant before a group of Canaanites called themselves Jews.
1Nephi 8:33 And great was the multitude that did enter into that strange building. And after they did enter into that building they did point the finger of scorn at me and those that were partaking of the fruit also; but we heeded them not. The usage by members of the Restored Church of Jesus Christ derive our names for the Father and the Son through modern revelation. Your claims, or the information on which you base your claims, are incorrect and your mocking attitude reflects that of the Accuser and Adversary and only fulfills scripture.
How deeply ironic to choose a user name derived from a film/story with such positive values, and then go about mocking and insulting others from it. "By their fruits ye shall know them..."
The modern Hebrew of Shaddai means Breast. However, EL Shaddai is a very ancient form of God. What was the occupation of the early patriarchs? With that in mind, look at Jeff A Benner thoughts: "The parent root for this word is שד (shad). The original pictograph for this word is shad. The (sh) is a picture of the two front teeth and has the meaning of 'sharp,' 'press' (as from chewing) as well as 'two.' The (d) is a picture of a tent door with a meaning of 'hang' or 'dangle' as the door is hung or dangles down from the top of the tent. The combined meanings of the sh and d would be 'two danglers.' The goat was a very common animal within the herds of the Hebrews. It produces milk within the udder and is extracted by the goat kid by squeezing and sucking on the two teats dangling below the udder. The function of these teats is to provide all the necessary nourishment for the kids, as they would die without it. The Hebrew word שדי (shaddai) also has the meaning of a 'teat.' Just as the goat provides nourishment to its kids through the milk, God nourishes his children through his milk and provides all the necessities of life. This imagery can be seen in the following passage: 'And I will come down to snatch them [Israel] from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up from that land to a good and wide land to a land flowing with milk and honey.' Exodus 3:8 The word שדי (teat) is often coupled with the word אל (mighty, strong) creating the phrase אל שדי (el shaddai) literally meaning the 'mighty teat,' hence we can see the translator's reluctance to literally translate this phrase in this manner and instead using the more sanitized 'God Almighty.'" Therefore, the Savior can be liken as a mother Goat that gives us nourishment or suck. The only scripture that may point to the Devine Feminine is with Genesis 49:25 but notice they only use Shaddai ( Almighty) not El shaddai. Therefore, it is clear El shaddai mean Jehovah (Genesis 17:1 and John 8) and just shaddai maybe relate to the divine feminine but I am not certain.
Interestingly, Jehovah means YHWH and in some schools of Jewish thought, YHWH means father, mother, son, daughter. In western esotericism it is similarly said to represent, King, Queen, Prince, Princess; so to me it represents the Divine Council, also known as the Council in Heaven.
This is new to me, YHWH has always meant "I am who I am". I've never seen an expert in Hebrew use it the way you claim. Can you please provide sources for this?
@@elderinisrael Hi, it is something I have come across a number of times studying Jewish mysticism, kabbalah, and the western esoteric traditions. The Center for Online Judaic Studies writes, "For the kabbalists, therefore, the use of human terms to speak about matters divine is not simply understood in the philosophical manner as an approximate way to speak of God figuratively, a concession to the inevitable limitations of embodied human beings who desire to speak of that which is disembodied. On the contrary, from the kabbalistic standpoint, the examples of anthropomorphism in the canonical texts of Scripture indicate that the nature of human corporeality can only be understood in light of divine corporeality...The textual evidence from the kabbalists indicates that the object of contemplation is the name configured anthropomorphically in the mind of the mystic. To cite a passage from the anonymous author of the fourteenth-century treatise Ma‘arekhet ha-Elohut, “It says in Sefer Yeṣirah that there are twenty-two objects in one body, and the body refers to the ten sefirot, for they one totality, and objects are the twenty-two letters … and they are all in one body, which is the ten sefirot contained in the one name, which is the Tetragrammaton” (196b-197a)...one brief passage from the zoharic text Idra Zuṭa, the “Small Gathering,” which appears in the culmination of the text as the final meeting of Simeon ben Yoḥai and the surviving members of the fraternity. The relevant passage, which is cited as a quotation from the aggadah of R. Yeiva Sabba, is a mystical reflection on the name of the third emanation, Binah, the mother that comes forth from and is united with the second emanation, Ḥokhmah, the father. From the union of these two emanations comes forth Tif’eret, the son, who contains within himself Malkhut, the daughter. In the name Binah is a reference to the quaternity of the Godhead, which is depicted more specifically as the four members of the divine family, an aspect of the kabbalistic doctrine that I mentioned previously. Yod and he refer respectively to Ḥokhmah and Binah; the remaining consonants, bet and nun, spell ben, which is the son, but the son is androgynous (after the pattern of the earthly Adam) and thus contains bat, the daughter, within himself. The son and daughter refer, moreover, to the last two letters of the Tetragrammaton, the waw and he. The four letters of the name, therefore, correspond respectively to the father, mother, son, and daughter.
I have run into the idea that in the Old Testament one of the reasons why they did not emphasize heavenly mother was that it led too easily into Baal worship. I don't mean that women are bad. But that women needed to be protected and kept from being used as images and from people admiring them too much. And that the first tactic of the adversary to create immorality was to use and promote the image of women to do so. And that worked very well in getting people snared into Baal worship. Baal worship used corrupting women's influence... but didn't end there and ended up using other things also that got mixed in not only women. But it started with corruption of women. This is part of why many idols in that whole area anciently will have breasts on them. Not necessarily because the idol is only a woman but for immorality promotion, etc. El was known as a name of God in ancient mesopotamia. But it was corrupted early. You also see El mixed with other terms. And this has to do with how Chaldean language used to be very similar to hebrew (though not now). This is part of why we don't emphasize heavenly mother now. Also our current society has too much emphasis on feminism and having feminists lead things. You also see modern socialism, tyrantisms think the men are expendable and throwaways and that they only need women and children. There's people In Europe recently that have taught that you don't need all those men and could have a society with only women. And they are also promoting a lot of transhumanism stuff also. It ultimately ends up going back to Baal worship. All of this links with what you said and agrees with it. A good form of worship drastically differs from evil worship, where they had groves and baal worship. It seems that the chaldeans were corrupted by this much earlier than hebrews. I agree with what you said. El can also mean 'Lord'. We differ only from that in we think that men can be lords. but old covenant Israel would only think God as the Lord. (Thus similar, same meaning). I hope this supports what you said. I agree and support your information.
@@Lamanitehistory Thank you also. I hope you'll keep doing videos and sharing things that help good people w heritage of Lehi. I hope to ask things to you in the future on these kinds of topics.
@chrisberlin1552 Oh, that's awesome. I miss hanging out with you. If you email me at ancientamericasdna@gmail.com I can give you my personal contact information to keep in touch
Rectangular platform with ramps leading up to it with specific placement…would love to see what 3 part space building was on top of it. Good stuff as usual brother!!
Oxygen was isolated & named in 1604. things using Oxygen when burning was discovered in 1771. 1771 is when limited Oxygen putting out fire was first discovered & published. Captain George William Manby, marketed the 1st fire extinguisher in 1819, which used Potassium Carbonate. The idea of things being about to put out or inhibit fire was a new exciting idea, a State of the Art technology when Joe embellished his Nephite story of thick darkness inhibiting fire.
Embellishments to stimulate faith. No different than the claims of Brigham Young & Porter Rockwell regarding the Nephite Cave in the Hill Cumorah which was 3 miles from Joseph Smith's home.
Your opinion was shared with such authority that some would confuse it as fact. Do the words corroborating evidence mean any thing to you. Or were you there, in Marietta Ohio 2000+ years ago, and really know, and I owe you an apology. Maybe when you share you opinion you should state it as your opinion. or don't. I'm not the opinion police. Pay your opinion forward?
The transfiguration of B.Y. is something not written down until many years after the event & which increased in embellishment levels every time to was publicly related.
*Problem is for the oxygen to got to 15% to prevent fire, the CO2 has to go to (60,000ppm). Everyone would have died of Asphyxiation by the time it was half that level. Nobody would have survived 3 days at 60K CO2. Air CO2 inhibits the ability of CO2 to leave the blood in the lungs & inhibits O2 from entering the blood!!! Everyone would have died at 19% O2, from the CO2*
Joseph Smith gave the women of the RS the authority or approval to bless the sick through actual administrations. See the RS minutes. I think you were very accurate on most points except about Brigham. I am sorry but those accounts of transfiguration are spurious as were written many many years after the fact. To pin it all on that is a problem. D&C 107 is very clear about the limits of authority of the 12 as a travelling HC. They were at best equal to a stake high council. They could not even work in a stake boundary nor call a stake president. There was still a member of the first presidency in Sidney Rigdon. Now he had faults but he was still in that position. That is why there was an issue of who would run the church. Brigham was chosen by some of the people and Sidney rejected and ex out. But that did not give anyone Joseph's keys. He still has them as his Patriarchal Blessing points out. I think when we finally figure out the blacks of America are the native people and are the true Hebrews and seed of Lehi we may accept there were some grave errors. I think Brigham did some good things and some truly bad ones. Glossing over it all with accounts from years later and no contemporary witness of the transfiguration is a big issue. If that really happened then why did no one get astounded enough to immediately write it down. I think if we can one day come to understand there were some bad things done then maybe healing can come. Prophet worship leads to darkness in my opinion. Joseph also counselled the RS sisters to not worship him or depend upon him or they would go to darkness. See JSP RS minutes. Nephi also speaks of the curse of trusting in the arm of flesh or man. We just cannot see. If Nephi had followed the prophet in all things he would never have gone out to make a bow and arrow, no he would have joined his father the prophet in complaining against God in the tents with Laman and Lemuel. Why is it so important to pin wrongs on Joseph he never did and exonerate Brigham for things he actually did do. Joseph gave black men the priesthood and was anti-slavery. Brigham and others took the rights from these same men Joseph gave it too, one even a seventy. Brigham was pro-slavery. It's ok, it is just history, just as in the BOM there were ups and downs. But glossing it all over to me is a disservice.
@FleeingBabylon-Now Thanks for your comment. The transfiguration event was attested by many people. A couple of the commenters below note their ancestors heard and saw the same thing. As for Joseph Smith, he was a great man. I decline to attack him as well. Neither do I think that any of the leaders (including JS and BY) were perfect. If we really knew fully the history, including the intentions of those men, it might be different. But we don't know the full history nor their true intentions. People think they do, but there are too many contradicting accounts which may be causing them to judge unfairly. I would rather not judge either unfairly.
Is there a reason on the map, west of the Mississippi River, it's like nothing there, until you hit the mountainous regions ? Could it be that was all under water, until about 3rd Nephi?
@ReedHansonRattie Good question. The Hopewell did get obsidian from the Yellowstone area out west dating back to 100+BC, and it appears like there were small hunter populations out there but no significant villages until after Book of Mormon timeframes. For example, the Spiro mounds in Oklahoma was later. The geologists will tell you that the water there ended long before the Book of Mormon but I tend to be cautious about just accepting geological dates.
American sellers didn't live there either until the invention of the windmill to pump water up from below ground. It was called the Great American Desert and was considered uninhabitable except possibly by small populations of ranchers or hunter gatherers.
When you talk to people on native american channels, I find its often kind of stressful. And I wondered about how people should do this? I tried to talk to several people on navajo youtube channels specifically, and the minute you start to sound like an American they somehow find a way to get offended. It just... something ALWAYS happens. I don't understand this either. I didn't cause their problems. Nor did any of my ancestors. I don't see how we're going to be able to do missionary work and help them and be actual real friends in an equal relationship if it always goes south. Do you have input on this? (It seems like some people want to be offended, and want to find that you wronged them somehow when I didn't. And maybe LDS heritage people might have more thoughts on this.) And... I'm not even sure I should mention I have some native american heritage, because I look like a white person, and talk like one even though my grandfather held a tribal membership. (At the time when he first told us we didn't believe him because he had blue eyes. But it turned out to be true). And if you are looking at some native heritage youtube channels, is it even a good idea to tell them you are from a tribe at all if its NOT THEIR specific tribe? ... I have had the spirit help me to see there are some things we could and should be doing with native people. And that there are literally tons of Book of Mormon links with their stories. There's no doubt about this. But I keep finding closed doors and not being able to actually interact with any of them.
@noahriding5780 Good question. It can be hard to avoid offense when resentment, suspicion and sensitivity are so high, and there's not much relationship or trust. I would say keep trying in a manner that shows respect and realize that often people won't be interested.
@@Lamanitehistory Thank you. I hope we can help and be friends with everyone. Any culture. Anywhere. I think this is how we qualify for Z I O N also. If we hold back for some people its like we can disqualify ourselves. So hopefully we can reach some people. In certain countries, ... the missionaries can literally spend their entire 2 years just to find 1 person only. So its like we really have to work hard to appreciate the value of individual people. It forces us to not take people for granted. I hope this conveys some response to you for giving me an answer to the question I asked you.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. This shouldn't be surprising regardless of what type of people they are.
