Emeritus GA Ted E. Brewerton gave a talk in the local stake on “16th Century Ancient American Writings”. I attended, and was even asked by a missionary (who knows my interest and own studies in this subject) what I thought.

At the beginning, Brewy made the following claims:
• The books he would reference were “records of history prior to the Spanish conquest”
• Joseph Smith could not have known these things before the BoM was written
• Anti-mormons are diligently searching to destroy this evidence and claim the BoM is imaginary
• Quoting Neil A. Maxwell: while the BoM will never be proven, there is “plausible evidence” to be found to help the faithful
• Quoting Tvedtness: “elements of BoM have ancient precedants”

He then went on to quote the writings of Catholic friars, priests and others, who it is claimed wrote the mythologies from the Mayans and Aztecs. Some examples are the Popul Vuh, Title of the Lords of Totnicapan, Books of Chilam Balam, Quotes from Aztec prince XTLILXOCHITL.

He gave around 40 slides of ancient quotes. There were a few mentions in the quotes to the Mayans believing they were a lost tribe, the great flood, the tower of babel, etc. But the large majority--nearly every quote--focused on Quetzalcoatl, which is translated as “Feathered Serpent”. As he started with the quotes, he referenced the scriptures in Numbers about the brazen serpent raised to heal the Israelites (which story is in Nephi and referenced in other parts of the BoM). Such that the feathered serpent can be translated as Healer with wings, or the “healer that descended from the sky”. He then referenced the passages in 3 Nephi where Americhrist heals the nephites.

From the 16th century quotes, basically he was trying to demonstrate the following about the myth of Quetzalcoatl:

• He was white
• He was bearded
• He was God the creator
• He was the healer (serpent)
• He lived 1500 years earlier
• He taught virtue and set up his kingdom among them
• He would return again

He ended with a testimony that while it doesn’t prove the BoM true, there is no way Joe could have known all this about Quetzalcoatl and made it up. Therefore, it’s implied as proof. The congregation was obviously overwhelmingly impressed, by the comments and attitude I heard and saw at the end.

I was disgusted with his sloppy scholarship (or even deceit):
• He did not “prove: that the records were before the conquest (they aren’t, Cortez began his conquest in 1519. The docs were all dated many years after that (1530-1600s). Brewy slipped in earlier dates pointing to the *birthdate* of the writer—very disingenuous.)
• He never once talked about what nearly every scholar believes about these texts: they are Spanish propaganda trying to mold Cortez into Quetzalcoatl as his return, in order to soften the conquest and help him take over by subterfuge & fiat.
• He never quoted the parts of the Popol Vuh that are completely contrary to his story.
• He never showed the murals of Quetzalcoatl that portray the Mayan/Aztec god as dark skin, clean shaven and clearly pagan.
• He never talked about how the major worship center of Quetzalcoatl during the same claimed era of utopian Christianity (33-200AD) was in Teotihuacan, at the temple of the Feathered Serpent, and which practiced human sacrifice and even infanticide at the temple from 100-150 AD (at the peak of the BoM's supposed Christian experiment).

I emphasize: if Quetzalcoatl were the Americhrist, then the similarities in the archeology would increase and be more similar the further back in time you go. What Brewy showed is the similarities are better in accounts that were produced by Cortez’s propaganda. Pre-Colombian ancient murals and artwork, have far less to zilch similarities. The dissimilarities between the original legend and the Spanish perversion of it are the ones which most resemble Jesus, and are the ones Brewy presented to highlight the Americhrist of the BoM.

My take is, Brewy at the least cherry picked his data and ignored important elements of history in his excitement at finding random hits of match to the BoM. At worst, Brewy knows he’s deceiving the crowd, because he’s been doing this investigation for decades. There’s little chance he hasn’t come across or found contrary information. His mention of anti-mormons in the beginning make me strongly believe he knows very well, but refuses to present the contrary info.

The crowd believes him because he was a GA. The 15 (I believe) cover their asses because he’s emeritus. I’d bet a year’s salary he’s still on the pension plan with full perks and travel paid.

I told the missionary that it was interesting. That Brewy probably convinced the crowd who’ve not seen any of this before. But I remain unconvinced. He asked why. I gave him the list above of the scholarship that Brewy-baby conveniently left out. The missionary asked me if I could tell him more. He gave me his email address and I said I would send him links and documents. He’s asked me in the past for other information. I believe he is a closet doubter.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2011 08:23AM by Jesus Smith.

Sounds like another case for him lying for the Lard and trying to hoodwink the mindless TBMs! Where the hell are their brains?

Thanks for the update.

The other things that bothers me with this:

1) Unlike Denial C Peterson, John L. Soreson and other Moaps, Brewerton carries the title "Elder" and gets away with really shoddy scholarship, even by the horrible Moap standards. Brewerton is doubly worse.

Yet, members trust his opinion even more because he carries that title, "Elder" (emeritus or not).

2) This Quetzalcoatl propaganda is being used to gain control over a group in modern times, just like it was in the past.

At one point in the 16th century and later, the Spaniards demonized Amerindians (in mesoamerica at first, and then the English did in the US later). The demonizing propaganda against the Amerindians is in line with the motives behind Brewerton's trick. He was crafty.

I knew Brewy in my mission. I was AP and traveled with him and the pres all over Guatemala for a few trips. He was propagandizing us back then too.

It seems the Spanish were telling the natives they were holy and looking for a savior in the Spanish lords. Then they told the troops they were demons to be destroyed. They used a bifurcated "doctrine" to motivate each side and make the conquest easier. Disgusting. And now the Mormons still use one set of the lies to promote their scam. Just as disgusting.

Here is Mark E. Peterson's pamphlet "Christ in America"
http://www.lds-mormon.com/christ_i.shtml

"Hernando Cortez was likewise believed to be the returning White God as he came to Mexico in 1520."

"Montezuma, the Aztec ruler, remembered that when he was crowned as emperor, the priests of the Aztec cult reminded him: “This is not your throne, . . . it is only lent to you and will one day be returned to the one to whom it is due."

This is fabricated. Here from an English translation of a letter written by Cortez on October 30, 1520 are the words Montezuma told him:

“We have know for a long time, from the chronicles of our forefathers, that neither I, nor those who inhabit this country, are descendants from the aborigines of it, but from strangers who came to it from very distant parts; and we also hold, that our race was brought to these parts by a lord, whose vassals they all were, and who returned to his native country. After a long time he came back, but it was so long, that those who remained here were married with the native women of the country, and had many descendants, and had built towns where they were living; when, therefore, he wished to take them away with him, they would not go, nor still less receive him as their ruler, so he departed. And we have always held that those who descended from him would come to subjugate this country and us, as his vassals; and according to the direction from which you say you come, which is where the sun rises, and from what you tell us of your great lord, or king, who has sent you here, we believe, and hold for certain, that he is our rightful sovereign, especially as you tell us that since many days he has had news of us.”

Here is a link to the above. The quote is on pages 234-235.

http://books.google.com/books?id=tuZ6AAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=editions:nArjHLek9kEC&hl=en&ei=ashZTbnvGIH48AbgkYTeBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

The Aztec had kept their own history and knew that they had not always lived in Mexico City. They knew that they had traveled to Mexico from another place in the Americas, and that the people they had left might one day come and conquer them.

Montezuma did not think Cortez was a bearded white god. He thought Cortez was a distant relative of the Aztec. The Aztec never believed in a bearded white god.

Best way for me is to poke fun of it; humor can be devastating...

Others speak their truths quietly and let the facts speak for themselves...

That works for some as well...

In the name of Thomas Ferguson...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2011 05:16PM by SL Cabbie.

Just google daylight fireball 1972

My TBM BIL tried to show me the Michigan Relics online, but was left at a loss when I showed him Ash's take on it from MormonTimes ... the Relics were ALL fakes according to none other than James E. Talmage. Some of this scholarship is so shoddy that even the Church won't back it up.

yes ... speaking as a scientist ... not an apostle. how silly of us! ;)

Or more to my point is it more specific than your post? If so would you be open to emailing it out? I haven't researched this stuff much since my disaffection.

When I was a believer I ate the Quetzalcoatl stuff up.

badseed Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Or more to my point is it more specific than your
> post? If so would you be open to emailing it out?
> I haven't researched this stuff much since my
> disaffection.
>
> When I was a believer I ate the Quetzalcoatl stuff
> up.


On the myth of Quetalcoatl:


"The Aztec Kings: The Construction of Rulership in Mexica History" by Susan D. Gillespie
"Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest" by Matthew Restall.
"History of the conquest of Mexico" by William Hickling Prescott, James Lockhart.

On Teotihuacan and the Temple of the Feathered Serpent.

"The Gods and Symbols of Ancient Mexico and the Maya" by Miller, Mary Ellen & Karl Taube
http://www.famsi.org/reports/96036/
"Human Sacrifice at the Temple of the Feathered Serpent: Recent Discoveries at Teotihuacan" by Castro, Ruben Cabrera (editor Kathleen Berrin)



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2011 02:08PM by Jesus Smith.

Do these sources present evidence against Quetalcoatl as Jesus?

"The Aztec Kings: The Construction of Rulership in Mexica History" by Susan D. Gillespie
"Seven Myths of the Spanish Conquest" by Matthew Restall.
"History of the conquest of Mexico" by William Hickling Prescott, James Lockhart.

Obviously the FARMS piece doesn't.

Restall's book (I believe if memory serves) goes into the evolution of the documents written by the Catholic friars, et al. They started with the theory of pinning Q.C. on Moses (as was also done in View of the Hebrews by Ethan Smith), as St. Thomas, and finally as Jesus.

This evolution is highlighted by a quote I just found by Restall online (I don't have the book handy).

"The legend of the returning lords (originated during the Spanish-Mexica war in Cortés' reworking of Moctezuma's welcome speech) had by the 1550's merged with the Cortés-as-Quetzalcoatl legend that the Franciscans had started spreading in the 1530's."

Also, Diane Wirth, at FARMS, has admitted that many of the catholic documents are propaganda. For example, that some or much of the Popol Vuh was created in an attempt to merge Mayan oral traditions with Catholocism in order to better convert the natives. She also once discussed the hypothesis that the oral traditions were taught to the Mayans by the friars and just regurgitated back by them as a way to appease their new conquerors, as would a victim of torture.

As a side story: When I was living in Guatemala, I had the chance to visit with a Priest in a remote town of the highlands (Sacatepéquez) and I asked him about the numerous statues of Saints they kept outside the very old (late 1600s) cathedral there. He indicated that the Cakchiquel refused to enter to worship, so they put the statues outside for them to worship there. He further stated that there had been a large mixing of the pagan with Catholicism in order to encourage the natives to convert.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2011 02:25PM by Jesus Smith.

Brant Gardner is an LDS scholar who has published extensively on Mesoamerican culture, and he rejects any claim that the Aztec/Mayan "feathered serpent" god is Jesus Christ. I have a long article of his on file: "Digging for Quetzalcoatl's Christian Roots" that thoroughly demolishings that common Mormon claim. I tried finding it on the Internet without success. I'll be glad to forward it privately if anybody wants it. (It's in .RTF format).

Please, Richard.
jesussmith.exmo gmail.com
thx



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/14/2011 07:03PM by Jesus Smith.

mothershiptokolob@gmail.com

Thanks, Richard, for the offer to email the rtf document. I would like to receive a copy. Please send to laststand[at]me.com

Thank you. Replace [at] with @ symbol.

It's interesting that the ritual sacrifices were going on right at the time that the BoM says everyone was at peace because of Christ's visit, when everyone was so "righteous" that nobody even bothered to write about what was going on for about 200 years. I had never thought of that before.

IIRC, Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews, widely considered to be one of JS's sources for the BoM, told all about Quetzalcoatl.

Sounds like Brewerton is full of you know what!

anyone have a good link to a kindle format version of View of the Hebrews?. The one I have is the 1823 version on my Kindle ... I could not find that reference, but I did find it online.

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/055-06-10.pdf

Is this the article that Packman was talking about?

lv skeptic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/055-06-10.pdf
>
>
> Is this the article that Packman was talking
> about?

No. Not the same. Some of the same information and arguments, but not the same article.

Anyone wanting to read about apologetics and how the current batch of apologists are in apostasy from the church, check out my paper at: http://grapenephi.freewebpages.org/docs/Road-to-Apostasy.pdf

Gee, I wonder who that would be???

I don't know.

PROBABLY ME!!!

Clash of the Titans, this time for surreal...

Hey, Jesus Smith

I Know You Know Better Than That!