Let me say up front here that this below is not meant to represent the official position of the LDS Church. This is one person's opinion. This is also written from my perspective as an American of European decent. So I'm going to focus on my particular experience as someone with European ancestry as an American. Obviously, someone of a different ethnic descent or living in a different country will have a different perspective and relationship to Mormonism. This is just my perspective.
To be honest, after studying my European ancestry and biblical scholarship, when I read the Old and New Testament now I can't help but think that while I appreciate it theologically it is not about me, where I live (North America) or about me as a European. It is about a different ethnicity and culture who spoke a different language, about people who lived about 2 to 5 thousand years ago. So it feels like someone elses' experience I am leaning about from a distance.
My own Scandinavian ancestors worshipped Thor and Odin. My Viking descendants were not enslaved by Egyptians, Babylonians and then Romans (as the Old Testament describes). The New Testament is also not about my life as an American today. I am not under Roman occupation. I do not keep kosher. I don't get my hamburger meat from a pagan temple after it was sacrificed to a pagan god in the first century. I don't go to the synagogue. I don't believe in the divine right of kings like Paul did. Roman legions don't patrol my neighborhood. Caesar is not "President." This is what the New Testament is about in historical context.
In contrast to the New Testament, Mormon Scripture is about where I live now in North America, written in Engleshy by a European author (Joseph Smith) just two hundred years ago. So it and offers more practical advice in many ways for me as an American in a capitalist and democratic society.
I have to fly on a plane to the Middle East to experience the holy sites described in the New Testament. In contrast, I can take a car drive and visit the holiest sites in Mormonism right here in North America.
According to the biblical scholar Matthew Thiessen, the Apostle Paul taught in the New Testament that I have to literally have my Germanic gene code supernaturally replaced and swapped out with a Semitic gene code because I am a Gentile. That is not what I am taught in Mormonism. According to The Guide to the LDS Scriptures:
The tribe of Ephraim ... Ephraim was given the birthright in Israel (1 Chr. 5:1–2; Jer. 31:9). In the last days their privilege and responsibility is to bear the priesthood, take the message of the restored gospel to the world, and raise an ensign to gather scattered Israel (Isa. 11:12–13; 2 Ne. 21:12–13). The children of Ephraim will crown with glory those from the north countries who return in the last days (D&C 133:26–34). [Empasis added]
LDS Article number 10 states, "We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; ..." (emphasis added).
The LDS Doctrine and Covenants is in part specifically about me (an American of European ancestry) and is about where I live as an American. The sacred sites of Mormonism are just as sacred as the Jerusalem sites from a "faith" perspective. I have been to Adam-ondi-Ahman and Liberty Jail for example.
As an American, I want to feel proud about being American and what better way than a spiritual philosophy and scriptures that are Pro-American and Pro-European?
In the the LDS scripture The Book of Mormon, in 2 Nephi 1:5 (emphasis added), we read:
... we [Lehi's family] have obtained a land of promise [North America], a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries [e.g. European countries] by the hand of the Lord.
... Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who believe themselves predominantly to be of the Ephraimite branch of the House of Joseph, assert that revelations given of God to the Prophet Joseph Smith (JST Gen 50),and as contained in the Book of Mormon (2 Nephi 3), bear witness that the Patriarch Jacob's firstborn 'double portion' of both progeny and lands with which he blessed his son, Joseph of Egypt (and his 'double portion'-inheriting grandsons Ephraim and Manasseh), included the additional 'land' portion of the whole of the American continent ...
The Book of Mormon frequently identifies itself as a record of Joseph's children,[29] with the ancient prophet Lehi (Hebrew לחי Léḥî / Lāḥî "jawbone") being an Israelite of the Josephite tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3) and the wives of his sons, as the Prophet Joseph Smith later explained, being of the Josephite tribe of Ephraim.[4] ...
... Lehi carried with them family genealogical records as well as scriptural records recorded on "brass plates", which declared that his lineal descent was from the tribe of Manasseh. He later prophesied (2 Nephi 3) that a latter-day Joseph, son of Joseph, descended from the house of Joseph, would do a great work that would be a blessing to Lehi's descendants. Latter-day Saints believe that this prophecy was fulfilled in Joseph Smith through the translation of the Book of Mormon, establishing the restored Church of Jesus Christ, and initiating the 'Gathering of Israel' among latter-day descendants of the tribes of Israel, particularly those from Ephraim and Manasseh.
So basically 2 Nephi 3 describes "four Josephs" and the American Joseph Smith Jr is said to be a descendant of Joseph of Egypt (see here for more detail). For even more details on how Joseph Smith is from the House of Joseph, see Joseph Smith as Found in Ancient Manuscripts by Joseph Fielding McConkie.
Brian H. Shirts is a molecular pathologist at the University of Washington. His current research explores using genealogy connections as a way to help families prevent hereditary cancer. In his article Genetics and Gathering the House of Israel, Brian H. Shirts basically argues that even if LDS members being of the Lost Tribes of Israel is only a metaphorical concept as a "spiritual" idea, it nevertheless provides a powerful tribal identity.
Furthermore, the March 2025 article, The Ancient Horsemen Who Created the Modern World by Bojan Pancevski, explains that "New DNA research shows that half the human beings alive today are descended from the Yamnaya [Proto-Indo-European], who lived in Ukraine 5,000 years ago." With this in mind, it becomes likely that there could very well have been some intermixing genetically among Indo-Europeans and Israelites at some point in time.
Brian H. Shirt's article made me realize the power of Mormonism for providing a cultural tribal identity for Europeans. Take for example Norse Paganism, which has undergone a surge in popularity recently since about 2018. Unfortunately, Norse pagan sources like the Eddas were written down by later Christians according to Norse expert Jack Crawford. So that today's versions of Norse Paganism are basically reconstructions, them trying to "reinvent the wheel" through a modern Christianized perspective. Mormonism, as a worldview philosophy, provides for Norse/Scandinavian peoples and other Indo-Europeans, a better alternative in my view or at laest a worthy option mythologically: as a way to re-establish Indo-European cultural identity, by merging one's European ancestry with the moral historical developments of Israel in Christianity through Mormonism which bridges the two: as Mormonism integrates all groups, North, West and East, etc; providing a cultural tribal ethos and identity based on new scripture taking place here on the American continent; revealed through an Indo-European prophet Joseph Smith. Now that I can relate to and feels closer to home!
The question for me then changes from is LDS theology factual true and more toward is it mythically unifying as a tribal identity. The practical functionality of being Mormon then becomes part of its "truthfulness" in that one can literally see empirically the difference between Mormon culture as a tribal identity compared to the "watered down" Protestant/Evangelical sects: that lack that tight-knit community and a cultural quasi-ethnic identity that one sees with LDS members.
Jack Donovan on "satanic" Ex-Mormon Losers
Jack Donovan is a controversial writer and philosopher who was a member of The Church of Satan but resigned his membership. He has since moved on to developing his own philosophy of life and moved toward his own unique Pro-Masculinity Philosophy: that emphasizes the importance of men belonging to a group and forming a tribe. He has sought to construct a philosophy and mythical quasi-religion that is functionally useful toward organizing a tribe. So Jack Donovan knows something about functional and dysfunctional religions and knows about "satanism" as an ex-satanist. So it is interesting what he says to Damian Paul (at youtube.com/@damianpaulpod), in October 2021, at the 8 minute mark in the video here, wherein Jack Donovan says that living in Utah he is around a lot of Mormons and says that some of his good friends are Mormons. He then says:
I'm never going to be a Mormon, that is clearly not my jam. At the same time, they have a real tribe and real social organization; they have a lot of things figured out. They are very functional. Yeah, I do think that's probably the way you should raise kids. Yeah, that's a really good family organization and you're doing a lot of things that are good. Whether or not the specifics of the religion, whether you agree with them or not, the functional structure of it is very positive and is making their lives better.
Whereas, it's funny, but in Utah you have people who grew up [in the LDS] Church, there is a small percentage of them, that bounce [leave the LDS Church] and are mad about it; and [they] spend their rest of their lives being mad about the Church. So there is this whole kind of like satanic, super liberal, vibe if you go downtown; because they're all super mad at the Church. But if you look at it, like 'Oh yeah, you're fat and you're addicted to drugs, and like 'good job' [puts his thumbs up], yea, you really figured it out there. A lot of those [ex-mormons] are not living really great lives. They're just mad.
Damian Paul then points out that a lot of ex-mormons start indulging their vices, but then realize that the hedonic lifestyle really doesn't lead to fulfillment and happiness. So basically you have Jack Donovan, who has spent his adult life basically trying to reconstruct a worldview, a meaning in life, and seeking to learn how to produce a healthy functional tribe and quasi-religion; and through that experience he is able to recognize in Mormonism a healthy, functional, pro-family, tribal structure; in contrast, he sees a lot of "satanistic" ex-mormons he sees as "losers." The way he sees it, the ex-mormons do not produce anything positive or functional toward a healthy tribe like Mormon culture does, but are simply whining and complaining and basically being "satanic."
Just go on the many anti-Mormon forums and in my opinion Jack Donovan is not far off. All the frequent posters are most often nihilistic Atheists, and one of these ex-mormon forum creators (and his forum moderators) literally weeded out the Christians so that most posters are now mostly far-Leftist Atheists at this point. All they day do is whine and complain and deconstruct, offering no better cultural tribe to Mormonism. They are also rude and insulting to anyone who disagrees with them intellectually, as if they are trying to go in the opposite direction of the Christian Ethos as much as possible.
This is obviously not to say that all ex-mormons are "satanic" like this. Of course not! There are "ex-mormons for Jesus" groups for example.
I should also add that Jack Donovan, as a former Satanist, doesn't believe in a literal Satan but see "Satanism" as a far-Leftist secular atheist religion that he eventually rejected.
I would also argue that even from a more critical perspective of seeing all religion as myth-making, like from the perspective of the comparative mythologist Joseph Campbell; if all of religion is the realm of "mythos," as dream language or poetry and metaphor, then it is all a matter of faith anyway. From this perspective, it's all mythology; eating the body and blood of a Jewish messiah (transubstantiation for Catholics) is also mythos. So "Mormon Israelites" of European descent is not outlandish from a faith/mythos perspective. The U.S. Declaration of Independence's assertion that we are endowed by our Creative with "inalienable Rights" is also a "mythos" as you can't scientifically demonstrate this; but look at the powerful functional effect of believing people have Rights, even though they can't be empirically demonstrated by science. So too, there is a powerful functionality and self-esteem enhancing power in the idea of European LDS members who descended from the northern countries, seeing themselves as basicallt "mixed race," as members of the Lost Tribes of Israel, who will gather all the tribes of Israel on the American continent.
Why does this matter? Well, the Apostle Paul is of the tribe of Benjamin (Philipians 3:5) and as I see it he was seeking to graft pagans into Israel in the first century. Paul was a first century apocalyptic Jew and Roman citizen with a specific message and strategy to graft gentiles/pagans into Israel. Part of that strategy was promoting the idea of celibacy and martyrdom by declaring Ceasar is not Lord but Jesus is Lord; and so by being sentenced to death by a first century Roman court you were imitating the suffering Messiah and gaining salvation (eternal life). Well, to be frank, what does that have to do with me today who doesn’t live in Rome two thousandyears ago? As an American it makes no sense to be celibate or seek martyrdom when there is no Roman Caesar today! So I can't even die by the hands of Romans by declaring Christ is Lord instead of Ceasar being Lord!
The fact is, "Cesarean" Rome fell and Ceasar worship eventually ended, and by 300 AD Rome had become Roman Christianity through the Indo-European Constantine; and then Christianity underwent a cultural shift through the germanization of Christianity and the growth of Militant Christianity. As I see it, "New Testament Christianity" was culturally replaced with Constantinian Western/European Christianity; and Christians have been reinterpreting or ignoring the actual content of the New Testament ever since.
Mormon-Christianity as I see it is the next stage in a clear Christian development away from first century Roman times, and into the 21st century and American capitalism and democracy. Therefore, it makes more sense to me to have an Americanized gospel and not try to retrofit yourself into the first century headspace of the New Testament. Thus, "Another Testament of Jesus Christ" is useful with the Book of Mormon, in that it updates the gospel for a modern American audience and gives European Americans a positive identity. In Mormonism, it's not just about Europeans being grafted into Israel, as if second class citizens "piggy backing" on Israelites. But instead, LDS members are believed to be members of the Lost Tribes of the House of Israel (through the tribes of Epraim and Mannasseh) whose genes mixed with Indo-Europeans. So in LDS Christianity you are not seen as a depraved sinner, a "pagan loser," cursed with Original Sin, needing to have your genes replaced with the genes of an Israelite Messiah. But instead, early LDS members who in the early 1800s were composed of mostly Europeans, considered themselves already part of a powerful European people with some Israelite genes intermixed with their Indo-European ancestry (through spiritual adoption or literal discent). Thus, Mormonism provided an in-group self-esteem and strong cultural identity for my British, Germanic and in Scandinavian ancestors.
