Reader comments
DNA claims rebutted on Book of Mormon
448 comments | Read story
Let me say something | 7:06 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
you are occupied whole post. I want say something. I believe in Jesus Christ i
believe In Joseph Smith I believe in Book of Mormon. Period.
Warmest regards | 7:23 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
Warmest regards to you as well. A lesson I learned long long ago is that there
are many wonderful people and differences shouldn't seperate us or limit us
from association. Too often they do. Or from enjoying each others strengths
and uniqueness. Good luck to you.
Comments continue below
Thomas | 7:24 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
There have been several comments above suggesting that since God cursed the
Lamanites by darkening their skins, it should be expected that their DNA no
longer would reflect their Hebrew ancestry.
The problem with that argument is that if you read Fourth Nephi, you'll notice that the "Lamanites" who were around at the end at the Book of Mormon were not all "ethnic" Lamanites -- that is, descendants of the dark-skinned peoples who had been cursed hundreds of years earlier. In Fourth Nephi, the people who survived God's slaughter of the wicked at the time of Christ's death all become one people -- there were not "any manner of -ites."
Later, some people dissented from the church and took the name "Lamanites." It appears to have been a cross-section of the people who apostasized, not just true descendants of the original "cursed" population. It would be unlikely that these "neo-Lamanites" wouldn't have carried some Nephite genes.
As some have pointed out, Lehi descended from a different tribe than modern Jews. However, they both descend from Jacob. Their descendants therefore *should* have genes reflecting a common ancestor in the Middle East in approximately 2000 B.C.
The problem with that argument is that if you read Fourth Nephi, you'll notice that the "Lamanites" who were around at the end at the Book of Mormon were not all "ethnic" Lamanites -- that is, descendants of the dark-skinned peoples who had been cursed hundreds of years earlier. In Fourth Nephi, the people who survived God's slaughter of the wicked at the time of Christ's death all become one people -- there were not "any manner of -ites."
Later, some people dissented from the church and took the name "Lamanites." It appears to have been a cross-section of the people who apostasized, not just true descendants of the original "cursed" population. It would be unlikely that these "neo-Lamanites" wouldn't have carried some Nephite genes.
As some have pointed out, Lehi descended from a different tribe than modern Jews. However, they both descend from Jacob. Their descendants therefore *should* have genes reflecting a common ancestor in the Middle East in approximately 2000 B.C.
Ill tell ya | 7:33 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
Moroni's promise worked for me. I dont know why, I didn't ask for it
or even expect it. I didn't pray before I read the Book of Mormon. I
didn't feel any peer pressure to know if the Book of Mormon was true. I was
the only active member in my family at the time. I didn't feel I
desperatley needed to have a testimony. Without any preconceived concience
desire my testimony was given to me suddenly after some sincere repentance and
having a desire to learn about the church and read the scriptures. The Holy
Ghost flowed into my soul and rushed around me for about 15 seconds or so...it
was as a rushing wind that carried with it such unspeakable joy that I cant find
words to really describe it. I hope others on this thread that have been
frustrated by their attempts to seek answers to their questions about the Book
of Mormon will find the strength to continue to seek, ask, knock, and strive for
answers.
Just Me | 7:36 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
I know the Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus Christ. I know that God
the Father and Jesus Christ came to Joseph Smith and the world of that young
man, and my life would be forever changed because of it. I know that Gordon B.
Hinkley is a Prophet of God. I know that Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ live
and I know that reading the Book of Mormon has brought me closer to God than I
ever could have imagined.
We are loved by a kind and loving Father, and that is all that matters. Science, money, the bills waiting to be paid and everything else only matter here, and while I am here, I will remember why I'm here and who it is I turn to when things are great and when things are bad, because without Him, there would be no reason to be here.
We are loved by a kind and loving Father, and that is all that matters. Science, money, the bills waiting to be paid and everything else only matter here, and while I am here, I will remember why I'm here and who it is I turn to when things are great and when things are bad, because without Him, there would be no reason to be here.
it may be true | 7:51 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
but how about you! only the true creator knows as he is given us drought, famine
and now pestilene of argueing amongst each other...practice love because in the
end only kindness matters..I'll see ya when ya get there!
Evidence | 8:08 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
I think with the lack of both DNA and archealogical evidence.... The Book of
Mormon is fiction. I think most "experts" and "scientists"
would agree.
Mark | 8:20 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
I find this whole debate laughable. How can someone's entire spiritual life
hinge on something like a DNA analysis of American Indian tribes? Why must the
BofM or any other holy book have to provide accurate historical facts to be
accepted as a source of spiritual knowledge? I mean, if our best scientific
research disproves entire chunks of holy writ, then throw them out for goodness
sake (since they're inaccurate). And keep the good stuff that actually has
something remotely to do with spirituality. It's not like the BofM is the
Final Word of God's canon.
Thomas | 8:36 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
Moroni 10:3-5 hasn't worked for me after 25 years, one mission, and a
dozen-plus readings of the Book of Mormon. I'm still open to the
possibility that God might provide some kind of undeniable spiritual conviction
of its truth -- but if you do the same thing enough times, a sane man starts
expecting the same result.
DNA evidence doesn't conclusively disprove the Book of Mormon, but -- overall -- I do think it has to be counted in the "evidence against" column. I judge that it would be more likely than not for a large Semitic population in the Americas to have left a recognizable genetic signature. The ingenious alternative explanations offered by Gardner and his colleagues are theoretically possible (just as OJ Simpson's high-priced lawyers thought up alternative explanations for the evidence that obviously pointed to his guilt), but less likely.
Could Joseph Smith have written the Book of Mormon? I don't know. Writing the Book of Mormon unassisted would have been an astonishing achievement. Those are rare, but not impossible. Parts of the book are profoundly moving. Other parts strike me as melodramatic and boyish.
I hope it's true, but I can't honestly say I'm convinced.
DNA evidence doesn't conclusively disprove the Book of Mormon, but -- overall -- I do think it has to be counted in the "evidence against" column. I judge that it would be more likely than not for a large Semitic population in the Americas to have left a recognizable genetic signature. The ingenious alternative explanations offered by Gardner and his colleagues are theoretically possible (just as OJ Simpson's high-priced lawyers thought up alternative explanations for the evidence that obviously pointed to his guilt), but less likely.
Could Joseph Smith have written the Book of Mormon? I don't know. Writing the Book of Mormon unassisted would have been an astonishing achievement. Those are rare, but not impossible. Parts of the book are profoundly moving. Other parts strike me as melodramatic and boyish.
I hope it's true, but I can't honestly say I'm convinced.
DNA is their God. | 8:47 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?
21 They say unto him, DNA. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto the Experts the things which are DNA; and unto God the things that are God�s.
21 They say unto him, DNA. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto the Experts the things which are DNA; and unto God the things that are God�s.
My witness | 9:05 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
Moroni's promise worked for me. I experienced a stupor of thought and now
know the Book of Mormon is not a true witness of Christ. No logical arguments or
DNA "proof" can shake my testimony. I now know that no matter what
scientific evidence for the veracity of the Book of Mormon may appear, it will
not affect the untruthfulness of this book.
unique book | 9:14 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
I'm a Mormon who wants to be believing and build up the positive things of
the church, even though I recognize that our beliefs are sometimes
problematic.
There may not be a person alive who can match a Shakespeare play, a Jane Austen novel, or the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon is a unique and fascinating work, but it's uniqueness and beauty don't prove it's historical authenticity.
There may not be a person alive who can match a Shakespeare play, a Jane Austen novel, or the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon is a unique and fascinating work, but it's uniqueness and beauty don't prove it's historical authenticity.
Cognitive Dissonance | 9:19 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
To all those who keep claiming that the Book of Mormon has to be true because
there is no way Joseph Smith could have written it himself, does that mean that
the Koran is true? Does that mean that Muhammad was a true prophet of God (or
Allah)?
He was just as uneducated, if not more so, and the Koran is arguably the most beautifully written book in Arabic.
He was just as uneducated, if not more so, and the Koran is arguably the most beautifully written book in Arabic.
Get Honest | 9:56 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
Thomas:
Thank you for responding to the posts you mentioned. Though your post was well said, I am not really connecting with it(yet). Are you saying that according to 4th Nephi, those who revolted against the church and called themselves Lamanites, eventually separating themselves completely, were never subsequently "cursed" with a darkened skin, but remained racially hebrew? I am not arguing a point, I am really asking you. What you said did not seem consistent. At this point, I am still with those who state that rebellion meant a racial change that altered DNA. Therefore, all debates on this topic are without basis.(pro or con).
Thank you for responding to the posts you mentioned. Though your post was well said, I am not really connecting with it(yet). Are you saying that according to 4th Nephi, those who revolted against the church and called themselves Lamanites, eventually separating themselves completely, were never subsequently "cursed" with a darkened skin, but remained racially hebrew? I am not arguing a point, I am really asking you. What you said did not seem consistent. At this point, I am still with those who state that rebellion meant a racial change that altered DNA. Therefore, all debates on this topic are without basis.(pro or con).
Reality | 10:12 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
The Desert News must not accept the existance of the three Nephites as they keep
censoring the suggestion to use a sample of their DNA to prove the orgin of the
Book of Mormon People. I have witnessed testimonies of people with experience
meeting them. Let's be a little more open minded.
The only book with a challenge | 10:33 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
There is no promise like Moroni's promise made in any other religious book
out there, not even the Bible. It couldn't be more clear...read it, ponder
it, ask about it's truthfulness and you'll receive an answer in your
heart, BUT WAIT, you have to be sincere. People who ask just to know won't
receive an answer. It MUST be sincere! Let me reiterate, pondering the message
of the Book of Mormon and its teachings and asking about its truthfulness is the
key to receiving an answer. I've seen the change in other peoples lives,
and interestingly enough, in the lives of the Lamanites themselves in Central
America, those who are in the middle of this debate. Who can refute an answer
from the spirit. I read one comment that said that as Mormons only accept
science when it's in our favor and throw it out when it's not, well
you're incorrect. The answer from the spirit is all we really need man!
Anonymous | 10:47 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
I am not a DNA expert therefore I cannot make a comment to support or deny how
these tests were performed, what samples were used or how to interprete the
conclusions. The only facts I understand about the golden plates or the Book of
Mormon is that there are 12 people listed in the front of the Book of Mormon
that testified that they held or viewed the plates that Joseph Smith said he
obtained and translated. It is my understanding that there were many other
witnesses that are not listed in the front of the Book of Mormon as well. Many
of these witnesses left the church, but none recanted their testimony that they
viewed the plates that Joseph Smith or heavenly messengers allowed them to
handle or view. I suppose we should just forget about those that said they
witnessed seeing the plates because the DNA evidence doesn't support the
scientific conclusions of our day.
John Pratt | 11:38 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
The Lamanites are the american Indians. They are not Mongols or Siberians. Look
at the church paintings, the Nephites are white and delightsome. Would the
Church hang those paintings if they weren't inspired to?
Chairman | 11:39 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
"One day science will reach the top of the hill of knowledge and find that
religion is already there."
kairos | 11:54 p.m. Oct. 23, 2007
Many Native American families living in Utah during/after the period of
SWK's presidency were convinced by mormon leaders/ mish's that thru
LDS placement programs their lamanite children would be educated, brought into
the Gospel and have their skin tones(DNA?) lightened as God worked the miracle
of transformation both inside and out. Clearly SWK believed sincerely he was
doing the Lord's work among the lamanites. SWK spoke in conference on how
"white" some children were becoming. Could the PSR be so sadly
mistaken on that third part of "God's" program? Put yourself in
NA's moccasins-would you feel used/abused, or simply let it be?
You see, good intentions do NOT always the Lord's work make!
That program led me and my NA relatives out of Utah and into a more racially tolerant faith tradition.
How many Mormons today really care and have compassion for the NA lamanites, and how many LDS humanitarian resources go to the tribes as opposed to headline making tsunami victims?
Worth pondering I would say!
You see, good intentions do NOT always the Lord's work make!
That program led me and my NA relatives out of Utah and into a more racially tolerant faith tradition.
How many Mormons today really care and have compassion for the NA lamanites, and how many LDS humanitarian resources go to the tribes as opposed to headline making tsunami victims?
Worth pondering I would say!
PB | 12:28 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
You believe what you want to believe and I will believe what I want to believe.
We have the "freedon of choice" thank goodness!! I am a member of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I do NOT understand all this
scientific stuff but I will believe what I believe. So there!! We are fortunate
to have the chance to debate. Right? By the way, There are millions of people
who do believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God. Someday, we will know
the answers to all the questions we are asking now.
some help | 12:40 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Try reading "a Study of the Book of Mormon" by the most famous and
revered Historian of the LDS Church, B.H. Roberts.
It will take your mind of the DNA issue.
It will take your mind of the DNA issue.
iboic | 1:25 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
when you catch your mind wondering and thinking about the book of Mormon. you
know its not true no matter how much is hurts face the facts. deep down you know
a lie when you hear it. please move on and be free stop misleading yourself and
your family. any parent should want better for their children don't let
someone keep you in the dark please let yourself be free.
Geotopia | 1:36 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
My first reaction to this is "why would there be Hebrew DNA in Native
American blood lines?" If we take the Book of Mormon literally, we know
that first, the native Americans are NOT Nephites, but are Lamanites. Secondly,
we know that the Lamanites skin "became dark". Well, I don't know
how even God could achieve that without altering the DNA of the population.
Otherwise it would only have lasted one generation.
But DNA really is a non-issue. To try to apply human science to matters of faith is doomed to dissappointment. Not because we won't ultimately know the truth, but because we will ultimately know the truth. Vis-a-vis, our methods to discern truth through scientific discovery will ulitimately catch up, but until it does, I wouldn't hang my faith on what we might be able to discern today through scientific methods. Even if the science proves the substance of my faith, I wouldn't even discuss it in more than a speculative forum.
But DNA really is a non-issue. To try to apply human science to matters of faith is doomed to dissappointment. Not because we won't ultimately know the truth, but because we will ultimately know the truth. Vis-a-vis, our methods to discern truth through scientific discovery will ulitimately catch up, but until it does, I wouldn't hang my faith on what we might be able to discern today through scientific methods. Even if the science proves the substance of my faith, I wouldn't even discuss it in more than a speculative forum.
To "iboic" | 2:02 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
I have no freakin' clue who you are but, wow, are you lost. God told me
specifically The Book of Mormon is true, not once but twice, and who are you or
anyone else to tell me otherwise? If the science discussed in the story is
accurate, someday we'll see how it matches perfectly with truth, no matter
the source, yes, even religion. "And we heeded them not"......
lovesaltlake | 2:08 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
how come no one has a response to "Hey BlueBerry"...
?
oh well, the response probably would have been something like, "you didnt pray with a pure heart" or something like that...
pretty sad.
?
oh well, the response probably would have been something like, "you didnt pray with a pure heart" or something like that...
pretty sad.
To "kairos" | 2:17 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
I was raised in Phoenix, AZ and had relatives that lived in UT. We drove H-89
MANY times north of Flagstaff through the Indian reservations of northern AZ
going to UT and back. Never saw a single LDS chapel on the reservations. Later
on we moved to UT and I joined the Air Force. I've had 2 assignments at
Davis-Monthan AFB in Tucson, AZ. So....more driving for me later in my life
between southern AZ and northern UT. Probably 7 or 8 years ago I was making one
of those trips when just west of H-89, maybe only a hundred yards or so off the
road, in the middle of the Indian reservations (I mean the middle of NOWHERE!)
and I'll be danged if there wasn't an LDS chapel! Wasn't there
before but it's there now. So, the Church will grow among your people,
just as prophesied. I'm sorry if you've been offended somehow but,
come back. The Lord doesn't need us; we need the Lord. Dan Maloy
OK, for "BlueBerry" | 2:37 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Blueberry - It could be that God is waiting for you to make a move with the
light and knowledge you already have. We all (LDS members) read the
"formula" for a testimony in Moroni 10: 3-5 but I think some of us
forget that the BofM also says in Ether that we "receive NO witness until
AFTER the trial of our faith". Why is that? It seems to me that if the
Lord told us everything first/shined the light constantly ahead of us and never
expected us to venture out into the darkness a little on our own, we would be
kind of lazy and constantly more than a little timid. That isn't the kind
of beings we're supposed to be. At one time I too prayed to know
"if" it was true and didn't feel a danged thing. Only after I
realized I already knew it was true (having been raised in a good LDS home) my
answer came, and yes, it came. Critics will say I imagined it but that
wouldn't be correct. I was there; I know. Hang in there. (BTW, research
how Marvin J. Ashton got his testimony. Sound familiar? Good luck!
JOHN J | 6:01 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
I didn't deserve to know the truth. I was and am a sinner. The Book of
Morman is true. ALL A HUMAN BEING has to do is follow the instructions in the
book. Read it and fast and pray and ask with a sincre heart, with a lot of
intent and the truth will be known to you. The heavens will be opened on you,
there will be no doubt. If all of you would do this you wouldn't be
reading, what I'm writing. Love to you all.
thought | 6:51 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Jesus said by this the world will know you are my disciples, that you love one
another. Guess the way they love murphy and southerton speaks louder that all
the DNA on earth.
Anonymous | 6:57 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
You guys do know that the curse was not dark skin but it was being cut-off from
God right. The skin was just a symbol of the curse.
Angry Asian | 7:34 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Let me get this straight...God changed the pure Hebrew DNA to Asian DNA as a
curse to the Lamanites? How offensive is that statement to 2/3 of the
world's population?
Iluminar | 7:33 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
This article talks about TWO scientists who have apparently "proved"
through DNA studies, the fact that the Book of Momon cannot be true.
Do you know how many scientists have written articles that "prove" Jesus Christ never existed?
Just do a Google search and you will find MANY, not just two, such "studies".
Should Christianity, which these experts quoted here probably believe in, fade away because of the studies of these other "experts"?
Do you know how many scientists have written articles that "prove" Jesus Christ never existed?
Just do a Google search and you will find MANY, not just two, such "studies".
Should Christianity, which these experts quoted here probably believe in, fade away because of the studies of these other "experts"?
Changed Hebrew DNA to Asian? | 7:39 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
This argument about Lamanite's DNA changing from their Hebrew origins begs
one question:
If God changed the Lamanite DNA so that skin color would change, why would He change it to Asian ancestry? Or to rephrase, God was punishing the Lamanites... giving them a sign that they were no longer God's people. So why give them Asian DNA? What was He trying to say? That Asians were NEVER God's people, so why not lump the Lamanites in with them? That Asians are already "punished"? That He isn't powerful, wise, or consistent enough to realize the Lamanites should be for their own sins, and therefore curse them with their OWN "curse"?
NONE of that makes any sense.
There may be an explanation for why Native Americans don't have Hebrew DNA that still supports the Book of Mormon, but it isn't because God changed their DNA... to ASIAN DNA.
If God changed the Lamanite DNA so that skin color would change, why would He change it to Asian ancestry? Or to rephrase, God was punishing the Lamanites... giving them a sign that they were no longer God's people. So why give them Asian DNA? What was He trying to say? That Asians were NEVER God's people, so why not lump the Lamanites in with them? That Asians are already "punished"? That He isn't powerful, wise, or consistent enough to realize the Lamanites should be for their own sins, and therefore curse them with their OWN "curse"?
NONE of that makes any sense.
There may be an explanation for why Native Americans don't have Hebrew DNA that still supports the Book of Mormon, but it isn't because God changed their DNA... to ASIAN DNA.
Forester | 8:02 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
I was surprised that the first statement in this blog was that the title page of
the Book of Mormon stated the Book of Mormon people were the ancestors of the
American Indian. There is no such statement on the title page. Were you
thinking of something else?
Faith | 8:06 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
If the historical accuracy of any scripture or ancient text were easily proven
through scientific methods, no person of any religion would have the need to
exercise faith. What's wrong with having a little faith? I, for one, am
not so arrogant as to assume that the human race is capable of systematically
unraveling the mysteries of God.
Proverbs 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
Proverbs 3:5-6
5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
DMN: Thanks for making my point | 8:09 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
What I would really like to know is why opinions or studies that produce
evidence contrary to church "doctrine" are so feared by church
leadership, as evidenced by the excommunication of Southerton and threats of
discipline to Murphy.
For anyone interested, I once read a book called "Christ in North America" by Delbert W. Curtis, which presents a strong argument that the geographic features described in the Book of Mormon more accurately reflect the geography of the area Joseph Smith was familiar with (i.e. the Northeastern U.S.). This book actually presents a stronger argument for the validity of the Book of Mormon than anything I've ever read or heard from church leadership. However, when first published this book was met with harsh criticism and threats of discipline to the author due to ideas contrary to what had been taught by church leaders.
Let's face it, facts get in the way of a good story. Censorship, selective fact presentation and revisionist history are key to building and maintaining the kingdom.
For anyone interested, I once read a book called "Christ in North America" by Delbert W. Curtis, which presents a strong argument that the geographic features described in the Book of Mormon more accurately reflect the geography of the area Joseph Smith was familiar with (i.e. the Northeastern U.S.). This book actually presents a stronger argument for the validity of the Book of Mormon than anything I've ever read or heard from church leadership. However, when first published this book was met with harsh criticism and threats of discipline to the author due to ideas contrary to what had been taught by church leaders.
Let's face it, facts get in the way of a good story. Censorship, selective fact presentation and revisionist history are key to building and maintaining the kingdom.
Frozen Chosen | 8:11 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
What about Nahom? Just a lucky guess by Joseph Smith, I suppose. And the Land
of Bountiful? All early 18th century New England farm boys knew about that
swath of green on the Arabian peninsula, you betcha!
hmmm | 8:14 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
1. The Book of Mormon states in several places that God would "cause [the
Lamanites] to be counfounded." One definition of confounded is, "to
fail to discern differences between : mix up b: to increase the confusion
of." (Merriam-Webster, online).
2. As a scientist, the only way that skin color can change and be passed from generation to generation is through an alteration of DNA.
The differences in DNA, according to the Book of Mormon, are very much expected.
2. As a scientist, the only way that skin color can change and be passed from generation to generation is through an alteration of DNA.
The differences in DNA, according to the Book of Mormon, are very much expected.
Steve | 8:18 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
to Cognitive Dissonance: regarding your statement about Muhammad and the Koran.
Though I haven't read the Koran, I have heard many times that it is a
beautifully written book. But this doesn't make Muhammad the same or even
comparable to Joseph Smith. Joseph declared, as a "Prophet of God",
that Jesus Christ is the Savior of the World and devoted his life to defending
the Savior's divinity. This is what Prophets are called to do. Muhammad did
not declare Jesus as the Savior of the World. Yet people are so quick to say the
term "Prophet Muhammad", but refer to Joesph as "so-called
self-described Prophet" Ask yourself what a prophet is supposed to do?
And who else testifies? | 8:28 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Many people around the world (billions to be exact) testify to something. One
church with members equivlilent to the numbers in New York is only one of them.
The world is full of much diversity.
metamoracoug | 8:46 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
I have appreciated this wonderful discussion. It helped me hone my thoughts on
this matter. First, I beg to differ with any who suggest that there is
increasingly more evidence against the BOM's historical context.
In 1829, when the BOM was published, nothing of the great central American civilizations was known among English-speaking people. The Spanish had this information available, but it had been conveniently tucked away to be forgotten. So, when Joe Smith produces a book stating that Native Americans had written language, governemnt, knowledge of astronomy, organized calenders, and tactical warfare, he was really putting himself out on a limb.
It was not until 1842, with the publication of drawings of central American structures, that these civilizations truly began to come to light. It was still several decades before scholars suggested that the art decorating so many structures was written language. Scholars determined that the Maya had two calendars. The BOM indicates that the Nephites kept track of time from when Lehi left Jerusalem and from the time of the sign of Christ's birth. The maya had prophet/kings not unlike those suggested in Mosiah.
In 1829, when the BOM was published, nothing of the great central American civilizations was known among English-speaking people. The Spanish had this information available, but it had been conveniently tucked away to be forgotten. So, when Joe Smith produces a book stating that Native Americans had written language, governemnt, knowledge of astronomy, organized calenders, and tactical warfare, he was really putting himself out on a limb.
It was not until 1842, with the publication of drawings of central American structures, that these civilizations truly began to come to light. It was still several decades before scholars suggested that the art decorating so many structures was written language. Scholars determined that the Maya had two calendars. The BOM indicates that the Nephites kept track of time from when Lehi left Jerusalem and from the time of the sign of Christ's birth. The maya had prophet/kings not unlike those suggested in Mosiah.
Proven? | 8:58 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
The DNA evidence is subject to interpretation by fallible men on both sides. I
don't care how much education a scientist has. He can still make mistakes.
For example how many times in the last 30-40 years have we been told conflicting
stuff about what's 'good' or 'bad' for you to eat?
Big bang theory.
DNA is not w/o it's 'change of tide' events. For those who crow DNA proves the BOM is false and if you're a Inerrant Bible Christian...What does the accepted DNA theory say about human origins? Hello monkey man!
To the person that called all those University Scientists asking if there was proof that the BOM was true...If you're an IBC-Ask them if the flood has been proven!The creation of the earth in six days!The Garden Of Eden!The Exodus!Where's all the horses, chariots, Egyptian soldiers at the bottom of the Re(e)d Sea? Hebrew slaves in Egypt!Abraham, Isaac, Jacob!, etc-If you do happen find one... Published? Peer reviewed?
I'm aware of "believer scientists" giving contrary views 'proving' it all, but the scientists that aren't believe don't agree.
Proven? Valid argument. Actual Lehite DNA? Mulekite? Jaredite?
Migration(s) - Chinese( Geez, They found Asian DNA. Suprised! Not!), Vikings, etc.
Big bang theory.
DNA is not w/o it's 'change of tide' events. For those who crow DNA proves the BOM is false and if you're a Inerrant Bible Christian...What does the accepted DNA theory say about human origins? Hello monkey man!
To the person that called all those University Scientists asking if there was proof that the BOM was true...If you're an IBC-Ask them if the flood has been proven!The creation of the earth in six days!The Garden Of Eden!The Exodus!Where's all the horses, chariots, Egyptian soldiers at the bottom of the Re(e)d Sea? Hebrew slaves in Egypt!Abraham, Isaac, Jacob!, etc-If you do happen find one... Published? Peer reviewed?
I'm aware of "believer scientists" giving contrary views 'proving' it all, but the scientists that aren't believe don't agree.
Proven? Valid argument. Actual Lehite DNA? Mulekite? Jaredite?
Migration(s) - Chinese( Geez, They found Asian DNA. Suprised! Not!), Vikings, etc.
metamoracoug | 9:10 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Of course, none of the evidence I see, historically or archaeologically, has
anything to do with DNA. This subject is extremely complex. Yet, we have
boiled it down to a simple yes or no.
We have undisputable evidence that Norwegians arrived in Newfoundland by 1000 A.D. Like everywhere else the Norsemen went, I'm confident they mingled with the natives. Yet, any genetic trace of their existence is erased. So it was for the Nephites. They were, no doubt, the purest genetic strain of the original colonizers. The BOM states they were always the minority peoples. Moroni records that strain was exterminated, save a few only, whose genetic signature -- like the Norse -- was lost.
The thing that concerns me most in this discussion is the Biblical problem. God made it clear in the Old Testament that if Israel didn't repent, He'd scatter them throughout every nation and people -- over the face of the earth. If there are none of Israelitish heritage in the New World, it not only brings into question the truthfulness of the BOM, but also the veracity of the Bible. God didn't keep his word? He's a liar? I think not.
We have undisputable evidence that Norwegians arrived in Newfoundland by 1000 A.D. Like everywhere else the Norsemen went, I'm confident they mingled with the natives. Yet, any genetic trace of their existence is erased. So it was for the Nephites. They were, no doubt, the purest genetic strain of the original colonizers. The BOM states they were always the minority peoples. Moroni records that strain was exterminated, save a few only, whose genetic signature -- like the Norse -- was lost.
The thing that concerns me most in this discussion is the Biblical problem. God made it clear in the Old Testament that if Israel didn't repent, He'd scatter them throughout every nation and people -- over the face of the earth. If there are none of Israelitish heritage in the New World, it not only brings into question the truthfulness of the BOM, but also the veracity of the Bible. God didn't keep his word? He's a liar? I think not.
Get Honest | 9:13 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
To Hmnnn:
Would you please expound on what you said? It sounded interesting.
To the offended Asians: These issues have to be explored fully or the truth cannot be discovered. And, of course, one must be objective. Highly emotional reactions may be very entertaining and attention getting but they don't get us facts.
Would you please expound on what you said? It sounded interesting.
To the offended Asians: These issues have to be explored fully or the truth cannot be discovered. And, of course, one must be objective. Highly emotional reactions may be very entertaining and attention getting but they don't get us facts.
Anonymous | 9:24 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
If I live to be a hundred, I will never understand why there are those who
insist of thinking externally rather than take the inward journey to really
become enlightened. Good things must always be "out there somewhere"
to these types.
Markus G | 9:35 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
Unbelievable ... The DNA argument is the new Salamander Letter..... First of all
- if you believe in Diety - Mormon - Allah - Baptist - whatever - then you would
accept the fact that Faith is what matters. God will not allow science to prove
or disprove his existence - for if that were to happen - then there would be no
faith..there would be knowledge. The science of DNA is so new.. so let me see if
I get this straight. The issue focuses on DNA from the mother that is passed
down on and on and on.,..so let me ask -- why don't we all have the exact
same chromosome from Eve?
200 words is not enough | 9:47 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
The reason I think the Lord, the prophets, apostles don't want members
relying on science as "proof" is that it's not conversion! The
members that have a testimony...Yes I said a testimony - Aren't shaken by
anything including DNA 'proof'. Science such as DNA is still in
it's infancy compared to other sciences. Have they mapped the human genome
yet? Everyone's? They just backed off how much chimps and humans share by
quite a bit of DNA. If you'd asked a scientist how close monkeys and humans
were related then...They'd would've said with confidence... we share
about 95% DNA. Not now!
Science in many disciplines is largely a work in progress. The Jews proselyted(See Matthew 23:15).
Were the proselytes 'Jews'? How much DNA that wasn't 'Jewish' get mixed into the 'Jewish genome'? There's no record that records it! You weren't there to observe it! So how can you or anyone know for sure the true 'Jewish genome'. Same with the
Lamanite genome! I have an Irish surname. I also have many other nation's blood in my veins. If you couldn't find my Irish markers in my DNA. Am I Irish or not? I'm Irish, Danish, French, etc.
DNA argument, stupid!
Science in many disciplines is largely a work in progress. The Jews proselyted(See Matthew 23:15).
Were the proselytes 'Jews'? How much DNA that wasn't 'Jewish' get mixed into the 'Jewish genome'? There's no record that records it! You weren't there to observe it! So how can you or anyone know for sure the true 'Jewish genome'. Same with the
Lamanite genome! I have an Irish surname. I also have many other nation's blood in my veins. If you couldn't find my Irish markers in my DNA. Am I Irish or not? I'm Irish, Danish, French, etc.
DNA argument, stupid!
Michaelangelo | 9:56 a.m. Oct. 24, 2007
There are thousands of people (generally LDS offshoots who likewise believe in
the Book of Mormon) who have taken Moroni's challenge and have been
"inspired" that Warren Jeffs (or some other nut) is the prophet they
should be following.
Discounting all scientific or tangible evidence (as many in this discussion have advocated) and basing ones beliefs on warm feelings only is not only stupid, it could be dangerous.
Discounting all scientific or tangible evidence (as many in this discussion have advocated) and basing ones beliefs on warm feelings only is not only stupid, it could be dangerous.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Utes prepare to go bowling 6:15 a.m.
- Unbeaten BYU takes trip to Logan 6:14 a.m.
- Wildcats dangerous foe for Utes 6:04 a.m.
- Flash get dramatic win over D-Fenders 6:01 a.m.
- All-MWC football awards 5:57 a.m.
- Deseret News Ms. Volleyball 2009 5:48 a.m.
- 5A All-State volleyball teams 5:14 a.m.
- 4A All-State volleyball teams 5:14 a.m.
- 3A volleyball All-State teams 5:14 a.m.
- 2A All-State teams 5:14 a.m.
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game
- BYU says Hall incident resolved
- Max Hall: a fixture in rivalry lore
- Witness: Mitchell wanted attention
- 'Grandfamilies' a growing trend
- MWC '09 season in review
- Mitchell called intelligent, controlling
- Daughter: Mitchell fed me my pet
- Find joy in life, Bishop Burton says
- Jazz ready to be without Harpring
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
906 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime483
- Hall reprimanded by MWC404
- Max Hall issues apology387
- Hall's pain reflects self-betrayal349
- Utes won't respond to Hall276
- BYU says Hall incident resolved238
- 2 citations issued at Y.-U. game163
- BYU is champion of the state143
- Religion in politics is tiresome130
My husband was teaching his 6th-grade class in Salt Lake last year when...
Latest comments
Is because it really isn't that big of a deal. Yes, he shouldn't have said...
Lee, This one is better handled quietly and by teaching a young man. There...
CO2 is natural and occurs when people breathe out. If you want a 17%...
That was one of the worsed speaches I have ever heard, in a so calle dattempt...
Alcohol is not served on the campus of the University of Utah. In some ways,...
gongrats to a great competitor who deserves ALL the praise she recieves. we...
We finally have a president who thinks through the issues and makes...
Max should concentrate on getting his degree so he can get started with his...
One question what happened to "free agency" Hall was a disappointment in...
can't they just arrest him again? I mean it is no secret where he lives -...
Advertisements
It's okay though, I went through a similar experience: Lived the gospel fully, served a honourable mission, and followed Moroni's PROMISE,I prayed and prayed and never recieved an answer that the LDS church was true, but I did recieve warm feelings in my heart that the LDS church is NOT true. But I don't need a subjective emotional feeling to tell me what is true an what is not when there is overwhelming evidence against the church. So it comes down to either relying on your warm fuzzy feeling or relying on facts & evidence. My new church doesn't tell me "don't rely on facts". The LDS church would publish any evidence to sustain their beliefs but they don't publish any evidence that goes against the church. When a scientist studies the effect a certain drug has on humans they not only accept the "good" evidence but the "bad".