Evidence like this is not what gives you a testamony against or for the Book of
Mormon. The Mormon Church emphasizes prayer to God, who knows all. In fact,
almost all churches emphasize that. So is that what we should do?
"The basics prove it"? Then start eating your friskies now.I can
"duplicate" it with a copy machine.Okay, I get the point you are trying to
make...but you still have to eat your kibbles.Using your logic, since the
bible and other holy works came before the BOM, then the BOM is a
"duplicate"....and all the words in all the holy books are written by man, too.
If you are seeking mystery and supernatural, you will find it...even if you have
to mix a little logic with some legend and a little self-brainwashing...and a
great leap of faith or two.
If anybody can duplicate a work like the BOM then I would eat cat food. It
takes months to traslate the book into different languages using modern
technology. The BOM is way too complicated for any group of educated people to
come up with in years of work. No way could JS have put it together. Christ
came in a way that puzzled most. Even the most righteous couldn't realize that
he was the Messiah. We have a similar situation here, those who are looking for
truth in the BOM will find it. Those who saw Christ healing on the Sabbath saw
him as a sinner. Those who look at the BOM as a lie won't see the truth. God
works this way folks. He only seeks after those who are honest in heart and are
seeking the truth. Look at the humble circumstances that Christ came into the
world. JS was in similar circumstances and that folks is how the Gospel was
restored. That is the way God works. JS was a Prophet of God! Open your
Let's do what the English have always done... Dig it up today and rebury it
tomorrow. It a good way to check out everyones DNA. That includes pioneer people
too. They need to start with those lost souls and their remains in "This Is The
Place Heritage park" in SLC. We would really like to know who those pioneer
bones belong too. Everyone wants to know who we are and who we have descended
down from. Ancestry.com is trying to fit DNA to many people and put the pieces
together. It's all quite interesting.
To JuniorYes, and perhaps the Utah Mormons should be told that the
world is not flat anymore!
I've been thinking for sometime on this article. Since the DNA tracers are from
the female line and Laman and Lemual's seed are the ones who are supposed to
have been preserved, it just seems that DNA tester's need to find a male marker,
which I'm sure they've tried and keep trying to do or we may never really be
able to tell who the Lamanites are or the remnant of Jacob until the time the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints needs to call upon a work force to
be in charge of building the New Jerusalem. Then, DNA or not, the remnants will
be known. Maybe it's God's secret, although I'm sure he hasn't left the prophet
in the dark. I was told 25 years ago as a missionary that one authority
at the general level had a spiritual feeling while in the Midwest that the Lord
was going to send tornadoes so large they would wipe out entire towns and a
tornado would go through New York City. Seems like that happened this past
summer.I believe the teachings that a remnant of Jacob will come
forth--DNA proven or not.
Right, on, Tim. B.H.Roberts revived LDS Historian, and respected on the
'outside' for his intellect, came to the conclusion that J.S. had a very vivid
imagination, and admitted to his plagerism of the "View of Hebrews"...word for
word in many places.I'd be interested in the average age of the people
defending the BoM...I can't get over the ignorance of young mormons and their
blind acceptance in this day and age. Is it fear, or just plain laziness?
There are many scientists with testimonies that have posted here. All these
postings are noteworthy. I would fancy myself being among their venerable
ranks. Their service to our nation, the world in general, and the improvements
upon the infrastructure of our lives and communities has been unrivaled for
millenia. Gratitude and appreciation are owing to many of these who have been
more in touch with the Spirit of Christ than many of ourselves and others of our
brethren who profess Christ and lay claim to His Gospel. This new
science MODEL I propose: Let us not forget the source of all
blessings nor those scientific tools that allow an even greater expression of
appreciation and gratitude, yea, even a greater magnification of those powers of
creation and accountability than hitherto had been possible. It
will come as no surprise to many who read these posts that science figures
prominently in a certain model of faith that has been available since Adam.
Namely, that doctrine of faith expounded by a very successful prophet called
Alma. While faith precedes the miracle, so too are many if not all scientific
hypotheses(sp), theories, principles, laws, and axioms thus derived. Faith lays
dormant. More later.
It is only fitting that as science has matured over the past 250 years, to the
point of being capable of solid DNA analysis, that the question of the origins
of the American Indians should be explored using our best science.The idea that the American Indians had their origins in Israel dates back as
early as 1765 (Boudinot, 1816) or before, in America, England, and Denmark.At least two relatively extensive books on the subject were available in
New York and Vermont before 1828, and the provocative idea was extant in that
region and in Europe (producing multiple editions of some of these books).In these books and in the ideas they spawned are all the concepts,
prophecies, scriptural supports, and claims that can be found in Joseph Smith's
works and teachings. He added little (if anythig) that was new.I'm
afraid that science is destined to debunk yet another myth. Hold on; it will be
a passionate battle between faith and science, as the comments here attest. But
I think science has the better track record.
He was a "creative man". He was talented....I will give him that. If we had a
trial with evidence and everything I think we know which side would be
considered valid. I do know that not all things are or should be brought "to
trial", but still we can use this in our thinking.I try and use a little
"common sense" in everything. My sense is that if something can help you live a
good life (and does not hurt others) go for it! If something hinders and/or
hurts others in ways of exclusion, "elite" type thinking and arrogance, I do
Read "History of The Hebrews" and you might well see how JS got some ideas.
B.H. Roberts was "shocked" when he read the work. The book was rather well know
during JS's early teens and twenties.JS used some glue (ideas) from
others and pasted this and that with a fetile imagination. He certainly was a
was a brilliant and creative man all his life.
Don't you people have anything else better to do?
Gardner said: ""We're often trying to compare our traditions versus science, but
what does the Book of Mormon actually say? ... No matter how many opinions
someone might have about the Book of Mormon, if the opinion is wrong, it's the
opinion that's wrong and not the book."So then ...if the opinion is
wrong then the opinion is wrong? well DUH!Who is this
It will never be the same. Enjoy yours and I will enjoy mine. My truth is not
literal...yours is. Thanks for sharing, but no thanks.
"Feelings Nothing more than feelings"A scientist tells me w/o
hesitation I can't tell the truth from feelings. Is that something
that you can put under a microscope, weigh, measure, really observe with 100%
accuracy, etc.? Aren't feelings subjective?Isn't that
beyond the power of any scientific instrument known to man?How do
you really observe feelings? Facial expressions,etc?You might be able to observe
the after-effects on the body(Chemicals, etc.), but those aren't the feelings
themselves.How do you know that a subject you haven't tested before
doesn't have the ability to do so?Does your powerful intellect tell
you so? Is it wishful thinking on your part?Have you ever been
mistaken about something, anything in your life? You couldn't be so now about
the ability to discern truth by a feeling?Really aren't you out of
your field of expertise(If you really are a scientist at all)? Is there a
science devoted to measuring/quantifying actual feelings ability to discern
truth(Isn't it really religion's job?)? Psycology-Nah?So you
shouldn't be saying with 100% certainty that it can't be done! Science
can't/won't do it!
Anon 12:55: "No matter what scientists say they have discovered can be disputed
by 4 or 5 other scientists."Right. For every scientist that says
that gravity makes rocks fall to the ground when dropped, there are four
scientists who say no, they fly straight up into the clouds.Sheesh.
I am an outsider and non-Mormon, so I have not had the privilege of undergoing
the conditioning process that exists here.
As I began to read these postings I became convinced that the Book of Mormon
must be true and decided to accept it. Then, I read further and determined that
it must not be true so I decided to reject it. Then I read further and decided
to accept it. Then I read further and decided to reject it. Then... I decided
to go get a tan. Then, I decided to go back to what I was doing before I got
captivated by all of the opinions and views expressed.
One thing that I find strange in this debate is the lack of understanding of
native Americans and their extremely diverse culture and history. They are not
one cohesive group. They speak many different languages that are not connected
to each other.For example, the Navajos speak an Athapaskan language.
They came from the north.The Hopis, who live right next to them,
speak an Uto-Aztecan language. They came from the south.There are 17
language groups containing close to 150 languages (including three groups simply
called "other" containing a couple dozen unclassifiable languages).I
do not think this issue is as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Have the authors typed every one of about 150 different groups among native
Americans? Have they DNA typed every ethnic group in the Middle East to match
the markers? There is not just one type of Native American. There is not just
one type of Middle Easterner.This is not a simple good vs. evil or
faith vs. science debate. I won't get upset and have my faith overturned because
my faith is not based on either science or "science."
To Anonymous - DNA researchers ARE able to identify the region from which the
ancestors of certain peoples (e.g., Native American tribes) came. Dr. Southerton
discusses how they do so in his excellent book, "Losing A Lost Tribe: Native
Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church.The Wikipedia entry about
mitochondrial DNA states: "Unlike nuclear DNA, which is inherited from both
parents and in which genes are rearranged in the process of recombination, there
is usually no change in mtDNA from parent to offspring. Although mtDNA also
recombines, it does so with copies of itself within the same mitochondrion.
Because of this and because the mutation rate of animal mtDNA is higher than
that of nuclear DNA, mtDNA is a powerful tool for tracking ancestry through
females (matrilineage) and has been used in this role to track the ancestry of
many species back hundreds of generations."There are no scientists
who dispute the fact that indigenous groups from northeast Asia migrated to
North America several millenia ago and subsequently spread through the Western
Hemisphere and became the ancestors of American Indians. Contact the
Anthropology department of several universities to inquire yourself.Feelings are not an infallible guide to the truth.
To Ned | 2:42 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007 To TYLER: wrote - "just thought I would
clarify. "Wondering" was just saying that if the LDS church and people had the
truth and the anwsers for life then they probably wouldn't suffer from the same
problems the rest of society has. But the LDS divorce rate and bankruptcy rate
etc. etc. are the same as the rest of the nation. That's allhe was trying to
say. "We never said we were perfect...Just trying to be
with God's guidance through prophets, and to the best of our ability. Guess what
we fall short.
I am going to write but this one comment. It saddens me to hear so many say
they have read the Book Of Mormon and do not believe it. It also saddens me to
hear so many say the book is not true. No matter what scientists say they have
discovered can be disputed by 4 or 5 other scientists. I know the Book of
Mormon is a Book of God. It is ancient scripture written by ancient prophets.
It was translated by Joseph Smith a prophet of God. I know this, This is not
just my belief it is my life. God lives, he is as real as any of us. I have
come to know him more by reading this book then could every be possible by
reading any other book.
re:Aint ya learned to read | 1:27 p.m. Oct. 25, 2007 "Huh?Yeah, just throw stuff on the wall a see what sticks.I never
learned to read incoherance... "I wrote my response to: to:re:Derek
Marlowe - 7:30 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007- wrote- "Dear Mom,That is
how you source facts?Lucky you never had to take any college
courses.OK, then.Can't argue with them there
non-facts."To the mocking tone of Derek
Marlowe's - "Can't argue with them there non-facts." I wrote - "Aint
ya learnt to read in grade skool?Guess what if all the anti posters
had read the BOM they'd find out the Jewish DNA is a non-issue.Lamanites/Lemuelites are sons of Lehi decended from Joseph through Mannaseh!
They split before the Mulekites(JEWS)came on the scene! The majority Lamanites
pretty much wiped out the minority Nephite/Mulekites!Hmmmm! No Jewish
blood? No argument there!My oh my...I can still keep my Sunday go to
LDS church card!" No facts just farce on his part.My
response is apropriate in kind.My incoherence for his incoherence.You read the incoherence and understoodit just fine.What about the
rest of the post?
Anthropologist are not biologists. Jokes are usually not true and mitochondrial
DNA can't tell the geographical origin of the woman whose DNA it is.Mitochondrial DNA can tell you that two people have a common ancestor and
where each resided at a certain point, but not 2600 years back. Mitochondrial
DNA does not take into account the father. This is really simple
basic logic. It doesn't require an expert to figure it out.If one
believes in the Bible, they believe that the black race came through the flood
through Ham's wife. Most blacks on the earth today live in Africa. However,there
are blacks in almost all countries of the earth. Anyone that believes that all
blacks originated from Africa would be considered a fool. Anyone who believes
that there are any blacks who have no white blood are equally foolish and short
sighted. The Bible and fathers would have to be totally discounted for that to
be true.The Book of Mormon talks of multiple migrations both to and
from the American continent all involving women. The Bible tell us that
Jerusalem was destroyed and the inhabitants were destroyed or taken into
Babylonian captivity with Zedekiah after Lehi left.
BA Christians in glass houses shouldn't throw out "DNA trumps the BOM truth"
rocks.Isn't DNA scientist's basic premise that the evidence speak of an
old earth(4-6 billion yrs?)? The Asians that they are saying the AI are decended
from came across a land bridge 10,000 to 15,000 years ago!Ultimely they
say they can show that man has a close relative in primates like Gibbons, etc.
until to the "Genesis" they preach...Life came out of primordial soup several
hundred millions years ago w/o any help from God.Can you say layers of
complex above layers of rock embedded with "simple" life forms? Proof?I've
read posts by Contributors that are Christian?Are they going to say that
they believe DNA science as far as it's translated correctly? It's science? It's
logical?Are Southerton, a former LDS bishop, Thomas Murphy BA
Christians?The inerrent Bible(Isa. 11: 12)preaches that Judah is
dispersed across the four corners(Whole world?)of the earth!If DNA
evidence that there isn't any Jewish DNA in the AI just as damning to Bible as
it is to BOM? Really? Maybe the J&S Tanner better join the fray on
You have to understand that the indoctrination process Mormon people have been
raised with is quite concise. The term "free agency" is bandied about, but if
one dare entertain the notion that Smith may have been making the whole thing
up, the Devil must be at work on your mind. (an external thing)With all
formal religions, it is always "the big boys" in charge who have everything to
To MG: Thank you. If anything, it gave me something interesting to look up.
I wonder what the science was at the time of Christ that the Jews used to
"prove" that Christ wasn't who he said he was. Missing out on recognizing the
son of God when he is standing next to you is kind of a biggie. I am sure that
Herods experts had all sorts of proof that Christ wasn't who he said he was.
Science says that the miracles he performed are not logical. Who can prove that
the bread and fish thing really happened? If you believe in Christ but choose
not to believe in the Book of Mormon due to some scientific finding you may be
like some folks who believed in the coming of Christ but missed him when he was
standing next to them.
So many people have spoken of "anti-mormons" on here, but I think mostly the
problem is that "truth hurts". I know the things I've spoken are facts: I
spoke of billions of people vs. 13 million people and I said that "not everyone
will agree"Those are facts. If you want to believe certain things even if
you believe "everyone will know" in heaven stuff that's up to you. It is not a
fact.Be aware however, that other religions may think similar things about
their religion and that they don't want to know.I once heard a joke about
a group of people huddled together in heaven. Some asked "who are they?" the
reply was "oh, those are the Mormons...they think they're the only ones
Before bashing Gardner it would be good to know more information.He has a
masters in anthropology from State Univ, Albany New York and also has completed
course work for a PhD in anthropology
In Brigham Young's day the debate went on...and B.Y. with his logic and faith
declared about the Joseph Smith controversy, when considering the problem people
were having with him, "THE DOCTRINE IS TRUE". He knew Joseph Smith to the
core.That is the simple truth about the Book of Mormon,'THE
DOCTRINE IS TRUE'. So Brigham Young had no problems to distract him from his
inspired work of building up the Latter Day Kingdom of God. Quoted
Jesus Christ.."A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign".
a while back i came across an interesting website put out by the Hope of Israel
Ministries (not affiliated with the LDS church) called "The Saga of Ancient
Hebrew Explorers" and their exploration into the idea of "who discovered america
first?"It is an interesting read. They have found a lot of
interesting evidences which they feel suggest that ancient Hebrew peoples did
infact come to the americas thousands of years ago. How this all
ties into the Book of Mormon and whether it would prove or disprove, I don't
care. I guess it could do either (prove or disprove) depending on your
perspective--how you choose to read it. At any rate, neither group can really
convince the other when it does not want to be convinced. Furthermore
individuals in either group can and will be convinced to join the other if they
are willing to be convinced.
I guess at the very least this long list of comments refutes Mr. Gardner's
comment that DNA is a non-issue.
Thomas wrote - Oops -- make that "Judah and Manasseh both
descended from Jacob." "Judah was his son; Manasseh his grandson. Either
way, both of them (and their descendants) are descendants of Jacob, and would be
expected to have common genes inherited from Jacob."I thought we
were talking mitochondrial DNA(mother)?Yes read deeper and you'll find
that Joseph had a different 1.mother2.married a
non-Israelite(pharoah's daughter)(What nation was the mother in law from?Kings
throughout the ages married daughters of kings of other nations to form
aliances/treaties.)3.Who did Manasseh marry?What tribe/nation's genes are
mixed into her DNA?*How much intermarraige went on w/in a specific tribe to
cause what DNA traits to become dominant/recessive? 4.Proselytes(converts.Adopted into Israel.)came into the mix. *See above5.What tribe was Sariah, Lehi's wife? *See above6.Laman/Lemuel married
Ishmael's daughters. The name Ishmael is more likely Arab(Covert?). What DNA did
they bring with them? Once they split off from Nephites.They intermarried till
the cows came home. *See above.Once the BOM narrative ends we don't what
other mitochondrial DNA is added to the mix?So you point about Jacob being
the Father/Grandfather while true doesn't make your point valid!Jewish
DNA? Read story!mitochondrial DNA
To TYLER: just thought I would clarify. "Wondering" was just saying that if the
LDS church and people had the truth and the anwsers for life then they probably
wouldn't suffer from the same problems the rest of society has. But the LDS
divorce rate and bankruptcy rate etc. etc. are the same as the rest of the
nation. That's allhe was trying to say.
All truth is suppose to be consistent - that is a somewhat unique (when looking
at religion in general) LDS core belief; that's why so many LDS Church members
care about whether science (of whatever type) matches up with what they are
taught.Science can only (in the best case) strongly confirm the
likelihood or non-likelihood of a given hypothesis. By keeping track of which
hypotheses are shown to be good predictors of subsequent events scientific
theory advances. Most of what we identify as our current civilization is due to
scientific progress.Science (of any type) will not be able to prove
or dis-prove whether the LDS Church is what it claims to be. Everyone must
eventually make their own judgment on that issue. The only "witness" available
is God (assuming you believe in God). If you are not willing to ask, or listen
to, God about the claim then you are left to your own conclusions.John Harvey
never the less, it seems to me if a people can give you the book ..how come you
have so much resistance against the illegals..many missionaries went to their
countries with the good news and the people listened , followed them back here
to utah and contributed greatly but now it as if we don't count! That seems to
be the real curse!
The comment page for this board has stopped at 10:31 Oct 25, 2007. Nothing
since then has been posted.
You all miss the point. The Bible says that faith is the substance of things
hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. If God allowed the concrete proof
of a spiritual guide you would be dammed because your knowledge of Gods
existence would become sure. You would thus loose enmity and the right to have
Christ atone for your sins. We do the same in our society. A person
with knowledge has more accountability than a person with less knowledgeable.
There are many legal examples. One such example is knowingly contributing to a
death vs negligent homicide. If our scientist conclusively
linked Native American DNA to the Hebrews, wouldnt the validity of the BOM be
proven? If so, then our knowledge concerning its truthfulness would be whole
and the existence of God confirmed. We no longer would need faith. Southerton proved God loves us enough to keep us from damming ourselves to
Why do Mormons always fall back on "Joseph Smith was an uneducated farmer,
there's no way he could have written the book, so therefore it's true"?Doesn't that same logic mean that Muhammad, a poor uneducated shepard, could
have never produced something so beautiful and powerful as the Koran, so
therefore the Koran is true?Just asking.
(cont. from above)I've been trying to become convinced that the Book
of Mormon is what it says it is for at least 25 years, during which time I've
done everything that is supposed to yield a knowledge that the book is true.
Why didn't I give up, long ago, when my first few readings and
ponderings and prayings didn't result in any spiritual confirmation that the
book was true? Probably because my DNA is Mormon -- and because so many people
whom I deeply respect have reported spiritual experiences that they describe as
an infallible confirmation that the book is true. I haven't had any such
experience, but I've always held open the possibility that I might, someday.The main problem is that I still haven't had any such experience. If I
had, it could overshadow a huge amount of contrary evidence; otherwise, the
rational evidence is all I have. And it frankly doesn't look too good at the
moment. The arguments in defense of the Book of Mormon's historicity that I see
on these boards don't fill me with much confidence. And Conference talks
attacking the credibility of science don't suggest that things are going well.
Mazer2soc advises us to "be careful" lest we find ourselves "fighting against
God."Sir, that's *exactly* what I'm doing. Our God is a
God of truth, and cannot lie. Also, as Peter said, we ought to obey God rather
than men. I want to be on the true God's side.The Church is making
some very serious claims. If they are true, they're potentially the most
wonderful news that the world could hear: God *does* exist, is actively
involved in human affairs, and really does have a plan to take care of us and
give everything meaning.If they're not true -- well, then, they're
not true, and accepting them as such is a kind of idolatry. It
behooves us, then, to strive as seriously and as thoroughly as we can to find
out whether those claims are true, or not. It follows that there is no room
here for sloppy thinking, moral cowardice, exaggerated allegiance to received
traditions, and so on.(cont. below)
They are still looking for a (any) stitch of proof that the bible stuff even
existed let alone the book of mormon. I personally think they are both fables.
But no one should care about religion one way or another if only it was totally
separated from the tax code, totally excluded from the political area, and, a
requirement that all charity collected be disbursed towards beneficial causes
for the betterment of society. No hoarding, none of these corporate churches or
otherwise large scale business enterprises like we have now. As is now stands,
"religion" is turning into a money racket where society might be better off
Oops -- make that "Judah and Manasseh both descended from Jacob." Judah was his
son; Manasseh his grandson. Either way, both of them (and their descendants)
are descendants of Jacob, and would be expected to have common genes inherited
Huh?Yeah, just throw stuff on the wall a see what sticks.I never learned to read incoherance...
Guys -- JUDAH AND MANASSEH HAD THE SAME FATHER. So yes, descendants of Judah
and descendants of Manasseh would have common DNA material. It just would come
from one generation further back.
Timothy of Trail wrote - "Why do some Latter-day Saints refuse to acknowledge in
their minds all the scientific, historical, and linguistic evidence that does
not support The Book of Mormon?"What scientific, historical and
linguistic evidence?Let's start with linguistic...Lots of words that
are related to hebrew show up in Indian languages. Some pretty much dead on.
Most of the written language that we can see on temples(Certainly doesn't tell
us where they came from.) can't even be accurately read at this time. Maybe that
could tell us more than some scientific theory about their origins. Historical? I guess it really depends on whose writing the history doesn't it.
The native culture's oral histories talk about coming on boats not a land
bridge! Could their own accounts be more accurate than some scientific
theory?Scientific? Again depends on whose analyzing the "evidence"!
Digging up temples, houses, pots, graves,etc tells everything want to know
about people's history, religion, ancestry? Scientific
theory((In!)accurate?) Written history would be more accurate
wouldn't it(Dispel misconceptions.)?"Why do some Latter-day Saints
refuse to acknowledge in their minds all the"Well...It's not proof!
Why go to fallible scientists w/incomplete evidence.Want
proof go to God!
Wow! This community is even more divided than I thought!First it was Harry
Reid, now this.
Bottom Line wrote - "the logical approach (setting aside warm fuzzies) is to
examine the character of the person who produced the book. He is a contemporary
individual, with much written about him."If (setting aside warm
fuzzies) can bring you to truth...Why does Jesus send the comforter(Testifier of
truth.) in the NT?God's truth is truth. The only place you should go for
truth about JS is GOD.Reading anti will bring doubts. They write it that
way for that reason."My analysis of his character, of recent months,
has left me wondering about his character. There is not time or space here to
discuss it, but there are solid JS histories that explore many troubling aspects
to his character in a neutral (and truthful) fashion. I think this is a more
fruitful field to examine for us logical thinkers.""solid JS
histories"? Name them!You've abandoned logic! Find he's of God w/o
God? There's no "neutral" fashion to examine JS...It'sa subject that
can't be neutral. Either he is or he isn't God's prophet! You can't
read "contempt-ary"(Agenda?, motives?, vendettas?) histories to
examine(Eviscerate) his character. God/Holy Ghost/spritual truth
inseparable...Spiritual truth...Sorry can't get it w/o HGhost(Warm,
to "wow cognitive dissonance" You asked people to speak out so here I am. You're
right about billions of people not believing...yet! Billions of people have
never even heard of it! But either in this life or the next people will hear any
many will believe. I am a person who has read literature that cotradicts the
Book of Mormon, but it means nothing to me. What many people choose to ignore is
that there is no possible way a 23 year old farmer with an elementary education
could write such a contraversial book that fits so flawlessly with the Bible and
Christ's atonement. Pioneers crossed the country sacrificing everything for
their religion. Throw all the Anti-Mormon garbage you want at me but it won't
even phase me and my faith.
There is a simple verse in Jacob 7 that might speak volumes as to the erroneous
assumption that the children of Lehi found an empty land:1 And now
it came to pass after some years had passed away, there came a man among the
people of Nephi, whose name was Sherem.So why would the writer
describe a Nephite like this? To me it sounds like he was an outsider. A later
verse indicates that he knew their language.So this debate about DNA
is irrelevant. The Book of Mormon is never going to be proven true by DNA, or
archeology, etc. That is not the point of scripture, nor is it how God
TO "WONDERING" just thought I'd clarify that Mormon people are quite happy
successful people. The Mormon church donates more than any other church on the
earth, that's a verifiable fact. I wouldn't say that we are superior by any
stretch of the imagination, but as a people we are happy, giving, culture and I
believe that our testimonies of that Book allow us to deal with life's troubles
far more easily than without them. Please don't think that we feel superior,
however I personally find comfort in the truthful words of the Book of Mormon.
They are working for me!
I have a question relating to DNA. When they do DNA testing, is it true or not
true they are only able to follow along the paternal line? If so, doesnt this
exclude a lot of people when it comes to tracing and comparing one group of
people to another?
re:Derek Marlowe - 7:30 a.m. Oct. 25, 2007- wrote- "Dear Mom,That is how you source facts?Lucky you never had to take any
college courses.OK, then.Can't argue with them there
non-facts."Aint ya learnt to read in grade skool?Guess what if all the anti posters had read the BOM they'd find out the
Jewish DNA is a non-issue.Lamanites/Lemuelites are sons of Lehi
decended from Joseph through Mannaseh! They split before the Mulekites(JEWS)came
on the scene! The majority Lamanites pretty much wiped out the minority
Nephite/Mulekites!Hmmmm! No Jewish blood? No argument there!My
oh my...I can still keep my Sunday go to LDS church card!
The Book of Mormon cannot be proven to be wrong to some people
(Incredulouserer's view) because they refuse to open their mind to the
scientific and historical evidence that abundantly proves that it is not a true
history of peoples in the ancient Americas. The DNA evidence that has
genetically connected Native Americas with Asians (from northeast Asia) and not
Jews/Israelis only supports what archeologists have determined, namely that the
ancestors of American Indians came from northeast Asia several millenia ago (and
not from Israel about 2,600 years ago). Why do some Latter-day
Saints refuse to acknowledge in their minds all the scientific, historical, and
linguistic evidence that does not support The Book of Mormon? The answer is
obvious: To do so would result in the collapse of their religious belief system
since The Book of Mormon is the keystone of the LDS religion. Losing one's faith
is not the end of the world, however. People mature psychologically and move on
with their lives. Some people ("New Order Mormons") continue to participate in
the LDS Church for social and family reasons, but no longer believe in
foundational church teachings and claims. It's OK to grow up.
Hey, "True it is" wrote - "Just curious, how does Galileo play into your little
argument? Maybe my memory deceives me, but I'm pretty sure it was
the church that prohibited Galileo's advocacy of heliocentrism, since it was
contrary to the literal meaning of Scripture."The "Church"
you're referring to is the Catholic church.As far as
Galileo and the BOM are concerned it's right in the BOM!The BOM
says the Lamanites are from Joseph through Mannasseh not Judah...So what's the
big deal with Jewish DNA? Yawn! Non-Issue!
I absolutely agree, if the BOM is shown one way or another to be true or untrue
the majority on either side would not change their perspective. Haven't
we proven that eggs are bad for you? And yet people still eat way too many.
And haven't we proven that eggs are good for you? Yet people dont eat enough.
Not to mention Milk. And sometimes water. I know I wouldnt change. My
perspective of the BOM is built on my experience of having the only "person" I
trust 100.00% tell me it was. For me to believe otherwise that same "person"
would have to tell me otherwise. So far he's not impressed.
Wow, Cognitive Dissonance wrote - "Your thirteen million (much less if you count
inactives) pales in comparison to our numbers."I'm sure that's what
the last lemming going over the cliff says on his way down, too!There are hundreds of millions believing Muslims...I should go join them
because of their numbers? Drug users...Yep!Lots of them too. They even tell me
LSD will expand my mind! "Cool man!" Actually it takes more courage
to speak out against the crowd...Especially when you're in the minority(I'm
talking about us in comparison to the world.)when it's unpopular, when you're
derided for your beliefs, etc."I hope that some of you will have the
courage to speak out and not (silently pretend) like so many people do.This is my wish for you."I'm glad that you can be "conscience" for
so many "pretenders".If you've "searched and found" what you want to
believe concerning the church....My wish for you...That you've went to the
right source, and not "pretending" like others do when they leave the church
because they weren't striving to keep the spirit in their lives. So they lost
their testimony...If they ever had one. Then leave..."Finding the better way!"
Frozen -- As I said, I'm not a statistician. We may *think* the appearance of
"Nahom" in the Book of Mormon and "NHM" in southern Arabia is an unusual
coincidence, but neither of us really knows what the actual odds are. Neither
do we know what the odds would be that there would be some islands in the Indian
Ocean named the "Comoros," whose capital city is "Moroni."As to the
argument that "NHM" is "exactly where the Book of Mormon says it would be" --
the text is general enough to cover thousands of square miles.As I
said, it's an interesting coincidence, but I couldn't get it into court as
evidence without some expert testimony by a statistician giving a rough idea of
just how unlikely a semi-random coincidence would be.Re:
"Bountiful," the story required enough timber to build a ship. I've seen
pictures of the wadi in "Bountiful," and while it's a lot greener than the
surrounding desert, the scrubby, brushy trees don't look like particularly great
ship-building material. It certainly comes closer to matching the text than the
surrounding territory, but it's not exactly a slam-dunk evidence, either.
What's that you say? There are people out there that do not believe in the Book
of Mormon? Really?And they tell people about the reasons why they
don't believe it? On the internet even? No!This all comes as
shocking news. If only I had gotten the memo. I guess I will just
have to continue the selfish act of being the one to choose my faith, along with
my reasoning behind it.
NVlawyer -- The problem with the comparison to the Norse in America is that
their presence lasted probably no more than a century, and never amounted to
more than a handful of families. And the sources we have -- the Vinland Sagas
(which I've read in the original Old Norse, BTW) make it clear there was no
intermarriage, or even much contact with the natives -- who were constantly
trying to kill the new arrivals, whose settlement was finally abandoned for that
reason.The Book of Mormon describes an entirely different scenario.
The Hebrew-derived Nephites numbered in the millions. They were present in the
Americas for close to a thousand years. Multiple instances of large-scale
intermarriage are recorded (for example, the constant joining of Nephite
dissenters to the Lamanites). If you draw the most reasonable
conclusions from the text, the most likely conclusion is that Nephite genes were
broadly distributed among the local population. That makes it harder to explain
why it should have disappeared entirely over the next fifteen hundred years.
Active Doubter wrote - "However, Joseph Smith called these same Native Americans
"Lamanites" - people who descended from a group that left Jerusalem in 600
BC.Was Joseph Smith right or is modern science right?"You're doing backflips because the DNA doesn't show they're
"Jews"?Actually He said they were decendents of Lehi a decendent of
Joseph through Mannessah. Read the BOM!Come to think of it the DNA
supports what the BOM stated all along! No Jewish blood in the Lamanites!Do you "...strain at a gnat and swallow a camel"?Ya got a
DNA sample from Joseph? Mannasah?I thought so!Neither do your
To Elijah Abel (continued):Cursing comes when you cut yourself off from
God, and the mark can be different, depending on who you are. Thus, later in the
Book of Mormon we learn that the mark of the curse was a mark that people made
on themselves in their forehead, as a sign that they had split off from God's
chosen people. As I noted before, my children are of Native American descent
though their maternal great-grandfather . (And as I also noted, I can't prove
that they are his descendants using the two types of DNA spoken of, though it
is only 3 generations, and not 2600 years). I rejoice in the knowledge that my
children are possibly of Lamanite origin and teach them of the promises that are
given to those of Lamanite ancestry. The Book of Mormon was Written to the
Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel to show unto the remnant of
the House of Israel what great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and
that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off
forever. Lamanites (and others) believing this are not cursed.
Bobby Miles Doopay - brings in the Salamandar letter as something the LDS should
consider as another 'nail' in the coffin...Actually that letter was a forgery,
and as such was shown to be false. Hoffman had been cookin' the 'antiquities'
he'd been selling for years. As a member of the LDS church I'm supposed to
believe a known forgery? I'm supposed to take that as anti "proof"? Wow!
Thanks for doing my thinking for me. I'll sleep better knowing you're looking
out for me!
This DNA debate certainly creates questions in a reasonable person's mind. I
share the same question posted ealier: what difference does it make whether or
not the Book of Mormon is "true"? Does it contain some secret to success or an
answer to the woes of the world?If it does, then we would expect the
Mormon people to be a far superior society/subculture than all others, wouldn't
we? I mean, if you have the answers to life's questions, that would necessarily
follow, wouldn't it? But what does the evidence show? Mormons are as
troubled by the problems of society as any group around. They are just regular
people, with problems and fears and average performance, etc. So what exactly
are these wonderful secrets that nobody should be without? They don't seem to be
working for you!
Bottom line...the DNA search does not support our belief that the BOM is true,
BUT it does NOT disprove it, since the genetic markers may be impossible to
find. Disappointing, yes, the final word?, far from it.Oh, by the
way, for Mr. Drummond...the BOM has no reference the Cyrus the great. You
obviously have not read the book. Read before you criticize.Lastly,
as I said much earlier, the logical approach (setting aside warm fuzzies) is to
examine the character of the person who produced the book. He is a contemporary
individual, with much written about him. My analysis of his character, of
recent months, has left me wondering about his character. There is not time or
space here to discuss it, but there are solid JS histories that explore many
troubling aspects to his character in a neutral (and truthful) fashion. I think
this is a more fruitful field to examine for us logical thinkers.
Actually what we need to do is test the anti- posters to see if they have Jewish
blood in them, because remarkably they are sounding and acting like the Jews in
Jesus Christ's time. Using the same types of arguments against the LDS church as
they used against Him and his church. They said Jesus couldn't be the Chirst,
"He's the Carpenter's son.", "We have his mother and brothers and sisters
amongst us",(That's "proof" if I ever saw it!) His teachings go against
established doctrine, He's adding to our scriptures("We Have Moses and the
Prophets."), etc.and then in the next breath they accused him of being a
Samaritan, lunatic, charlatan magician(We have it's equivalent applied to JS in
our day.), etc. They were so busy looking for reasons to not believe they
missed real proof...His teachings, fulfillment of prophecy, spiritual feelings
when He preached, etc.Hiding in plain sight?It was easier for them
to believe lies detractors spread about Christ. Believing would require a change
in their lives and beliefs.Hmmmmmmmm! That sound familiar to you?"Funny how the more things change...The more they stay the same." "If
you can't learn from the past...You're doomed to repeat it!"
To Elijah AbelI am serious. When I talk about genetic profile I mean the
actual DNA markers that they are using to track the peoples ancestry, not a
generalization that these people are descendants of Lamanites. The introduction
to the Book of Mormon that says that "the Lamanites were the principal ancestors
of the American Indians" was written by Bruce R. McConkie, as I understand it,
and was not part of the original book. I am not apologizing for the fact that it
says that, because I believe that it is true, but you ought to understand where
it comes from. But the word "principal" here doesn't refer to ancestors with
Lehi's Y-chromosome or Sariah's mitochondrial DNA. It refers to a linage through
which people receive their spiritual blessings. I feel sorry that you find
application of the term "Lamanite" incredibly offensive. You must not appreciate
the Book of Mormon the way I do. The dark skin spoken of was not the curse, it
was a mark of the curse in the beginning to keep the Nephites from marrying
those who didn't have their faith. The curse was actually that the Lamanites cut
themselves off from God.
The object of "true" sciene and "true" religion are to come to the truth of all
things. They may take different paths but eventually they will cross.Matters of faith as said many times cannot be proved or disproved by
science.As science gains more knowledge on a subject the theories
change. But to say the science we have today disproves the validity of the BofM
seems absurd becasue todays theories will be outdated in a few years from now.
We used to belive the world was flat or the sun revolved around the earth.
Those theories changed as we gained more knowledge.However, as
people of faith we need to keep our minds open to "true" science. Becasue a
scientist will come to the truth before a religious zealot will. Look at the
dark ages.I used to believe the only people that were in the
Americas where those spoken of in the BofM and that people did not come across
the Bering Strait. However, as I have grown older and learned more I have
changed my opinon. The BofM did not preclude people from other migrating to the
The fuss is really about the fuss of what constitutes knowledge of history. If
you don't think there's a problem with faith based history as opposed to
evidence based history, then perhaps your content with people inventing their
own history while ignoring overwhelming evidence that faith based history is
bunk.It's funny how science is lame and stupid when it contradicts
religious belief, but when science (pseudo-science) "proves" religious belief,
then suddenly science is placed on a pedestal of truth.
To Incredulous, Take a moment and ponder this!!! , no-scholar, etc , etc, etc -
It not proof the church is not true. It's evidence the Jews DNA in the old
hasn't shown up in Indians in the new world!What the DNA "experts" at the
center of this controversy don't have is Jewish DNA samples from before and
after the time that Lehi's family DNA, and the other's DNA that left Jerusalem
2600 years ago. They also don't have DNA samples from Jaredites that left from
around the tower of Babel roughly 5000 years ago. They also don't have samples
from the people that came to the Americasthat we have no record of.So again it's not proof!What it is proof of...Is that those that want so
badly for the church to not be true that they, the non-believers, will use this
as justifacation for non-belief. "Can't be true because the scientist told me
so!" Doesn't matter their conclusions, these "expert" scientists might be
tainted by anti-LDS bias does it? It isn't game , match, point as badly as
you yearn for it to be!
I see so much Cognitive Dissonance going on here it's almost mind bogling. And
the sad thing is, the people doing it don't even realize it. Some of you
decided that a book is true and that nothing will sway you. Be aware, however,
that there are many more people in the world (billions to be exact) that don't
and will never believe. Your thirteen million (much less if you count inactives)
pales in comparison to our numbers. Hopefully some of you received some
information that will cause you to research (even if you won't admit it). In
fact, I know some will because I was one years ago before I started to search. I
hope that some of you will have the courage to speak out and not (silently
pretend) like so many people do.This is my wish for you.
The role of science is to explore the practical implications of our beliefs and
theories. The theory that the American Indian descended from Jewish ancestors
has been articulated in a number of different ways by a number of different LDS
Church leaders. Which of these differing theories is being tested?And since these DNA researchers have published their findings, the scientific
process will kick in to refine the theories and improve the research. That is
why BYU is staffing up with researchers qualified for the task. Good luck to
them. BYU researchers' credentials and research have historically been suspect
because they have obvious and powerful biases. And in many cases, the best
credentialed LDS researchers actually leave the Church.This should
be interesting to watch over the next decade or so. In the interim, I will keep
my 10% sin premium and enjoy a little wine with my dinner. Good luck to you all!
Let's see. 'Ol' Joe Smith, Jr. Prophet or charlatan. Let's see what what some
other guys said about all of this: Oliver Cowdrey, David Whitmer And Martin
Harris. Yeah. These three knew for sure. Oh. And then there are these:
Christian Whitmer, Jacob Whitmer, Peter Whitmer, Jr., John Whitmer, Hiram Page,
Joseph Smith, Sen., Hyrum Smith and Samuel H. Smith. We can even add the name
of Sidney Rigdon to the list if we want. Interesting that some of these
gentlemen even turned against Jo Smith BUT none ever renounced or refuted what
they saw, what they witnessed. No! Not one. And in fact, one even was an
instigator of his death. Besides the Book of Mormon and the work that was
started in 1830, and is still growing and growing, there can be only one
conclusion: Joseph Smith, Jr. is the Prophet of the Restoration. So be careful,
all you who feel you must fight against him and his work. You could find
yourself fighting against God and His work for all his children, including even
you and me! That's not a good place to be, fighting against God, no sir-ee,
I think it's great that science has obtained a greater knowledge about DNA. I
hope that scientists can obtain the funding to do more research in the area of
DNA and microbiology. I don't believe DNA information can ever prove or
disapprove the truthfulness of the BOM. Only the Sprit of God can do that.
The DNA research DOES change things dramatically for me. It opened a crack to
let the light in, and now I am seeing clearly for the first time in ten years!
The claims of the LDS Church are unsupportable, untestable, and absurd in most
cases. I can finally relax and ignore the extreme fanaticism they have foisted
on me for the past ten years!
Dear Mom,That is how you source facts?Lucky you never
had to take any college courses.OK, then.Can't argue
with them there non-facts.
What is unbelievable is how Mormon defenders/apologists will endorse and support
and utilize scientific research when it supports their claims about the Church,
but then turn around and reject science when it may not support the Church's
claims. Science is clearly the fair-weather friend of Mormons, and that is what
makes their claims suspicious.Afterall, the two best (so far) DNA
scientists who originally researched the common LDS claims of the Jewish
ancestry of the American Indian were ACTIVE MORMONS when they did it!? From what
they have said, they were NOT trying to disprove their faith. That just happened
as a side benefit.
Incredulous | 10:06 p.m. Oct. 24, 2007 "I have long, long held that if the
BOM were one day "proven" (in actual fact) to be a great fictional story, it
would matter not at all to the vast majority of LDS, who would go on believing
in it and defending it nonetheless.The dialog herein have proven my
point in spades. To the devout, it does not matter if the BOM is true or not,
therefore debating it is a fruitless exercise for all concerned. Precious few
will modify their positions."And what if it were proven true (with
actual fact)? Do you think people would come running to join? No, people like
you would write it off. Point is, you can't prove its wrong and I can't prove
it right. It's one of those things you have to study and learn for yourself.
The only one that can prove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon is the Holy
Ghost. It's like saying, "prove that Jesus is the Son of God by
scientific means." Well, we can't. Nobody can't. You just have to "Believe" and
have Faith. The Holy Spirit will come to your heart, and if your heart is open,
He will let your heart know. You either believe scientisits, or you
believe the Holy Ghost.
Personally i don't see what all the fuss is about.
For some they ask? Why the DNA test? The Book of Mormon indicates that a
remnant of Lehi's sons, Laman and Lemuel's seed, called a remnant of Jacob,
would join the church in the last days and be the ones who build the New
Jerusalem in Missouri. So, who and where are they? Lehi was Hebrew. So would
his sons be. But, if DNA is from the female, If the American Indians are of
Asian descent, who are remnants of Jacob talked about? Someone in there has to
have Hebrew blood. If ancestors of Laman and Lemuel were preserved and migrated
to Asia--Hagoth was a ship builder, so could others have been--and mixed with
Asian blood or Asian females, and their seed moved back to the Americas
somewhere and now are American Indians but with obvious Asian mother ancestors,
who's to know! It doesn't prove the Indians aren't also Hebrew. The DNA tests
already done could leave that to one's imagination. Doesn't change why you are
or aren't a member of the Church. Christ is still our Savior and Joseph
a prophet, and Peter James and John came. And, when you know, you know!
You know what? You're right? Pls forgive us. Sometimes we get so wrapped up
in our own lives and culture that I think we forget that there are others who
don't belong to our church paying attention to us or what we say. Why DOES The
Book of Mormon matter? Because it is the word of God; an additional witness
that Jesus is the Savior of all mankind, or at least wants to be, if we will do
our best to follow Him. The Book of Mormon not only testifies of the reality
and divinity of Christ but also testifies, once one knows for themselves it is
of God, that Christ's divinely authorized and inspired organization, The Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, teaches the one true gospel of Christ to
prepare mankind for the Second Coming of Christ and to prepare God's children
for eternal glory and joy in the portion of our life beyond the grave. In
short, The Book of Mormon matters because if mankind follows it's teachings it
will lead us closer to God and His son. I asked God if it was true and learned
it was and now you can too. Good luck!
You Gentiles complicate things to much. According to the title page of the Book
of Mormon there are 3 groups of people on earth. The Jews(Judah), the
Lamanites(Joseph-Mannasah) and the gentiles(the rest of the world). The Jews
were scattered throughout the world. The Lamanites were brought to America and
given this land and were cursed, smittened, and scattered acorss the Americas.
The Gentiles were led to America by the spirit. The BofM prophesies of
Christopher Columbus and the Pilgrims coming to America. Could the Asians have
made their way here thru Alaska and could the Vikings have come thru Greenland
and parts of Canada probably. It doesn't matter though. There are only 3 groups
of people anyway you slice it. Jews(Judah), Lamanites AKA Native
Americans/Polynesians(Joseph-Mannasah) and the Gentiles(the rest of the world)
according to the title page of the BorM. So please stop complicating things
It seems to me that people from both sides have a good argument. However,
it also appears that those who believe in the BofM are somewhat blinded by their
faith. Anything negative about their religion is automatically labeled "anti"
and the person saying it is "apostate". In my experience, even AFTER reading
the book..several times, I was told that I was doing it wrong/praying wrong
because I never got the "fuzzy" feeling of it being truth...I have come to the
conclusion that I'm not going to base my life on the so-called truths dictated
by others...especially ones that claim that if I don't see things their way,
then it's WRONG..."A foolish faith in authority is the worst enemy of the truth"
It's funny everyone is going against everyone in this argument. First, I agree
with the mechanic at the top saying basically you are believing that a computer
geek is your scientist. That doesn't make sense to me. Than you say we should go
back to freezing in a cave and believe science not our religion. Well didn't
mine and everyone's God create us. Which would mean that he would have to have
some science knowledge to be able to create humans the earth or in a nut shell
everything. But yet you criticize us and tell us to live in a cave and freeze
did the cavemen have scientists to show them how to make fire, NO! To mock God
and say that we would have to live in a cave and freeze because we don't believe
science is ridiculous, not to mention very offense to our God who in fact is a
scientist. If scientist are so smart than tell me why we are still trying to
figure out the world that God created. I think we should believe in our God
before we believe the people that are trying to catch up to him and prove him
to the doubter that wants sources for:2/3 of members of the LDS
church are inactiveandthe church growth rate is in the 3%rangethese are undisputed statistics provided by the LDS church. Sorry that
nobody told you, but they are readily available. look them up for yourself, I am
not your mother.
In reading through all these comments, I feel like I have been in contact with
creatures from another planet.
One last thought: Someone brought up the norsemen being in American, but no DNA
to prove it, depsite absolute proof of their presence. That reminded me that
there is a DNA problem with dilution in large populations. Once again these
"scientists" never even offer this as a possible problem with their theory. The
Nephites were a significant minority in the much larger population of Laminites
-- who were probably of Asian descent and were probably joined by Laman and
Lemuel -- hence the real reason for the dark skin, e.g., mixing of races. Kill
off the Nephites and dilute the DNA of a few new additions to a much larger
population and you are left with asian descendants alone. nuff said.
Let's go with what most people would agree upon: DNA, archaeology, linguistics
and other scientific means (not to mention the Mongolian/Navajo links mentioned
above, reportedly acknowledged by Pres. Kimball) confirm with relative certainty
that the vast majority of Native Americans came from Asia several thousand years
ago. However, Joseph Smith called these same Native Americans
"Lamanites" - people who descended from a group that left Jerusalem in 600
BC.Was Joseph Smith right or is modern science right? Each person
who cares to have an interest may decide for himself. The trouble is that
people having these conflicting beliefs have to live together at home, work
together at Church, etc. It is becoming a significant issue and I think the
Church should do something about it. I don't think that taking a hard line
against science or allowing amateur archaeologists (like Mr. Gardner) to spout
off is going to solve the problem. Does the Church really want to have a
significant number of its membership (note the sampling represented here) as
closet disbelievers in one of its major tenets?
Dwayne Anderson:Your Harvard Quote requires two population sources.
First, you need a population source today that has something to do with the
second population source and you need to have DNA from both.You
assume -- incorrectly, that the Native Americans who we are testing have
occupied the same space since (at best) 400 a.c.e. You are smart enough to know
that even the best ruins investigated in Mayan areas only date back to around
600 a.c.e. at best. Even with that, we don't have DNA from even that time (and
we are assuming that the Mayans are actually the same people of the BofM, which
is mere speculation). So we have niether the original population, nor a current
population that we can certify as being the same people possessing the same
land. Your reasoning and arguments are fatally flawed. Sorry, but the truth
Thomas,Could Joseph Smith have guessed the name "Nahom"? Perhaps -
but unlikely. Could he have guessed the name for a place which actually exists
WITH the correct geographic location AND with the correct time period?
"Statistically" speaking, HIGHLY IMPROBABLE!I'll at least give you
credit for offering up the only weak counter argument to Nahom that I've seen on
this board (although I noticed you didn't address Bountiful in Oman).Don't worry, I don't base my testimony of the BofM on Nahom, but I do think
that critics will not believe the BofM if they found a sign in Hondouras which
said "Welcome to Zarahemla". The doubter can always find reasons to doubt,
coincidences and lucky guesses can always be used as possible explanations.Should you believe the BofM because of Nahom? No. But it should at
least open your mind enough for you to read the book yourself and ask God if
Is Gardner talking out the side of his mouth or what. Amazing. The truth could
smack Gardner between the eyes and he wouldn't recognize it.
Instead of acknowledging the real facts, The church would rather excommunicate
people who expose the REAL truth about the church
Just curious, how does Galileo play into your little argument? Maybe my memory deceives me, but I'm pretty sure it was the church that
prohibited Galileo's advocacy of heliocentrism, since it was contrary to the
literal meaning of Scripture.
I have long, long held that if the BOM were one day "proven" (in actual fact) to
be a great fictional story, it would matter not at all to the vast majority of
LDS, who would go on believing in it and defending it nonetheless.The dialog herein have proven my point in spades. To the devout, it does not
matter if the BOM is true or not, therefore debating it is a fruitless exercise
for all concerned. Precious few will modify their positions.
Can we settle this? the FP's vault contains bones of Zelph,great
nephite/lamanite warrior. All we need is a bone sample/scrape and we can
determine his dna/descendants. Good luck on convincing the FPto give up
the bones-they already know the answer, and it ain't faith promoting!!
To Cognitive Disonance:It was not a mistranslation. Joseph Smith
didn't "literally" translate the papyri, he used them as inspiration in
receiving the revelation for the Book of Abraham.
The Savior said "My sheep shall hear my voice." Just because others don't
believe the Book of Mormon, doesn't make it not true. In the days of Columbus,
it was thought by scientists that the world was much smaller than it is. They
were proven wrong. It was once thought by scientists that the sun circled the
earth. They were proven wrong. Thirty years ago scientists warned of the "coming
ice age", now it's "global warming." And science today proclaims the big bang
theory as truth. Nothing could be more laughable, but it does eliminate God and
makes it easy to justify sin. The scriptures say we can "experiment" on God's
word and therefore prove it to be true. I have. It is.
From wikipedia:"Cognitive dissonance is a psychological term
describing the uncomfortable tension that may result from having two conflicting
thoughts at the same time, or from engaging in behavior that conflicts with
one's beliefs, or from experiencing apparently conflicting phenomena."In simple terms, it can be the filtering of information that conflicts with
what you already believe, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce
your beliefs. "In detailed terms, it is the perception of
incompatibility between two cognitions, where "cognition" is defined as any
element of knowledge, including attitude, emotion, belief, or behavior. The
theory of cognitive dissonance states that contradicting cognitions serve as a
driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or
beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to reduce the amount of dissonance
(conflict) between cognitions.
Does anyone remember in 1967 when the Church found the papyri that Joseph Smith
used to translate the Book of Abraham? It was thought to be lost, but was
actually in the Metropolitan Museum of Art? Anyway, everyone waited with baited
breath as the papyri was sent to BYU where professors and egyptologists went to
work "finally proving that Joseph Smith was a true seer and prophet". And then
what happened? We got some weird Hugh Nibley article about the death
rituals of the Egyptians . . . the papri said nothing of Abraham!And
the Church still survived! It's called cognitive dissonance. Google it, it
will be the best thing you've learned today.
Great use of facts.Now add sources and you have a real post.
Trying to prove science with science also makes the person of science look
ridiculous."If something is in me which can be called religious then
it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our
science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954, The Human Side, edited by Helen
Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press)"It doesn't
appear that even Einstein could rule out a higher power.
To You're On!Here's a better idea. If you're so keen on backing up
your position with cash, why don't you donate your $300,000 (not nearly enough
for a project of this magnitude) to 10 university researchers (who need money to
conduct any research at all) so they can prove your claim. At least that way
you would be putting your money where your mouth is, instead of issuing some
hollow, notary-backed threat.I'd love to read what they come up
with. Although, since we know money drives research, you (like others before
you) might tell the researchers what they are looking for before they find it.
You know, buy the results. Nah, that NEVER happens...
Ok LDS put up or...well you know
I accept I Still Believe's dare for a wager. I will wager $300,000 that during
the next 15 years no genetic, archeological, or linguistic evidence supporting
what's described in The Book of Mormon (BoM) in terms of Nephite and/or Jaredite
societies will be discovered. My primary condition for this wager are that 10
university researchers (one can be LDS) with expertise in ancient American
cultures spanning the BoM timeline confirm, in writing, that the evidence (e.g.,
artifacts, genetic data) supports the historicity of the BoM. I am willing to
produce a notarized document confirming this wager.
Momons dna rebuttles the BOMMormon rebuttle mormons scientistBaptist
rebuttle mormonsMormons rebuttle Baptistand dolly loma has it all
figured outthanks, see you all kansas, I'm the oneclicking my heels!
If you don't read it for yourself, how will you ever know whether its true or
Wow! how come the poor natives have to be blamed for all the dilemas? I am
native and where I grew up in Idaho..being native i wasn't allowed to date
mormon girls by the parents..but when i go back now and see them ..I say thank
you ever so much! Then we got blamed by the mormons for mtn meadows..so I will
just stay with my own story of creation which is right here thank you and let
all you plymouth rockers fight it out over the creator..I tell my friends when
they ask me about the LDS church just to read the comments on the two papers as
it helps explain better than i ever could.I think all the in-active women are so
hot in Utah so much so that I could be JOE LAMANITE or you can call me sam,
charles ,bill but you better not call me Sioux!
You have the right to discount science. But you cannot have it both ways. You
are either for science or against it. If you are against science,
you cannot use the internet to post your precious feelings, because the internet
uses science. As far as your "Book of Mormon", science was used to print and
distribute it, so you must rid yourself of it's science-tinged text. Don't
drive a car, go to a doctor, live in a house or do any other thing that science
has created because it isn't true.Go live naked in a cave and freeze
to death or die of a disease while knowing that you are right and science is
wrong.Science is skeptical of everything, including science itself.
It's a system that, unlike religion, filters out bad ideas and gradually defines
truth. Einstein believed that science reveals the mind of God. I
I'll make you a wager, more and more people will attempt to prove the Book of
Mormon as a fake and Joesph Smith as a fraud.Each will become more
skilled and persausive in their arguments, so much so that many will believe
them. In fact, the very elect of God may even become deceived by their
logic.But everyone of these will ultimately be proven wrong. In
fact, science will ultimately prove the existence of a God, as well as the
varacity of the Book of Mormon. To base your opinion that the Book
of Mormon cannot be true because our current level of understanding of DNA
research seems to indicate the "Lamanites" are not decendants of the Hewbrews is
illogical and niave. Please see 2 Tim. 3:7Science can no more prove
that a prophet can hold back the waters of the Red Sea, withstand the heat of a
great furnace, shut the mouths of lions, or even that The Savior could atone for
our sins and then rise from the grave 3 days following his crucifiction.Despite all that science cannot prove - I still believe!
DNA cannot be proved in this case and should not be a factor in determining if
the BOM is true or fiction. Anyone who has a science degree already knows how
limiting DNA theories are and would'nt waste their time trying to disprove a
book. Don't any of you have better things to do with your time?
with nearly 2/3 of LDS members not actively involved in their church and the
church currently growing at only 3%, I think that alot of people are not buying
what the church is selling.
Oooooh! what a fun discussion over Mr. Gardner's rebuttal to the fact that DNA
of Native Americans is demonstrably Asian and not Semitic. And an iron-clad
rebuttal it is, too:Apologists have known about the problem for a
long time (okay.....)No matter how many opinions someone might have
about the Book of Mormon, if the opinion is wrong, it's the opinion that's wrong
and not the book," Gardner said.I guess that seals it. The Book
can't be wrong even if it is...The false positive stuff he's touting
is just an attempt to put a blanket over the DNA issue and say "nothing to see
here, folks! move along!". False positives matter when trying to interpret
single measurements or small sample sizes. The sample size involved here is way
past teeny statistical uncertainties.
To- To Anonymous- wrote - "I should make it clear that I don't believe that
"Lamanites" are the Native Americans....in fact I don't believe "Laminites"
existed. I feel that this is one of the many clues in the BOM that tells me the
book is fiction.I think Native Americans are beautiful and that they were
created as they are."As far your non-belief...That's fine...You can
believe or not believe what you want.But what clues? Your belief
that they don't exist proves the BOM false!Wow! Well all head for the
revival tent Jed we've been proven false by someone's belief that the
"Lamanites" don't exist. I'll sleep better knowing that I don't have
to recieve revelation for myself...I can get it off the internet from a
stranger. Thanks for sharing!What's this?"I think Native
Americans are beautiful and that they were created as they are."Well
la dee da!What do you think you are somehow special in your love
towards the "Native Americans"?What we don't "think" the are
"created" as they are?
I believe in Mormongolians!!!
Truth is important. People disagree about honesty and history, fact and
fiction, feelings and reality. And I think I could have looked beyond all that
if only it had been kind. The Dali Lama has said, kindness is my
religion. When will the Church realize that its not being kind. Its not kind
to label whole groups of people, gays, feminists, and intellectuals as enemies
of the Church. Its not kind to tell mothers that they are not worthy to watch
their children get married. Hasnt every mother earned that one basic right?
(Last I checked, Christ himself, hung out with some unworthy characters. Would
He really turn a mother away?)Its not kind to fire BYU professors,
or to excommunicate members for simply exercising their right to free speech.
How can a person stay in an organization that is so terribly unkind?
Dr. Thomas Murphy, a Mormon, correctly pointed out some years ago that there is
no scientific evidence that any person who did not comply with certain religious
teachings ever had their skin changed in color ('supernaturally' or through a
natural process such as evolution). 2 Nephi 5:21 states that 'the Lord' was
displeased with Laman, Lemuel, and their followers, and cursed them with "a skin
of blackness". Skin color is determined by the amount and type of the pigment
melanin, not compliance with religious rules (ref.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skin_pigment). Most people have
confidence in scientists because their research has resulted in us gaining an
understanding of so many aspects of the physical universe much, much better than
the primitive, 'spiritual' perspectives of our ancestors. I have friends who are
scientists. They publish their research, which is peer-reviewed so that any
errors may be detected and corrected. The technology, materials, and medicine
(three examples of many) that we benefit from would not exist were it not for
the excellent work of scientists. When researchers who specialize in
ancient American cultures say there is no evidence supporting the BoM, I have
confidence in their conclusion.
Oh yeah, Lamanites. Weren't they supposed to turn "white and delightsome" for
one reason or another?
We can have God wrote - "in our lives without believing any particular
religion."While I appreciate the intent of your post...Let's all
just get along. What you're really advocating is relativism.It is better to "agree to disagree" than it is to say there is no
absolute truth. Revelations 3:15-16 Lukewarm?You said- "Don't
accept anything because someone "says so"....what's good for them may not be
valid for you.", and "I noticed a post that said that this person goes and does
things for his wife/family, but he knows it isn't true. Usually this is doing a
good in the short-run. In the long-run happiness depends on honesty and helping
others to see what you feel inside." Your two statements are
contridictory...Essentially, don't do what someone tells you and do what I
tell you.He doesn't believe. What are you advocating with these
words? - "Usually this is doing a good in the short-run. In the long-run
happiness depends on honesty and helping others to see what you feel inside."I'm glad to see how freely you give advice.Are you
advocating inactivity, or leaving the church or marraige?So much for
Sorta reminds me of how they rationalized the "Salamander Letter".Hey, if you believe the church is true, quit posting...If you
think the church isn't true, quit posting...You are both right, and
neither one of you is listening to the other...This is Bobby Miles
Active Doubter - Why should it bother you what the introduction to the
Book of Mormon states about the connection between American Indians and
Lamanites. The introduction was not part of the original record, but added
later. Joseph Smith and other prophets have made many statements or opinions
that may not have been factually correct, but just opinion to which they are
entitled to. Now if the introduction indicated that through revelation
it is revealed that every flavor of native american indian from every tribe was
a decendent of Lehi, then you might have a more valid point. As it is, we can
look back to the title page to find out that it indicates any errors are the
errors of man.
To Anonymous wrote - "As an aside it is possible that the BOM is not a work of
fiction but rather loosley based on a collection of historical documents that JS
senior had from the multitude of ancient historians and travelers that visited
his house. There are many witnesses to suport the possibility. Additonally
Freemasonry has similar historical documents and account of Israel beliefs that
may have helped fill in some of the mythology of the BOM. Most of the rituals
are the same."Well I've got an idea rather than give every rumour
possible some credence why don't you try something else. Read study, pray about
the book.You see that's what the antis like to do...They don't just
throw out one version, "Oh I've got you with this "one" now you poor misguided
Mormon!"They throw out a plethora of rumors, inuendo, false stories about
the BOM, Joseph Smith, history of the church, etc. That way you pick out a
favorite pet "theory" as to how it all began, and why it's false because of your
choice.Just read the negative posts you'll pick up at least a couple of
dozen. Yours included!
I should make it clear that I don't believe that "Lamanites" are the Native
Americans....in fact I don't believe "Laminites" existed. I feel that this is
one of the many clues in the BOM that tells me the book is fiction.I think
Native Americans are beautiful and that they were created as they are.
Active Doubter wrote - "After thousands of years, all were destroyed except the
Lamanites" After thousands of years just what did their DNA contain?
Quite a mixture of Jaredite(Find me some of their DNA), Nephite(Ditto),
Ishmaelite(Arab convert? Ditto?), bloods, etc.The record also never really
state that weren't any other DNA mixed in the Jaredite blood(Maybe during
migration?), etc. What about after trading with the people of Hagoth? Did they
intermarry with other peoples and somebody come back on a ship from where ever
they went?What about after the record closes? Other migrations DNA
mingling in?The BOM states that he leads peoples away from time to time
and allows them to come to this continent. I already mentioned evidence of at
least one Chinese migration. A prior post- MOngolians? The record really only
deals with a small microcosym of time, place and history of 3 main migrations.
Most of all it's a Readers Digest version of what happened. We don't have the
Book of Lehi, and the sealed portion. The largest book is Alma, and that deals a
lot with the wars, missionary work, etc..1 Nephi preaching! So
define what Lamanite DNA should consist of exactly.
Todd Moon, Bruce Whiting, good to hear from both of you. It has been many
moons.Additionally to language and birth markings, the food
similarities are quite striking. Fact: The Navajo Taco and
Mongolian Beef place are both located quite closely in the food court in our
local mall here in Scranton.Fact: The coincidences outweigh the
evidence in all matters of religous belief.Fact: Bears eat Beets.
Neither Mongolians nor Navajos grow beets.
in our lives without believing any particular religion. We can find fallicies in
any of them. I have studied many and find likes and dislikes in all. The bottom
line is doing what makes you feel is good for yourself and mankind. Don't
accept anything because someone "says so"....what's good for them may not be
valid for you.I noticed a post that said that this person goes and does
things for his wife/family, but he knows it isn't true. Usually this is doing a
good in the short-run. In the long-run happiness depends on honesty and helping
others to see what you feel inside.
Bruce Whiting it is good to hear from you. It has been many years.Additionaly to the language simularities the Navajo's and Mongolians share the
same birth markings as well.
"Actually - wrote - I was replying to the person that said he knew people that
were "dark skinned from the sun" and that's how the Laminites got dark skinned.
I was not saying he was correct at all. It is a fact that there are
multi-colored skinned people in the world (dark skin is actually dominent) and I
was telling him that it is ridiculous to say that the Laminites got "dark skin"
from the sun. I believe "God" created all people (white, dark and anything
in-between equally) and that skin color is genetic...not a curse.I wasn't
rationalizing anything...I was calling the writer on his rationalization."I gave an observation that my brother and I through different sun
regimines look different as far as color of our skin!You were the one that
observed that it might be possible to pass it on.Of course it's evident
that the darker skinned people occupy the more tropical regions, and the lighter
skinned people the more northerly climeshistorically. That wasn't passed
through the generations? A norwegian w/o any dark skinned forebears might bear
dark skinned children?"It's dominant you know!" You admitted the
possibilty, but backtracked.
A Reason to care in Chicago,How is trying to teach love, hope and
charity hinder anything. Trying to tell others of the marvelous potential we
all have if we but listen and obey. I know that I am a better man when I obey
the truths that I have found. Some are taught by the LDS church others are
taught by other religious and scientific affiliations. This doesn't hinder me
at all. I obey and I have become better. I hope everyone will to. Try to
emulate what we now to be good is good and doesn't hinder you. There may be
"Rules" that you don't agree with that you think might hinder you in what you
want to do but I have found that this is erroneous when you take a look at it
from a broader viewpoint. you must have that correct viewpoint in order for you
to see why we it is better. Love, live and believe in the BOM thats what I
I find these posts illuminating for their content. The moderator allows a broad
range of opinion. If you read all 300 posts without concern over whether DNA
can prove or disprove heredity, you can really learn about what people believe.
Very interesting. For example, the faithful LDS seem to have fairly varying
beliefs. Are lamanites the forebears of American Indians? Using these posts by
faithfull lDS I can come up with several different points of view. As someone
who married into the LDS culture (but not faith) I really enjoy reading these.
What some call anti-mormon might suprise you biblically, faithful are the wounds
of a friend but the kisses of a enemy are deceitful. Go and learn what this
means and you might find you have more friends than you believe (bible dna)
I think it is easier for people to not believe that is why they say I am happier
without that believe. It is a struggle to believe for some when people are
trying to destroy your beliefs. It doesn't make it any less true then before.
It is just easier. Americans these days....sheesh
It comes down to a matter of faith. No need to convince anyone one way or
another. If you are having doubts this will ad to the many doubts that are
already there. Everyone has their own experience. I believe in Science and that
is my belief system. The difference between my system and religion is that mine
is open to change based on new information. And I have read the BOM
cover to cover several times. It did not ring true to me even in the same way
that the Bible did as a historical document. But that is my experience. I can
not tell you that mine is the right one or yours is.As an aside it
is possible that the BOM is not a work of fiction but rather loosley based on a
collection of historical documents that JS senior had from the multitude of
ancient historians and travelers that visited his house. There are many
witnesses to suport the possibility. Additonally Freemasonry has similar
historical documents and account of Israel beliefs that may have helped fill in
some of the mythology of the BOM. Most of the rituals are the same.
town Heathan wrote - "DNA is the least of LDS or any other "Christian"
religion.Christians can't even prove that the Great Flood in the
bible existed, so why should they be concerned about DNA? The beauty
in religion is that they can ignore physical facts while claiming everything is
a miracle.So disproving Christian or any other religion is virtually
impossable due to the fact that they DON"T HAVE to provide hard evidence." I would be concerned if we didn't get a little action from the
Atheist/Agnostic crowd. Thanks for your post. At least we have everyone
represented.The "HARD EVIDENCE" is in the eye of the beholder.Just look in the sky above and earth beneath. In the ocean blue
and the baby new.Look inside yourself because it's there to see.God
in his infinite power majestically speaks.10/24/2007 4:45PM RCBefore you write off Christianity and especially the LDS faith...The evidence you scoff at is being debated on this very thread. Read it, yes
pray about it. Live teachings. Then witness will come.What better proof
is there than proof you can discover about God w/in yourself.Life w/o God
is empty indeed.
We are we supposed to rely on Southerton and Murphy because they claim to be
experts on DNA and make conclusions which logic alone dictate can't be made
conclusively. What they are basically asserting is that since X is a Native
American and X doesn't have a specific DNA sequence that X cannot be descended
from Y's (who lived thousands of years ago but whose DNA isn't in our
possession) descendents. So what they are doing is comparative DNA testing to
see if there is a family link but they are doing it on a broader scale. What we
know from such tests is that they aren't 100% accurate therefore the conclusions
that they disprove the Book of Mormon cannot be made. If I wanted to know if
someone with the same name as me is somehow related these tests don't prove or
disprove that but only lead to the possibility.Several people have
commented that Gardner isn't an expert. This is very fallacious reasoning. It
assumes that because Southerton and Murphy have specific training and Gardner
has general training that Murphy and Southerton are better qualified to make
these assertions when there is no evidence that they are qualified.
For the record:Not the title page, but the introduction to the Book
of Mormon states, at the end of the second paragraph: "After thousands of years,
all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the principal ancestors of
the American Indians." So please - no more posts stating that the
book doesn't make any connection between the American Indians and the Lamanites.
You just have to read past the title page. This is in addition to numerous
statements by church leaders over the years. And on the cultural side, does
anyone remember the "Lamanite Generation?" Now it is "Living Legends." I know
I'm not the only one who questions the timing and purpose of that name change.
People keep generalizing and are so absolute in there views. I believe in the
LDS church and the BOM however I don't believe what alot of the people in the
church says. People can say erroneous things. I believe in the Big Bang
theory. Science shows that the Universe is growing. That More and more stars
are formed. However this doesn't prove my religious beliefs as being false.
One tries to provide answers on how the universe was created and the other
provides why we are here in the Universe. DNA can show that there are Asian
markers in Native Americans however this doesn't disprove that my believes that
the eternal truths taught in the book are false. I don't know how the universe
works and I don't know how to do DNA analysis. But neither of them conflict
with my religious beliefs because they are there anwsering different questions.
One is asking how the other why. "Why are we here" science says nothing.
Religion "how" is this created we have a miracle. The two aren't in conflict
but are seperate quests for knowledge. It is when you try to prove the other
wrong using the other is fallacy.
It is my belief that we are all hardwired to believe in a higher spiritual
power. Some (or I guess most) are just a little more hardwired than others.
I was born into the Church, graduated from BYU, served a mission,
and married in the temple . . . but no matter how hard I tried I never received
a testimony of the Book of Mormon or Joseph Smith. I still attend
Church every Sunday and even go to the temple once a month, but only to make my
wife and family happy. But, coming to my own personal conclusion that the Book
of Mormon and the Church are not true, has finally brought me real peace and
happiness . . . since I was finally able to free my mind and actually dive into
the search for truth and knowledge that philosophers have been on for 2,500
years.Bottom line: if it makes you happy to believe, then believe.
If you makes you happy not to believe, then dont believe. But why waste all the
time trying to convince people either way?
I was replying to the person that said he knew people that were "dark skinned
from the sun" and that's how the Laminites got dark skinned. I was not saying
he was correct at all. It is a fact that there are multi-colored skinned people
in the world (dark skin is actually dominent) and I was telling him that it is
ridiculous to say that the Laminites got "dark skin" from the sun. I believe
"God" created all people (white, dark and anything in-between equally) and that
skin color is genetic...not a curse.I wasn't rationalizing anything...I
was calling the writer on his rationalization.
I have a great respect for His Holiness The Dalai Lama. He said this recently -
"Mankind is having a tremendous problem with the simple truth."I believe
he is right on with this observation and I might add that darker days ahead
because of this.
The reason you should care about a book being true is if it hinders you in your
studies of other things. I found that when I was of a certain "mindset" nothing
else mattered. Certain groups drill into the minds of young children that
something is "true" and the child may not ever question. A child may "bare
testimony" of "truth" that they have no personal knowledge of. A missionary can
do the same from the "good feeling" of familarity of the beliefs that was
"drilled" into them from early on.It's time to think for ourselves and
study and look at the vast knowledge in the world. If we've studied hard and
compared we can then make an informed decision.
While in Mongolia in 02-03 we noted that Spencer W Kimballs statement in the
Instructor magazine was quite accurate. We noted 19 words in Navajo sound and
mean exactly the same in Mongolian. Mongolians and Navajos eat similarly, look
alike, and even act alike.When Pres Kimball stated that he believed that
some Native Americans came over the Bering Strait, [as well as from other
places] I believe he was correct.
I was baptised a Latter-Day Saint nearly 35 years ago.When that
occured, I was nineteen. I didn't know anything about genetics then and what I
know now, could fill a very small thimble.But this is where I come
from in terms of my thoughts on the subject. As important as scientific evidence
is to the relavent discussion of a topic as important as this is, it really
boils down to one's testimony and relationship with God Himself.I
know all you mormon haters and other doubters will shriek and yell about a
testimony and how our feelings are irrelavent when making decisions like this.
Like Joe Friday used to say, just the facts maam. WellI can't compare my
testimony of the Gospel of Jesus Christ with scientific facts. It never
computes. But my testimony has been there for over thirty-four years and there
is no denying that either.Knowing that Jesus is the Christ and the
Book of Mormon is the Word of God comes from another sourcemuch higher
than a piece of paper with its facts. Dr. Southerton and Mr. Murphy
are entitled to their facts. Members or not. Eventually our facts, willcomefromChrist, notscience.
My goodness.... wrote - "It is possible to get "dark skin" from being in the sun
a lot, but it's not possible to pass it on to your children! Of course, probably
over many years it is possible for a human to adapt to the environment."Are you talking out of both sides of your mouth?That's why there are
only fair skinned(White)people that populate the earth. They only pass that
trait(White) on to their children.Yeah I know...You talk for God as
to what kind of curses he can put on people(s)?By the way...I'm glad
we have so many experts on Aesop's fairy tales on this thread...Although wasn't
Aesop Greek not Nephite?Maybe that's why you're having such a hard
time discerning truth from error....You spend way too much time reading fairy
tales!You're mistaking that energizing, warm, fuzzy feeling you get
from DNA "experts" telling you about their fable like ideas on Jewish DNA not
showing up in Indians proving the Book of Mormon false, and the energizing,
warm, fuzzy feeling you get from reading Aesop's fables.I can get a
good night's sleep knowing this! Thanks! So as far as rationalization goes your not guilty,
It seems to me that people must work a little harder when it comes to discerning
Reality Check wrote - "The same warm, fuzzy, energizing, sacred feeling is felt
by"Really? Is that quantifiable? Can you
put it under a microscope and see it's the same?You can't...So don't
try!I always describe it as a feeling of peace, calming(Holy
ghost=Comforter) when I have the Holy Ghost with me even in times of crisis. LDS
that have described it me descibe it the same way.Hmmmmmmmmmm!Would you know a sacred feeling if you had one? Maybe when you go
about mocking somebody else's religious beliefs, feelings and experiences maybe
DNA is the least of LDS or any other "Christian" religion.Christians
can't even prove that the Great Flood in the bible existed, so why should they
be concerned about DNA? The beauty in religion is that they can
ignore physical facts while claiming everything is a miracle.So
disproving Christian or any other religion is virtually impossable due to the
fact that they DON"T HAVE to provide hard evidence.
Today's science seems more to be of consensus instead of true science.
Ultimately, science cannot answer all questions because the human mind thinks
too finitely.For those who believe in a life after this one, one day
we will all know the truth. If those who don't believe in a life after this,
then anything having to do with faith is a waste of time to them.I
look forward to life after mortality when all questions will be answered. For
now, I will continue believing the Book of Mormon is the word of God.
I am a member of the church and I have noticed a few people have said that
science changes so we can't beleive what it tells us. With all due respect
hasn't the BOM been changed also.
A few people have said that science changes so we can't beleive what it tells
us. With all due respect hasn't the church changed also.
I am still reading various reasons posters are giving for their not believing in
the Book of Mormon.But I have yet to be given a reason as to why I
I don't know to much about the DNA analysis process but if there are Asian DNA
in American Indians couldn't they be part other race as well? My kids are part
caucasan, Brazilian which is a mix of European, African and Indian. I think it
is shortsighted to say that they are only one race when we now that there have
been plenty of mixing going on.
Todd -- Science may always be tentative at the fringes, but as time goes by,
certain findings become more and more established.The jury is not
still out, for example, on the basic theory of gravity: Apples, regardless of
their mass, will accelerate towards the center of the earth at roughly 9.8
meters per second (adjusting for friction, etc.) Ditto the germ theory: Inject
Hep A-tainted blood into your veins, and you're likely going to get
Frozen Chosen --Yes, "Nahom"/"NHM", "sheum," etc. are interesting
coincidences. They are either evidence that the Book of Mormon is a
translation of a document written in a Semitic language, or they are the result
of chance. Which is more probable?To answer that question, you need
to calculate the odds of those coincidences occuring on their own. What we call
coincidences are actually less improbable, mathematically, than they intuitively
seem, so it's not enough just to point to similarities without actually showing
that they are statistically too unlikely to be reasonably expected.Joseph Smith was familiar with the Bible, which is full of Semitic names and
placenames. Many of the unique non-English words in the Book of Mormon are at
least vaguely Semitic-sounding. So it's not as unlikely that he might invent
words that have parallels in actual Semitic languages than if he'd written names
in a language with which he had no familiarity at all, like Chinese.I'm not a statistician, but I suspect that if I made up a hundred vaguely
Semitic-sounding words, like "Gathoni" or "Gaddriel" or "Eggonihah," FARMS could
probably find a parallel or two in some historic Middle Eastern language or
I've copied and pasted some of the title page of the Book of Mormon...Nowhere on
the title page does it say anything about the Lamanites being the direct
progenitors of the Indians!THE BOOK OF MORMON AN ACCOUNT
WRITTEN BYTHE HAND OF MORMONUPON PLATESTAKEN
FROM THE PLATES OF NEPHI "Wherefore, it is an abridgment of the
record of the people of Nephi, and also of the LamanitesWritten to the
Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel; and also to Jew and
Gentile""...And now, if there are faults they are the mistakes of
men; wherefore, condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at
the judgment-seat of Christ."However do pay particular attention to
the last line from the title page. Just some friendly advice to especially those
who are making it a habit of mocking the Book of Mormon. Fools mock. The argument about what the book of Mormon says and doesn't say about the
Lamanites and American Indians relationship is covered here. The rest is truly
Tyler wrote: "How does a 23 year old farmer with an elementary education write a
500 page book that can so perfectly refer to the past and present, that fits so
perfectly with the Holy Bible,[....]"This is what's called
confirmation bias, Tyler. You see what matches and ignore what misses. And the
things that are near misses you count as hits. What you're doing is the
apologetic approach to the Book of Mormon, i.e. treat it all as true and look
for points to support that. There's no objectivism in your approach.
Just because the Mormon church receives a "revelation" doesn't make it true for
the rest of the world.It is very apparent that "revelation" is relative to
someone's way of thinking.And there have been many "revelations" that have
been proven wrong and destructive in the world. Your "feeling" are not a good
indication as to whether something is true or not.
Subjectivism is not the ground work for truth. The Word became flesh, why would
we settle for some second hand unprovable stories to base our lives on instead
of the Living Word of God, Jesus, said "search the scripture for in them you
think you have eternal life, they are they that testifies of me." John 7:52 Why
do we settle for anything else dna, newer testament or experince, like children
forsaking a trip to the ocean and indstead settling for playing in a mud puddle.
I just remembered that the BOM is an abridged book meant for spiritual purposes.
What would you scientists do if we got the college edition unabridged version of
Nephite history and it corroborated with the story.
When it comes to the Book of Mormon, it always boils down to this: Either
Joseph Smith as telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth -
or was lying. After much study and an overwhelming gut-feeling (faith), I
believe he was lying. Now what?
To DNAGenealogist - you wrote - "Modern science is learning how to read this
text more accurately every day."Base on imperfect knowledge of
genetics...You expect all LDS people to drop their beliefs concerning the Book
of Mormon based on somebody that tells me they can "create a text that tells our
own personal history along with the history of all mankind."REALLY? How
does one "translate" this text? With a "DNA and Thummin"? So, DNA can tell
me who I had a crush on in high school? Who I went out on first date with?No, it's only a personal history insofar as who parented whom. That still
requires a complete DNA knowledge. More than you currently possess. To know for
sure that someone's ancestor didn't ultimeately have some progeny somewhere else
on the globe now you would need a perfect knowledge of events in the distant
past. W/o the aid of your perfect science,which I'm going to make an "educated
guess" based on your statement that you nor any of your eminent colleaugues seem
to possess at this time or in the forseeable future(I'm guessing you're not
claiming to have visions! Are you?)want me to leave.
reply to Johnny Rotten:-In your first post you state among other things,
that you are a recommend holder and former seminary teacher. You then
proceed to combat the historicity of the Book of Mormon, and also express your
non-belief in the inspiration of church leaders. As it stands, the position you
are taking would make it impossible to obtain the temple recommend without being
dishonest. With this in mind, how could we lend any amount of truthfulness to
your posts. Please explain.
Get Honest 9:56 --You ask whether I'm saying that the Lamanites
discussed at the end of the Book of Mormon weren't "cursed."There is
no account in the Book of Mormon of this having happened. The only two
instances of "cursing" in the Book of Mormon are in 2 Nephi and Alma ch. 3 (when
a bunch of Nephite dissenters joined the Lamanites and got "cursed" along with
them.) Now, the Alma passages do mention that any Nephite who
"mingles his seed" with the descendants of the Lamanites would become subject to
the same curse -- but again, if you read Fourth Nephi and the subsequent books,
everybody mingled after the coming of Christ. (Presumably, the righteous
Lamanites had gotten de-cursed and whitened.) There's no indication that this
righteous population incurred a curse for "mingling" with former Lamanites;
Mormon laments over a field full of "fair" Nephite corpses after the last
battle. So I have to conclude that there's no scriptural evidence
that the "Lamanite" population at the end of the Book of Mormon didn't carry at
least some unmodified Nephite -- i.e. Hebrew -- genes.
I remember a long time ago when President Kimball was recovering from illness on
the Navajo Reservation he made the comment that Navajo's were not Lamanites.Interesting. It is my limited understanding that the Nephite family
landed in the area of Brazil and then later when the familys split up the
Nephites went North and the Lamanites stayed in the southern portion of South
America.Navajo's language is a athabaskin based language that
extends not only to Alaska but across to the peoples in Russia as well.The bible is not a history of everyone in the old world. Neither is the Book
of Mormon a history of everyone in the America's.Science is often
more a of a art than fact. We get some information and try and make sense out of
it. Later on we learn that we did not interpret the data correctly. Science
eventually gets it right. Data does not lie but interpreters often
It is possible to get "dark skin" from being in the sun a lot, but it's not
possible to pass it on to your children! Of course, probably over many years it
is possible for a human to adapt to the environment. But the story told in the
BOM is talked to as a "curse". How offensive that must be to all the people in
the world with skins of different color (that a religion believes it was
originally a curse.) Heaven help the human race!People will make any kind
of rationalization they can to believe what they want to believe.Perfect
example of the "Aesop Fairy Tales".
No one is forcing you to believe it. If you do not, then you have nothing to
worry about, if you do, then you also have nothing to worry about.Religious freedom is the foundation of America, so shut up already
I do not discredit the validity of science or its products. With out science I
would not have a job. Life would not change and we'd be hunters and gatherers.
My point is that in relation to life there are two possibilities. Science or
faith. Science in its true form tells us the universe exploded into existence.
Is constantly expanding, and changing. Our sun and its system are in a life
cycle, which is possibly half way through. In millions of years the sun will
lose its energy source, expand as it dies and consume earth. This is the cold
cruel fact I'm talking about. Faith tells us we are created by a loving god who
placed us here for a reason. Science ultimately discounts god and all religion,
all religious recordsAccording to science both can't exist. Faith teaches God is
the Master of Science. I am not advocating either. Either may be the reality. My
point is we are our own agents in life. And we ultimately choose our beliefs.
All the science and spiritual tests are subject to us individually. Death is the
true absolute, the final inspiration.
Where reason can be applied, it should be applied. We don't use "faith" to
decide whether a man is guilty of murder -- we put him on trial, look at all the
evidence, and then decide as best we can. We know the evidence of reason is
fallible -- that even in cases where the evidence looks clear-cut, it's at least
theoretically possible we may be wrong. Yet we are willing literally to stake a
man's life on our (imperfect) reading of the (imperfect) evidence.If
DNA evidence, even with its uncertainties, is good enough to hang a man, it's
good enough to evaluate someone's claim to be a prophet -- if that claim is
capable of being subjected to rational study. We can use faith to
choose to believe things that are beyond reason's ability to measure -- like the
existence of a loving God, which can't be proven or disproven rationally. It's
not "faith" simply to say we believe something we are genuinely convinced to be
false. If Gordon B. Hinckley were to say tomorrow that Provo is five miles from
Los Angeles, having "faith" wouldn't make it so.
The same warm, fuzzy, energizing, sacred feeling that tells the former RLDS
members that the Book of Mormon is true also tells them that the LDS church is
false, that polygamy was an abomination from the beginning, and that women
should have the priesthood.The same warm, fuzzy, energizing, sacred
feeling that tells the FLDS members that the Book of Mormon is true also tells
them that the LDS church is false, that polygamy should be practiced, and that
Warren Jeffs is God's mouthpiece on earth.That same warm, fuzzy,
energizing, sacred feeling that tells LDS members that the BofM is true also
tells them that...Are you finally getting the picture now? Step
outside of your perspective for a moment and think critically. It's not that
hard to understand, but it is very, VERY hard to accept.
Book of Mormon will remain true to everyone who reads it with full intent of
finding what's in it. How can you dispute something that change your life for
good? Shall I say oh this man found a scientific breakthrough and it says that
the BOM is not true therefore i will turn to my old ways? HAHAHA thats
senseless. Is the BOM being tested for it's physical truthfullness? If one ever
tries he will surelly doom to fail for the book is not at all that physical
tangible object that one can examine and hold. It is that word which came from
differrent prophets of old. It is that word that came from God himself. Why not
this Scientist test the word of God?
Science is always "tentative". Just wait a little while and it changes.
Any good Latter-Day Saint knows that being able to receive revelation directly
from the Lord enables them to confound the most learned person no matter how
many years of education or experience that person may have. Therefore; if an
illiterate deacon would state that the DNA evidence is wrong, it is WRONG, if
that is what the Lord told him. Those science people waste so much time and
effort when they could just become Mormon and ask the Lord. Silly
Now, that's a really nice testimony, "thank you geat(sic) philosopher.But
I am comfortable with my personal beliefs. Now what do we do?
To FreeAtLast - read (Google this also)Actually God wouldn't have had to
"magically" darken their skins at all...Pigment does that quite well on it's
own. The lamanites ran around in loin cloths...Out in the sun a lot hunting,
fishing, (Read the book, suprise they're dark skinned!)etc. My
brother and I come from caucausian stock...However, you should have seen him in
the summer as a kid. He looked like a "lamanite".In fact now that he's a
lot older and he doesn't spend near as much time in the sun...He's still
tanned(Dark skinned). Go figure?I've mostly stayed out of the sun. I look
like more like a "Nephite", because I don't sun tan.We're related, but
you'd never know from the shade of our skins.So your reason in your post
for not believing the dark skin curse!Really kinda flimsy isn't it? Ouch!
to Free at Last:Here is an answer from personal experience. My father was
a insulin dependant diabetic and during the 1950's, our family doctor diagnosed
my father with gangrene in his foot, and set him up for amputation. My mother
had been a nurse overseas during WW11, and knew a "trick" with boiling
water,salt, baking soda and a good knife, with which she performed her own
"operation" ( I watched this). Less than 24 hours later, the gangrene was
declared cured by our doctor, with circulation returned to normal. To this day
amputation is the rule for gangrene incident to diabetes, because our doctor was
ridiculed by other scientists for this discovery.We could go on for three days
talking about nothing but examples like this.I could only excuse your
Naivete and overt trust in "scientists" to you being very young, or as Anonymous
says, you just believe everything you are told.
Since not all the yDNA and none of the mtDNA in human cells recombine upon
reproduction they pass to each following generation supposedly without change.
However, occasional tiny mutations occur when the molecule is replicated. As
the mutations accumulate and pass from generation to generation they create a
text that tells our own personal history along with the history of all mankind.
Modern science is learning how to read this text more accurately every day. For a discussion of the power of DNA as a genealogical tool check out
the Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation website. For a
discussion of the power of DNA as an anthropological tool check out The
Genographic Project, Atlas of the Human Journey. IBM and the National Geographic
along with The Waitt Family Foundation jointly sponsor this project.As the body of scientific knowledge grows it becomes more obvious that the
Book of Mormon is a pseudepigraphic religious text. Mormons would be better off
focusing on the powerful messages, teachings and principles in their book rather
than as a history of the western hemisphere. The time is coming when
excommunicating Mormon scientists will no longer change Native Americans back
Is DNA really needed? Common sense works for me.The supernatural
can be used to "prove" anything. And, therefore, proves nothing.
How do you know that Jesus wasn't Indian?
Bible and Book of Mormon stories can be compared to Aesop's Fables. There must
be something one can learn from them. But what has happened is that they have
been used to set people apart today and this benefits no one.
To thinking-You wrote- "faith is not apart from reason" Sounds like
you sort of lifted the line from the movie "Leagally Blonde"!Cognitive resoning why non-believers can't make the leap to a religious
mind-set. The problem with your "reasoning"...Religion can't be
separated from faith. Religious people have to live by faith!Stories
abound in scripture of faithful people basically going against what made "sense"
or "being reasonable". Abraham offering Isaac is great example. It sounds crazy,
until one realizes that he was offering Isaac in similitude to Father's
sacrifice of Jesus(His Son) on the cross."God told Moses to take us
into the desert." "He's nuts there's no food, or water!""I don't
think I'll go"Would have been reasonable thinking!They'd missed
out?Exactly! Reason probably told American colonies to
just take what the British were giving out:Because after all the British
empire had most powerful army/navy in the world at the time.America didn't
have trained army, navy, industrial base. Of course they had some help
from the French navy at the end, but even that was almost too late in coming.Guess what? We won, they lost!God's revelation is "reason" enough
to a believer!
Well put and my thoughts exactly. I've added a few such thoughts to this comment
section and it's nice to see a few others that feel this way.Things don't
have to be complicated in life.Bless You
These are not good times to focus on setting ourselves apart from each
other. Religiously or otherwise. To dunk or to sprinkle arguments is an absurd
way of fostering brotherhood in man.
If what Rambis described actually exists (info. sources please, Rambis), why
have no archeologists, anthropologists, geneticists, or other scientists who
specialize in ancient Mesoamerican societies indicated that there is evidence
supporting The Book of Mormon? Furthermore, since the Lamanites were
the "principal ancestors" of the American Indians (according to the BoM) and the
Lamanites began as a race sometime between 588 and 559 B.C. as a result of God
'magically' darkening the skin of Laman, Lemuel and their followers because of
their rebellion (see 2 Nephi 5), how is it possible that American Indians
existed millenia before 588 B.C., as scientific work relative to several
archeological sites in the Americas and genetic research involving retrieved
skeletons has proven?
Why try to tear down when you can build. Why accuse and fight when we can be
brother and sisters trying to make the world better. There are so much bad in
the world and we should have the same goal to make it a better place no matter
what the religious or scientific beliefs are. Non-believers and believers a
like are all brothers and sisters in this amazing thing called life. We can all
hide behind man created catergoizations of culture and race but we are all the
same brother and sisters of God and we should strive to be the best we can be.
Letting each other have there own beliefs without belittling them.
Yes someone did, GOD. No one else in my case.
To Mr Mr, why are the questions nonsense? Have you done any research yourself?
I have. Those questions weren't "invented". Nice try, yourself, at completely
ignoring evidence that has, indeed, been found.
"Skulls in South America Tell New Migration Tale" Bjorn CareyLiveScience Staff WriterLiveScience.com "For decades it has been
believed that the first peoples to populate North and South America crossed over
from Siberia by way of the Bering Strait on a land-ice bridge."Ya
think scientists wrong? Wrong about American Indian origins? Asians, "AND"
Africans, Australians! Who else? Nephites, Lamanites? Jaredites? Mulekites?We know everything about DNA right? We might as well not study it anymore!
Save money...Close down the research labs!Think DNA theory ought to be
reinterpreted by any new yet undiscovered evidence? News flash!
Scientist imperfect! However, God is perfect! Knows end from the
beginning!D&C 101: 16 Therefore, let your hearts be comforted
concerning Zion; for all flesh is in mine hands; be still and know that I am
God. God revealed to me many times through Holy Ghost to avoid
things that could have caused harm.I haven't been disappointed by the
Lord. Know what? He is God! He's in charge. God debunks the
debunkers!Scoffers can't 'prove' work isn't true.Let the heathen
rage!For now get spiritual proof through revelation! Scientific
proof? Our's will come when God's ready to reveal it!
ways of thinking. I grew up loving the scriptures (Bible and BOM) and I still
do. But, I realized my knowledge was limited and I researched. I don't believe
in any one "truth". The world is full of "true" things and I don't believe that
"God" chose any one church or way of thinking.I now live my life in Peace
and Love and "God" is my "ground of being".Bless you all!
TO "MICHEALANGELO" you clearly know nothing about the LDS church. First of all,
we sure do not support Warren Jeffs, the man is in prison where he belongs,
secondly, he does not belong to the LDS church, he belongs to the FLDS church
which is a breakoff from us and we denounce any other sects that breakoff from
the LDS Church. Maybe you should leave comments where you know what you're
talking about. Last, when one reads the Book of Mormon it is more than a warm
fuzzy feeling that tells them it's true. It's the Holy Ghost, who is a very real
Spirit that can strenthen you physically and emotionally like no other thing in
this world can.
With due respect "Book of Mormon" ,the Bible and Book of Mormon is "the word of
God" as you say, because someone told you it is.
just like the Koran was "true" to Mohammad, just like the Old Testament was true
to Moses and the New Testament to Paul (and many other ways of thinking) We
can't just think that one way is the only way of thinking. Everyone will never
agree and it's time that people take what is precious and make the world a
better place. It's not fair to think that others have to think the way we
think. If someone decides to that's fine, but don't think less of people because
they have their own ways. I think the very fact the God allows our world to be
this way tells us something.
I have read the article on Southern's web site. It is apparent that he was
rather looking to be offended before he did any genetic work. When something as
spurious as this "evidence" could convince him the Book of Mormon is wrong, you
know there never was much depth to begin with. Better to believe an uneducated
farm boy made up the Book of Mormon out of bits and pieces. This is a major
religious text, and it was just made up? The scientific evidence might or might
not change our view on the Book of Mormon, but I am 99.9% sure that an
uneducated person, such as Joseph Smith was at that time, could not have made it
up even with a rough framework to begin with. Yet that is what some of you
highly educated experts would have us believe. As a scientist myself, I cannot
Any of you who know anything about philosophy of science would know that's it's
categorically impossible to prove the negative. So refuting the Book of Mormon
as not true, and everyone who believes it's knowledge as made-up, just because
of the "lack of evidence" (either physical or spiritual) doesn't make
philosophical sense.Has it ever occurred to anyone that God doesn't
want there to be physical evidence? If he created the Earth, surely he's capable
of hiding any evidence that might pop up and confounding people so they wouldn't
figure it out. Why? Because he doesn't need scientists to prove to people that
it's true so that he can gain followers. He's capable of gaining followers his
own way.There may be no evidence, but you can still never prove it
didn't happen. Don't think there's a God? Well, you can't prove that either.Philosophically, the MOST you can say is that it's unprovable by science
The Bible and the Book of Mormon is the word of God, simply put. You have two
choices, either you follow what God has said in the scriptures or you go against
what he has said.
Why does Rambis provide a list of nonsense questions invented by those
threatened by evidence that doesn't square with the stories of the B of M?Nice try.
Why are there Mesoamerican drawings of battles between light and dark skinned
people?Why are there Mesoamerican drawings of people with large
beards, when modern Central Americans don't really grow beards?Why
are there artifacts and drawings of horses, when scholars said there were no
horses in Mesoamerica?Why did the Central Americans believe that the
Spanish Conquistadors were the fullfillment of the Great White God's promise to
return?Why are there stories passed down through generations among
some Central Americans that their ancestors came across the ocean in boats?Why have there been defensive earthworks been found, as described by the
BofM (do a search for defensive earthworks of Tikal)?Why is chiasmus
so prevalent in the BofM, when it wasn't even really understood at the time of
its translation?Oh, because it's not true, and there is no
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.
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 theLamanite 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
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?
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
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.
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.
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,
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.
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.
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?
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.
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!
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.
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.
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?
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.
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"?
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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.
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"......
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
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.
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
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.
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!
"One day science will reach the top of the hill of knowledge and find that
religion is already there."
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?
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.
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!
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.
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).
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.
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
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.
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 Gods.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I guess he is judging you that you didn't deserve an answer. I think we all
deserve an answer to gospel questions. 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".
Talks cheap, why not give examples of all these "great book writers?" If what
you assert is true than you have been caught by your own snare...indeed, if the
only criteria for being a prophet is a good imagination and mental illness than
we should be swimming in a sea of Book of Mormon type books by now? The Book of
Mormon stands alone in what it claims to be and how it claims it was produced.
All your other fiction writers are just that, fiction writers by their own
admission. Give me a break already.
I am sorry to hear of your struggles and respect your opinion. However, why
would I endure to the end in something that wasn't manifested or confirmed to
me? I struggled with this from being a sophomore in high school, through my
mission and up to a couple years after. I put Moroni's promise to the test and
it failed. Since leaving the church, I have never been happier! I have no ill
will towards the members as they are some of my favorite people out there. The
world is a better place because of Mormonism! I just feel like everyone has a
different path that suits them best. I like hearing what active members have to
say because there is always a similar tone behind their answer. No hard
feelings, but there are many other truths out there. Warmest regards!
RE: comments by 'Hey, "Ever notice"'Remember how I just wrote -
quoting the ever classic Hugh Nibley, of course - that thing about critics using
rhetoric in place of evidence? I rest my case.
To DNA (Just one reason) - To all of the things you addressed, my response is,
"Been there, done that." You can continue to repackage, retool,
reshuffle and rearrange all the old, tired arguments against the LDS Church as
much as you would like, but no matter what, they're still tired and old
arguments. Christians on this post having been telling Latter-Day
Saints, again and again to "Wake Up." My response is, wake up to what? To the
true form of Christianity? What then is true Christianity? Is it the
Christianity that supports gay and lesbian clergy, or the type that does not? Is
it the true Christianity which teaches the "Word Faith" doctrine, or the type
that does not? Is it the true Christianity which accepts the Catholic Church, or
the type that does not? Is it the true Christianity which follows people like
Benny Hinn, Bob Larson, Paul Crouch and Pat Robertson, or the type that does
not?You want to know why some Christian ministries spend most of
their time and resources attacking the LDS Church? Well, if a church can't even
agree among itself what true doctrines to follow, then of course it will attack
Have you read many books other than church books? I have. I have too many
examples to name in front of me of great book writers of fiction (some young of
age.Just because someone has a good imagination and a belief doesn't make
him/or her a prophet.There is also such a thing as mental illness and
there are many examples of that too.
Ever Notice 6:25:Truer words were never spoken. All of those who
scoff never bother to produce their own "version" of a "Book of Mormon". Indeed,
they, along with all other anti-Mormons, follow Hugh Nibley's rule of using
rhetoric in place of evidence and never bother to do us Mormons the invaulable
service of proving that it - writing the BOM that is - could be done. And what
they fail to realize is 1) Joseph Smith had a third grade education, he enjoyed
no formal training or schooling 2) Joseph simply dictated, he never refered to
notes, he never went back or asked where he last left off, he only dictated (by
memory if you do not believe his own testimony and the testimony of 11 other
witnesses) a 500+ word document in three-four months. Now that is impressive! If
Joseph Smith was just a good author, then he is the greatest author who ever
lived and deserves posthumously the Nobel Prize in liturature. But the fact is
that he was not "just a good author" he was exactly what he said he was. A
Prophet of God comissioned to translate a true witness of Jesus Christ.
In repsonse to your inquiry to Blueberry. I believe we each experience and
endure specific tests and trials to allow us to achieve our potential. Some
tragically lose loved ones as I did my little girl (and struggled with why?).
Some are striken with life altering disease. Others have survived all manner of
abuse. My personal believe is that you were handling your test
impressively. You became discouraged and stopped short. I truly don't know how
I would have handled the same test. The doctrine teaches to endure to the end.
Resentment is a repellent to happiness and can destroy so no matter what else
you do find a way to overcome what appears to be a large dose of it. Sincerely.
We have to be careful what we claim we DESERVE. Forgiveness from our Savior is
among the safe list.
That those who scoff at the challenge to duplicate Joseph Smith's work always
say that there are plenty of talented 25 year old writers, but they never give
evidence of a similar book as the Book of Mormon that has been created or
written. Why not? Also, notice that the scoffers never will attempt to
demonstrate themselves or show just how Joseph Smith did what he did. I know the
Book of Mormon is true because the Holy Ghost bore powerful witness of it too me
when I was reading it one afternoon in 1988. All the theories regarding how
Joseph Smith produced the Book of Mormon seem rather pitiful once you actually
know the truth. How did Joseph Smith create the Doctrine and Covenants, did he
plagerize that document too from some unknown source? The real proof of the Book
of Mormon is not from DNA, or external evidences at all, its from the withness
of the Holy Ghost. I have had that witness given to me in a profound and
convincing experience. I can not deny what I know, even though I cant prove it
to others. One day all will know the truth.
To Listen | 5:42 p.m.Dude, you rock! That is the funniest thing I
have ever read!
Hey blueberry or any other LDS member who believes the BOM to be true. I am
being completely sincere when I ask this. As an ex-missionary who defended the
church, who lived the gospel to the fullest, who through blood sweat and tears,
gave two long years of my life plus a good chunk of my life to the cause, how
come I never received the answer that it was true? If anyone deserved the
answer it was me. How come you or many others were able to receive this
confirmation, yet I could not? Trust me, I was worthy, I poured my soul out in
prayer and earnestly opened my heart. Nothing! Why?
Kinderhook Plates, Blood Atonement, Masonry, Adam God theory, DNA, Polygamy
(that is still practiced albeit in the "celestial kingdom," 9 different versions
of the first vision, Joseph Smith and Glass Looking, Teachings of Man lived on
moon in pat. blessings, editing of the book of commandments to D of C, revisions
of the church history, JS smoking a cigar after a sermon on word of wisdom. It
goes on and on and on.Wake up. Research any of this (use all of the
church teachings if you like....it is all there)Type any of these in the
internet and only read church documents...you will be surprised that this is all
part of the history of the mormons. Stop living the guilt from
Bishops and neighbors and live a life of choice.There is no free agency in
the church. People say that there is, but there isnt. You HAVE to follow the
leader or you wont make it in the eternal kingdom. That is ridiculous.
"The text is silent about others and the current Prophet along with every
Prophet since Joseph Smith have identified ALL native American, North and South
America as descendents of the Lamanites."Johnny: Please cite your
reference for Pres. Hinckley, Hunter, Benson, etc. where each of them states
what you claim above. Also, please state which definition of "lamanite" you are
using to base your claim (the one in Jacob 1 or the one in 4 Nephi). There is nothing incongruent about the BOM introduction (which is NOT
scripture, btw) stating that "[Lamanites] are the principal ancestors of
the American Indians" under the 4 Ne. definition of "Lamanite", i.e., everyone
who did/does not belong to the Church of Christ set up in 3 Ne 11-18. In fact,
unless you hold to the precept that 1) the LDS Church is a restored version of
the Church of Christ and 2) you belong to it, then everyone who doesn't fall in
that category would be a "Lamanite" under the 4 Ne. definition, regardless of
At the end of the day there are still over 13 million members of a church that
is expanding over the entire earth, as prophesied, that has a mix of devote and
casual members. Some quite confident and some quite confused. However, growing
rapidly and surviving every criticism and test with impressive results. Additionally, there are over 6 billion earthly inhabitants that are
mostly made up of good people with a vast aray of beliefs and traditions. Some
quite confident and some quite confused. Many will have the story
of the book brought to them and many will accept while many will not. Likely,
10, 20 and 30 years from now the membership will expand to impressive numbers.
A most critical scientific truth, within 70 years most if not all of
the authors today will know the truth. Until then, it will likely be a matter
of faith for science likely cannot prove or disprove the matter. It
is either a great hoax that teaches people sound doctrine of hope, love and
service which directs them in positive paths (so, not a bad worse case scenario)
or it is a GREAT truth that provides a blueprint for eternal exaltation.
Brant Gardner is a good guy, but is the wrong person to be representing a point
of view on this topic, even though he is probably correct. There are actual
credentialed LDS human DNA experts who have already spoken on this topic on
Gardner's side of the issue.To those who are calling Murphy and
Southerton's work and conclusions "science" and "facts", I disagree.In my profession I work with scientists. My role is to make sure they set up
their studies properly in order to effectively test their hypotheses. Murphy and
Southerton fail to do this.DNA matching requires, obviously, two or
more samples to compare. Conclusions must be limited to the source of the
samples (time, place, etc.) and not go beyond. For a BoM test, you would require
a representative sample at 600 BC of all potential populations in the Middle
East, plus a sample from the (probably) Asian Steppes at around 2000 BC and
compare those to native american samples from the same period (mtDNA and Y
chromosome both).Until we can do this, the argument is meaningless.
How could the Jaradites have left the middle-east at the time of the Tower of
Babel, when the Tower of Babel never existed?Things that make you go
Joe: Indians come from Jews.Scientist: DNA says they come from Asia.Joe: SOME of the Indians come from Jews.Scientist: Do you have proof of
that?Joe: The BoM says their DNA was altered because they were righteous.
They turned white.Scientist: Is black skin evil, then?Joe: Not
anymore. The Mormon people were at fault because they forced their leaders not
to give Priesthood to blacks.Scientist: How do you know the BoM is
reliable?Joe: The Spirit tells me in my heart and in my mind.Scientist: How do you know that is the Spirit and not your own thoughts,
feelings, and wishful thinking?Joe: I just know. Have you ever tasted
salt?Scientist: Yes.Joe: Come be baptized and you can work for
Read the introduction? Yes, the introduction states that "the Lamanites were
the principal ancestors of the American Indians". Let me
reiterate...."PRINCIPAL ancestors of the American Indians". The key word here,
principal, points to the fact that they were not the ONLY ancestors to the
American Indians. Someone supposedly uninspired and making it up would
reasonably have said simply that the Lamanites were the ancestors of the
American Indians. Further, Jews today have many different ancestors, yet they
are still referred to as and considered Jews and of Jewish descent, even when a
possible DNA mapping shows otherwise.
To Challenge:Are you serious!? The world both now and in the past is
filled with brilliant writers who could easily pen anything comparable or even
better to a single chapter! In fact, even a whole book. Your challenge is
of 23 year old talented writers (and they also have editors) I "feel" much truth
too..., but not much literal truth. It's time to face reality people!
Scotty,I trust that you are sincere in your remarks, but I would put
more stock in comparing the ATCG's of the genetic code in tracing relationship
to the subjective comparisons of photographs. Distinctive changes can occur
through restricted breeding. Look at the variety of dog breeds that developed
in less than a century.
What are you talking about? There is no reference to Cyrus the great in the
book of Mormon. You are thinking of the Old Testament.
I find this conversation so hilarious I don't even know where to begin. First of all, has Simonerton or Murphy ever said that their evidence is
air tight, irrefuttable and that no future science will ever alter their
findings in any way? I don't believe either of them have said that, but it sure
sounds like those who follow their works are saying just that, again and
again.Second, don't Born-Again Christains believe that the Holy
Spirit can manifest truth to them? I recently read where a critic of the Bible
has called into question the writings of Bible Apologist Josh McDowell. In
response, a Bible beliving Christian responded that she still believed in the
Bible because of the "Holy Spirit" telling her it's true. Hmmmmm. So if a
Christian feels strongly about the Bible it's the Holy Spirit working. If a
Latter-Day Saint feels strongly about the Book of Mormon, it's dismissed by the
same Christian as onl;y a "warm fuzzy."Finally, if the evidence
against the Book of Mormon is so irrefuttable and air tight, why does the word
"racist" have to be emphasized again and again by critics. Wouldn't the science
be able to stand all alone?
Yep don't confuse me with the facts my mind is made up. If they discovered the
golden tablet today and found they were written in ebonics and DNA showed we all
came from one of Joseph's 49 wives, we would believe it anyway just as the BOM
has been correctly tranlated and edited 200 time to be true and your not going
to change us.
This is not science. Nothing has been peer reviewed; not Murphy's work, not
Southerton's work, and certainly not Gardner's work. Thus this
"news" article does not report on science, it reports some crack-pot conculsions
of a bunch of people who have no idea what they are talking about. If the DMN is interested in some of my crack-pot conclusions, just let me
know. I'd love a little press.
I forced myself to read all the comments coming from those of you who
desperately want to believe in a book that you know cannot hold up to scientific
scrutiny. I have heard, and at one time believed them all. If you want to
believe in the Book of Mormon and its origins, according to Joseph Smith, then
go ahead. Just do so with the knowledge that most of the world sees the book
for what it is: a marvelous work of fiction.
I agree with Scotty | 5:14 p.m.I mean, what idiot said the sun is
the center of the galaxy? Just look and you can SEE that the sun swings around
the earth!And what imbecile said that germs cause disease? It is
obvious by looking at their eyes that sick people are possessed by demons!Scotty, step slowly away from the computer and put the keyboard down...
"Faith vs. Science rebuttal" supports his faith with facts, such as "Christ's
empty tomb, the star in the sky that appeared at His birth, Christ's miracles,
ect." Mr. or Ms. rebuttal, are you really a Mormon believer trying to make a
point using irony? What other "facts" support your faith? Do a few
archeological remnants validate ALL of the stories of the Bible? What evidence
PROVES the truthfulness of Christianity? It too has to be taken on faith.
If Joseph Smith "wrote" the BOM by his own intelligence, then why cant you or
your dispersion casting minions write one too? I mean you've only had since 1830
to duplicate Joseph Smith's work, whats taking you so long?
All you folks that keep pointing to the 60 minutes special, need to drop it.
That show was about do-it-yourself kits. It had nothing to do with DNA migration
studies like the Genographic Project being done by National Geographic. Also the lost tribes argument holds no water either. All the tribes
descended from Jacob, and all his wives were sisters. All the DNA would match.
Plus Asians existed before Jacob so that's not where they came from.
Earlier this year, I e-mailed the anthropology departments of 15 major
universities (starting with Syracuse Univ., which is just 70 miles east of
Palmyra, NY) that have researchers who specialize in ancient American cultures
to inquire if there is ANY evidence (archeological, genetic, linguistic, etc.)
that supports what's described in The Book of Mormon and the foundational claim
of the LDS Church regarding it (i.e., that the BoM is a history of ancient
peoples in the Americas, and the Lamanites were the principal ancestors of
Native Americans). All the departments' responses indicated the same thing:
There is no evidence supporting The Book of Mormon. I also asked if
there is ANY evidence of 230,000+ fair-skinned people (Nephites) who were killed
in 385 A.D. in the vicinity of the Hill Cumorah near Palmyra, NY (where the LDS
Church portrays the slaughter, as described in Mormon chapter 6, theatrically
during its pageant). I was informed there is none. If The Book of
Mormon was true, there would be genetic, archeological, linguistic, and other
types of evidence supporting it. Unfortunately for Latter-day Saints, there is
none. No thinking person can avoid these facts, or the conclusion that the BoM
is not historical.
How does DNA explain the sometimes striking European/Hebrew facial features of
many North American Indian tribes, such as the Sioux, Crow, Cherokee, and
Iroqua? These Indian tribe members do not look Asian at all, as compared to the
Alaskan Eskimos. Many of the Sioux tribes were referred to as Teutonic Sioux by
early settlers, because of their Germanic features. Judge for yourself. Look
at the early photographs of the various Indian tribes.
IF the Book of Mormon was simply the creation of a 23 year old farm boy then
there would be many other 23 year old guys that would be able to write a similar
book...where are they? In fact, IF the Book of Mormon were simply the rantings
of a 23 year old farm boy it would make for a poor sunday school
cirriculum...yet it is studied every fourth year in the LDS sunday school my
millions. IF the Book of Mormon were simply a creation from the imagination of a
young yankee farm boy it would not have the depth or complexity to be studied at
the college level. Most importantly, IF the Book of Mormon were just the work of
man it would not have the power to manifest the Holy Ghost to one that seeks to
know of its divinity with a pure heart and with real intent. I know the Book of
Mormon is true without a doubt because of a spiritual witness that was far more
than "warm fuzzies" or an emotional experience, FAR MORE!!!
Can someone tell me why they are comparing Latin American DNA with Jewish. From
my reading of the book of mormonn, Lehi was of the house of Manasseh and Ishmael
from Ephraim. Both descended from joseph, not Judah. Why should we expect the
same miotochondrial DNA if they had different ancestral mothers?
It's hard to believe that there are STILL people who literally believe that an
obviously angered god decided to kill all the mothers, their babies, puppies and
kittens of the world in "The Great Flood." Come on people ... haven't you ever
heard of symbolism and metaphor?
It doesn't matter what the evidence is, there will always be people who believe
in the Book of Mormom and the LDS Church. It's a little thing called cognitive
The observation has been made, several times now, that the Lamanites were a
people genetically altered from their original state of " a white and
delightsome people". Therefore, of course their DNA would not match a modern day
hebrew(or an ancient one, either). When the first comment in this regard was
made, this debate was over. Why this point was ingnored and arguing continued
tells me that interest in DNA is not really the driving force of this discussion
faith is not apart from reason
TO "ELIJAH ABEL"I don't think you're correct in saying that the Book of
Mormon is a way of dehumanizing, exploiting and enslaving dark skinned people.
The Church has 12 million plus members, an extremely large percent are "dark
skinned". In fact there are more Mormons outside the U.S. than inside.
Missionaries are sent all over the world, ie South America, Mexico, Asia,
Africa. I will soon be going on a mission to South Africa which is a 73% black
mission... We Mormons would not sacrifice 2 years of our lives in hopes of
teaching these people our religion and want them to join our church if we were
racist. What's more an increasingly large percent of leaders of our church are
"dark skinned" we love everyone equally and it's a shame that you've been misled
concerning what the Book of Mormon truly means.
Faith vs Science - I have disagree with you. Science is amazing, and how life
perpetuates itself is amazing. I am unsure as to why you feel science is cold
and absolute. Science is searching for answers to questions and creating
questions. Science is why I am alive today, because without science my mother
would have died before I was born, without science, I would have never had
children, without science both of my parents would have died from cancer,
without science people would not have vaccinations, anti-biotics and numerous
other benefits to humankind. Without science, this forum you are posting on
would not exist.Science is not cold and cruel, unless you interpret
it to be so.
Faith and science are ultimately reconcilable because I don't have enough
information to conclude that they're not.
Why did the First Presidency direct me as a missionary, back 30+ years, to teach
Mesoamerican archaeology using "Ancient America Speaks" filmstrip and supporting
pamphlets and photos in my missionary copies of the Book of Mormon, only now
have removed it all?How confused would my investigators be if I came back
one day later, and told them all that stuff I had taught them the day before,
had been removed? We dont know where the Book of Mormon lands are! Or who the
descendants are! Talk about science being unreliable? Inspired leadership?To quote from an authoritative source:"The Authenticity of the
Book of Mormon constitutes our most important consideration of the work. Not
only does the Book of Mormon merit [the most thorough and impartial]
consideration, it claims, even demands the same The question of the authenticity
of the Book of Mormon is therefore ONE IN WHICH THE WORLD IS CONCERNED.The
Latter-day Saints base their belief in the authenticity of the book on the
following proofs: certain external, or extra-scriptural evidences,
amongst which are:5. Corroborative testimony furnished by archeology and
ethnology."James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith [Salt Lake City:
Deseret Book Co., 1981], 247.)
Science and evidence support faith.When Christ was resurrected He
left us with an empty tomb. The star in the sky appered at His birth. He
worked miracles. His apostles did not have to walk by faith, Christ was with
them performing rock hard scientific evidence to conclude this Man was not just
any man. We do walk by faith today but that faith is grounded and rooted in
historical facts, evidence, and science. If historical facts start to discredit
your faith maybe your putting your faith in somthing that isn't true. The Bible
has much scientific evidence backing it up. Does the Book of Mormon? I was LDS
not too long ago but facts and evidence changed my views of Joseph Smith. Why
rely on subjective emotional feelings to costantly discredit factual claims
against your beliefs? This article is just another attack on a fact that was
produced by an unexperieced "professional" trying to support a "warm fuzzy
feeling" he had while reading the Book of Mormon. I support my faith with
Apologetics disgust me. Can any of you really step back and look at your own
philosophies from an objective point of view? Is it even possible? I want to
know that you can prove ANYTHING in your favor if you REALLY want to. So it's no
coincidence that a very small percentage of people ever leave the religion they
were born into. This includes you, your parents, your grandparents, etc. Think about it: which looks more legit from a far-away viewpoint? Would
the "Jaredite" markers have totally overtaken the Israelite markers of Lehi's
group in such a small span of time? No. Don't you think there would be some
remnant of archaeological evidence to support the Book of Mormon if it actually
happened? Look at the apologists evidences. Are those really legit? Come on
If the LDS Church does not put any stock in DNA science, then why is Michael
Whiting, PhD, a professor at BYU and curator and director of the BYU DNA
This is off the subject, but Scientists are doing anything they can to get a
rise out of people. Example: Global Warming is cause by polution from cars,
industrial plants, all by humans. Yet, figure how much polutant goes in the air
when a volcano explodes. Ive yet to hear how the Scientist figure on caping one
of the volcanoes up. In fact its probably the polution from volcanoes that built
the Ozone layer in the first place. Our Scientist need to use there knowlege for
finding cures for cancers, and aids. Not the DNA to try to turn people away from
the church. Its not going to work. The gospel is true. We hope some day you find
that out for yourselves.
If we believe science is the ultimate rule then faith has no place. Science
speaks nothing of faith and hope. Science is only absolute. If we live by
science we live in a cold, cruel world and die. Science tells us we come from
like animals over tens of thousands of years. We are animals and there for we
should act like animals. More and more this is the attitude of non believers,
not just anti Mormons. The more we remove faith and hope from our lives the more
we are animals. In fact many will read this and say what more are we then
animals. It is our right to believe as we may. It is not our right to force
others. The LDS Church make claims and continues Pres. Smiths claims because
that is it's right. We can have faith in it or reject it, which is our right.
Any one who uses science to prove or disprove it is acting on that right. But in
the end Earth is either a mass of rock that will eventually be consumed by the
sun or a place for god to raise children. Death is the only absolute.
We should be able to locate Zelph's bones and do a complete study on his DNA.
That would clear it up.
Dear Anonymous, EXACTLY!!!
I've always viewed religion as a philosophy on how to live your life.
"Christian" principles such as love thy neighbor, etc lead to happiness for most
people. If the Mormon philosophy satisfies you then it is positive. If you end
up with eternal salvation good on you! I don't think anyone is going to burn in
hell by practising christian values by whatever name you call them. FYI, for me
the word of wisdom is not a christian value, but power to you if it helps you
lead a happty life. I can say this with 100% certainty--Mormon women are hot!
maybe the word of wisdom has some eternal good in it. Or it could be DNA.
DNA is powerful, but the key to DNA is not even close to being solved. Some
people have a tendency to dispute scientific evidence if it doesn't fit within
their personal beliefs, others incorporate science into their beliefs. I have
been to church functions where some members are obnoxious about their political
beliefs, assuming every other LDS person is a hard core right winger. Why
ignore scientific evidence, why embrace ignorance? There is no scientific
proof that the writings in the Bible are accurate. It is healthy to not blindly
follow in any religion, it is healthy to seek the truth.
I'm not sure why I get censored. My comments are not that negative. Basically
the computer geek let us know that there are possible explanations why the DNA
evidence does not show middle eastern origins (Hebrew) for the natives of North
and South America. I think everyone is too believing in the "science" of DNA
matching. It can produce iron clad relationships, or, it can produce....nothing
conclusive (the case here). Let's face it, thousands of years have gone by
since the time of the BOM stories. Peoples have come and gone. We just don't
KNOW anything for sure. What we can look at is the character of the person who
translated the BOM. Now there is where we can begin a real debate....
Dear engineer,If you had been the insightful engineer who had the
commission to build the fortifications that Captain Moroni required to defend
the people of his day but you knew that they would ultimately fail and would
possibly remain to be judged by a people who you knew would far surpass any
knowledge that you currently had wouldn't you try to secure the promise of your
biographers to skew the books just a little?I stand ready to defend
Joseph's actions, to testify of him as The Prophet of this last dispensation and
take The Book of Mormon seriously enough to allow its historicity to play out in
the sealed portion(s) thereof. Who can say whether either the
descendants of Hagoth or perhaps even Moroni himself were not allowed to leave a
record of being inspired to unite in bringing this record to its most recently
recorded resting places from some other, yet undisclosed but real land that
remains to be revealed for the very purpose that Our Father knew would happen so
that our very faith might be tried as was prophesied? Is this all
too convenient? Please keep Charles Anthon and the book of Lehi in mind!
What it always comes down to is this:Either Joseph Smith was telling the
truth or was a liar.
You're gonna believe a London architect about the language of ancient Crete?
Over the greatest scholars of ancient languages? Of course not. So Michael
Ventris's decipherment of Minoan Linear B can be dismissed without a hearing.And, obviously, you're not gonna believe a clerk in the Swiss patent
office over the great Newton and the leading professors of physics in the
greatest universities. So that silly Einstein can safely be ignored. What a
loon. If we was any good, he'd have a university appointment in physics.Credentials are everything. Evidence and argument count for NOTHING.
you are right. Utah was the last state to allow NDNs the right to vote-1954-, we
might all be speaking Japanese if one of the Lamanite tribes hadn't been allowed
to participate in the military. One has no farther to look than at a particular
SE UThigh school with 50% percent natives yet the sports teams speak volumns of
the racism that exists as a microcosim of that community. Within the last 5
years the county court had to be reminded to allow natives to be chosen from the
jury pool, the town baseball field was one of only two to be awarded nationally
using ndn numbers and proposals to get that huge grant. In county with 55%,
being native, the descripancies ring loud and clear in who is in the detention
centers and on the law enforcement.From the state colleges to the hospital being
built NDN money and numbers play a significant role in rewarding grants. Issues
that selma,alabama settled years ago still linger yet when you bring up the
elephant in the room ..the answer is whipdeedo! or Kill the messenger. Heck they
can keep the book just show us where the money is for real!
Funny, don't you think, that not only did both Southerton and Murphy admit in
their essay in the book "American Apocrypha" (pg. 53) that their very DNA
testing methods did not rule out a small scale migration of people into an
already populated area (see John Sorenson's essay on the issue of "others" in
the Book of Mormon) but that a report came in just three days ago that refutes
those very same methods that both Southerton and Murphy used in their "rebuttal"
of the Book of Mormon. I cannot post the link here, but I can direct people
interested to go to Jeff Lindsay's blog "Mormanity" and then to click on the
link given under his post "DNA and the Book of Mormon Update: Science Warns of
Limitations on DNA Testing".For those who are triumphantly declaring
that truth and science have "proven" the Book of Mormon false, might I suggest
that they stick by their own standard and look at all of the evidence and facts
before they jump to conclusions. In other words, do for yourself what you keep
insisting the Mormons should do.p.s Pay attention to the 2nd to last
paragraph in the report.
Well, engineer, perhaps you're finally right and nobody has anything to answer
you with just now. Oh, but wait! I think I see it coming to me
now. (Please be so kind as to read my next message).
As used in this article, the term "LDS scientist" is an oxymoron.
As a member of the LDS church, I think we should all be very respectful of
science. I think is unfortunate when church members downplaying science. Of
course science changes, but that is usually the nature of truth-seeking.
Scientists are trained to conform their views to be consistent with the data,
which I think is admirable. I wonder what is the best way for a
person who wants to be a believing, science-loving, Mormon to handle difficult
facts? The most comfortable response for me is to suspend judgement until we
have further information. But there isn't a lot of room in the church for doubt
or uncertainly. If more unpleasant facts are to come out in the future, maybe
we will have to become more accepting of doubt and uncertainty? Our
leaders seem to be setting the example of not being interested in intellectual
or scientific topics, and most church members seem to be following that example.
But how many generations will that last?Then there is the pleasant
chance that at some future time science and history will become more "friendly"
to our cause.
All of you who are basing the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon on a "spiritual
feeling" need to question your assumptions regarding that spiritual feeling.
Just because you feel it, doesn't make it true. Based on the evidence, it's all
in your head. Yes, it is wonderful and life-changing, but it doesn't mean it's
I suspect Joe Smith wrote the Book of Mormon in concert with Oliver Cowdry and
Sydney Rigdon, lifting the main story from Spalding's "View of the Hebrews" as
well as inserting extended passages from the bible.
Fifth, there is NO, absolutely NO, mention of any others in the BOM text. The
text is silent about others and the current Prophet along with every Prophet
since Joseph Smith have identified ALL native American, North and South America
as descendents of the Lamanites. The Church defined the grounds of the debate.
Sixth, it is incomprehensible how a book a specific as the BOM can
mention everything about war, metallurgy, farming, coinage and yet no mention of
interaction with others. When ancient culture and civilizations encountered
each other usually war resulted. Not in the BOM, it was so uneventful that no
mention was made in the entire text. That is ridiculous. Seventh,
DNA evidence refutes every population size with the exception of a small colony
which is easily swamped by others DNA.Eighth, the Church continues
to print in its correlated material, which is described as "inspired" by the
members of the Church, a hemispheric model. So maybe you should send a memo to
the "inspired" brethren that they are incorrectly describing who the Lamanites
are and were they lived.Best,Johnnny Rotten
A Scientist...I disagree with you; we do know many things;First it is inconsistent with Hebrew law to marry outside the Chosen people.
And if you read Southertons book he explains who the control group is and how we
identify ancient Hebrew DNA. That is the control group. Second, we
know that all the DNA migrations to the new world predates book of Mormon
peoples and Adam and Eve. The date to 8,000 B.C. or earlier.Third,
we do know that the sample size is more than large enough and has a very small
margin of error.Forth, the claims Southerton and Murphy refute,
hemispheric and Meso-American models, in there books and articles were made by
Joseph Smith, the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants section 32 or
Bert: didn't read it did you? Even though He can, God doesn't often reward
intellectual laziness with inspiration and knowledge.
Science, depends on who looking into the microscope and WHY? Been to Egypt 23
times and they can not determine the DNA of who's who and they KNOW who the body
belongs to. This dog and pony show is just that.
If the BOM is not what it claims to be, where did it come from? I challenge
anyone to write a single chapter of comparable content.
To "A Scientist""The Book of Mormon makes no claims as to the
genetic profiles of the peoples in it." ?!?!?!Are you serious?Read the introduction. It still says that "the Lamanites were the
principal ancestors of the American Indians."I take that at face
value, to mean what I was taught my entire life as a Mormon, that Native
American and Lamanite are interchangeable. Every LDS Prophet since Joseph Smith
up until Gordon B. Hinkley has used the term "Lamanite" to refer to Native
Americans. It is still used to describe Native Americans. My children are Native
American and I find the application of the term "Lamanite" to my children
increadibly offensive, since the Book of Mormon makes Lamanites out to be cursed
with a skin of darkness.It is, what Thomas Murphy said, a 19th
Century racist myth that dark skinned people got dark because God cursed them
with dark skin, developed as a way to legitimized dehumanizing, exploiting and
enslaving dark skinned people. It is the same with the curse of cain doctrine,
which still stands and will be taught as long as LDS leaders refuse to set the
record straight by repudiating it.Shame.
Ok, let's remove the DNA claims and see what we are left with. Look at many of
the above posts and we are basically left with "feelings". Let's look at some
of the other posts regarding "feelings". This is what we are basically left
with. Some will use their feelings to make the world a better place...I hope so
because I feel that's all we will have in regards to the BOM. Stop arguing and
use the book to make your life better. Also, do not critisize those that know
that "feelings" do not make truth. They can make the world a better place too.
I prayed... God told me it's not true. End of debate for me.
The problem with modern apologetics is that it is not intellectually honest.
The apologists omit important facts, facts that put evidence in its proper
context.For Instance they give hope to sincere members of the Church
by stating that the Jaradites could be Asian, without explaining that the DNA
evidence conclusively states that all migrations predate the end of the last ice
age. DNA markers place the date prior to Adam and Eve. Furthermore
they omit the information about DNA markers, information that can determine
whether migrants come from western or eastern Asia. The markers prove the
ancestors of the native-Americans almost exclusively come from Mongolia. They also fail to mention that the horses found in America died out over
8,000 years ago.It is the apologist that misleads and misuses
evidence to cloud the truth about BOM studies.Best,Johnny Rotten
B.H. Roberts (a believer) wrote in the 1920's that the BOM had serious
problems regarding historicity (See Studies of the Book of Mormon). Since that
time the evidence against the BOM and its truth claims has continued to grow.
It is so overwhelming that apologists are forced to redefine
important facts about which the descendants of the Lehites are, where they
lived, were there others and rewrite other so called unchanged truths.
Apologists even ignore D&C section 32 pronouncement from the lord to serve a
mission to the Lamanites in the mid-western USA.Science only
confirms the claims made by anti-Mormons that the BOM is not historical.Best,Johnny Rotten
If anyone bothered to watch the 60 Minutes (CBS) broadcast on tracing genealogy
via DNA sampling, they would know that frankly it is an inexact science. The
segment is worth watching and seems to trash the assertions from Simon
Southerton. Also, think about this: Iraq/Turkey/Iran, etc. are technically
located in SOUTHERN ASIA. WIth migration from those areas to other zones deeper
in "traditional" Asia, this explains a great possibility of complicating a
"pure" find. Also, as I recall, the most accurate comes from the X chromosome,
not the Y. At any rate, there are a lot of "scientific mysterys" the surround
the Bible, yet few question its veracity. Hence, we should take the Book of
Mormon more as a spiritual not literal historical document. Anyone who has
studied the monographs of Ce Acatel Tepolitzlan Quetzalcoatl and the Popol Vuh,
see too many similarities to render the Book of Mormon invalid. It is impossible
for Joseph Smith to have conjured up so many similarities over 150 years ago
without knowing of them.
Didn't Joseph Smith also say that the earth was 6000 years old? Please someone
correct me if I am wrong.
I don't know why many of you seem to believe the notion that everything that is
stamped with the word science on it is actually legitimate science. Anybody
scientist that is completely familiar with the Book of Mormon and has actually
read the works of Murphy and Southerton and honestly evaluated their claims
without bias realize that THEIR CONCLUSIONS ARE TOTAL GARBAGE. Yes, I believe
science, and I would never dismiss the claims of good science done well, but
this is not good science. It takes claims the Book of Mormon never made, and
then tries to disprove it using DNA from modern people without a legitimate
control for comparison. The Book of Mormon makes no claims as to the genetic
profiles of the peoples in it. Lehi, Mulek, and Ishmael were likely all of
different genetic backgrounds, and even if you had their DNA to compare to, you
might never prove that any native Americans were their descendants. My daughters
are 1/8 Cherokee. But you could never prove that they were a descendant of their
maternal great grandfather using Mitochondrial DNA or Y chromosome markers,
because these genetic markers are not passed on in that way.
Why are we relying in the arm of flesh to dictate what we believe? The BOM is
historical no matter what DNA may state. We do realize that the knowledge of DNA
hasn't been around all that long and when it comes to science anything "new" is
rarely right and is filled with flaws.
YesI've read the BOM my entire life; I read it 8 times on my mission alone. I
also taught seminary for three years. I never received an answer to my prayers,
however I always felt warm and comfortable in Church. What is funny to me is
that all my very good Evangelical friends have received similar "feelings of the
spirit" when they prayed to know if what they believed is true. Furthermore, I have felt those same wonderful feelings while bonding with my
wife, watching TV, enjoying good and not so good music, competing in and
watching my children compete in sporting events, reading a good fiction novel,
watching Star Wars, and playing war games in the US Army.I no longer
feel comfortable using feelings as a means to test truth claims. I believe God
gave me a brain and expects me to use it.Best,Johnny
Why wouldn't the Nephites have Asian genetic markers? Nephi is a direct
decedent of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were born in Missouri, some 6,000
years after Asians migrated to and populated the Americas. Hence all of
Adam and Eve's decendents were Asian. Who needs Brant Gardner?
Can DNA evidence disprove the divinity of the Book of Mormon? Of course not.
But certainly several claims and popular LDS beliefs need to be re-examined.
Might it be time to quit identifying anyone of American-Indian or Polynesian
descent as Lamanite? Mormons and Americans must begin to call into question
their notions of race. If we want to put DNA studies to positive use we will
realize that we are all "mutts." DNA shows that we are all pretty much the
same. Our group identities are historical and cultural constructs used to
reinforce power relationships. DNA can't disprove the Book of Mormon, but
hopefully it can challenge notions of being "God's elect" and racist attitudes.
I believe that DNA and Genetic technologies are still in their infancy. Science
is always discovering new facts--the future holds an infinate number of new
facts. The Spirit of Holy Ghost does not lie.
I am an active, temple recommend and calling holding, tithe paying, member of
the Church who doesn't believe in the historicity of the BOM.If you
spend anytime studying DNA, BOM anachronisms, anthropology, textual critism, and
archeology you will come to the same conclusion. If you visit with trained
professionals even at BYU they will confirm that the BOM has hundreds of
problems. It is not that evidence for the truthfulness of the BOM does not
exist; while that is true, it is that there is a vast body of evidence that
continues to mount against the BOM. All the Asian DNA predates
8,000 B.C.That means it predates the Jaradites, the Lehites, Noah
and the flood and Adam and Eve. Furthermore we (the Church) are forced redefine
the BOM to fit modern understandings of Mesoamerica and its population. The
Prophets continue to teach that all these peoples and events are literal.Even Dr. Whiting has admitted that our understanding of the BOM and its
lands must be redefined. I say yes, redefined as not historical, rather they
were created in the mind of Joseph Smith.
Those of you who don't believe due to these scientific facts obviously can not
believe in a God, or in Jesus Christ, and apparently refer to Bible stories as
only being metaphorical. If you take science as the ends all to all debate -
then obviously you are all very atheistic.I will hold to my beliefs
regardless of science as it gives me something more important to hold to than a
belief in nothing more than the Big Bang theory and evolution. Just leave us
alone and let us worship how, what, or where we may - the same as we do for you.
I believe in the Book of Mormon. Shouldn't that be the most important factor to
me? I am secure in my faith and am not swayed by what others say to support or
refute it. If someone else doesn't believe it, fine. If someone else does
believe it, that's fine, too.I never understand why believers and
non-believers care so much about what others think.
Science also can not support the idea that Jesus Christ was resurrected. There
is no evidence for this as according to science it would be impossible. So I
guess that all Bible believers out there and those that profess Christianity are
wrong because the Bible is wrong also.There will always be unanswered and
unproven theories regarding religion. Why do you non-mormons feel that you have
to spend so much time and effort to convince us how wrong we are? Are we doing
something to hurt you by our beliefs? With all the good that the Mormon church
does in the world to help others, etc. why do you feel you need to stop it? Why
take it all so personally? Christ taught that by their fruits ye shall know
them - whose fruits are sweeter here - those of the church and its leaders and
majority of members or those who continue to kick against the pricks and accuse
Mormons of believing in a false book.It doesn't matter to me the lack of
evidence to support the resurrection and Bible either - I believe in Christ's
resurrection as fully as I do the BOM.
Just read the book with an open mind and then ask yourself if an ignorant, 19th
century farm boy could have "fabricated" this writing. Perhaps JK Rowlings great
great grandmother wrote the book? OF course if Rowlings ancestor wrote the book
then Nephi would probably be gay! People who critisize the book have never read
it - that is my experience. They have a bone to pick with the Church and so they
start drumbing up a hodge-podge of unfounded so-called scientific mumbo jumbo
that some ex-communicated member is hosting. Same ole same ole. Just READ THE
BOOK. The Book of Mormon stands on it's own and doesn't need any scientific
proof any more than the resurrection of Christ does.
I think the reason why this non-issue is so important is that when a layman
reads the Book of Mormon in the context of the LDS religion, it is clear to him
that the preponderance of modern Lamanite ancestry is supposed to funnel through
the Book of Mormon Lamanites, whose ancestry funnels through Lehi, Ishamael,
Sam, the Mulekites, and the other characters who immigrated from Israel to the
New World. Most people just arent smart enough to read the Book of
Mormon and perceive that the genetics of the Nephites and Lamanites could have
been totally drowned out millions of Asians who were already here.
Does not Isaiah speak of a marvelous work and a wonder, at the end of verse
29,and he states that the coming forth, presumably of the Book of Mormon, will
be to confound the wise and the learned? why then based one's belief principally
on the ever changing development of human understanding? Did not "science"
believe at one point the earth was flat? DNA debates problably neither prove or
disprove a pointunless one has the control sample to compare it with, in this
case Seventh Century Lehite. Is not the obscurity of the origins of the Book of
Mormon part of the process of the|"depths of humility" required to approach in
sincere prayer the putative author of the Book, namely God?
A few years ago, I took the Moroni challenge. My heart was achingly open. I read
the entire Book of Mormon and prayed about it. Without knowing anything about
DNA evidence, I knew that what I had just read was 19th century literature,
written by a some rough genius. Not very faith-promoting, I know, but really,
there are some things you can intuit with an open mind. Who really doesn't have
an open mind here in this debate?
i am native american. if i am not jewish then why am i circumcised?
Like Moby Joe, I have read the Book of Mormon, prayed about it fervently...and
was never filled with the Holy Spirit to change my faith journey. Why is it
that people who honestly have read it...and NOT been moved by it..why is it that
we are told we just were not being spiritual enough??? That we really did not
I don't buy it. It's time for the Church to admit that the Book of Mormon is
inspired fiction. Go to mormon.org and watch Elder Ballard's response to the
question, "Is there scientific proof authenticating the Book of Mormon." His
reply is indirect. He seems to be implying that the word of God does not have
to be based on actual fact or history. I believe the Church is headed toward
that premise.My sincere and direct statement to the leaders of the
Church: This duplicity is causing major strife in my relationships. OWN UP to
the truth! You will ultimately be responsible for much sorrow because of your
I love it Attack the BOM and everyone and their dog comes out of the woodwork.
The philosophy seems to be "I have already made up my mind, don't confuse me
with the facts." Some things you just have to take on faith. Either you have
faith or you don't. If people are leaving the Mormon church based on this
issue, they don't belong in the Church. Happy Trails.
To begin, I am an active member of the LDS church and I don't understand why
Mormons continue to get upset about these types of articles. Somehow, we have
gotten the idea that we are being singled out in some way. All you have to do
is turn on the history channell and there is at least a program a day where
"experts" of various forms debate the bible, it's teachings, what happened vs.
what didn't happen. A lot of it is very interesting and I ponder what was
discussed and other times I dismiss it. I guess the point I am making is that
there are people out there trying to prove/disprove the Bible and its various
teachings. They have discussed it until they are blue in the face and have not
come up with any definite conclusions. The Book of Mormon is not exempt from
these discussions either. We all need to look at these type of articles and
take them for what they are. Opinions with a bit of science rhetoric. Stop
getting so worked up about everything.
Read 4 Nephi. the definition of "Lamanite" was changed to denote those who
rebelled against the believers around AD 190 or so. Under that definition,
anyone not of the Nephite faith (or refusing it later) would have been
classified as "Lamanite"--including American Indians.The problem,
not with good science, but with people's twisting of good science, is that we
quickly become overly confident of ourselves and our "results". Elder Scott (a
nuclear engineer, btw) had it right in his last conference talk when he
explained that we can never reach "absolute truth" using the scientific
method.Scientific claims cannot knock down religious tenets anymore
than religious dogmas will destroy scientific inquiry; the two are after
completely different questions: Science searches out the "how", the mechanisms
nature, but does a poor job of explaining "why", the underlying purpose. With
religion, answers to the purpose of everything are sought, but the details are
less important. I have no qualms with the idea that "And God said, Let there be
light" leaves out some of the details of creation. Such mechanistic questions
are not germane to the point that God brought forth the earth, however it was
To "Why Argue About it?":You say you "find it interesting that those
who oppose are those who have not read the book and taken the promise of Moroni,
or are those who have had action taken against them by the church and lost their
testimony."You've described some, but not nearly all, of those who
disagree with the church's claims about the Book of Mormon. I have read the
book. I have prayed sincerely, fervently, desperately about it. If God gave me
any answer, it was to trust what makes sense. The Book of Mormon doesn't.Also, I've never had action taken against me by the church. No one
offended me, causing me to stop believing. There are hundreds of thousands of
people who are just the same.
My comment is to the person who claims the Book of Mormon to be fiction; How
does a 23 year old farmer with an elementary education write a 500 page book
that can so perfectly refer to the past and present, that fits so perfectly with
the Holy Bible, that he devoted his life to, Putting his money, time, labor, and
pain into the words of this book you call fiction. He willingly went into a mob
prison where he prophetically claimed he would not be coming out of alive. He
died for this so called fictional book. You must not know much about this Book
of God if you truly believe its words to be fictional.
A most timely and provocative subject, DNA and the lineage of cultures outlined
in the Book of Mormon. But it was and is a giant mis-step, by either an editor,
the writer or folk at the conference, to allow this "speaker and protagonist" to
carry the banner for the LDS scientific crowd. Very disquieting to have the News
offer such a piece and then juxtapose that a rank amateur make pronoucements
best left to geneticists and trained scientists. The debate and discussion needs
to occur, but the "public participants" should be those schooled not only in the
culture of their "calling" but in serious academic endeavor. As is, the piece is
largely "opinion" and to the malcontents, it just evidence the Mormons don't
wish to shoot straight or play fair - when discussing the nuance of Book of
Mormon lineages. Apparently there is plenty of mystery that remains to be
explored; and with some the Book of Mormon story is re-branded and re-packaged
nearly every decade. Navajo children, once of Lehi's clan; now part of the tribe
of Northern Mongolians? A gordian knot of sorts,and who shall unwind the
tortuous mystery? "Any speaker" at a public forum in SLC?
The most troubling thing about this article to me is the treatment of Southerton
and Murphy at the hands of the church. If they don't tote the party line 100
percent on all things then they are kicked out? What is the good of that? Most
members of the church are inactive, yet they still remain on the records of the
church. Fine. Why single out these two? Don't we want ALL to come unto Christ
and be baptized in His name? Let God be the judge of who is in and who is out
at the last day!
Didn't the Jaredites come from parts of the M.E. and Asia following the changing
of languages and destruction of the Tower of Babel? In any case, they weren't
Israelites. Whose to say, no matter how learned some former bishop may be, that
more of the Jaredite DNA didn't survive through inter-marrying and various
degrees of population destruction over the course of 2,600 years? The records
are so detailed from that time period, and we're all so smart, we know exactly
what happened. Right.
It would seem that if you are disposed to non-belief or belief, DNA is your
friend. Either way genetics is not as simple as the two sides would have you
In response to the person who posted as "Science has all the answers?":You say you support studying and learning to answer the questions we face, and
leaving the rest up to faith. Fine. Is the DNA/Book of Mormon question one of
those issues?I'm not saying that science has all answers, but on the
question of whether Native Americans were descended from Lehi and his fellow
Book of Mormon characters, science has a clear answer: no. There's no need for
faith to answer that question; the question has been answered. And
yes, your world view probably would change, possibly every month, if you relied
on science to answer your questions. That's the beauty of it. Science changes
because human understanding grows. No one claims a scientific theory is beyond
question, and, ideally, as one theory falls, a better one takes its place,
bringing us closer to the truth. If your ultimate goal is to
understand truth, then your understanding and beliefs should change and improve
as you learn more.True, some questions are unanswered, but be sure
you don't reject answers when they come and when they make sense.
I disagree with Cuch's statement on the treatment of the native Americans. I can
go to any of my numerous histories of the American West (not Church
publications) and pull out statement after statement of Indians trusting their
Mormon neighbors and being very wary of the "gentiles." I have had some very
dear friends that belong to the Pima and Navajo tribes. I never used, exploited
or took advantage of any of the Indians I know. They are humorous and
interesting people. Furthermore, one of my distant relations was known as a
particular friend of the Indians and his family keeps that reputation over a
century later. Read the (based on fact) accounts by non-Mormon author J.D.
Fitzgerald of the Mormons helping the Indians when the gentile government was
stealing from them. Very little in history bears out your statement. I'm sorry
if you had a poor experience personally, but I don't think that the overall
historical record bears you out. From Joseph Smith's first mission to the
Lamanites to today, the church has sensed their scriptural responsibility toward
the native Americans. They certainly have not acted perfectly, but at least
Hooray for free speech in this country, no matter how mis-informed. Spectacular
technology developments cannot account for customs which date back before the
time line given. If the learned scholars had spent time in Harvard's
anthropological studies, they would have noted that the underclass or non-rulers
were picked up as slave/family to provide continuance in the trades. This goes
back over 3000 years. THEY WERE NOT FAMILY in the DNA sense but in every other
The problem arises when someone like President Hinkley when speaking to a
gathering of Native Americans refers to their Lamanite ancestors. DNA should
back up his references if they are indeed descendants of Lamanites.
Adam and Eve, the Flood, the Tower of Babel, etc. are not metaphorical, "Belief
in Bible", they are real people and real events. There is ongoing debate as to
the true location of the "final battle" of the Nephites and Lamanites, whether
it was in Central America or North America, as there is a "Hill Cumorah" in each
place. I truly don't care where it happened. It is enough for me to know that
it did. The teachings in the Book of Mormon were written for us in modern
times, kind of like an email sent to us by our ancient prophets to be
discovered, or revealed, when the time was right. Read 1 Nephi Chapter 13.
There is a lot in there about the settling of the Americas, the difficulties
that would face the Jews and the Indians, and more. But beyond the historicity,
it is an account of Christ's dealings with these ancient people, and His
teachings for our time, to help us and guide us. I love the Book of Mormon.
I have been honored to know Simon Southerton well, and I was also privileged to
meet Thomas Murphy a few years ago. Murphy's presentation at the "U" pointed to
the decidedly racist tone of the BOM, and he placed it nicely in a context with
a statement that "When white men want to act out, they dress up as Indians."
Well, my ancestors weren't at Mountain Meadows, but I was still zinged by the
knowledge of the actions of some New England forebearers circa 1773.Mr. Gardner's attacks on Simon Southerton amount to shock jock radio tactics
playing to his audience and little else. Simon described literally "going to bed
a Mormon and waking up a non-Mormon" after he reviewed the DNA findings, and for
Gardner to imply any agenda is ludicrous. Think of the five Native American
mtDNA haplogroups as colored marbles, say, red, blue, green, orange, and white.
All of Mr. Gardner's rhetoric will not change them to the "blacks, browns, and
pinks" of Semitic populations any more than Native American skin tones have
changed despite the words of LDS prophets. Add to that the impossibility of
Lehi's ocean voyage, and the case against the Bom is closed.
From the most weak and humble Hmong of Laos to the richest, and most undeniably
"challenged" intellectual elites of any and all socio/politcal or religious
persuasions or backgrounds all have ancestors and these will have had promises
made to them by a loving heavenly father. We as Latter-Day Saints who seek to
honor our commitments to the Lord who has declared that He will have a "covenant
people" from among all people and out of every walk of life do well to emulate
His bountiful example by promoting those who pioneer correct databases of all
DNA samples. Since this cause includes people from every nation, kindred, and
tongue we do well patiently learning the complete identity of each and every
person we meet including those who presently remain burdened as "illegals".
With kind regard and the most sensitive discretion we would be well advised to
learn as many languages as we can and be prepared to allow these people to find
out all they are prepared to know about their own ancestors. Obviously, we can
continue to lead the way by starting out with our own family histories. Thus we
can know when God Our Eternal Father keeps those promises.
It is apparent that there are alot of opinions out there on the subject. I find
it interesting that those who oppose are those who have not read the book and
taken the pronmise of Moroni, or are those who have had action taken against
them by the church and lost their testimony. It was sted by the prophet Joseph
Smith that; "...the standard of truth has been erected; No un hallowed hand can
stop the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies
may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly,
nobly, and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every
clime, swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God
shall be accomplished, and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done."
Really it doesn't matter what we think or agrue about. The Lord's
purposes will be fulfilled.
Many LDS defenders seem to be forgetting something here. Many "Prophets" (same
priesthood keys as Joseph Smith) have been telling modern "Native Americans"
they are Lamanites. These are the people who have been shown to have no semitic
DNA. It's not that complicated...either the modern prophets are wrong, or
Joseph was wrong. Either way, it demonstrates the human fabrication of this
LOL! Debating the minutiae of the BOM is like debating the minutiae of Lord of
the Rings. Mixing the epistemology of science with the
epistemology of religion never results in satisfactory results.
I suggest folks read the book "The Journey of Man" by Spencer Wells. Wells has
a Ph.D. from Harvard University (1994), focusing on population genetics and
evolution. His book isnt about Mormonism, but the science is absolutely fatal
to the cornerstone of the church. Let me quote a few paragraphs from his book:
"There is one piece of DNA, though, that has recently proven to be
an invaluable tool for inferring details about human history -- providing us
with far greater resolution than we ever thought possible about the paths
followed by our ancestors during their wanderings. It is the male equivalent of
mtDNA ... known as the Y-chromosome.... The Y turns out to provide population
geneticists with the most useful tool available for studying human diversity."
[pages 42-43] "The genetic evidence is quite clear: all
ancient migrants to the Americas seem to have traveled via Siberia." [page
144] Brant Gardner, a software consultant, simply doesnt know
what hes talking about when he dismisses DNA evidence thats been collected and
analyzed by scientists like Spencer Wells.Duwayne AndersonAuthor of Farewell to Eden: Coming to terms with Mormonism and science
There will always be reasons to believe and reasons to doubt no matter what
religion you profess. Call me bias but my experience in a university setting has
conditioned me to doubt anthropologists in general. The problem is that
anthropology is so general and inter disciplinary that I always find
athropologists making fools of themselves. You find applied anthropologists
making preposterous economic conclusions and recommendations that anyone with an
intro to economics course would refute (I'm talking about basic economic laws).
I do a lot of field research and I have been so surprised when people don't want
to talk to me if I'm an anthropologist, they don't like how anthropologists have
used them as specimens and misrepresented them. The problem is that anthropology
brushes up against so many other fields, and anthropologists are rarely as well
read as they should be. I don't think this guy is straight up denying the
anthropologists results he's just stating something that has been obvious to a
lot of people, the conclusive denial of the Book of Mormon based on DNA is
questionable. which is why I'm glad most people in the church stick with Paul's
advice 1 Cor 2:5.
I disagree, I can go off from my feelings to determine truth. I
have witnessed many people over the years forming their opinions based on
circumstances associated with actions of members of the church. Use caution to
seperate the imperfect actions of man from the perfect doctrines of Christ.
Fault will always be easily found in man. Your descriptions of exclusion,
inequality and labels appear to me to be weakness of man.
I go back to what the Prophet Joseph Smith said. Whether we agree or not."...the standard of truth has been erected; No un hallowed hand can stop
the work from progressing; persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may
assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly,
and independent, till it has penetrated every continent, visited every clime,
swept every country, and sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be
accomplished, and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done."
I believe this question about Lamanite DNA is answered in the Book of Mormon its
self. Read in 2 Ne. 5: 21 how the Lamanite DNA was changed.
I am not so sure testing the validity of the Book of Mormon is so critical as
examining what is revealed in Mormon people's treatment of the so called
"Lamanities." My observation is that they continue to be either completely
ignored and made to be invisible, or they are exposed to the other extreme of
being used, exploited, and taken advantage of. This causes me to question
whether anyone truely believes the BOM and the LDS Faith.
I like CB's response. The difficulty is resolving a complex question with a
simplistic answer. Although I understand that belief in the Book of Mormon is a
matter of faith -- as any religious belief is -- being an educated individual, I
cannot dismiss scientific, historic, or anthropologic evidence. I have found
sufficient evidence to believe it is possible the Book of Mormon peoples,
cultures, civilizations existed. One small but significant example is David
Freidel and Linda Schele's (both non-LDS scholars) referring to Maya script as
reformed Egyptian (see their book A Forest of Kings). I encourage
all to read Michael Whiting's (PhD, BYU professor, curator and director BYU DNA
sequencing Center) article: DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic
Perspective. It is found on-line at the FARMS website.
If the Lamanites were not Jewish - then how come in Michigan there are indian
petroglyps of jewish menorahs?Just google for images of petroglyph
Based on scientific findings of recent date we can discount the entire Bible and
Book of Mormon. For that matter all religion, and previous scientific findings
to include Einstiens theories have been relegated to new theories. Ones personal
beleifes evolve as time passes as well, if not, one is not learning and growing.
Knowledge is limited by current understanding and perspective, we have a very
limited understanding and have not touched the beginning of what science is and
isn't. In understanding truth, one must keep an eternal perspective, for truth
has a past present and future to withstand the test if time. Our limited view
can be greatly supplemented when we allow the truths we have, to be guided by a
honest and selfless desire, utilizing both our temporal and our spiritual eyes
to see into God's perspective
I get good feelings from many books including works of fiction. We can't go
simply by our "feelings" to say something is "true". I like many stories that
are not "true", but they give me a great feeling.So let's pretend we don't
have this argument about whether the Book of Mormon is "true". Let's say it is.
Does that make everything else in the LDS church right? There are many things in
the church that has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon. The BOM follows
closely along with the Bible and it can help us in lots of ways. But the
problems I have had with the church (I'm no longer a member) comes from other
belliefs of exclusion, inequality and labels that has nothing to do with that
How can Gardner say that Murphy didn't believe in the book before and went off
looking for things that would support his view? Isn't Gardner subject to the
same criticism of making a conclusion that supports what he's already decided?
I suggest that if you make a distinction between "Mormon Scientists" and
"Scientists who happen to be Mormon," you'll find the studies of the later group
to be much more reliable than those of the former.
I didn't take time to read all preceding comments, but has anyone brought up the
point that the "curse" or "mark" on the Lamanites must have been a genetic
change, since it was passed from generation to generation? This alone would
invalidate any attempt to prove the descent of modern Native Americans from a
Hebrew stock through DNA research.
Dr. Southerton, search your heart and not your mind. More importantly, trust
your heart and not your mind. I am sure you must recall the experiences you
have had that only your heart can explain and justify. You are still a divine
son of God and my brother. God bless you and all of us.
According to the D&C, God said the Native Americans were Lamanites.
Ignorance on the part of most LDS? That ignorance has been taught to them by
their "inspired" leaders. Gives a whole new meaning the inspired, huh?
What a fun debate!! This has been one of the cleanest debates on the comments
pages of the DesNews and I commend just about everybody here.My only
comment to add as a scientist and (almost) physician is that we should never
seek to discount verifiable, well-performed research. So the DNA evidence says
something. Let it. In my field, we carefully report experimental findings, and
then take EXTRA care when drawing conclusions. It is in the making of a
conclusion that we enter the realm of opinion. I am not sure whether any of the
three experts quoted in the article should be drawing conclusions based on the
evidence they have accumulated to date.But it sure is a fun
Find 2 nice looking young men or young women that seem to have a kick in their
step and sparkle in their eye wearing black and white badges and they will be
happy to discuss this matter further with you.
I am fascinated by the ignorance on both sides of this issue--those who think
their non-belief has been vindicated and those who think that the 'evidence' is
wrong. Both are looking in the wrong place. Ancient records are plentiful
since the earlier 50s and not only validate the idea of ancient records, but
validate the material found in the ancient records, including the Book of
Mormon. The Book of Mormon is a singularity because its origins are always
questioned, and yet it exists. The best proof is within its pages. You
determine the validity of ancient records by what they say. The race issue in
the Book of Mormon is very complicated and is not like taught in primary, a
record of the American Indians. That is ignorance on the part of most LDS.
There was also supposed to have been a great battle there. Surely there would be
weapons and such. I don't believe all the stories in the Bible, but there is an
actual place on the map, artifacts and many other things showing that at least
some of peoples existed. With the Book of Mormon there is speculation, no
confirmed artifacts, the DNA thing and plenty of fallacys to be explained.I like the Book of Mormon and believe it was written as a work of fiction to
accompany the Bible. The problem is it was potrayed as literal truth.
To Pray About It:I did. And I was told beyond a shadow of doubt,
it's not true.
I am a devout LDS member and believe the BOM is true. However, this article
probably should not have been published by Deseret News. The expert
was an amatuer and just had opinions. They may have been good opinions to have,
but, this does not advance the understanding of the BoM and Ancient America in
any way. It just sounds like an interesting fireside.
I will put my trust in the perfect scientist, who knows more than every
scientist that has existed, even all those combined. There is a place in the
Book of Mormon that talks about how the Jews wanted more complicated words, so
the Lord gave that to them. I will never let science waiver my faith, because I
do not put my trust in the arm of flesh. So no matter how convincing things
are, I put my trust in an all knowing God and that what can't be explained to me
today will one day be understood.
If you base your faith on what Cleon Skousen and others like him have to say, or
even on modern apologetics, these studies might conceivably blow your mind. I
prefer to go to the scriptures for my information about the scriptures.
Secondarily, I will read things like William Prescott's books. Nothing I have
read in actual pre-Mormon-bashing ancient American history contradicts the Book
of Mormon. Nothing in the Book of Mormon contradicts the idea that it gives the
history of geographically specific tribes. It even tells right in the scriptures
about the ties between Oriental lands and the people in the Book of Mormon.
Hint: look up "Sinim."
Both science and religion are human responses to the unknown. Each has its
strengths and its deficiencies. The trick is to keep an open mind and heart and
not rush to judgment in any direction, particularly as it relates to others'
conclusions. Everyone should take a deep breath, analyze the facts as a
scientist, feel the spiritual as a religionist, and only then reach some
personal conclusions -- which may be different for me than for you. Cumbaya.
Falcon - Your question is a red herring. I might as well ask "Are there any
non-Christians who accept the New Testament?". Any non-Muslims who accept the
Koran? etc. While one might claim these documents have some generally accepted
historical facts, they also occur in a region of known historicity (unlike the
Americas). Where are the historical documents we could compare the BoM history
to? There are none. So to claim it is or is not historically correct is only
subjective opinion or in the case of the LDS a matter of faith. Also, if we
validated the Koran historically would you become a Muslim?On the
DNA issue, I agree that a software programmer isn't the first person I would
trust. But that in and of itself doens't mean he is wrong. An easier
evidence he could have offered is the fact that NO expatriate Hebrew group (in
Russia, America, etc.) can be be proven to be of Hebrew extraction via DNA. Not
with any certainty. And rather than a computer geek this is the opinion of a
Harvard science professor.
So let me get this straight. The BOM contains stories from the Bible that most
every rational person can see were meant to be metaphorical (the Flood, Adam &
Eve, Tower of Babel) yet the BOM is supposed to be taken literally?
we beleive things will be revealed when the time is ready. DUH!
I am a scientist. I work with DNA pretty much every day. Admittedly, I don't do
the type of genetic studies referenced in the article. It comes down to faith.
On the one hand we have the Book of Mormon which some believe is not historical
because of current scientific evidence. They would also have us believe that
this major religious writing was fabricated by a 20 something young man with a
third grade education. On the other hand we have those who believe that the
Book of Mormon is what it says it is; written from gold plates and testifying of
Jesus Christ. This genetic evidence against the Book of Mormon is, like
previous arguments, rather tenuous when compared to the evidence for it. I have been in science long enough to know that what we think we understand
now will look elementary, perhaps even misguided, in a few years. We go with
the best knowledge we have, but sometimes we have to go on faith. I wasn't
there when Lehi came to America; I didn't see anyone come from Asia, and none of
us can know for certain. But, I believe God knows.
Hogwash Hogwash | 9:01 a.m. Oct. 23, 2007Today's science is tomorrow's
fiction. The fact that these two "scientists" are speaking in absolutes speaks
volumes about their hidden (or not so hidden) agenda.
Yeah Stephen, Mormons are the cause of all the worlds problems, aren't they.
Maybe we all should just submissevely sit back while folks who mask themselves
as experts devote their entire lives trying to debunk a spiritual workTruth is, it was not intended for spiritual things to be scientifically
proven, and they never will be. You can not scientifically prove that Jesus
Christ is the Son of God, you cannot scientifically prove that anything in the
bible really happened, and you won't ever prove the Book of Mormon eitherFor those of you who don't believe it, relax and go your own way. Funny
though, they can't do that.
The world is flat. No, wait, I believe it is round. No, wait, it is some
geometric form that is likely impossible to exactly and correctly detail without
fault. That I don't understand it to perfection intellectually doesn't interfer
with my belief that it exists and is real. It is beautiful and with all of its
mystery and complexity affords me life and hope. So it is with the story of the
Book of Mormon. Skeptics that have read it attempt to disprove it
intellectually. Can they disprove the beauty and hope found in its pages? A
marvelous thing happens when you read the story with an open heart ready to
experience something beyond logic. It answers questions logic does not. I am
thankful for our free land that allows us all to have our own veiws and beliefs.
It is alright to view things differently and to disagree but first and foremost
we should always respect each other. Who knows, DNA might even establish that
we are connected.
The problems with trying to use DNA to trace ancestory was recently addressed by
a story in 60 minutes where decendants of slaves are trying to trace their roots
back to africa. Watch this program before you start making comments about this
I believe it is offensive to blame members of the church for believing that the
American continent was uninhabited before the Lehites or Jaredites or that the
inhabitants of the American continent decended from Lehi. The book itself says
that, as well as Moroni (or Nephi), God, and every supposed prophet since Joseph
Smith (We also bare testimony that the "Indians" (so called) of North and South
America are a remnant of the tribes of Israel; as is now made manifest by the
discovery and revelation of their ancient oracles and records.PROCLAMATION
OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST, OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS . . .
.April 6, 1845). The Limited Geography Theory (?) is a new idea that came about
only to explain away the lack of evidence supporting BOM claims and the
overwhelming evidence showing the American Indians were decended from ancestors
in Northeast Asia.
DNA research isn't the nail in the coffin of the BOM; that's already clear from
archaeology, language studies, and the like . . . It's the headstone on the
grave. However, to some Mormons, that shouldn't matter. Faith never had anything
to do with reality, look at what the Catholic church once taught about the shape
of the Earth.
Heres what we have, we have thous who believe and those who dont and when you
get right down to it it dont matter what you bring to the table you will have
those who will believe and those who wont. It dont matter what the evidence
states, what one needs to do is what it says in first James, 5 and 6, apply this
and ask God for answers and remember dont rely on your own understanding but
that of God. Science cant prove the Book of Mormon nor can it prove the Bible,
we rely on God to help us understand. Human kid is trying to understand the
Science of God and we could never hope to fully understand the Science of God.
I am a big believer that we should do our best to study and try to come up with
answers to the questions that we face. However, if I relied on science to answer
all of the questions concerning my faith then those answers would change each
month with the publishing of the newest scientific theories.I am OK
with not having all of the answers right now and still living what I believe to
be true. At the same time I am open to discussion on any topic dealing with my
faith and the current view of science that either supports or opposes that view.
There was a comment that someone should dig up the Hill Cumorah? That would
certainly not be worth the time. Joseph Smith claimed that the angel Moroni took
back the plates. That does not mean the plates were taken back to the hill, it
just means Moroni took them. Again, as stated in other posts, the value of the
Book of Mormon is not in proving it. The value is in reading it and allowing it
to change your life for good, which it has mine.
It is true. Take the test at the end of the book. :)
Take the Book of Abraham to a Egyptology's. Take the quotes from the brass
plates inside the BOM to a scholar of the Hebrew bible.-Jake-- Read Book
of Moses, part of the Pearl of Great Price--.. God said: "Worlds without number
have I created", -- Now go to Hubble Space pictures and look Up Worlds
without number... Trillions of Stars, Billions of Earths.. Galaxy's without
number, as of now.. Jake..Now, Jake, You prove to me there is not a God,
and he didn't approve/write the BOM or the Pearl of Great Price.. Sheeeesh..
I guess it is who you want to look to for evidence, God or man. I prefer to
place my hope in something that created everything scientists have been trying
to figure out since the beginning of time. Has science, as defined by man, ever
been able to define basic principles like faith, hope, and charity and how
trying to adhere to them has the ability to increase mans capacity to love and
be a better human being. Science is mans interpretation and definition of Godly
things. I would imagine that God has his own perspective on gravity, the law of
relativity, and DNA. Then again, maybe all of this that we experience as humans
just happens and man is trying to define it or is it possible that we are just
figuring out the same blueprints that were used to design and build it all in
the first place.
That's not a very good analogy. Lets make a few adjustments to show really what
we're arguing about. first OJ lived about 4,000 years which is at the very least
how far the DNA has to trace (The tribe of Joseph is lost and spread throughout
the world, so we're tracing back to Isaac). Second the DNA trace we're using on
this criminal is mixed about 50% with someone else's geneology we don't know
(Ismael, and Zoram). You know what I'm going to stop here but it could go on
much longer. I just want to say that it seems very unscientific for people to
come to such conclusive denials of the historicity of the Book of Mormon based
on the shaky ground of these type of DNA tests. Science is always a never ending
dialogue, some people don't understand this and try to use science as a
justification for pre-concieved biases; I recognize that goes both ways, lets
just keep it real
There's one 'minor' thing that the DNA experts forget. They seek to find a link
between the ancient hebrews & indians through the line of Judah -- but the BoM
tells us that Lehi was a descendant of Manassah -- from Joseph -- who had a
different mother than Judah. DNA lines generally follow the matriarchial line
and in this instance, that premise would be false to begin with.
"Is there anyone outside of LDS circles that believe the Book of Mormon is a
factual history of a real people?" - FalconIf there are they're not
large in number. The reason for this is they would have to accept the coming of
Lehi & the Jaredites by boat to the Americas. They would also have to admit that
Joseph Smith translated it in 2 months with an education of a third grader. That
then leads to admitting he had the power of translation from god, that the LDS
Church is right, then they would have to join and then they wouldn't be outside
the LDS Church any more.
The Jews are one of 12, twelve, tribes from Israel..So he is trying to
prove the DNA of the Jews/Indians.What about the tribe of Joseph? So
says my blessing, not to mention the tribe of Ephraim or the tribe of
Manasseh.. Where did the Asian tribe come from? Maybe Dan?Come on
people get serious.The Book of Mormon is true, the ex- Bishop just
hopes its not...
Jaredites, Nephites, Mulekites, Zoram? Is this for real? You all need to read
the Book of Mormon from cover-to-cover and then ask yourself if it makes any
I don't think the church is concerned, it's just it's members. The presidency
doesn't fund studies, plus members of the church shouldn't be basing their faith
on scientific proof.as far as what science states, most of the time
science states a theory, NOT a fact. but it gets reported and media blitzed and
comes off sounding like a fact. how many scientific 'facts' have been found
wrong years later, or for that matter flip-flopped on over the course of time?
consider also, how long the bible has been around and how much of it
has actually be found (lands, civilizations, etc) the bom has been around a lot
What's amazing to me is how so many people run around now and say, well, sure,
there could have been some asian people here too who got thrown into the mix...
yet for the last hundred and seventy years all we have heard from the LDS church
is how these native americans are the lamanites. Like everything else, when
there's something that challenges the doctrine or the belief of the LDS church
in a major way, they find a way to fit square pegs in round holes and justify it
away and or subtly change their view or position; and after enough time, no one
remembers how things used to be. So much for the same yesterday, today, and
I note that many of the attacks equate software engineer to biologist. Who are
you going to believe? But I am familiar with Brant Gardner's work. He knows his
stuff when it comes to Mesoamerica. The two so-called LDS scientists, on the
other hand, either know virtually nothing about Mesoamerica or about DNA. One is
an anthropologist. Why would HE know anything more about DNA than a software
engineer? The other is a biologist who, while knowing a few things about DNA,
knows nothing about Mesoamerica. Put them together and you get a remarkably
ignorant view of ancient America. And they are supposed to be the experts??Brant Gardner, on the other hand, specialized in Mesoamerica. He can read
their languages. He is a top authority on Mesoamerican culture. And he sees many
hits between the Book of Mormon descriptions of society and what he knows about
Mesoamerica. Which do you think is the authority here?David
The leaders of the Church, including Pres Hinckley and Elder Ballard have
declared (more or less) that there will never be any external proof that the BoM
is true, it will always be a matter of faith and how one feels about it. If
there was proof then where would be the exercising of faith? So what if nothing
in the BoM agrees with what we know about ancient meso-american culture?
According to the Prophet and Apostles, it never will. Read B.H. Roberts'
treatment of the subject. It's entirely possible and consistent that the
Jaredites, Nephites and Lamanites were miraculously transported to another
planet entirely during their ocean voyages, just like Christ's teachings,
mission and atonement apply to all the other created worlds in the universe
past, present and future, whose inhabitants only hear of Him through their own
prophets. Perhaps they all have the BoM like we do. This should only increase
the wonder and awe at the marvelous work and a wonder that is the latter-day
I prefer to spend my time pondering the deeper meaning of the Book of Mormon,
Chirst's teachings, and the many eternal truths it holds inside its pages. I
don't really care whether Lehi and his descendents were Asian or Hebrew; whether
there were already people in the America's when he came over; how many times the
Nephites and Lamanites got into a war; or who begat whom and on what date. Read
3rd Nephi. Do you think Jesus has something more in mind for us to learn and
take away from this book?
Good points here regarding the BoM peoples coming from multiple sources
(including Asia, referencing Dr. Nibley). I know I've never met a scholar who
believes that the Lehites were the ancestors of *every* Native American... One
point that no one has made yet is that the book itself claims a genetic change
in the non-Nephite survivors. (Okay, not in so many words, but a genetic change
is the simplest way for God to work a physical change, although I'm very willing
to grant Him other options beyond our scientific understanding).
Does this really matter? Science can't tell me why I like the way the sun feels
against my face, or what makes me me and not just a pile of protein. Theology
doesn't really explain how the internet works. The point of life is to take all
that we are given and do what is right. Luckily we have a choice about what we
do and believe. Maybe we should not enforce our individual beliefs on others and
focus our efforts on something good for all, like finding a cure for cancer.
What makes everyone think that the Nephites don't have the same DNA as Asians?
Wasn't there a large group of people, larger than those that remained in Israel
that were taken captive and taken north and east. The Lost Ten Tribes could have
been the blood that makes up much of Asia. The Jews that remained were scattered
and their blood may not be pure - so in reality the DNA similarity between the
American Indian and Asia could be a witness that the book is true. A testimony
of God and truth is not found through science - scientific theory can support or
question your belief. But responsible science should look at all the
possibilities then list those options. But in the end each individual can
approuch God it see what truth is.
Ye shall receive no witness until after the trial of your faith.I
feel sorry for those who are dupped by the "learned" experts that claim science
as their religion. There are still so many variables that are simply not known.
In addition to the Jaredites and other possible groups already on the American
continent, The Book of Mormon ends in about 421 AD. There is much that could
have happened between then and Columbus' landing.In the end, it
comes down to a question of faith, not science, that will win the day. May you
try Moroni's challenge to read the book, pray about its authenticity, and
receive the spiritual conviction that I know will come.
The lost tribes were taken north and east possibly to the northeastern Caspian
region. The Jews intermingled primarily with Europeans. Lehi was from those ten
tribes. So what they're saying is that the American Indians have more in common
with peoples living west of Mongolia than the modern Jews. And I'm supposed to
It's interesting how science is completely dismissed by Mormons when its
conclusion don't support Mormonism, yet fully embraced when it does.
How many people believe in God?How many scientific theories have remained
the same for more than 50 years?I think I will go with the fact that more
and more people believe in a God, than with science that can't stand the power
of tests for more than a life time.Science, sorry to say, does change
facts. God never changes. But science and "fact" does.
Examine the character of the "source" of the BOM, then make a logical
determination as to the validity of the book. In light of the fact that we do
not have the gold plates, we do not have the translator to interview, or his
associates, we are left with very little, perhaps only faith. In this case, a
logical person can look at the type of person who produced it and make some
reasonable judgement about the liklihood of it being true. I say this not
intending to sway a person one way or another.
Everyone knows that America was really populated by Hobbits who came across on
the Brooklyn Bridge (which, by the way, is for sale).
Gardner is one of the more prolific apologists defending the Book of Mormon
against scientific evidence. LDS apologetics is primarialy made up of
non-professionals writing outside their area of expertice. The real
problem for the BOM is its historicity. Nothing matches reality. It fails all
historical, anthropological, archeological, and reasonable scientific tests. If
you think it's only "anti-mormons" who think this take your best evidence for
the book to a regular academic professional and see how they view it. Take the
BOM to a mesoamerican archeologist or a Mayan expert. Take the Book of Abraham
to a Egyptologist. Take the quotes from the brass plates inside the BOM to a
scholar of the Hebrew bible.
Today's science is tomorrow's fiction. The fact that these two "scientists" are
speaking in absolutes speaks volumes about their hidden (or not so hidden)
agenda. The variables in their "conclusive" study, and the fact that the
"scientists" failed to adequately address these variables in their study leave
them open for peer review attack. I would agree that the speaker lacks
credentials, but others with credentials are saying the same thing -- the
speaker is only making restatements of the peer review literature.1.
The adequacy of the the source DNA is highly questionable. Without a pure Lehi
sample, any speculation to connect new DNA with old DNA is just that --
speculation -- not science.2. DNA lines extinguish for known and
unknown reasons. No one can speak with authority until the cause of DNA line
extinction can be excluded -- which it cannot at this time.3.
Genetic isolation followed by catastrophic events such as genocide and massive
casualties of a plague can substantially change the DNA map. Where have the
scientists addressed this issue?Absolute positions in science do not
make good science.
That there Book Of Mormon is sure one big fat comic book! Whoo eeeee! It shore
The Flat Earth Society would welcome with open arms the likes of Brant Gardner
and his Book of Mormon Archaeological Forum. And speaking of Brant Gardner's
spiritual software, he could use a serious upgrade.
I find it interesting how so many hang their hat on the current scientific trend
as the absolute and final proof and then in 5 years when a new theory comes out
which modifies, changes, "updates" or invalidates previous theories or
practices, they then claim that this current line of thought is the absolute and
final word. So to all of you who absolutely believe that this current
discussion of DNA is the last and final say and the Book of Mormon is absolutely
invalidated, wait for a few years science will change as it always has and we
can have another discussion about your absolute knowledge. All of this
doesn't matter anyway because an angel could appear on your bed at night and
tell you it is true and you wouldn't believe. One day we will all KNOW and if we
are wrong I'll apologize to you personally. Wait I won't be a person...?As an aside...how do you feel the world is made a better place if you
discredit the Book of Mormon? Does the hate help you sleep at night? How could you improve the world if you spent this energy on something
worthwhile? Just curious.
Who cares? You will never convince an unbeliever nor a believer of belief or
disbelief respectively. People are gonna find evidence for either viewpoint and
bend and twist it until it fits their viewpoints. Personally I don't buy into
Mormonism, but maybe I'm wrong. So let people live they want within reason,
don't push your religious notions on others and have some tolerance.
I guess after reading this article, one seems to forgot the FACT that after the
supposed "curse" from God that there would be definite change in DNA as well.I can't explain why the Africans and Asians and Eurpoeans as well as the
smaller tribal groups do not have links in their DNA since they are all supposed
decendents of Adam.Question is, what are you trying to prove???
For those concerned about the questionable credentials of Mr. Gardner or for
anyone who cares to educate themselves on this topic, Michael Whiting (PhD,
professor at BYU, curator and director of the BYU DNA sequencing center) has
writing an article which addresses the Book of Mormon/DNA question. The article
is availabel on-line through the FARMS website.
The arguments used to question the use of DNA evidence in this article were the
same used to question the evidence that 99.9% linked OJ to murder. There's
always a little doubt in science, it's just whether you're willing to go with
the majority of evidence or a very slight chance it might be wrong. If you were
gambling money, I'd bet you'd go with the odds.
In the face of heavy attacks on the "historicity" of the Book of Mormon, the
significance of the "DNA evidence" isn't that it disproves the book's
historicity, but rather like many other "evidences", it clearly does not lend
any "scientific" support to the Church's official postion that the Book is of
pre-columbian origin. Those that believe the Book of Mormon to be historical
will continue to do so no matter what the "evidence" shows because, when all is
said and done, such belief is mostly based upon faith.
I looked at the online DNA databases a couple of years ago to see if it was
worth spending the money to get into it. I looked at some of the results in my
extended family tree (large well-researched Mormon family). They were so
laughable. Close relatives were not showing up as being related to each other.
It was happening enough in the DNA record so that you couldn't say that it was
due to other factors. So let's all run out and change our theology based on a
new technology that has problems in looking back four or five generations.
I'm not sure why the Church is so concerned about DNA evidence. Scientists have
pointed to numerous pieces of evidence that point to Asia as the origin of
Native Americans. This includes language, archeology, and customs. Meanwhile
the Book of Mormon contains many references to an Iron age culture in North
America for which there is no evidence. It also contains many anachronisms
including references to Cyrus the Great who wasn't even born when the Book of
Mormon peoples left Palestine. Science has always been at odds with this and
other religious beliefs. Why not just leave belief in the Book of Mormon in the
arena of faith and not try to contort science in an attempt to make it fit. A
man can't serve two masters.
The only way this experiment would work is if you could do some sort of Jurassic
Park analysis and find the actual remains of someone who we know for sure was a
person in that book. Do a bone analysis or test blood in clothing, or whatever
they do. The problem is finding someone you know lived during that time. There
is no way in this world you can do DNA samples on descendants hundreds and
thousands years later to find the DNA that matched those in Jerusulem...no way
at all. If they can, you have to wonder what unaccredited junior college these
There is more proof that the book is a work of fiction than a true book. Some of
the principles in the book are great (like the Bible) and that is where the idea
of the book came from.Why doesn't someone dig up the Hill Cumorah? It's
because they are afraid of what they'll find (or lack thereof). I'm sure there
might be some lively debates to this post....but no proof.Enjoy this
wonderful book and then start thinking that many wonderful books we enjoy are
just fiction. Of course, the difference is that we know they are.
The American Continent was already inhabited before Lehi - The Jaredites - and
inhabited by others shortly after Lehi elsewhere unbeknownst to them - the
Mulekites- who is to say that there weren't other people from other lands who
migrated here. Nowhere in the Book of Mormon does it say that only a select
group of people lived here. In fact, it states that others would be led to this
continent throughout history. The American Indians could have genetic traces to
I will never look at a scientists "findings" as fact. They can say what they
want, but I for one will believe what I feel in my heart where the Book of
Mormon is true or not. I have read it and I believe it to be true. A scientist
can print anything he/she wants but it won't make me believe any other way nor
can anyone else.
I have not read any of the studies mentioned here, but I find it interesting
that they talk about the "American Indians" as if they were descendants of one
single group. It is an accepted fact that groups such as the Vikings, among
others, lived in some areas of the Americas. With Ra II, Thor Heyerdahl
demonstrated how people from the Ancient world could have traveled from Africa
to the Americas.Furthermore, many LDS authors have pointed out that
the Book of Mormon is NOT the history of ALL the inhabitants of the Americas.I am from Mexico and I am quite surprised at the differences in features
of the extant inhabitants that have remained separate from the mainstream of the
Mexican nation.You can do a Google image search for "Olmec head" and
compare them with those of Mayan faces; you will be surprised at the
differences, even though they lived in such close proximity.Undoubtedly more research needs to be done before jumping to any conclusions;
particularly to lumping "American Indians" as descendants from one single group
Carrie Moore needs to do a little more research into the Book of Mormon (printed
by the newspaper's owner), given her comment that "LDS members have grown up
believing that the only people who ever migrated to the Americas descended from
Lehi's family in the Book of Mormon."Latter-day Saints who don't
read past the first couple of chapters in First Nephi will believe as Carrie
stated. However, later in that same book one can read that Ishmael's
family and Zoram also migrated with Lehi (& family) to the Americas. Zoram
married one of Ishmael's daughters.In addition, the Book of Mormon
states that Mulekites had migrated to the Americas separately. These people
could have mixed with the existing Nephites and Lamanites.And the
Book of Ether states that Jaredites travelled to the Americas not long after the
Tower of Babel.
The scientific and historical evidence regarding the mortal origins of the Book
of Mormon is vast and growing every day. However, does that make the church
vanish? Of course not. For millions of faithful members, science and history are
no substitute for the positive feelings they experience from their beliefs.
People don't embrace their religious beliefs because the scientific data support
their decision, they embrace their religion because it helps them manage the
vicissitudes of life.Religion is a state of mind completely removed
from objective investigation, and the church only opens itself to trouble and
pain by attempting to reconcile scientific data with its scripture.
Are you kidding me??? If Joseph Smith wanted to write a book to start his new
religion, he could have clearly chosen a much simpler way of doing things.
Instead, he produced a book, at 23 years old, that has 1,000 years plus of
history, culture, systems of worship, military strategy, philosophy,
argumentation, economics, literary forms, criminology, sociology, etc., etc. There is no other book out there with these characteristics that claims
to be from an actual ancient civilization, through a modern source. It
successfully attempts to be so many things and is just too complex to be lightly
written off, especially with bad science.So someone with an axe to
grind has 'disproven' the anthropological roots. There are all these other
aspects that still support it. Oh, and add to all these other
things, that it supports and interacts with both the Old and New Testament. The
Book of Mormon is the ultimate "Inconvenient Truth".
People have devoted their entire lives to trying to disprove the Book of Mormon,
and it is ever a tragic waste that has availed them nothing (in nearly 200 years
of trying). I would submit that their fervor against the book is
almost more of a confirmation of its truthfulness than anything I've ever heard
in favor of it.They just have it in their heads that it's wrong and
must be stopped at all costs, but I'm not sure even they know exactly why. They
might divert all of that energy into something more useful (like, say, actually
READING it with an open mind), rather than relying on prejudice, fallacious
logic, inconclusive evidence, and limited understanding to disprove its worth
entirely with one dismissive wave of the hand.
From my point of view, the whole issue about the Book of Mormon and DNA sounds a
lot like the debates different "experts" have about 9/11 conspiracies, or
whether or not The Holocaust occured. In a nutshell, no matter what your opinion
is, anyone can find a so-called expert to agree with them on anything.The Book of Mormon is just over 500 pages and covers a time period of about
2,000 years (Including the Jaredites). From that perspective, I don't believe
anyone can totally prove or disprove it using DNA or archeological evidence. We
simply don't have enough of the record to make of definitive conclusions. The real test of the Book of Mormon comes from the spiritual
mainifestation one can receive when they read it. It's more than just a warm
fuzzy, as some people claim. I'm talking about reading the Book of Mormon to the
point that it changes your whole life. The Holy Ghost can have that type of
influence, if you're willing to read the Christ-centered and beautiful messages
contained in the Book of Mormon.
Am I supposed to believe in a software engineer over the word of DNA/Genetic
scientist? That's an intellectual mis match. I am a mechanic, maybe I can try
and become a key note speaker at an Economics seminar.
But it doesn't take a genius to know that you can't trace DNA to a group of
people that originated in 600 BC from a tribe that no longer exists (Joseph).
What "Hebrews" would we be sourcing as the original DNA pool?? The only ones we
have today are Jews (only one tribe) who come from all kinds of countries around
Europe. So, no DNA source to compare with.Secondly, even if they
were the original source, we are comparing a pool with 2,600 years of new genes
introduced into the DNA within the eastern hemisphere, compared to a pool with
2,600 years of new genes introduced to the DNA in the Western hemisphere. A good test would be if we could confirm that Jews from Iraq compare
favorably in DNA to Jews from Russia. Can anyone say if that has been done?
It is impossible to "prove" the Book of Mormon true or false on the basis of
scientific evidence. All we know for sure is those that hate the LDS Church
will use any and all means possible in their attempts to destroy it.
Nowhere does the Book of Mormon state or even imply that the Lehites came to an
empty continent. As Nibley pointed out long ago, the Jaredites appear to have
been Asian, and colonizers would have disseminated from their civilization
throughout its long history. Also, their "war of extinction" almost certainly
left any number of stragglers. In fact, there is nothing in the Book of Mormon
to indicate that the Jaredites came to an empty conduct. This is to say nothing
of other trans-oceaning migrations, none of which are precluded by the Book of
Mormon. How would one even begin to attempt to get a "Nephite" genetic
signature? It's high time that provocateurs Southerton and Murphy got over
themselves, and their irrelevant research.A note to Anti-Mormon, biblical
literalists: lest you overlook the fact, studies suggesting that N. America was
populated 10,000+ years ago from Asia, are even more damaging to your theology.
Is there anyone outside of LDS circles that believe the Book of Mormon is a
factual history of a real people?
First, Jaredites referred to in the Book of Mormon as early inhabitants of the
Americas were likely from Asia. The number of Jaredite names used by the
Nephites indicate extensive interaction between these groups. Therefore, those
who claim the presence or even predominance of Asiatic DNA in the ancient
inhabitants of America refutes the Book of Mormon haven't really studied the
record closely enough or don't understand what they have read.Second, there are no specific DNA markers that are exclusive to all Hebrews.
The most common DNA marker for Jewish ancestry is only present in 2% of modern
Jews. Thus, DNA evidence cannot exclude someone as a Jew, even if they lack
some specific Jewish markers.Finally, European DNA markers
(indicating, for example Finnish ancestry) found in pre-Columbian remains are
usually discounted as evidence of sample contamination. Preconceived notions of
some researchers has thus resulted in some interesting data being discarded. DNA evidence, therefore, has certainly not disproved the Book of Mormon.
Gardner talks as if Murphy and Southerton simply made up the idea that the
American Indians are primarily descended from BOM peoples out of whole cloth.
They didn't. That idea has been taught by prophets since Joseph Smith, and is
still claimed in the introduction the Book of Mormon published by the church.
Is Gardner also ready to criticize the church and its leaders for these
Did he really say that the DNA research only involves mitochondrial DNA? If so,
he is greatly mistaken. The Y chromosome is also very important in DNA research.
I'm not sure why we'd want to take the word of a software consultant when the
subject is DNA.
Let me get this straight, a software consultant, with SOME training in
Mesoamerican studies and anthropology, is able to rebut a molecular biologist
such as Dr. Southerton? (a former Bishop, no less) He attempts to make his point
by using scientific sounding non-conclusions and throwing a few red herrings
into the mix to sound knowledgeable enough on the subject. This serves no other
pupose than to confuse his audience into believing that HE is the true expert on
the subject while minimizing and ignoring the full breadth of work done by Dr.
Southerton on this.The ultimate hypcracy here is that he throws out
personal speculation (as fact) that Thomas Murphy had already decided the Book
of Mormon was fiction and was merely making conclusions to support this already
decided belief. Then, only a few paragraphs later, Mr. Gardner professes that
no study can 'change the truthfulness of the book.' Who is it that is making
conclusions to support a preconceived belief here?And Don't forget,
the title page of the Book of Mormon, still, to this day, states that it is a
record of the ancestors of the American Indian as was taught by Joseph Smith