Comments about ‘LDS Church posts topic page on Book of Mormon and DNA studies’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, Jan. 31 2014 5:00 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
thriveplanet
Lehi, UT

@Church Member...

Good point, I would say that there is truth in most if not all religions, including Islam, FLDS, Jewish, Catholicism, and LDS, and if members of those religions sincerely read their respective books of scripture, the Lord will communicate to them the true parts. Even as an LDS member, there are parts of my religion that I have to pray about to confirm their truth or lack thereof. I know He communicates through prayer and the Spirit, as a reward for our efforts to seek Him/truth and trials of faith, and when that communication happens, there is no denying it.

desert
Potsdam, 00

Since there is no such thing as a DNA department of the church, who is to wonder what should be stated, and what should be truth ?
The reason the church puts this out is, to claim to have no DNA proof. Period.

But what it does, as you can see on this becoming popular page, it makes people think and talk about it.

Those who have their doubts should continue to question everything, that's what truth is for.
But here is an interesting point of no return for some of them, as they always claim the lack of evidence about Next Life, as "nobody has ever returned" argument.

Here is a NEPHITE Prophet, who did return, and plenty of times.
His name is Moroni, and Joseph Smith did not take finger prints at that time, but he sure was talking with him and saw him, as described.
DNA and Moroni ? Why would they believe it ? If they can't believe what Moroni did, how would they believe anymore of any other prophets.
So here we have the evidence.

Did the Lord not say...and I will show unto them that fight against my word.(NEPHI 29)

Cowboy Dude
SAINT GEORGE, UT

Wolfgang57 said, "LDS church leaders have long said that ALL of the Native Americans were descendants of a group from Jerusalem who came over to what is now the Americas."

I can't find that. Be careful using absolutes like "all".

What they said is that they are the primary descendents of the Lamanites. Big difference.

However, at 400AD we don't know the DNA of the Lamanites since we don't have their history except for their interactions with the Nephites. The Lamanites were named after the splinter group of the Nephites, a group from Lehi's family which joined much bigger groups through conversion for the Nephites and perhaps by conquest by the Lamanites.

But the 400AD Lamanites are those that rejected the Christ movement (that involved all of the people of the whole area for over 200 hundred years) and survived the horrible wars at the end of the Book in 400AD.

We don't have the history prior to the Nephites, the Lamanites except with certain interactions with the book, missing 200 years of the People of Zarahemla, and the 1,500 years after the book. Plus all the Nephite history that Mormon did not abridge.

sharrona
layton, UT

RE: greatbam222, "We Thank Thee". Nephi 29:6 , "Thou fool, that shall say:A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible." Mormon’s have their prophets instead E.g...

D&C 7:1–3, John the Beloved will live until the Lord comes.(The Apostle John is alive)

D&C 17:10-23 *edited. V23…to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it…

RE Desert, Moroni 10: A testimony of the Book of Mormon comes by the power of the Holy Ghost… Moroni’s words speak from the ‘dust’.

KJV compared to(Latin vulgate, Is 29:4), and thy speech shall whisper out of the ‘dust’. and thy voice shall be from the earth like that of the “*pythonis=(familiar spirit)”, and out of the earth thy speech shall mutter.

Acts 16:16 And it came to pass , as we went to prayer a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination= (*python/Grk,=4436) met us which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying.

In Greek mythology, Pythian a serpent dwelt in the region of Pytho… 2. a spirit of divination.

Canyontreker
TAYLORSVILLE, UT

"We believe all things, we hope all things."

I refuse to say, "Prove to me it's true than I will believe." rather I say, "I believe in the possibilities until you can prove it is not true."

I have often wondered why some people think the whole history of Ancient America could be in a single book. All of the theories here can be true. Lehi's journey does not prove there was no Asian migration over a Siberian bridge. Far East DNA does not prove that Christ did not have His gospel in other parts of the world.

Canyontreker
TAYLORSVILLE, UT

I am convinced that the only reason The People of Zarahemla (incorrectly called the Mulekites by modern scholars) are included in the Book of Mormon is that Mosiah converted them which more than doubled the size of the Nephites.

If Mosiah had not converted them they would not have been in the abridged book we have today. How many other people were there besides the Nephites? We do not know?

Cowboy Dude
SAINT GEORGE, UT

When I was a kid, I saw a Brontosaurus skeleton at the Natural History Museum with my own two eyes. Science said it was so. Seeing is believing right? The Brontosaurus was on the Sinclair gas signs, even "Dino" on the Flintstones was a puppy Brontosaurus.

But, when my kindergarten boy came home one day and said, "There is not such thing as a Brontosaurus" I got my first real lesson that science and my own eyes can be wrong.

I think we should embrace the DNA tests to learn more about our history. But, be careful, don't use it to jump to conclusions, since our understanding of science has been known to be wrong.

falasha
Mount Laurel, NJ

This year we are studying the Old Testament and just had lessons on the creation, the fall, and then the flood last week. When I was in seminary and still in use today in 2014, the CES chronology chart all of our children and young adults receive still date Adam to 4000BC and says he lived for 100's of years. No humans have ever lived for 100's of years - these are facts. Considering that the 3 migrations in the book of mormon are now considered small and insignificant and that they integrated with the existing indigenous population, we need to acknowledge that Adam also is not the father of the human race, and that there was certainly physical death before the fall, and clearly reproduction. Otherwise how could we have this article about ancient dna dating to 20,000 years ago? This gospel study essay acknowledges that native americans existed before the Judeo-Christian Adam came on the stage of human history. Temples in Gobekli Tepe date back 11,000 years ago i.e. before the Adam of all Abrahamic religions. Human reproduction dates back 100's of thousands of years, and even human clothing dates back 170,000 years ago. These are verifiable facts not theories.

falasha
Mount Laurel, NJ

Elder Spencer W. Kimball said in october 1959, when speaking to the kinsmen of the isles of the sea and the Americas said that "Millions of you have blood relatively unmixed with Gentiles." Columbus called you "Indians," The Lord calls you "Lamanites", the name signifies the descendants of Laman and Lemuel, sons of your first American parent, Lehi; you undoubtedly possess also the blood of the other sons, Sam, Nephi, and Jacob. And you likely have some jewish blood from Mulek, son of Zedekiah, King of Judah (Hel. 6:10)."

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.
Provo, UT

MoreMan,

My journal may have imperfect records of events/actions in society. The dates may be off and things may be exaggerated or underestimated by the limits of my knowledge. Yet, I may still record moral truths and their relationship to my surroundings... and those reflections and declarations may be the most accurate, useful, or valuable bits of information I have to offer.

Spiritual truths are far more important than physical history.

To testify of the physical visit of Jesus Christ only tells of a His existence. But He taught our purpose, potential, and His plan for us to come here, learn from our mistakes and return to His teachings and principles. When we live correctly, we live happily. No other physical or mental satisfaction can substitute for spiritual happiness. The Book of Mormon is a record which teaches us of such things.

If you'd rather worship a History Book, go for it. But what is history "but a fable agreed upon?" If men write history and God writes "The One True Path to Happiness", what would you rather have?

Razzle2
Bluffdale, UT

The theory that most Native Americans and Polynesians are descendents of the Lamanites may even be true if you realize that all of the people (perhaps most but the scripture says all) were in peace together and were one people after Christ. Any breakups into groups after that was not likely based on DNA. So, my Native American and Polynesian brothers and sisters, you may still have Lamanite blood, just not as likely from Lehi.

Capsaicin
Salt Lake City, UT

I'm glad the church removed the word "principle" from the Book of Mormon introduction. I always winced every time I read that. It was NEVER stated in the BOM whether or not there were people already on the land. It does state that there were jaredites at one point. But it never states implicitly "principle ancestors of the american indians." I have no idea how someone could come to that conclusion based on the book of mormon text! I could go so far to postulate that God told his messengers not to include whether there were or were not people already on the land. It really doesn't serve any spiritual purpose. There is no exercise of faith with perfect knowledge, and perfect knowledge implies you already know too much. Does behavior change with perfect knowledge? For some, maybe, but for the vast majority of us sinners who feel like we know the truth, faith has to be exercised because perfect knowledge wouldn't encourage change in us anyway. Only faith and the promise of exercising it, changes a person.

Razzle2
Bluffdale, UT

I also wince at the Book of Mormon "Living Scripture" cartoons and comic like books that simplify the text into just two great nations; one dark and one light that were founded by brothers and most often were at war.

As romantic as this simple story is; the real Book of Mormon is more complex. Even the LDS Church posts topic page on DNA studies says that the DNA of Lehi, Sariah, and Ishmael is not known. Yet, the larger genetic pool of the Nephites is from the People of Zarahemla, not Lehi's family. (Mosiah 25:2)

These were not Mulekites. The word Mulekite is not in the text of the Book of Mormon, yet is introduced in the 20th century chapter headings to save space for writing "People of Zarahemla". Zarahemla could trace his genealogy back 200 years by memory to Mulek, but the People he led had no written history.

Who were these People of Zarahemla? How did they become so numerous in just 200 years? Without a written history, could they have not joined more people over the centuries?

The same is true of the Lamanites. We do not have their complete 1,000 year history.

CBAX
Provo, UT

OK.

Scientist gets BOLD on comment boards and sits quietly in relief society. Keep up the real intent there!

Weber State Graduate
Clearfield, UT

"Thus it is extremely unlikely that any LDS leader ever proclaimed that all the inhabitants thereof were descendants of Lehi - Nephi."

Perhaps you missed this...

"With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea."

Spencer W. Kimball, April 24, 1971

Ghost Writer
GILBERT, AZ

Former leaders of the church have had just as much right to speculate about the origins/peoples of the Book of Mormon as anyone else. I get so tired of all those who insist that if any church leader ever made any mistake whatsoever the "church must not be true." That's always been an unrealistic expectation and a shallow criticism.

Cletus from Coalville
Coalville, UT

Ghost Rider – it's clear you did not read the above post more carefully.

It's obvious that Weber's quote from Kimball was a challenge to an earlier post that "it is extremely unlikely that any LDS leader ever proclaimed that all the inhabitants thereof were descendants of Lehi."

The earlier poster was wrong and Weber called him on it.

Craig Clark
Boulder, CO

Belief in the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon is not a condition for membership or fellowship in the Church. But members who suspect it is of modern authorship generally find it prudent to keep a judicious silence on the matter in Church.

DocHolliday
reno, NV

"Thus it is extremely unlikely that any LDS leader ever proclaimed that all the inhabitants thereof were descendants of Lehi - Nephi."

This doesn't sound like the prophet was speculating to me. Plus, why would a prophet have to speculate on this subject? Wouldn't they know something as important as this without having to speculate? I mean it it was written on the introduction page on the book of mormon, which is canonized scripture... Doesn't add up.

DocHolliday
reno, NV

"With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea."

Spencer W. Kimball, April 24, 1971

Not speculation.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments