CLICK
Posted on 01/18/2006 11:50:52 AM PST by johnk
WOW!
I just finally read my way through this thread, if there was ever proof that the Bible can be interpreted more than one way, this thread is IT. Is that why we have continuing revelation, (man’s circumstances change, but god’s does not)?
Just a thought.
and morticians too.
I meant to ping you to post 169 and 170.
Thanks! That was good, especially coming from someone who used to belong to LDS.
If you listen to the above linked documentary:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-
8594203721530427132
Quoted from above Video Documentary:
"Mormon 1:7 says of the growing Nephites, the whole face of the land had become covered with buildings, and the people were as numerous almost as the sand of the sea."
Some of the staunchest evidence against mormonisn comes from the above statement. How can the whole of North America be covered with buildings and peoples. Yet there is no artifactual evidence of these vast civilizations.
On the other hand they are yearly finding more and more evidence to back the Bible and it's place in history. You can even go visit this land and it's many Biblical artifacts and places. Even archeological evidence thousands of years old from the old testament times, much older than evidence that has "been destroyed" here in North America.
This should be a real problem to some caught up in the LDS system. Where are traces of these civilizations?
Also 2 Nephi 5:21,24 says of the rebellious lamanites, "the Lord God caused a skin of blackness to come upon them." and "because of the cursing which was upon them they did become an idle people full of mischief."
Also Alma 3:6 we read "And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression... "
The prophet Joseph Smith taught that the Lamanites eventually destroyed the white skinned people (Nephites) and that the American Indians are the descendants of the ancient Lamanites.
Joseph Smith himself taught that "Negroes" are the "sons of Cain, this is exactly where Brigham Young got his opinion from."
(History of the Church, Vol. 4, page 501)
Mormon leaders also taught that "As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed with a dark skirt; he became the father of the Negroes, and those spirits who are not worthy to receive the priesthood are born through his lineage." (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, page 102)
"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity.-..wherefore, as they were white, and exceeding fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them." (2 Nephi 5:21)
The doctrine which Mormon leaders used to teach concerning blacks was clearly set forth in a letter written by the First Presidency of the church in 1947: "From the days of the Prophet Joseph even until now, it has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel. "
(Letter from the First Presidency of the Mormon Church, July 17, 1947, as cited in Mormonism and the Negro, by John J. Stewart, 1960, pages 46-47)
That is correct. I was an active member in the late 70's when the last official proclaimation published in the Doctrine & Covenants was posted, allowing the Blacks to hold the priesthood. It was a great day!
They always have politically expedient revelation. Just like the manifesto against polygamy that came just in time for Utah to be granted Statehood.
"With that being the case, if there is or isn't DNA evidence whoopee too doo! Why? Because there is NO CLAIM THAT THEY WERE THE FIRST PEOPLE HERE, nor in fact that they were some pure blooded people. The word 'civilization' can be defined in more than one way."
How does that line up with statements taken from the introduction to the Book of Mormon.
"Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel" and also "after thousands of years, all were destroyed except the Lamanites, and they are the pricipal ancestors of the American Indians."
This is taught as church doctrine. It is also taught that the Book of Mormon is a literal, factual history of the people that were on this continent, and there visitation by Christ himself and so on....
There is evidence in the current leadership of the LDS that this belief is changing.
The DNA evidence should be vastly Jewish. This is not the case. Remebenber the father's "Y" chromosome remains intact as it is past from genreation to genreation. The mothers DNA information is passed to both sons and daughters through the genreations." DNA markers are then compared with different groups of people. These tests have been going on for more than 30 years!
Genes that are most commonly found in Native Americans and most commonly found in Jews, they don't conincide at all.
There are no similaties to the gene populations of the Native Americans and those of the middle east.
Anthropoligist and Archeologists have found no evidence of Hebrew origins for the people of North, South and Central Americas.
The American Indians are not Hebrews or Israelites. You have to deny the prophecies of Joseph Smith when you study this. The book of Mormon is stated to be the history of the former inhabitants of this continent, not just a little corner of the Americas, but about the continent. It is for this reason that LDS members believe that the Book of Mormon talks about all of the inhabitants of the continent.
The argument that it was a small group of people, goes against the teachingof the BOM. You have to say it is wrong on these matters.
Can you admit it is wrong on these imporatant matters?
Even if it was a small group of people, there should still be traces of DNA evidence in those existing populations.
The DNA evidence on peoples from Central America is equally devastating to the claims of the BOM. Mormon scholars believe that this is where most of the BOM occurred. There is no evdidence in these small areas of any Hebrew DNA.
There is also no Hebrew influence in any of these languages. That includes 800-900 languages, that are or have been spoken in the last few centuries.
How convenient. :)
Keep reading the thread...
There is evidence in the current leadership of the LDS that this belief is changing.
That whats changing?
The DNA evidence should be vastly Jewish.
Says who?
The argument that it was a small group of people, goes against the teachingof the BOM.
Says who?
With the book of Mormon, there is not one single source, outside the Book of Mormon, validating a single place, person, a single event. There isn't any of that, so the problems that DNA poses for the BOM, simpy exemplifies the problems already evident in archeaology.
There is essentially nothing to link the old world with the new world.
Not only do the Native Americans not come from Israel. It gets worse for LDS members. We know where they cmae from, they came from norhtern part of East Asia.
There is no evidence of any Hebrew migration, not in genetics or for that matter, in any other source, whether it be archealogical or linguistic.
Let's go back to the title of the thread"
DNA vs. The Book of Mormon...
Did you watch any of the Documentary?, there at least 5 specialists interviewed.
All those questions you ask are answered, for instance...
Look at 13 minutes 17 seconds.
Thomas Murphy (Mormon Anthropologist and Scholar) states the following:
"one repsonse among Mormons wrestling with genetic data, is that the founding populations of the Book of Mormon, would have been small and made a small genetic contribution to the larger populations that were already here (North America)."
continued...
"this response rests upon a rejection of statments from the Book of Mormon. It also requires a rejection of the teachings of Joseph Smith, Bringham Young, and virtually every other church president who has commented on the subject.
"
continued...
"it requires setting aside statements in the Doctrine and Covenants, another Mormon scripture, about Lamanites being the indigenous people near present day Missouri. This approach is kind of like trying to defend the prophetic status of Joseph Smith, by denying his prophecies."
continued....
"another scripture that has to be set aside, is a statement in the Pearl of Great Price, in Jospeh Smiths history, in which he has Maroni telling him that the gold plates contain the history of the people on this continent."
continued...
"this continent presumably would meen North America, because this event took place in New York."
continued...
Additional comments from Simon Southerton, Ph.D. (Molecular Biologist)...
"Clearly here you have Jospeh Smith stating in scripture that Book of Mormon record is about the former inhabitants of this continent, noi a little corner of the Americas, but about the continent and it's for this reason that Latter Day Saints believe that the BOM talks about all the inhabitants of the American continent."
continued...
Thomas Murphy (Mormon Anthropologist and Scholar)...
"The book of Mormon is not saved by a small limited geography, becuase even that group, even if that sort of thing happened, then that is not what is described in the Book of Mormon, and we have to say that the Book of Mormon is wrong. Not aonly that, there still ought to be straces of a small population in the gene pool in that local region."
There are other specialists with similar data...
If you think this documentary is a fraud, I can understand that. But unless you've watched it, we won't be on the same page in this discussion. I took for granted that you were up on the topics of the video, and was not as discriptive as I could have been.
Thanks,
johnk
The Bible vs. The Book of Mormon (.wmv medium quality)
It drags a little at first but really hits home.
From the BOM Text:
Mormon 9:32-34
32 And now, behold, we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.
33 And if our plates had been sufficiently large we should have written in Hebrew; but the Hebrew hath been altered by us also; and if we could have written in Hebrew, behold, ye would have had no imperfection in our record.
34 But the Lord knoweth the things which we have written, and also that none other people knoweth our language...
Has anyone brought up the fact that the so called "descendants" of Lehi that are being tested for DNA were genetically altered when the Lord Cursed Laban way back at the beginning of the BOM, roughly 570 BC? Every succeeding generation that "mingled his seed" with them had the same genetic change. I don't hear anyone talking about this? These people became physically different from the Abrahamic line from which Lehi came.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.