Replies

I'm sure Jeff Lindsey, FARMS and FAIR already have a press release prepared.

Any such press release, if not issued by an official arm of the church, will carry a similar disclaimer to this one (found at the bottom of FAIR's homepage here. Thus, any press release, article, or response from these types of organizations can be completely disregarded as carrying any weight of authority, sanctioning, or blessing from the LDS church whatsoever:

FAIR is not owned, controlled by or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of FAIR, and should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief or practice.

. FAIR itself elaborates on their position, in these excerpts taken from their FAQ page:

Are you affiliated with the LDS Church?
We're not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in any way. Most of the members of FAIR are devout members of the Church that serve in various ward and stake callings.
Is the LDS Church aware of you?
We know several departments in the Church office building that are aware of us. But they do not endorse us or support us in any way.
Aren't you discussing doctrinal issues without priesthood authority?
We are not affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and are therefore not doing this under the direction of the priesthood. We would fall more under the category of book publishers. Just as the books you purchase in the bookstore are not published under priesthood direction, so the things we write are not under priesthood direction.
How authoritative are the things that you write?
We try very hard to not give the impression that we are speaking for the Church in any way. We are not affiliated with the Church. We therefore try to avoid doctrinal declarations. Most of the time it isn't an issue as we are discussing things from a historical or scholarly point of view. Occasionally we get into discussions of doctrine when we feel our beliefs as Latter-day Saints have been misrepresented. At those times the writers are speaking from their own experience and beliefs.

Not yet! The study has not been released. . . .

The articles I linked discuss the limitations of DNA studies in general. They are well worth reading.

But will they believe it when it happens, or will they issue the same type statement as always, that all one requires is faith.....that science, reason, and God have not suceeded in revealing the untruthfulness of the Isrealite migration?

I do not know what Lindsay, FARMS, or FAIR will say when that particular study is released. But I would expect them to respond the way they have always done: with facts and reason.

(Really, you cannot have read much by Lindsay, FARMS, or FAIR if you think that their stock answer is "that all one requires is faith.")

Several things struck me about the linked video. First, the presentation seemed very one-sided. Second, the critics spent too much time attacking straw men. Third, the interviewees claimed more certainty than is possible from their methods.

Other than that, the video was fine.

Years ago I use to frequent Genforum.com they had list of various Religions for those doing geneology.

they had List The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and under the name Mormon

it got so bad that they had to remove the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints because a few anti Mormon would just reek havoc!

During that time their were no Fair or Jeff Lindsey sites to get answers that other LDS might have knowledge of!

It became necessary LDS apologetic becaues for years site like CRI Walter Martin, Angleberg etc had been going strong for years!

There is nothing new under the sun I read them all and what I discovered it is the same old, same old just got new packaging!

Here a place to find LDS and bash to ones heart content!
http://www.fairboards.org/

Jesus as one member of the Trinity.

Yes,--- you referred me to where this doctrine came from.

You told me that Tertullian originated this doctrine.

I looked up his biography, and you are right.

He was a pagan lawyer who started writing revisionist doctrine. He sent it to the Bishop of Rome and promptly had it rejected as Heresy.

He left the church at Antioch in a snit.

Later his revisionist doctrine started to be accepted by some because it was so rhetorical that they could read anything into it.

By the time of the council called and presided over by the Roman Emperor, Constantine, the revisionist doctrine was being debated by other revisionists.

They eventually voted to accept it because nobody could understand it.

That is the way of a lot of revisionist doctrine. First it is rejected, then it is tolerated, then it is embraced.

It doesn't change its character as revisionist doctrine though.