Posted on 01/04/2011 3:45:06 PM PST by Paragon Defender
DNA samples taken from modern Native Americans do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East. Critics argue that this means the Book of Mormon's claim that Native Americans are descended from Lehi must be false, and therefore the Book of Mormon is not an ancient record as Joseph Smith claimed.
See also: Source(s) of the criticism
Few criticisms of the Church have received as much media attention as this criticism, with so little thought and science being applied to the question. DNA attacks against the Book of Mormon account fail on numerous grounds.
It is important to realize that critics of the Book of Mormon base their arguments on DNA data that has never been shown to be even relevant to the issue of Book of Mormon genetics, let alone conclusive. Such critics have cobbled together DNA data gathered from unrelated studies to produce arguments with the appearance of scientific weight but having no real significance. No genetic studies have been designed and performed to test the hypothesis that Native Americans were of Lehite descent and that this inheritance is detectable today.
DNA issues can be complex for the non-specialist (especially those who were in high school more than twenty years ago, before much of the modern understanding of DNA was available). A number of excellent articles are available on this topic.
For those interested in general introductions to DNA science:
These articles discuss the feasibility of testing various hypotheses using the Book of Mormon and DNA:
A variety of geographic models have been suggested for the Book of Mormon. Some geographic models introduce other difficulties for the DNA attacks.
Critics have claimed that DNA tests mean that all Amerindians cannot be "Lamanites," and even some Church authors have conceded this point too readily.
Some have tried to use a genetic group called haplotype X2a as proof of the Book of Mormon, but the science at present cannot support this.
Regardless of the geographical model used, efforts to date at "testing" the Book of Mormon through the use of genetic data encounter a number of problems and issues that should be considered. The remainder of this page discusses issues which must be considered regardless of the geographical model being used.
Genetic attacks on the Book of Mormon focus on the fact that Amerindian DNA seems closest to Asian DNA, and not DNA from "the Middle East" or "Jewish" DNA. However, this attack ignores several key points.
Lehi and his family are clearly not Jews. They belong to the tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3, 1 Nephi 5:14), and married into Ishmael's family, the tribe of Ephraim.[1] These tribes were carried away captive by the Assyrians, and did not contribute greatly to the current genetic mix of the Middle East.
Furthermore, the Middle East is located at the crossroads of three continents, and has seen a great deal of immigration, mixing, and intermarriage. To use modern Middle Eastern DNA as the "standard" against which to measure what Manasseh and Ephraim DNA must have been like 2600 years ago is extraordinarily sloppy science.
Articles which consider that "Asian" DNA and Lehite DNA may actually correspond due to an earlier common source:
Identifying DNA criteria for Manasseh and Ephraim may always be beyond our reach. But, even identifying markers for Jews—a group that has remained relatively cohesive and refrained from intermarriage with others more than most groups—is an extraordinarily difficult undertaking.
One author cautioned:
Articles which discuss the various criteria (and the difficulties involved) for identifying "Jewishness" via DNA include:
Mitochondrial DNA is passed only from mothers to their children. It has been used in attacks on the Book of Mormon, and yet even known Jewish populations do not share mtDNA.
So, known Jewish groups cannot be linked at all by mtDNA studies, and yet the critics would have us believe that two of the lost tribes (Ephraim and Manasseh—from whom we have no 'control' or 'reference' samples to compare to) can be ruled out as ancestors of the Amerindians via mtDNA testing?
Articles which discuss difficulties in using mtDNA:
Y-chromosomes are only spread from father to son; the female line does not carry them at all. These markers have also been used by critics to "prove" that the Amerindians cannot be descended from Lehi.
Despite claims that Y-chromosome data do not support Book of Mormon claims, there are some markers which should be considered in another light:
Articles which discuss Y chromosome issues:
Murphy uses the "Lemba" as an example of a group proven to be Jewish via DNA testing. But, this example is misleading. The Lemba were identified as Jewish because of a marker called the "Cohen modal haplotype." This marker is carried by about half of those who claim descent from Aaron, Moses' brother, and only 2-3% of other Jews.
But, the Book of Mormon does not suggest—and in fact seems to exclude—the idea that Levites (the priestly family of Aaron) were among the Lehi party. Without priestly families, one would not expect to find the Cohen modal haplotype! Yet, only 2-3% of modern Jews from non-priestly families (to say nothing of Ephraim and Manasseh—remember, Lehi and company are not "Jews") can be identified by this test.[5] Are these 97-98% of modern Jews then not Jews because the genetic test is negative for them? Excluding the Nephites on the basis of such a poor test that we would not even expect them to pass (since they do not include Levitical families) shows how far the critics will twist the evidence to find fault.
Articles which discuss Cohen modal haplotype issues:
Approximately ninety percent of the Amerindian population died out following contact with the Europeans; most of this was due to infectious disease against which they had no defense.[6]
Since different genes likely provide different resistances to infectious disease, it may be that eliminating 90% of the pre-contact gene pool has significantly distorted the true genetic picture of Lehi's descendants. Studies of pre-Columbian human remains have not shown any extinct haplotypes—as one would expect given the small contribution made by a Lehite colony. Gene frequency, however, could well have been altered by such a dramatic die-off, suggesting that caution should be used in assuming that modern Amerindian populations are an identical match for pre-Columbian gene frequencies.
Critics often over-look the Jaredites, and assume (as in the hemispheric models type 2 and type 3) that the Jaredites can have contributed nothing of consequence to the Lehite DNA picture.
But, it is not clear that this must be the case. Some LDS have believed in a total eradication of the Jaredites, others have argued that Jaredite remnants survived and mixed with the Lehites. Bruce R. McConkie, while believing that the majority of Amerindian descent was from Israel (i.e. Lehi, Ishmael, and Mulek) nevertheless wrote:
The Jaredites are complete genetic unknowns. They cannot be Israelites, since they pre-date Israel. Some authors, such as Hugh Nibley, long ago argued that they were of Asian origin.[8]
Articles which discuss the relevance of Jaredite issues:
It should be remembered too that many sectarian critics use DNA science in a sort of "suicide bombing" attack on the Church.[9] The fundamentalist Christian critics are happy to use DNA as a stick to beat the Book of Mormon, but do not tell their readers that there is much stronger DNA evidence for concepts which fundamentalist Christian readers might not accept, such as:
And, despite being inconsistent with DNA data, fundamentalist critics do not call on their congregations to abandon such literalistic Biblical concepts as:
The critics are often hypocritical—they claim the Saints should abandon the Book of Mormon on flimsy, dubious science, and yet do not tell their audience that they should (by the same logic) abandon religious beliefs of their own that have much more DNA evidence against them.
Discussions of this ironic twist are found in:
DNA attacks against the Book of Mormon are ill-advised, a "contrived controversy."[10] Various geographical models introduce issues unique to each model, but the DNA data is no where as conclusive as the critics claim, regardless of the geographical model chosen.
Critics tend to opt for the most naive, ill-informed reading possible of the Book of Mormon text, and then cry foul when the Saints point out that they have given much thought to these issues and come to more nuanced conclusions that are more faithful to the Book of Mormon text than the critics' poorly-considered caricatures.
Critics do not provide the "whole story" of the DNA data, and seem to want to use the certainty which DNA provides in modern crime-solving as a springboard to trick the Saints, the media, and investigators into thinking that their historical DNA conclusions are as solid.
The Church's statement on the matter of DNA is succinct and accurate:
In fact, DNA data tells us nothing which we did not already know from archaeological data—at present, the human settlement of the Americas is thought to date thousands of years before the advent of Lehi. Many of these settlers have links to east Asia. None of this is news, and none of it threatens the Book of Mormon's status as authentic history.
But, the critics hope that their listeners will be awed by the banner of DNA science, and conclude that something more impressive is going on. Informed members of the Church have not been persuaded by their tactics, and much has been written to help non-specialists understand the "numerous and complex" issues in the fascinating and valuable science of genetics.
Oh wow...my brother could weigh in on this and blow it right out of the water. Humm-mm. Might get his imput but he is so busy now in his work.
BTW Jim just posted about PD spamming the site. Looks like he’s not even fazed. Some might call it “match and Play”.
South Park said it best, “Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb!”
Heh, heh, first of all the Book of Mormon is a hodgepodge of single-author poppycock, just like the Koran, only not as murderous in its effect.
The truth is that the Americas were first populated by Central Asians who crossed the then-extant Alaska land bridge.
In 2003 I got deployed to Uzbekistan, believe me there’s a connection. The Uzbeks are mostly secular Muslims who like their vodka. One day a very mixed group of young Uzbek men and women took me to task for regarding them as an isolated people. One asserted:
“We headed west and conquered the Byzantines (Uzbeks and Turks are ethnically identical); we headed east and we eventually beat Custer!”
FWIW, they scoffed at the American belief that we were their first ever window to the West. One said, “in the sixties my Uzbek grandmother was wearing miniskirts, drinking vodka, and listening to the Rolling Stones!”
In other words, Jewish Indians my foot!
***No matter how many times I beg these LDS morons to stop they just keep posting this trash!*****
It is far better to not post, and be thought idiots,
than to post and remove all doubt.
Filed in the fiction section...
Filed in the fiction section...
I don’t know, they are so much fun to play with. ;-)
invisible
Same old regurgitated propaganda, been addressed thousands of times before. Here are some haystacks for you to read through to find where it’s been addressed. If you’re really interested in the truth that is.
http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_dna.html
http://www.godandscience.org/cults/dna.html
http://www.irr.org/MIT/southerton-response.html
http://www.ils.unc.edu/~unsworth/mormon/dna.html
http://signaturebooks.com/2010/06/answers-to-apologetic-claims-about-dna-and-the-book-of-mormon/
http://www.irr.org/mit/lamanites-dna-bom.html
Mormon Scholarship...
LOL...
You’re kidding, right?
Examine internal contradictions - google anachronisms in the book of mormon. The reformed hieroglyphics 300 years before Jesus using the words "Jesus" and "Christ" (both based upon greek). or French "au due".
Perhaps the 4000+ changes to the text of the book of mormon, said by smith to be the most perfect book in the world - corrections all done without benefit of the metal plates.
And finally, research HOW the bom was translated. True history records smith with his face in a hat looking at a smooth pebble (seer stone), no special glasses, etc. Check out www.mormonthink.com for more background.
Joseph Smith knew all about DNA. He sure like to spread it around.
I just skimmed through all of the above and can say - been there, done that. My input deals with the linguistics.
Language tends to be the last cultural item lost in assimilation. One can pretty much follow the migration patterns of humans using comparative linguistics.
For example, the Thai language is spoken by Thais, Laos, and ethnic minorities in both Vietnam and China. In China’s Yunnan province, the Dai minority speak Thai in such a way that Thais visiting there can actually carry on a conversation with these Dai people. Relationships can be linguistically followed and tracked as linguists have done with the Indo-European languages and have even replicated what appears to be the mother of all Indo European languages or proto-language by using the common words in a host of European languages. In fact, a tree of these languages has been developed and one can easily see the connections. (http://www.danshort.com/ie/) between the languages.
There is no connection whatsoever with American Indian languages and any Middle Eastern or even Indo European languages. The concept that somehow these indigenous North American languages are related to the Mormon “Lamanites” is certifiably absurd.
As I stated earlier: been there, done that.
Wait a minute.
You used those two words in the same sentence!
Oh.
I get it.
You meant to incite roaring laughter!
LOL!!!
Ejonesie: Mormon scholarship [post #30]
Well, I looked @ my vast dozens-upon-dozens of books in my Mormon book library & files & e-files about the Jaredites...searching for the "best" Jaredite Mormon scholarship I could find.
I think I found it: "The people didn't want to cross the ocean in the dark, so the Brother of Jared made 16 clear stones and asked God to make them shine."
Source: My First Book of Mormon Stories retold by Deanna Draper Buck, Mormon church owned Deseret Book Company, 1998, 30th page.
Now, I searched within this primer in vain for footnotes that would further explain the above -- how Jared's brother created ("made") stones...[Boy, & here I must have been some backwoods bumpkin to actually think God was the Creator of stones & rocks & the like!]
And so, I was "forced" to go back to read the Book of Mormon [which is just about the right word you need for opening a BoM -- "forced"]...specifically Ether 2 -- to discover the sequence of how these shiny rocks came to be. What I discovered is that initially the Mormon god -- as He instructed them in constructing this vessel -- forgot all about the need for not only lights but ventilation as well!
So you see. I'm not the only country bumpkin on this! The Mormon god was this bumbling afterthought Mormon god on the design of these barges as well!
Its a redundancy.
Mormon Scholarship...
- - - - -
Oxymoron at its best.
As my grad chair once said to me...”You went to BYU? I wouldn’t put that on my CV”.
Mormon scholars are not accepted in anyway in the fields of biblical studies, meso-American history or Archeology. And I have a lot of friends in the field who corroborate that.
There sure as HECK had better be some smores and Hot Tea at the end of this thread.
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.