Our Mormon Brothers?

Reformed Evangelist ^ | May 14th, 2007 | Jeff Fuller

[Gamecock]

The following draws from the book Is the Mormon My Brother by apologist James White. Earlier this year, Paul Kaiser reprinted a Worldview article titled 10 Mormonism Facts which generated a myriad of responses from visitors who stated that Mormons were being misrepresented and are simply our brothers & sisters in the Body of Christ. Let’s look at what Dr. White presents using LDS resources:

The First Vision

Without question the key revelation in Mormon Scripture regarding the nature of God is to be found in what is known as the First Vision of Joseph Smith. The vision itself is fundamental to all of LDS theology. Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie described the vision:

That glorious theophany which took place in the spring of 1820 and which marked the opening of the dispensation of the fullness of times is called the First Vision. It is rated as first both from the standpoint of time and of pre-eminent importance. In it Joseph Smith saw and conversed with the Father and the Son, both of which exalted personages were personally present before him as he lay enwrapped in the Spirit and overshadowed by the Holy Ghost.

This transcendent vision was the beginning of latter day revelation; it marked the opening of the heavens after the long night of apostate darkness; with it was ushered in the great era of restoration, the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3:21.) Through it the creeds of Christendom were shattered to smithereens, and because of it the truth about those Beings whom it is life eternal to know began again to be taught among men. (John 17:3.) With this vision came the call of that Prophet who, save Jesus only, was destined to do more for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. (D. & C. 135:3.) This vision was the most important event that had taken place in all world history from the day of Christ’s ministry to the glorious hour when it occurred.(1)

And Mormon Prophet Ezra Taft Benson said,

Joseph Smith, a prophet of God, restored the knowledge of God. Joseph’s first vision clearly revealed that the Father and Son are separate personages, having bodies as tangible as mans. Later it was also revealed that the Holy Ghost is a personage of Spirit, separate and distinct from the personalities of the Father and the Son. (See D&C 130:22.) This all-important truth shocked the world even though sustained by the Bible. (2)

How is it that the creeds of Christendom were shattered to smithereens and the knowledge of God was restored by this one vision? While the story is as familiar to Mormons as John 3:16 is to Christians, we present Joseph Smith’s own recounting of the story in full, taken from the LDS Scriptures (and hence carrying canonical authority). However, we note that the account that appears in the LDS Scriptures was written in 1838, eighteen years after the events described:

14 So, in accordance with this, my determination to ask of God, I retired to the woods to make the attempt. It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty. It was the first time in my life that I had made such an attempt, for amidst all my anxieties I had never as yet made the attempt to pray vocally.

15 After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon bysome power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.

16 But, exerting all my powers to call upon God to deliver me out of the power of this enemy which had seized upon me, and at the very moment when I was ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction—not to an imaginary ruin, but to the power of some actual being from the unseen world, who had such marvelous power as I had never before felt in any being just at this moment of great alarm, I saw a pillar of light exactly over my head, above the brightness of the sun, which descended gradually until it fell upon me.

17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!

18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)–and which I should join.

19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong;(3) and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.

20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, Never mind, all is well I am well enough off. I then said to my mother, I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true. It seems as though the adversary was aware, at a very early period of my life, that I was destined to prove a disturber and an annoyer of his kingdom; else why should the powers of darkness combine against me? Why the opposition and persecution that arose against me, almost in my infancy? (Joseph Smith History 1:14-20).

What does this vision, recorded in LDS Scripture, teach concerning God? First and foremost, it presents to us the concept of a plurality of gods. This arises from the fact that God the Father is a separate and distinct physical entity from Jesus Christ, His Son. God the Father is possessed of a physical body, as is the Son. This is why McConkie can claim the creeds of Christendom were smashed to smithereens, for the vision has always been interpreted by the LDS leadership to teach that God the Father is a separate and distinct person and being from the Son. The unity of Being that is central to Christian theology is completely denied by Joseph Smith in the First Vision. Hence, you have one God, the Father, directing Smith to another God, the Son.

While it is not our intention to critique these teachings at this point, it should be noted that there are a number of problems with the First Vision, and with the entire development of the LDS concept of God as well. As we noted, this version of the First Vision was not written until 1838. Previous versions, however, differed in substantial details from this final and official account. Most significantly, the presence of both the Father and the Son as separate and distinct gods is not a part of the earlier accounts.(4)

————————————————-

(1) Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine,2nd ed., rev. (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), pp. 284-285, LDSCL.

(2) Ezra Taft Benson, Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988), p. 4, LDSCL. On page 101 of the same book, we read this strong statement:

The first vision of the Prophet Joseph Smith is bedrock theology to the Church. The adversary knows this and has attacked Joseph Smith’s credibility from the day he announced the visitation of the Father and the Son. You should always bear testimony to thetruth of the First Vision. Joseph Smith did see the Father and the Son. They conversed with him as he said they did. Any leader who, without reservation, cannot declare his testimony that God and Jesus Christ appeared to Joseph Smith can never be a true leader, a true shepherd. If we do not accept this truth if we have not received a witness about this great revelationwe cannot inspire faith in those whom we lead.

(3) One of Mormonism’s leading scholars, James Talmage (and a General Authority), said the following in the General Conference of April, 1920:

This Church, therefore, from its beginning, has been unique, for the organization of the Church was forecasted in this declaration that at the time of Joseph Smiths first vision there was no Church of Jesus Christ upon the earth; and I do not see why people should take issue with us for making that statement (CR1920Apr:103).

(4) I noted a number of the historical problems with Mormonism in Letters to a Mormon Elder, pp. 88-106. For a fuller treatment of this issue, see H. Michael Marquardt and Wesley P. Walters, Inventing Mormonism (Salt Lake: Smith Research Associates, 1994), pp.1-41, and Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? (Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1982), pp. 143-162.

[Osage Orange]

ROFLOL!!

Nice deflection..."both" of you.

[FastCoyote]

“But it’s all hush-hush, so let’s not go there.”

You would think that if they really believed that baloney, they’d tell the world instead of having “secret rites”. And of course, once you have secret rites, all sorts of bizarre accusations result, and spin off rites.

[colorcountry]

LOL....

You think you are believable. You, who dosen’t want what you do in secret exposed, but any who dare expose it are “unreliable,” “not to be recommended,” against the “odds of being well adjusted.”

And these charges just because someone leaves a minor cult of orthodox Christianity and dares post about their experiences on the internet?

I think anyone should examine any claims of anyone, inlcuding you and your Church. And when they do....when they examine your claims in the light of day, against Biblical truths, an honest and intelligent person would run far, far, away before they become ensnared in the brainwashing. Only those who are indoctrinated would believe that everyone (but those who adhere to their “religion”) are liars, or not mentally well adjusted. It is you who must paint your detractors in bad light, because the truth will expose your secret ceremonies and ordinances for what they are....and we mustn’t let THAT happen. Right?

[DelphiUser]

You think you are believable.

I speak what I believe as you do, however, I think I sound more reasonable (most of the time) YMMV.

You, who doesn’t want what you do in secret exposed, but any who dare expose it are “unreliable,” “not to be recommended,” against the “odds of being well adjusted.”

Doing some thing in secret implies that you don't want it exposed, sky is blue alert!

Sacred, do you understand the word? Our temple ceremonies are sacred to us.

I said leaving the church did not show dishonesty, nor does it recommend them, it is neutral to this point, yet to you saying something does not matter is an insult? Get the chip off your shoulder you's walk easier.

I DID say that going to boards and posting about a religion you no longer believe means they are not well adjusted, and I stand by that assessment, so flame away all you mal-adjusted anti's (LOL)

And these charges just because someone leaves a minor cult of orthodox Christianity and dares post about their experiences on the internet?

If you post for one to six months, that's understandable, but to keep posting month after month, year after year without having Life fill the time? You either have and addiction, or an obsession, neither are considered "well adjusted behavior". (Before anyone asks, i am DU and I am a FR addict and so by definition I am mal-adjusted too).

I also said recently divorced talking about their Ex spouse was not a recommendation, as well as the "The Divorce was not my fault" line is classic denial stuff.

I think anyone should examine any claims of anyone, including you and your Church. And when they do....

They will find that we are telling the truth and the spirit will testify to them of that.

when they examine your claims in the light of day, against Biblical truths, an honest and intelligent person would run far, far, away before they become ensnared in the brainwashing.

Light I welcome, Biblical comparisons I welcome, Prayer I welcome, what i do not welcome is people who misquote, break oaths, and mislead. Anyone who does any of those things I am "anti" to, whether it be about my church or another Church.

Brainwashing? Any form of education can be called "Brainwashing" by someone.

Only those who are indoctrinated would believe that everyone (but those who adhere to their “religion”) are liars, or not mentally well adjusted.

Grin, Pot, meet kettle...

It is you who must paint your detractors in bad light,

Actually, I prefer to let them do that.

because the truth will expose your secret ceremonies and ordinances for what they are....and we mustn’t let THAT happen. Right?

Sacred? They are. I am perfectly willing to discuss what they are about, why they are performed in the temple and why they are sacred. none of that is a problem, but posting pictures of temple garments and the actual (or imagined) text of the ceremony is disrespectful to another person's religion, and will not reflect well whether I be showing video of a Mass against the wishes of the Chhurch, or photos of a buddhist temple, or Mormon temple cerimonies, I would look bad by so doing for the fact that I would do that says far more about me than about the cerimony I am trying to "Expose". Now before people ask...

• Baptisems for the dead (allowing those with no opportunity in life to be saved in death)
• Endowment (basically an opportunity to recieve the belssings promised to abraham)
• Sealings (joining families together for eternity)

That's it. Why because we have been commanded to and by helping others, we come closer to Jesus, our lord and savior.

[Elsie]

(you see in order to go to the temple, you are asked to covenant with God to keep the proceedings sacred and not reveal them, you are asked to do this of your own free will or not participate.

---

I've two simple questions:

You are asked to do this by WHOM?

Is it written in your SCRIPTURES to do this?

[Elsie]

Light I welcome, Biblical comparisons I welcome...

Alrighty then!

---

...but posting pictures of temple garments and the actual (or imagined) text of the ceremony is disrespectful to another person's religion...

How is it 'disrespectful'?

[Elsie]

...and why they are sacred.

Ok; why?

You listed three - WHY are they so SACRED?

Baptisems for the dead (allowing those with no opportunity in life to be saved in death)
Endowment (basically an opportunity to recieve the belssings promised to abraham)
Sealings (joining families together for eternity)

[DelphiUser]

You are asked to do this by WHOM?

The officiator of the ceremony politely asks if anyone is not here of their own free will and choice to raise their hand, they will be invited to spend time elsewhere in the temple, where there are some really nice quiet waiting rooms, no-one will say a thing.

Is it written in your SCRIPTURES to do this?

The LDS scriptures are replete with discussions of agency, God will force man to do nothing, even coming to earth was a choice.

[nowandlater]

Here’s Bruce R. McConkies last talk. He died just a few days afterwards. I double dog dare the skeptics to listen!

The Purifying Power of Gethsemane - Part 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTqeJ2d3DwY

The Purifying Power of Gethsemane - Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9NRhzkyURk

The Purifying Power of Gethsemane - Part 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feJ-6CuuCxY

[DelphiUser]

Ok; why?

You listed three - WHY are they so SACRED?

Because we have been commanded to hold them sacred, and we accepted it by covenant. (which should be reason enough.)

Since I know you will not consider that a good enough answer, the way the endowment for example is presented reveals truths that are eternal, I have had many an epiphany while in an endowment session on some point of doctrine which in prior sessions had not occurred to me for I was not ready, this communion with God and fluidity of knowledge from the spirit, I personally hold sacred, as many of my catholic friends hold their rosary sacred.

Let us use that as an example, say I a non-Catholic bought a rosary, not to pray over, but for my daughter to use in her dress up box, I allowed her to take them outside and play with them getting them muddy and allowing them to be stepped on and abused as toys often are. Would a neighbor who was Catholic be offended? I think they would. If I bought a priests collar to use at a drunken party, or a habit to use at an orgy, or a Jewish prayer shawl to wear to a skin head party. There are things that just ought not to be done, ceremonies that mean so much to those who believe in them should be treated with the same respect that you would treat that person, maybe even more respect. To disrespect the trappings of any religion is disrespectful to them and more disrespectful to the person "Disrespecting" the religion for it shows that the disrespecter has no mercy, Which is the best thing to be found possessed of at the last day.

Lastly, if someone is crass enough to be disrespectful of another persons heartfelt beliefs, they can expect, human nature being what it is, that the person who has been attacked in this most personal manner, will retaliate in kind Thus, they will have started a conflict. Jesus taught men to love their enemies, do good to them who despitefully use you, and to turn the other cheek. this is incompatible with the attitude of "I attack because I can", which reminds me more of Bill and Hillary and the liberals.

I have at times engaged in such behavior myself. It is something I regret when the heat of the moment is over and I stand, surveying the damage I have wrought. Luckily, for me, I can still repent of such behavior, and try to rid myself of the attitudes that bring it out, when I feel attacked.

I hope I have answered your questions about both sacredness, and respect.

May God bless you and heal the wounds that abide in all our hearts, may you awaken tomorrow full of the joy of a soul refreshed by our saviors love, amen.

[nowandlater]

Some of My Favorite LDS Hymns in Numerical Order

Redeemer of Israel
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/6.mp3

Guide Us, O Thou Great Jehovah
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/83.mp3

How Firm a Foundation
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/85.mp3

The Lord is My Light
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/89.mp3

Nearer, Dear Savior to Thee
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/99.mp3

Jesus, Lover of My Soul
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/102.mp3

Precious Savior, Dear Redeemer
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/103.mp3

The Lord is My Shepherd
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/108.mp3

Cast Thy Burden upon the Lord
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/110.mp3

Rock of Ages
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/111.mp3

Savior, Redeemer of My Soul
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/112.mp3

Our Savior’s Love
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/113.mp3

Come, Follow Me
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/116.mp3

I Believe in Christ
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/134.mp3

I Know That My Reedemer Lives
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/136.mp3

Abide with Me; ‘Tis Eventide
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/165.mp3

As We Now We Take the Sacrament
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/169.mp3

God, Our Father Hear Us Pray
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/170.mp3

In Humility, Our Savior
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/172.mp3

‘Tis Sweet to Sing to Sing the Matchless Love
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/176.mp3

O Lord of Hosts
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/178.mp3

Again, Our Dear Redeeming Lord
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/179.mp3

Father in Heaven, We Do Believe
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/180.mp3

Lord, I Would Follow Thee
http://broadcast.lds.org/churchmusic/MP3/1/1/words/220.mp3

BONUS: Here is an article comparing 1st Century Christian Beliefs with LDS Beliefs.
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display.php?table=transcripts&id=93

[nowandlater]

Dr. Scott Woodward’s presentation on DNA and the Book of the Mormon

http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/woodward01/swfair01rmdsl.html

Here’s an overview:

DNA and the Book of Mormon
by Cooper Johnson

Have you ever tried to envision the big picture with a few pieces of a thousand-piece puzzle? Come on, you puzzle buffs; you know what I’m talking about. Say I were to give you five random pieces of a thousand-piece puzzle. Would you have any chance of identifying the picture that would result from all one thousand pieces put together, from just having those five pieces? No cheating; no peaking at the puzzle box to identify the picture.

It would be an impossible task, and of the thousands of people reading this article, I doubt I could find anyone who has even attempted this task. Why would anyone take five pieces and use that to guess the “big picture?” Silly, isn’t it?

Attempting to determine the validity of the Book of Mormon with current mitochondrial DNA (MDNA) studies of the Native American populations is equally as difficult, according to Scott Woodward, Professor of Microbiology at Brigham Young University, as he addressed the attendees at the FAIR Conference last year.

The focus of the 2001 FAIR Conference was the Book of Mormon, and with the rise of genetic studies of Native American MDNA that have been reported in various press and media outlets, Dr. Woodward’s presentation on the subject of DNA and the Book of Mormon was timely and extremely enlightening for those in attendance. My purpose in this article is to summarize and outline the findings and conclusions of Dr. Woodward as per his conference presentation. I hope this will help us understand the current state of DNA evidence as it relates to Native Americans and the Book of Mormon, ultimately providing all of us a sound basis with which to judge the genetic data being produced in this area.

DNA: A Simple Formula?
There are those who would advocate a simple formula for determining the validity of the Book of Mormon: Analyze Hebraic and Native American DNA and voila…we either have a match or not! Well, it is not that simple, especially considering only the genetic data that is available today. Let’s take a closer look.

There are, of course, different types of genetic analysis. Mitochondrial DNA analysis is the study of a small molecule inside our cells, which, according to Dr. Woodward, makes up 1/200,000th of our total genetic make-up. So, we are talking about a tremendously small contribution from MDNA.

So, why is it studied so extensively? Why are we seeing so many MDNA studies surfacing regarding the origins of specific populations of people? Dr. Woodward attributes this to how easy MDNA is to study. The genetic community knows quite a bit about this type of DNA, so re-creating the wheel isn’t necessary for those looking to use MDNA for these purposes.

MDNA has a specific characteristic about it that sets it apart from other genetic analyses. It has a specific inheritance: maternal. It can only be passed from a mother to children. Males can receive the MDNA, but not pass it on.

Another unique characteristic about MDNA is that, as opposed to Y Chromosomal DNA and Autosomal DNA, it is non-recombining, which is to say, it doesn’t get mixed-up as it is passed from generation to generation. Additionally, MDNA’s linkage disequalibrium, means all markers (parts) are inherited intact through a population’s history.

Y Chromosomal DNA, which is the most well-known DNA type to all of us who attended biology classes in Junior High and High School, is inherited in males from males. According to Dr. Woodward, this type of DNA doesn’t accomplish much other than determine one’s maleness (all you guys can stop grunting now).

The bulk of our genetic information, as it relates to linking us to specific populations, is Autosomal DNA. This DNA contains tens of thousands of independent loci (pieces of genetic information) whereas MDNA contains only a handful of loci, according to Dr. Woodward.

Problems Identifying Past Populations
Why go through all this genetic mumbo jumbo? Well, in order to understand what the genetic findings are all about, we must identify the actual type of DNA that is being used in the studies. Only in this way can one ascertain the significance of a study’s findings. With this in mind, let’s consider some of Dr. Woodward’s expressed limitations or concerns when using MDNA to identify the origins of the Native Americans or any population of people, for that matter.

Since MDNA is maternally inherited, one obvious limitation is in an instance when a mother bears no daughters. Her MDNA effectively comes to a screeching halt. This will complicate issues. Later generations will not have a trace of the former generation’s MDNA in this case. Autosomal DNA is inherited from both a mother and father (50/50), which makes it more reliable to track, as it recombines.

If we limit ourselves to using MDNA or Y Chromosomal DNA to identify a population’s genetic origins, we are omitting the bulk of the ancestral information. It is essential to keep this in mind when observing the DNA studies being released today. The picture we are seeing is only a few pieces of that thousand-piece puzzle. It is an extremely limited view. This is not to say we are unable to learn anything from MDNA. Indeed, Dr. Woodward makes it clear that valuable things can be learned, but we must understand what we are looking at: a very limited picture.

In addition to certain MDNA becoming extinct due to the lack of daughters, we must also consider new MDNA showing up due to new groups being introduced to a given population. This can also significantly skew any results.
With this in mind, let’s imagine we have ten generations of a family tree in front of us, beginning from the top down to the bottom, over the ten generations. If we are only considering MDNA, as we look at any individual in the 10th generation at the bottom of the chart (which, let’s say, represents the current generation), because of the above limitations, we, by no means, have an accurate understanding of the original genetics of this population.

Some MDNA, which existed in, let’s say, the first generation may not be present (and likely won’t) in the current generation. And, on the other side of the coin, there will be MDNA information in the current generation that didn’t exist in the first or second generation, due to new populations integrating through marriage to other families.

Now, let’s say we not only look at the current generation (the 10th generation), but let us also include it’s parental generation (the 9th generation). Do we now have an adequate survey, using all MDNA in these two generations, of the ancient population? No, we do not, according to Dr. Woodward. Once again, we are observing a very limited amount of the genetic make-up of this population, because of extinct MDNA throughout it’s past, in addition to new MDNA inserting itself from other populations.

Finding Lehi’s DNA
We know, and the evidence is overwhelming, that when Lehi arrived in the Americas, there were populations already here. Lehi and his group were certainly not the first to arrive here. What effect would the integration of these two populations have on the passing of Lehi’s, or should we say Sariah’s, genetic makeup? Specifically on the mitochondrial DNA structure? Dr. Woodward informs us that although this depends on the size of the populations, among other factors, this would certainly have a great effect. For we know that Lehi’s group was very small.

The population that existed in the America’s prior to Lehi’s arrival certainly would have been much, much larger and dominated the genetic structure of later generations (i.e. current generations). This proves to be extremely important when looking at today’s Native American genetic information in an effort at determining the origins of this population.

In fact, Dr. Woodward concludes, with the above in mind, that we should not expect to find any MDNA from Lehi’s family in today’s generation. The introduction of the new MDNA from the larger population, preexistent in the Americas, would prevent such a trace.

Dr. Woodward also addressed the difficulty in recovering ancient DNA for these purposes. It can be done, but it is very difficult at this time. This means the large majority (Dr. Woodward estimates 99.5%) of all MDNA used for these types of studies is derived from current generations. This means our picture is even more limited.

One last statistic will help us understand the status of Native American genetic studies today and, once again, demonstrate our limited view of this populations genetic structure. Today, the number of those used in all the Native American genetic studies is less than five thousand, coming from seventy-five different populations. We know of five hundred populations that exist today in Native American culture, according to Dr. Woodward.

Conclusions
While MDNA can help us understand ancient populations, to test the validity of the Book of Mormon utilizing MDNA as some advocate is an unsound and unacceptable hypothesis. The hypothesis cannot be answered. This hypothesis begs the question: What did Lehi’s genetic make-up look like? This question cannot be answered today, nor is it likely to be answered in the near future.

We are indebted to Dr. Woodward for his tremendous insight that was shared with all those in attendance at the 2001 FAIR conference. We now have a realistic view of the state of Native American genetic studies and more specifically, mitochondrial DNA data. And most importantly, we now understand the tremendously limited and inadequate perspective that today’s MDNA information provides, as it relates to determining the origins of the current Native American population.

Today’s MDNA information gives us absolutely nothing with which to base our conclusions as to the validity of the Book of Mormon. Perhaps someday, we may gain a more complete view. But that day has certainly not arrived. We now have a few pieces of this puzzle. These pieces tell us that there is indeed a bigger picture. But as to what that picture is, we have along way and hundreds of puzzle pieces to go.

[nowandlater]

As demonstrated by this song. It’s the heart which ultimately counts. “Here’s my heart, O take and seal it,
Seal it for Thy courts above.” If a Orthodox Christian or an uncreedal Christian, like a Mormon or a Stonewall, loves Jesus with all their hearts then in my opinion all other things will ultimately work out and a place in the heavens would be one for the sincere and good of heart.

Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Og2PPbWt_1k

Come, Thou Fount of every blessing,
Tune my heart to sing Thy grace;
Streams of mercy, never ceasing,
Call for songs of loudest praise.
Teach me some melodious sonnet,
Sung by flaming tongues above.
Praise the mount! I’m fixed upon it,
Mount of Thy redeeming love.

Sorrowing I shall be in spirit,
Till released from flesh and sin,
Yet from what I do inherit,
Here Thy praises I’ll begin;
Here I raise my Ebenezer;
Here by Thy great help I’ve come;
And I hope, by Thy good pleasure,
Safely to arrive at home.

Jesus sought me when a stranger,
Wandering from the fold of God;
He, to rescue me from danger,
Interposed His precious blood;
How His kindness yet pursues me
Mortal tongue can never tell,
Clothed in flesh, till death shall loose me
I cannot proclaim it well.

O to grace how great a debtor
Daily I’m constrained to be!
Let Thy goodness, like a fetter,
Bind my wandering heart to Thee.
Prone to wander, Lord, I feel it,
Prone to leave the God I love;
Here’s my heart, O take and seal it,
Seal it for Thy courts above.

O that day when freed from sinning,
I shall see Thy lovely face;
Clothed then in blood washed linen
How I’ll sing Thy sovereign grace;
Come, my Lord, no longer tarry,
Take my ransomed soul away;
Send thine angels now to carry
Me to realms of endless day.

[nowandlater]

Truman G. Madsen, “The Olive Press,” BYU Speeches (9 May 1982) Truman Madsen looks at the symbolism of the olive press as related to Christ’s suffering at Gethsemane. (MP3; also available in PDF)

http://speeches-files.byu.edu/freefiles/provider2/type2/Madsen_Truman_051982.mp3

[nowandlater]

David L. Paulsen, “Joseph Smith and the Problem of Evil,” BYU Speeches (21 September 1999) Dr. Paulsen examines how Joseph Smith’s revelations solve the philosophical problem of evil in a God-created world. (Real Audio; also available in PDF.)

http://byubroadcasting.org/devotionals/audio/real/092199.ram

Enjoy!

[nowandlater]

Robert L. Millet, “What We Believe,” BYU Speeches (3 February 1998) Robert Millet examines some of the uniquely LDS beliefs that seem to cause concern among other Christians. (PDF files; also available in PDF format.)

http://speeches-files.byu.edu/freefiles/provider2/type2/Millet_Robert_021998.mp3

[nowandlater]

A young Hugh Nibley talks! I double dog dare the Orthodox (2nd/3rd Century thinkers)camp to listen.

Hugh W. Nibley, “Forty Day Ministry: Part I,” BYU Speeches (12 February 1964) Dr. Nibley looks at non-canonical literature that purports to reveal information about Christ’s forty day ministry. Nibley demonstrates that some of the details in this ancient literature has interesting parallels to unique LDS beliefs. Part 1 of 2. (MP3 file)

http://speeches-files.byu.edu/freefiles/provider2/type2/Nibley_HughW_021964-2.mp3

Hugh W. Nibley, “Forty Day Ministry: Part II,” BYU Speeches (12 February 1964) Dr. Nibley looks at non-canonical literature that purports to reveal information about Christ’s forty day ministry. Nibley demonstrates that some of the details in this ancient literature has interesting parallels to unique LDS beliefs. Part 2 of 2. (MP3 file)

http://speeches-files.byu.edu/freefiles/provider2/type2/Nibley_HughW_021964-1.mp3

[nowandlater]

John E. Clark, “Archaeology, Relics, and Book of Mormon Belief,” BYU Speeches (5 May 2004) Dr. John Clark, director of the New World Archaeological Foundation, discusses some of the evidences that place the Book of Mormon into the real world context of ancient Mesoamerica. (MP3)

http://speeches-files.byu.edu/freefiles/provider2/type2/Clark_John_052004.mp3

[nowandlater]

Daniel C. Peterson, “A Scholar Looks at Evidences for the Book of Mormon,” (Provo, Utah: FARMS) In this audio presentation, Dr. Peterson examines some of the many evidences that favor Joseph’s prophetic abilities in translating an authentic ancient text.

http://www.farmsresearch.com/multimedia/viewaudio.php?id=4

[nowandlater]

Margaret Barker, “What Did Josiah Reform? The Earlier Religion of Israel,” BYU Speeches (6 May 2003) Non-LDS Cambridge scholar, Margaret Barker, discusses some of the interesting aspects of ancient Israel (and the Israelite temple). LDS scholars recognize some uniquely LDS traits in the things noted by Barker.

http://speeches.byu.edu/freefiles/provider2/type2/Barker_Margaret_2003.mp3

This is just too good!