DNA doesn't prove Book of Mormon historicity, either (OPEN)

Mormon Times ^ | May 17, 2010 | Michael R. Ash

[greyfoxx39]

 

 

 

DNA doesn't prove Book of Mormon historicity, either

 

By Michael R. Ash

Monday, May. 17, 2010

The past several issues have established that DNA studies do not refute the historicity of the Book of Mormon. The flip side to this issue is the erroneous claim made by some Latter-day Saints that DNA studies prove the Book of Mormon.

Because the pro-DNA argument is closely tied to a specific geographical model, I'd like to reiterate that there is no official geography for Book of Mormon events. Eventually, I'll discuss the various geography hypotheses and will offer the reasons why I believe that the Mesoamerican model fits best.

But for now it's important to understand that believing Latter-day Saints can respectfully disagree as to where the events described in the Book of Mormon took place.

 

Elder Dallin H. Oaks, speaking of those who participate in non-official venues wherein church-related topics are discussed, observed that sometimes "a volunteer will step forward to present what he or she considers to be the church's position. Sometimes these volunteers are well-informed and capable, and they contribute to a balanced presentation. Sometimes they are not, and their contribution makes matters worse. When attacked by error, truth is better served by silence than by a bad argument."

I wish to "liken" Elder Oaks' comment to the arguments made by those who claim that DNA studies offer evidence or proof for the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Briefly outlined, here is the position taken by those who make such a claim:

1. DNA evidence for the Lehites should be discernible in modern DNA studies.
2. All Native Americans belong to one of the following five mitochondrial lineages (haplogroups): A, B, C, D and X.
3. Haplogroup X, the least common of the five groups, appears to be traceable to the ancient Middle East.
4. Ergo, haplogroup X provides evidence for the existence of Lehites.

The first part of this argument is based on the faulty assumption (as pointed out in the past several issues) that we should expect to find Lehite DNA. The second and third parts of the argument are somewhat accurate (with some caveats). The fourth part, however, is a faulty conclusion unsupported by what we actually know about the origin and distribution of haplogroup X.

Not long after the initial haplotypes A-D were identified in Native American populations, a fifth and more rare haplotype (dubbed "X") was also found among some Native Americans. Sister lineages to the Amerindian haplogroup X are found at low frequencies in many geographic regions of the world including Western Europe, North Africa, East Asia and the Middle East. The presence of haplogroup X in the Americas in primarily limited to the Great Lakes area (which is one of the proposed models for Book of Mormon geography), but it is also found to lesser extents in other parts of North America.

Thanks to an improved analysis of mitochondrial DNA genomes and a greater number of samples available, the Native American haplogroup X is currently termed X2a, a lineage that is not found anywhere else in the world.

As noted in past articles, mtDNA mutations are measured by molecular clocks used to calculate age estimates of the different branches in the mtDNA tree. Currently, there are five different molecular clocks that have been proposed using all or a considerable section of the mtDNA genome. All five clocks provide close estimates for haplogroup X2a indicating that it pre-dates the Lehites' arrival to the Americas by several thousands of years. (For more depth on the measurement of these molecular clocks, see Ugo Perego, "The Book of Mormon and the Origin of Native Americans from a Maternally Inherited DNA Standpoint.") In reality, based on current DNA science and the lack of additional evidence, X2a cannot be linked to the Lehites.

The irony for many of those who attempt to use DNA studies to buttress a belief in the Book of Mormon is that all respectable DNA studies accept (as a fundamental part of DNA science) the principle of evolution and that humans came to the New World over 12,000 years ago. Those who attempt to argue that DNA studies prove the Book of Mormon, however, typically reject the principle of evolution and the early age of man.

Basically, when it comes to DNA science they want to have their cake and eat it too.

I accept the current state of DNA research by those who are experts in the field, adding that it is premature, at best, and irresponsible, at worst, to claim that DNA research may be employed to prove or disprove the authenticity of the Nephite scripture.

[Godzilla]

I accept the current state of DNA research by those who are experts in the field, adding that it is premature, at best, and irresponsible, at worst, to claim that DNA research may be employed to prove or disprove the authenticity of the Nephite scripture.

To the indoctrinated mormon this must seem confusing. Throughout the history of mormonism the Amerindians were announced to be THE descendants of the hebraic origined Lamanites. Ash also glosses over that the DNA studies are confirmed by numerous other studies - anthropological and linguistic - which clearly show no hebraic/egyptian culture or influence at all on the Amerindians. Add to this the abysmal LACK of archaeological findings to support even the hail mary pass of the Limited Geography Theory (let alone its gross contradiction of the teachings of the prophets and church over the history of mormonism) - the proof becomes overwhelming - the book of mormon is a piece of fiction.

Mormon apologists make many claims as to the authencity of the bom story - yet these claims clash against each other. Here Ash is defending the LGT against popular mormon apologist Rodney Meldrum who is using the DNA to support the traditional N. American model. This is challenging BYU sponsored LGT theorist Sorenson, who holds that N. America could NOT have been part of the bom lands.

Alternative locations have also been put forth including multiple variations on the LGT and N. Am theories, Polynesia, Malaysia, Baja California and even Africa.

The classical mormon testimony is that the bom is 'true'. If it is true, then there should be no loss of archaelogical finding as well as related science to support the history it claims within its covers. Only fairy tales speak of fictional lands - just like the lands the bom talks about.

[Godzilla]

You sound just like a muslim!

I see you've set aside this special time to humiliate yourself in public. Thank you. We're all refreshed and challenged by your unique point of view. However, I don't know what your problem is, but I'll bet it's hard to pronounce.

[greyfoxx39]

Thanks for the concise summary, 'Zilla!

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“You sound just like a muslim!

Hearing is going fast, apparently...

[Godzilla]

Hearing is going fast, apparently...

FR has audio capabilities!!!

[svcw]

ooohhhhhhh K?
You do realize islamic fascist muslims are not Christians, correct?

[Religion Moderator]

Be careful to not compare Freepers with Islamic Fundamentalists.

[ejonesie22]

My brain hurts.

[SWAMPSNIPER]

Mormons seem to fervently believe that they are Christians, so do Catholics and Baptists, and Methodists and Episcopalians.

I simply don't see this as a good time for for all the bashing that is going on.

Will you refuse to share a foxhole with a Jew, or a Christian who doesn't share your precise rituals, if things come to that?

What if two Mormons are already in the foxhole and don't want to share it with a Catholic, or whatever you are?

[svcw]

Ok, Mr Sniper, I think I am getting it here.
You object because I said LDS are not Christians. We are not talking about foxholes we are talking about souls.
LDS do not believe in the same jesus as the the Biblical Jesus. This has been demonstrated in the RF many times using words directly from LDS sources.
LDS believe in multiple gods, as demonstrated many times in the FR directly from LDS sources.
This is the Religion Forum, which is why we are talking about theology.
If you find the discussion distasteful then I suggest that you not enter the Religion Forum.

[Colofornian]

You sound just like a muslim! [swampsniper to svcw]

Perhaps you wouldn't be so quick to say that if you knew of the following two parallels:

Muslims believe Christians are "infidels"
Mormons believe Christians are "apostates"

[greyfoxx39]

Will you refuse to share a foxhole with a Jew, or a Christian who doesn't share your precise rituals, if things come to that?

It appears that you are throwing in anti-semitism in with accusations of "sounding like muslims".

The thread topic is DNA and the BOM, not foxholes.

It may be wise for you to take your own advice HERE

IMO, there is only person on this thread who doesn't seem capable of carrying on the discussion without confrontation.

[Colofornian]

All of us, Jew and Christian, share an enemy who is eager to cut our throats. [Swampsniper]

Hmmm...How about Jesus' words? "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him." (Luke 12:4-5)

So tell us, SWAMPSNIPER. Does Jesus say, "fear the 'throat-cutters' (No)
Does Jesus say, "fear the Jewish enemies?” (No)

Instead, does He say to exercise fear of the One who has authority to cast somebody into hell? (Yes)

So, indeed, our "fear" is on behalf of those who are placing their eternal spiritual lives at risk.

Personally I believe that too many of the religious discussions around here become confrontational and damaging to our, hopefully, common goals. [SWAMPSNIPER]

As for "common goals" do you think Christians and Jews share the temple Mormons’ goals of becoming gods of their own world? (Again, No)

Do you think the Jews ever took idolatry -- somebody making themselves out to be God -- lightly? Didn't the Jews twice pick up stones to stone Jesus for idolatry became He clearly uttered the Sacred Name for Himself ("I AM")?

Do Mormons make themselves out to be gods? (Just google the phrase "God in embryo" and see what you come up with)

I could probably guess that the folks who the apostle Paul warned the church @ Ephesus about had the bulk in common with the “sheep” there. Both groups were "religious." So, did Paul play the "allies"-game-don't-divide-us-you're playing? (No)

As Paul was leaving the church of Ephesus, he warned them with this high-priority alert:

"For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole will of God...I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears." (Acts 20:27, 29-31)...

Sorry, Swampsniper. The apostle Paul's cultural priority was to defend against the false disciples who will proselytize the flock and draw away men unto themselves!

Tell us something, Swampsniper: If you did something tearfully night and day for three years, do you think it's rather important? And now you're telling us to ignore him? So what? We're just to conclude, "Oh, the man who contributed a good chunk to the New Testament -- what does he know about cultural priorities?"

(I'll take Paul's and Jesus' already-revealed priorities to your guesswork based upon your theological relativism any day)

[Nosterrex]

What would be far more helpful would be the genetic comparison between the descendants of Abraham and the Native Americans. Unless I am misinformed, the Mormons believe that the Native Americans or Indians are remnants of the lost tribes of Israel. If that is so, then I would expect that there would be genetic evidence supporting that belief. Since Indians are Mongoloids and Jews are Caucasoids, I would expect that the genetic evidence would disprove the factious Book of Mormon.

[Godzilla]

Since Indians are Mongoloids and Jews are Caucasoids, I would expect that the genetic evidence would disprove the factious Book of Mormon.

Those studies have been done and more. For example, the National Geographic Genome Project is putting many of the pieces together -

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/index.html

As Ash points out in the article above there is no support from DNA for the bom story. However, this does not stop the valiant mormon apologists. One common defense is that the bom does not PRECLUDE others being in the americas at the same time and thus their genetic pool was eventually cut off/overwhelmed by the asian/mongoloid dna. This is currently the working premise of Sorenson's/BYU limited geographic theory. However, to accept this answer, one must then reject the prophetic teachings of lds presidents and church since its inception.

Throw in the inexplicable LACK of archeological evidence, anthropological and linguistics and other applicable sciences - the evidence becomes even more overwhelming against the bom.

[greyfoxx39]

the evidence becomes even more overwhelming against the bom.

Burning in Bosoms

[Godzilla]

Burning in Bosoms

[aMorePerfectUnion]

“Mormons seem to fervently believe that they are Christians, so do Catholics and Baptists, and Methodists and Episcopalians.”

Fortunately, the Bible tells us exactly what Christianity believes. Mormonism doesn’t believe that.

As to your comments about foxholes, I’d be more than happy to share my foxhole with another Christian, Jew, or mormon. That is a separate issue.

[svcw]

kir

[Tennessee Nana]

And the point would also be well taken if the LDS were not kissing up to the enemy of the Jews and the Christians...

Just as they did to the Nazis in the 1930s/40s...