As prophesied HERE:
by 
<-- for you, Nana!
Posted on 02/14/2009 6:41:48 PM PST by restornu
Was Hebrew DNA recently found in American Indian populations in South America? According to Scott R. Woodward, executive director of Sorenson Molecular Genealogy Foundation, a DNA marker, called the "Cohen modal haplotype," sometimes associated with Hebrew people, has been found in Colombia, Brazil and Bolivia.
But it probably has nothing to do with the Book of Mormon -- at least not directly.
For years several critics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and of the Book of Mormon have claimed that the lack of Hebrew DNA markers in living Native American populations is evidence the book can't be true. They say the book's description of ancient immigrations of Israelites is fictional.
"But," said Woodward, "as Hugh Nibley used to say, 'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.' "
Critic Thomas Murphy, for example, wrote in one article about how the Cohen modal haplotype had been found in the Lemba clan in Africa. The Lemba clan's oral tradition claims it has Jewish ancestors.
Murphy then complained, "If the (Book of Mormon) documented actual Israelite migrations to the New World, then one would expect to find similar evidence to that found in a Lemba clan in one or more Native American populations. Such evidence, however, has not been forthcoming."
Until now.
So will Murphy and other critics use this new evidence of Hebrew DNA markers to prove the Book of Mormon is correct? Probably not. But neither should anyone else.
Why?
According to Woodward, the way critics have used DNA studies to attack the Book of Mormon is "clearly wrong." And it would be equally wrong to use similar DNA evidence to try to prove it.
This is because "not all DNA (evidence) is created equal," Woodward said.
According to Woodward, while forensic DNA (popularized in TV shows like "CSI") looks for the sections of DNA that vary greatly from individual to individual, the sections of DNA used for studying large groups are much smaller and do not change from individual to individual.
Studies using this second type of DNA yield differing levels of reliability or, as Woodward calls it, "resolution."
At a lower resolution the confidence in the results goes down. At higher resolution confidence goes up in the results.
Guess which level of resolution critics of the Book of Mormon use?
The critics' problem now is what they do with the low-resolution discovery of Hebrew DNA in American Indian populations.
For people who believe that the Book of Mormon is a true account, the problem is to resist the temptation to misuse this new discovery.
Woodward says that most likely, when higher-resolution tests are used, we will learn that the Hebrew DNA in native populations can be traced to conquistadors whose ancestors intermarried with Jewish people in Spain or even more modern migrations.
Ironically, it is the misuse of evidence that gave critics fuel to make their DNA arguments in the first place. According to Woodward, the critics are attacking the straw man that all American Indians are only descendants of the migrations described in the Book of Mormon and from no other source.
Although some Latter-day Saints have assumed this was the case, this is not a claim the Book of Mormon itself actually makes. Scholars have argued for more than 50 years that the book allows for the migrations meeting an existing population.
This completely undermines the critics' conclusions. They argue with evangelic zeal that the Book of Mormon demands that no other DNA came to America but from Book of Mormon groups.
Yet, one critic admitted to Woodward that he had never read the Book of Mormon.
Woodward also sees that it is essential to read the Book of Mormon story closely to understand what type of DNA the Book of Mormon people would have had. The Book of Mormon describes different migrations to the New World. The most prominent account is the 600-B.C. departure from Jerusalem of a small group led by a prophet named Lehi. But determining Lehi's DNA is difficult because the book claims he is not even Jewish, but a descendant of the biblical Joseph.
According to Woodward, even if you assume we knew what DNA to look for, finding DNA evidence of Book of Mormon people may be very difficult. When a small group of people intermarry into a large population, the DNA markers that might identify their descendants could entirely disappear -- even though their genealogical descendants could number in the millions.
This means it is possible that almost every American Indian alive today could be genealogically related to Lehi's family but still retain no identifiable DNA marker to prove it. In other words, you could be related genealogically to and perhaps even feel a spiritual kinship with an ancestor but still not have any vestige of his DNA.
Such are the vagaries, ambiguities and mysteries of the study of DNA.
So will we ever find DNA from Lehi's people? Woodward hopes so.
"I don't dismiss the possibility," said Woodward, "but the probability is pretty low."
Woodward speculated about it, imagining he were able to identify pieces of DNA that would be part of Lehi's gene pool. Then, imagine if a match was found in the Native American population.
But even then, Woodward would be cautious. "It could have been other people who share the same (DNA) markers," said Woodward about the imaginary scenario.
"It's an amazingly complex picture. To think that you can prove (group relationships) like you can use DNA to identify a (criminal) is not on the same scale of scientific inquiry."
Like the Book of Mormon itself, from records buried for centuries in the Hill Cumorah, genetic "proof" may remain hid up unto the Lord.
As prophesied HERE:
by <-- for you, Nana!
And yet you put your trust in an Organization that is based on altered Scripture.
We Christians are praying for you.
Start at any time.
So did I. For twenty years, I was a quiet unbelieving Mormon. Two things happened. 1(I found Christ and forgiveness and I wanted to tell everyone about it and 2( I was confronted on FreeRepublic by some of your fellow LDS about my 'dishonesty' for remaining on the Church rolls. Those two things convinced me that it is time to speak out about the lies and ecliastical abuses in Mormonism. Thank you very much! ;)
Just out of curiosity AMPU, how do you reconcile the findings of Southerton w/ those of the experts & new findings as cited by Delphiuser? It would seem that Southerton is lacking in many very important areas.
Was your intent to really add to the discussion about DNA, or was it to find cause to throw out yet another anti-LDS link? Not sure this really added anything to the debate between Delphiuser & Godzilla et al. Do you really feel your motives aren't transparent?
Forgot to ping you on post 285.
Albeit you were confronted by some about your dishonesty for remaining on the church roles, you were/are confronted much more about your dishonesty about our beliefs.
Yes I seem to find my way to these threads just as you do. Sorry you were late to the party, not that I made it on time myself
As for me I still find your teams methods “interesting” I don't know which amuses me more, the “ask them what time it is and they tell you how to make a watch and start a dialog on the nature of time” routine or the twist and shout approach to debate.
As far as me adding anything “Substantive”, no need as it was done and done quite effectively by several of my peers early on in the thread with little in the way of effective rebuttal. Of course when the opposition has an empty hand, factually speaking, all that is left is the “bluff”. Therefore I see no need in running up the scoreboard, it would be redundant anyways...
As far as “quips”, why not, my expectations of any truly honest straight forward response instead of ones wrapped in meaningless rhetoric and linguistic slight of hand had dropped to basically nil. So as I have said in another post else where the debate on these subjects has become as “substantive” to those in the real world as one over whether Picard or Kirk was the best Starship Captain.
Hum, I guess it does add substance to the debate, at least from your perspective.
That came later.
There are those who like to torment a dog on a chain.
They usually torment the kinder dogs, being somewhat frightened of the meaner dogs, though they are chained.
Often, even the kindest of dogs becomes mean after enough torment.
When those dogs that had been tormented are unleashed, they are usually mercilessly vicious towards those that tormented them.
I've been very cognizant of the fact that I became a vicious dog at times, through Christ I have gained my freedom, but like a chained dog once freed, I stay far away from the chain and snarl whenever I see it surface.
Then, in your following posts your own "substantive" contributions are as follows: To AMPU in which your contribution is to slam Southerton without any details or sourcing of your claim, "It would seem that Southerton is lacking in many very important areas."
THEN. Was your intent to really add to the discussion about DNA, or was it to find cause to throw out yet another anti-LDS link? Not sure this really added anything to the debate between Delphiuser & Godzilla et al. Do you really feel your motives aren't transparent?
Then, AGAIN against forum rules, add to the discussion with your attack on Colorcountry about her "dishonesty": Albeit you were confronted by some about your dishonesty for remaining on the church roles, you were/are confronted much more about your dishonesty about our beliefs.
SO happy you dropped in to inform us in such a substantive manner that we aren't up to your standards LOL.
Just wondering what your substantive contribution to the topic of the thread will be?
It isn’t a shame that the link is from a site of former mormons. It is a great source of information for any mormon who wants to see the other side. As such, I consider it a privilege to pave a road and make it easy for them to see it. Many, many mormons escape each year and need support, so it is a valuable service. Many of those who escape become Christians too, once they hear and understand the Gospel.
As to DNA, Southerton can speak for himself. It wouldn’t surprise me if he updates his book, using the new data that Godzilla and others have posted, that refutes the wild claims of mormonism.
I hope my motives are crystal clear: to prevent anyone who may consider what the LDS says from getting ensnared in the cult & to let people trapped in mormonism know that they can get out and they will find lots of support when they are set free. No hidden motives there. Those are the only two reasons I post on the plethora of mormonite threads.
As such, I consider that the link I posted contributes to the discussion on how DNA refutes the claims of the book or macaroni.
Hope you are well. Are you enjoying reading the book of systematic theology? Do you have questions from your reading of the volume?
best,
ampu
Reno,
I didn’t mention it earlier, but your post reminded me.
There are ministries that help mormons leave by taking time
to mentor them one on one.
For any mormon who is troubled by the falsehood of mormon
DNA claims, you can go to this link and find help to get
out by another former mormon who was able to successfully
leave and start a new life away from the deception.
http://www.irr.org/mit/mentor-request.html
I'll bet Tolkien has chasmus too - doubly authentic.
You mean there are other scientists and researchers in the world other than mormons?
Is that in your best Melchezadek order voice?
http://www.exmormon.org/whylft125.htm
Important aspect of his story - he began his research in an effort to defend mormonism and discovered the truth that it was a myth after all.
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.