Post by Zeitgeist on Jun 5, 2004 23:09:34 GMT -5
To whom it may concern:
I am new here and was referred to this site as a means of getting some help. I have a challenge that I hope to get some help with.
My challenge centers on geography and human populations. I am critiquing the FARMS (http://farms.byu.edu)/Mormon position on the Book of Mormon using genetics. The Mormons believe in the Book of Mormon. The book of Mormon mentions three small migrations from Jerusalem to the Americas. Mormons typically place these immigrants in Mesoamerica. The first group around the time period of 2400 B.C. to their exitnction around 400 B.C. The second and third groups around 600 B.C. to their extinction at 420 A.D. These populations are said to have moved into already existing populations, thereby losing all trace of middle eastern genes because of founder effect and genetic drift. The time frame would mean it would be at the time of the pre-classic Mayan Civilization (600 B.C.-400A.D.). I can find no evidence supporting the text myself anywhere. The controversy between science and the Book of Mormon has been fierce. It seems to be getting even more so: see how one professor was threatened because of his beliefs about it: faculty.edcc.edu/~tmurphy/ and www.tungate.com/murphy.htm and churches.net/churches/utmiss/Bookofmormon/DNABookmormon.html and churches.net/churches/utmiss/Bookofmormon/DNABookmormon2.html. The last three links go through the recent DNA controversy in chronological order and summarizes it fairly well.
Due to the use of DNA as a research tool and the criticisms leveled because of it, the LDS Church has issued a statement at www.lds.org/newsroom/mistakes/0,15331,3885-1-18078,00.html that is aimed at trying to dispel some controversy regarding this issue. Much of this centers around placing the Book of Mormon in a geographic model. Traditionally the hemispheric model (all Amerindians are descendants of Jews) was the model of choice. Because DNA does not support this idea, the church has turned to neglecting statements made by previous leadership and forced by the tools of science, such as DNA, the model of choice has positively shifted to the more limited model, which suggests that the people's of the Book of Mormon moved into and lived among a larger pre-existing population when they came to the Americas in 600 B.C., rather than be the source of the entire Amerindian population. Founder effect and population drift, as well as assimilation of this Semetic group are now being used as rational for explaining their nonpresence in the archeological, linguistic, and biological record.
I recognize that much of the criticisms leveled against the LDS Church are religiously motivated and often mean-spirited and that many of the claims the LDS Church makes are religiously oriented and not scientifically testable. This said, I do feel that some evaluation of the Book of Mormon is possible and should be made. If false, it certainly should not be used to mislead people or misinform them about the ancient people of the Americas.
I was hoping that you could answer some of my questions and give me some of your thoughts regarding this topic. Further, perhaps you could refer me to others in the field who may also have additional insights. I would greatly appreciate it. An excellent peer-reviewed article explaining the arguments of the controversy between DNA and geography can be read here:
www.dialoguejournal.com/excerpts/36-4.shtml
These questions all relate to the article above:
(1) What are your thoughts on the Book of Mormon as history in reference to the various models of geography mentioned in the article?
(2) Many Book of Mormon apologists and researchers often make scientific "sounding" claims supporting the Book of Mormon. It seems in the past few years these have grown ever more bold and in number. Do you have any thoughts on DNA and the Book of Mormon? Does it support it or not? Is the science good or is it being misused?
See: www.lds.org/newsroom/mistakes/0,15331,3885-1-18078,00.html
"Before DNA" (John L. Sorenson and Matthew Roper, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Sorenson_Roper_DNA.pdf (715 KB)
"DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective" (Michael F. Whiting, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Whiting_DNA.pdf (431 KB)
"A Few Thoughts from a Believing Scientist" (John M. Butler, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Butler_DNA.pdf (169 KB)
"Who Are the Children of Lehi?" (D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Stephens_Meldrum_DNA.pdf (427 KB)
"Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book of Mormon?" (Jeffrey D. Lindsay, Ph.D., 16 November 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/jeff_lindsay_dna.pdf (478 KB)
(3) If the Book of Mormon is not supported by science, do organizations such as the NSF, etc. have statements regarding the Book of Mormon? Both the Smithsonian and National Geographic had one years ago, but have since adopted rather simple and non-explanatory statements that reflect more politically correct passions rather than commitment. While commenting on the scientific nature of the Book of Mormon one need not make a statement on the religious value of the book. I dislike science being used in such a way as to dupe people and think that those with the knowledge should share it. I was raised with the teaching knowledge brings responsibility.
(4) This last question relates to the limited model. Is it testable. I had thought of a way around the limitations by comparing DNA from the same ancient date, thereby getting close to the original populations, hopefully? Are there other biological tests that can be done to evaluate the claims of this church and the researchers taht are pushing these claims?
I understand that such arguments seem as if they not worth the time. Yet, I feel that science has an obligation to better our lives. Understanding our past and the cultures of others is important. If the LDS Church or researchers are making claims that are dishonest, or even misleading, I want to know about it and I think it important to be made known. For many this is a critical issue. As a Peruvian member of the LDS Church put it at a recent BYU presentation on the topic:
"Q: Jose - native Peruvian: Dr. Whiting referred to the statement in the preface to the Book of Mormon that the Lamanites are the principal ancestors of the Native Americans, I thought somewhat condescendingly, a mere commentary. I want to know exactly what the weight of the scientific evidence does to that statement. Does it support that statement? Does it contradict that statement? With the state of the science right now should there be a different statement? It seems to me, I'm left with the impression that it contradicts that statement and if that's the case will you join me in requesting the Church leadership to remove that statement from the Book of Mormon? Because it is now as we speak being used in the entire American continent as a missionary tool to lure members into the Church, perhaps under the mistaken impression that they are the descendants of Lamanites. I am Peruvian. I grew up believing that I was a Lamanite. I am now overwhelmed with the surprise coming from the science, coming from the archaeological evidence. We don't know where the Book of Mormon took place. We don't know where the Lamanites are. If we don't know who the Lamanites are how can the Book of Mormon promise to bring them back? It's an identity crisis for many of us that has to be understood. If it's misunderstood then it's going to come back to haunt the Church, in my opinion." see www.tungate.com/whiting_panel.htm. I was present at this meeting and felt the conviction this man had. It was not a simple statement but almost a plea.
The Book of Mormon is used to recruit many members in Central and South America often at the misuse of science and with less than accurate statements. This conflict between the what members are hearing form apologists and said researchers from BYU and FARMS seems to be in conflict with the rest of the world. It also seems to be having a tragic effect on many members who were told they were a people they may not be. Am I wrong in my observations? I want the truth to be known, no matter where it falls. With this I thank you for your time.
If you have comments or more questions concerning the topic email me.
Sincerely,
Zeitgeist
mormon_history@yahoo.com
I am new here and was referred to this site as a means of getting some help. I have a challenge that I hope to get some help with.
My challenge centers on geography and human populations. I am critiquing the FARMS (http://farms.byu.edu)/Mormon position on the Book of Mormon using genetics. The Mormons believe in the Book of Mormon. The book of Mormon mentions three small migrations from Jerusalem to the Americas. Mormons typically place these immigrants in Mesoamerica. The first group around the time period of 2400 B.C. to their exitnction around 400 B.C. The second and third groups around 600 B.C. to their extinction at 420 A.D. These populations are said to have moved into already existing populations, thereby losing all trace of middle eastern genes because of founder effect and genetic drift. The time frame would mean it would be at the time of the pre-classic Mayan Civilization (600 B.C.-400A.D.). I can find no evidence supporting the text myself anywhere. The controversy between science and the Book of Mormon has been fierce. It seems to be getting even more so: see how one professor was threatened because of his beliefs about it: faculty.edcc.edu/~tmurphy/ and www.tungate.com/murphy.htm and churches.net/churches/utmiss/Bookofmormon/DNABookmormon.html and churches.net/churches/utmiss/Bookofmormon/DNABookmormon2.html. The last three links go through the recent DNA controversy in chronological order and summarizes it fairly well.
Due to the use of DNA as a research tool and the criticisms leveled because of it, the LDS Church has issued a statement at www.lds.org/newsroom/mistakes/0,15331,3885-1-18078,00.html that is aimed at trying to dispel some controversy regarding this issue. Much of this centers around placing the Book of Mormon in a geographic model. Traditionally the hemispheric model (all Amerindians are descendants of Jews) was the model of choice. Because DNA does not support this idea, the church has turned to neglecting statements made by previous leadership and forced by the tools of science, such as DNA, the model of choice has positively shifted to the more limited model, which suggests that the people's of the Book of Mormon moved into and lived among a larger pre-existing population when they came to the Americas in 600 B.C., rather than be the source of the entire Amerindian population. Founder effect and population drift, as well as assimilation of this Semetic group are now being used as rational for explaining their nonpresence in the archeological, linguistic, and biological record.
I recognize that much of the criticisms leveled against the LDS Church are religiously motivated and often mean-spirited and that many of the claims the LDS Church makes are religiously oriented and not scientifically testable. This said, I do feel that some evaluation of the Book of Mormon is possible and should be made. If false, it certainly should not be used to mislead people or misinform them about the ancient people of the Americas.
I was hoping that you could answer some of my questions and give me some of your thoughts regarding this topic. Further, perhaps you could refer me to others in the field who may also have additional insights. I would greatly appreciate it. An excellent peer-reviewed article explaining the arguments of the controversy between DNA and geography can be read here:
www.dialoguejournal.com/excerpts/36-4.shtml
These questions all relate to the article above:
(1) What are your thoughts on the Book of Mormon as history in reference to the various models of geography mentioned in the article?
(2) Many Book of Mormon apologists and researchers often make scientific "sounding" claims supporting the Book of Mormon. It seems in the past few years these have grown ever more bold and in number. Do you have any thoughts on DNA and the Book of Mormon? Does it support it or not? Is the science good or is it being misused?
See: www.lds.org/newsroom/mistakes/0,15331,3885-1-18078,00.html
"Before DNA" (John L. Sorenson and Matthew Roper, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Sorenson_Roper_DNA.pdf (715 KB)
"DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective" (Michael F. Whiting, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Whiting_DNA.pdf (431 KB)
"A Few Thoughts from a Believing Scientist" (John M. Butler, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Butler_DNA.pdf (169 KB)
"Who Are the Children of Lehi?" (D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/Stephens_Meldrum_DNA.pdf (427 KB)
"Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book of Mormon?" (Jeffrey D. Lindsay, Ph.D., 16 November 2003) Download PDF document www.lds.org/newsroom/files/jeff_lindsay_dna.pdf (478 KB)
(3) If the Book of Mormon is not supported by science, do organizations such as the NSF, etc. have statements regarding the Book of Mormon? Both the Smithsonian and National Geographic had one years ago, but have since adopted rather simple and non-explanatory statements that reflect more politically correct passions rather than commitment. While commenting on the scientific nature of the Book of Mormon one need not make a statement on the religious value of the book. I dislike science being used in such a way as to dupe people and think that those with the knowledge should share it. I was raised with the teaching knowledge brings responsibility.
(4) This last question relates to the limited model. Is it testable. I had thought of a way around the limitations by comparing DNA from the same ancient date, thereby getting close to the original populations, hopefully? Are there other biological tests that can be done to evaluate the claims of this church and the researchers taht are pushing these claims?
I understand that such arguments seem as if they not worth the time. Yet, I feel that science has an obligation to better our lives. Understanding our past and the cultures of others is important. If the LDS Church or researchers are making claims that are dishonest, or even misleading, I want to know about it and I think it important to be made known. For many this is a critical issue. As a Peruvian member of the LDS Church put it at a recent BYU presentation on the topic:
"Q: Jose - native Peruvian: Dr. Whiting referred to the statement in the preface to the Book of Mormon that the Lamanites are the principal ancestors of the Native Americans, I thought somewhat condescendingly, a mere commentary. I want to know exactly what the weight of the scientific evidence does to that statement. Does it support that statement? Does it contradict that statement? With the state of the science right now should there be a different statement? It seems to me, I'm left with the impression that it contradicts that statement and if that's the case will you join me in requesting the Church leadership to remove that statement from the Book of Mormon? Because it is now as we speak being used in the entire American continent as a missionary tool to lure members into the Church, perhaps under the mistaken impression that they are the descendants of Lamanites. I am Peruvian. I grew up believing that I was a Lamanite. I am now overwhelmed with the surprise coming from the science, coming from the archaeological evidence. We don't know where the Book of Mormon took place. We don't know where the Lamanites are. If we don't know who the Lamanites are how can the Book of Mormon promise to bring them back? It's an identity crisis for many of us that has to be understood. If it's misunderstood then it's going to come back to haunt the Church, in my opinion." see www.tungate.com/whiting_panel.htm. I was present at this meeting and felt the conviction this man had. It was not a simple statement but almost a plea.
The Book of Mormon is used to recruit many members in Central and South America often at the misuse of science and with less than accurate statements. This conflict between the what members are hearing form apologists and said researchers from BYU and FARMS seems to be in conflict with the rest of the world. It also seems to be having a tragic effect on many members who were told they were a people they may not be. Am I wrong in my observations? I want the truth to be known, no matter where it falls. With this I thank you for your time.
If you have comments or more questions concerning the topic email me.
Sincerely,
Zeitgeist
mormon_history@yahoo.com