The indictment
The examples from modern American Indians do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East. Critics argue that this means the Book of Mormon claim that Native Americans are descendants of Lehi is false, and therefore the Book of Mormon is not an ancient record as Joseph Smith claimed.
prosecution sources
- Thomas W. Murphy, "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics," in Dan Vogel and Brent Lee * Metcalfe, eds., American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002).
- Thomas W. Murphy and Simon G. Southerton, "Genetic Research a 'Galileo Event' for Mormons," Anthropology News 44 / 2 (February 2003): 20
- Simon G. Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2004).
response
few of the criticisms of the church have received care through communication systems like this with so little critical thought and science being used for the question. DNA attacks against declamation Book of Mormon fail in many areas.
Some initial considerations
is important to realize that the Book of Mormon critics base their arguments of DNA material that has never been shown even be relevant to the issue of genetics in the Book of Mormon, and still being conclusive. Such critics have paved the DNA material taken from unrelated studies to produce arguments in the guise of scientific weight but without any significance. No studies have been designed and presented to test the hypothesis that American Indians were descendants of that heritage Lehies be detectable today.
Issues DNA can be complex for non-specialists (especially those who were in high school over twenty years ago, long before modern understanding of the availability of DNA). There are many excellent articles are available for this item.
For those who are interested in the introduction of DNA science:
- This article provides a full assessment by an LDS bishop who is like a world expert on the use of genetic testing. Short, simple and straightforward (and English): John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006): 101-108.
- This article provides a more detailed, but accessible as a non-specialist: David A. McClellan, "Detecting Lehi's Genetic Signature: Possible, Probable, or Not?" FARMS Review 15 / 2 (2003): 35-90.
These articles discuss the possibility of testing various hypotheses using the Book of Mormon and DNA:
- Michael F. Whiting, "DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12 / 1 (2003): 24-35.
Geography
A variety of models have been suggested for geographical the Book of Mormon. Some models introduce other difficulties geographic attacks DNA. These issues are discussed on separate pages here.
Are all Amerindians 'Lamanites'?
Critics have claimed that DNA tests mean that not all Native Americans can be "Lamanites," and even some authors of the Church have given this point without much difficulty. These issues are discussed on separate pages here.
genetic General Affairs
Despite the geographic model used, the efforts to date of 'proof of the Book of Mormon through the use of genetic material found a number of problems and issues to be considered. The remainder of this page discusses the issues which must be considered despite the geographic model being used.
What do we want?
genetic Attacks in the Book of Mormon focus on the fact that Native American DNA to be closer to the DNA of Asia, not the DNA of the "Middle East" or the DNA "Jewishness" However, this attack ignores several key points.
Lehi and his family were clearly not Jews. They belonged to the tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3, 1 Nephi 5:14), and married into the family of Ismael of the tribe of Ephraim [1] . These tribes were taken captive by asérianos, and did not contribute greatly to the genetic mix of the Middle East today.
Moreover, the Middle East is located across roads of three continents, and has been a migration treaty, mixing and intermarriage. The use of modern DNA in the Middle East as the "norm" against which to measure the DNA of Manasseh and Ephraim should have been like 2600 years is an extraordinarily sloppy science.
Articles by considering that DNA "Asian" and DNA Lehies can now correspond to a main previous source:
David- G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006): 109-138.
What is Jewish DNA?
DNA Identify criteria for Manasseh and Ephraim can be far from our reach. But even identifying markers for the Jews, a group that has remained relatively cohesive and refrained from intermarriage with other groups over others is an extraordinarily difficult assignment.
He warned
- genetic diversity studies have just begun. But even the fashion of the ancestral genetic test is stamped ... Other groups, such as Jews, are now being targeted. This despite the fact that Jewish communities have little in common in their side mitochondria - the female line by which Judaism is traditionally inherited. It is the men's side, revealing a lineage between the different Jewish communities - so, of course, that's where geneticists focus .... Geneticists - like preachers and philosophers before them - need to avoid promising more than they can offer. [2]
Articles which discuss the various criticisms (and difficulties involved) to identify "Jewish" way DNA include:
- John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003): 36–37
- John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 101–108.
- Ryan Parr, "Missing the Boat to Ancient America . . . Just Plain Missing the Boat (Review of: Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church)," FARMS Review 17/1 (2005): 83–106. o
- Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): ix–lxii.
- David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006): 109-138.
- Brian D. Stubbs, "Elusive Israel and the Numerical Dynamics of Population Mixing," FARMS Review 15 / 2 (2003): 165-182.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA)
Mitochondrial DNA is passed by mothers to their children. And it has been used in attacks on the Book of Mormon, and still known Jewish populations do not share the same mtDNA.
A new study shows that women in nine Jewish communities from Georgia ... to Morocco have vastly different genetic histories of men ... The identities of women however, are a mystery, because ... their genetic signatures are not related to each other or those of the present day Middle Eastern populations. [3]
then known Jewish groups are not bound by anything to studies of mtDNA, and even then the critics would have us believe that two of the lost tribes (Ephraim and Manasseh - of which we have no no 'control' or 'reference' of examples for comparison) can be discarded from the test as ancestors of Native Americans via mtDNA?
Articles which discuss the difficulties in using mtDNA
- John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12 / 1 (2003): 36-37.
- David A. McClellan, "Detecting Lehi's Genetic Signature: Possible, Probable, or Not?" FARMS Review 15 / 2 (2003): 35-90
- David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006): 109-138
Chromosome - Y DNA
Y-chromosomes are only passed from father to son ; the female line does not take them all. These markers have also been used by critics to "prove" that American Indians are not descendants Lehi.
Despite claims that the Y chromosome material does not support the claims of the Book of Mormon, there are some markers which should be considered in another light:
Douglas Forbes notes that the Y-chromosome biallelic SNP marker [biallelic belonging both alleles (both alternative forms of a gene.) For example, biallelic mutations in the MYH gene predispose to colon cancer.] Q-P36 (also known as the M242 mutation marker), postulated by geneticist Doron Behar and colleagues to be the founding lineage within the Ashkenazi Jewish populations, is also found in Iranian and Iraqi Jews and a group present in the lineage founder present in 31 percent self-identified American Indians in the U.S.. [4]
Articles to analyze chromosomes items:
John M.- Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12 / 1 (2003): 36-37.
- David A. McClellan, "Detecting Lehi's Genetic Signature: Possible, Probable, or Not?" FARMS Review 15 / 2 (2003): 35-90.
- David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006): 109-138.
Lemba and Cohen modal haplotype
Murphy used to "Lemba" as an example of a Jewish group proved through DNA testing. But this example is misleading. The Lemba were identified as Jews because the marker "Cohen modal haplotype." This flag is only brought in half of those who claim to be descendants of Aaron, the brother of Moses, and only 2-3% of other Jews.
But the Book of Mormon does not suggest - indeed seem to rule out - the idea that the Levites (the priestly family of Aaron) were in the company of Lehi. Without families of priests, one could not expect not to have the Cohen modal haplotype. Moreover, only 2-3% of modern Jews non-priestly family (to say nothing of Ephraim and Manasseh - remember, Lehi and company were not "Jews") can be identified by this test. [5] these modern Jews are 97-98% then the non-Jews because the genetic test is negative for them? Excluding the Nephites on the basis of such evidence, nor so bad that we would expect the pass (if not included in the Levitical families) shows how far the critics are going to twist the evidence to find fault.
Articles which analyze the themes of Cohen modal haplotype:
- Matthew Roper, "Swimming the Gene Pool: Israelite Kinship Relations, Genes, and Genealogy, "FARMS Review 15 / 2 (2003): 129-164.
- David G. Stewart, Jr.," DNA and the Book of Mormon, "FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006 ): 109-138
90% rate of death by coming into contact with Europeans
Approximately ninety percent of Amerindian people have died following contact with Europeans, most were from infectious diseases to which they had no defense. [6]
Since different genes usually provide different types of resistance to infectious diseases can be eliminated that 90% of the table gene pre-contact has a significant truth distorted the true picture of the genetic descendants of Lehi.
What about the Jaredites? Critics
followed overlooked Jaredites, and assume (as in the hemispheric models [type 2 and type 3) that may have contributed to Jaredites nothing to the table accordingly Lehite.
But it is not clear that this may be the case. Some LDS have believed in the total extermination of the Jaredites, others have argued that the remains of the Jaredites survived and mixed with Lehies. Bruce R. McConkie, while believing in most Native Americans were descendants of Israel (Example: Lehi, Ishmael and Mulek) still wrote:
- American Indians, however, as Columbus found them also had other blood than that of Israel in their veins. It is possible that isolated remnants of the Jaredites may have lived in the period of destruction in which millions of his fellows perished. It is very clear that Eastern group found their way over the Bering Strait and gradually moved south to mingle with the Indians. We have records of a colony of Scandinavians attempting to settle in America some 500 years before Columbus. There are archeological indications that an unspecified number of groups probably found their way from the old to the new world in pre-Columbian times. Out of all these groups might have been American Indians as they were discovered in the 15th century. [7]
Jaredites genetics are unknown. Can not be Israelites, as they were pre-dated to Israel. Some authors such as Hugh Nibley, long ago argued that they were of Origin Asiático.viii
articles that analyze the relevance of the topics Jaredites:
John M.- Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12 / 1 (2003): 36-37
"Suicide bomber" fundamentalist
should be remembered that many critics as sectarian use of DNA science as a kind of "suicide bomber" in attack on Christian fundamentalists iglesia.ix critics are happy to use DNA as a stick to whip the Book of Mormon, but do not tell your readers that there is stronger evidence of DNA by the concepts that readers can not accept Christian fundamentalists, such as
- evolutionary change in species
- descendants of other human primates
And, despite being inconsistent with the DNA material, the fundamentalist critics do not call their congregations to abandon such concepts such as Bible literally:
- the earth being only 6.000 years
- an Adam and Eve were the parents of all mankind only 4,000 years before Christ
- a flood which exterminated all life except that he was in the ark, occurred about 5,000 years ago
Critics often are hypocrites - they claim that the Saints should abandon the Book of Mormon in the flimsy, dubious science, and thus, do not tell his audience that they should not (for some logic) to abandon their religious beliefs have more DNA evidence against them.
Discussions of this twisted irony found in:
Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15 / 2 (2003): ix-lxii. David G.
Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18 / 1 (2006): 109-138.
conclusion
DNAattacks against the Book of Mormon are ill-advised, a "dispute diverted." [8 geographic models introduced several issues unique to each model, but the DNA material is in no way conclusive as critics claim, despite the geographical patterns they choose.
Critics tend to opt for the more innocent, ill-informed as possible reading the text of the Book of Mormon, and then scream when the Saints needed point that they have given enough consideration to these issues and have become more meaningful conclusions that are more faithful to the text of the Book of Mormon critics considered poor-caricatures.
Critics do not provide the "whole story" of DNA material, and seem to want to use the uncertainty which DNA supplied in modern crime solving as a springboard to catch the Saints, the media, and researchers to think that their conclusions are sound historical DNA.
The Church's statement on the subject of DNA is concise and current
- The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ is exactly what it claims to be - a record of God's dealings with his people ancient America and be a second witness in the divinity of Jesus Christ. The strong testimony of the Book of Mormon is obtained by living the Christ-centered principles contained in its pages and pray about its truthfulness.
- Recent attacks on the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon based on DNA evidence are ill considered. Nothing in the Book of Mormon prevents migration to the Americas by people of Asian origin. The scientific issues relating to DNA, however, are numerous and complex. [9]
In fact, the DNA material tells us nothing that we knew of the archaeological data - in this, it is believed that the establishment of the Americas was thousands of years before the arrival of Lehi. Many of these villages are linked to East Asia. None of this is news, and none of it threatens the position of the Book of Mormon as an authentic history.
But critics hope their listeners will marvel at the banner of the science of DNA, and conclude that something more impressive is going on. The informed members of the Church have not been persuaded by his tactics, and much has been written to help non-specialists to understand the "many complex" issues in the fascinating and valuable science of genetics.
Footnotes
- "The Prophet taught us that the record of Lehi, was first with 116 content pages that were translated and subsequently stolen. In which we were given a summary in the first book of Nephi, which is a record of Nephi individually, the same being of the lineage of Manasseh, but Ishmael was the lineage of Ephraim and his sons to marry within the family of Lehi and Lehi's sons marry the daughters of Ishmael, if same fulfilling the words of Jacob on Benjamin and Manasseh in Chapter 48 of Genesis ... "Erastus Snow," Ephraim And Manassah, etc., "Journal of Discourses , Reported by Geo. F. Gibbs, John Irvine, and others, (6 May 1882) Vol 23 (London: Latter-day Saint's Book Depot, 1883), 184.
- [back] Martin Richards, "Beware the Gene Genies," Guardian (21 February 2003).
- [back] Nicholas Wade, "In DNA, New Clues to Jewish Roots," New York Times (14 May 2002): F1 (col. 1).
- [back] "Cohen Modal Haplotype," in David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 109–138.
- [back] Suzanne Austin Alchon, 'A Pest in the Land: New World Epidemics in a Global Perspective,' Albuquerque : University of New Mexico Press, c2003
- [back] Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine , 2nd edition, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), 33
- [back] John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 101-108
- [back] Press Release, "Mistakes in the News: DNA and the Book of Mormon" (11 November 2003)
