My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

[_ldsfaqs]

Oh, look: it's Gordon B. Hinckley's book, Truth Restored. Since it is published by the Church, the following is official doctrine:

http://www.LDS.org/manual/truth-restore ... d?lang=eng

The second general conference of the Church was held in September, 1830. Among matters of business was the call of Oliver Cowdery to undertake a mission “into the wilderness, through the western states, and to the Indian territory.” Peter Whitmer, Parley P. Pratt, and Ziba Peterson were later called to accompany him. This mission charted much of the future history of the Church.

In October the four men left their families and set out on foot. Near the city of Buffalo they met with members of the Catteraugus Indian tribe, to whom they told the story of the Book of Mormon, explaining that it contained a history of their forefathers.

http://www.LDS.org/manual/truth-restore ... t?lang=eng

Respect for the natives arose out of the Book of Mormon. This volume declares that the Indians are descendants of Israel. Their progenitors are known in that volume as the Lamanites, and, in a prophetic vein, the book speaks of a hopeful future for these people.

And....???

Nothing here debunks anything we are saying.

Natives of the America's ARE among the lost tribes of Israel.
Natives of the America's HAVE always been called "Lamanites", just as they were in the Book of Mormon.

Further, even IF you want to ignore the "various" usages of the words in Mormonism, and just interpret Lamanite as ONLY being Lehi descended, then the Church STILL is true. Because a small group inserting itself into a larger continent would by today due to genetic drift, Lehi's DNA WOULD in fact be in nearly every single Native American.

Thus, either way you cut it, Mormonism is true, out leaders words are true.

[_brade]

ldsfaqs, I know you're jelly and mad because you lost the argument with the truth of facts and logic.

[Guest]

Further, even IF you want to ignore the "various" usages of the words in Mormonism, and just interpret Lamanite as ONLY being Lehi descended, then the Church STILL is true. Because a small group inserting itself into a larger continent would by today due to genetic drift, Lehi's DNA WOULD in fact be in nearly every single Native American.

Thus, either way you cut it, Mormonism is true, out leaders words are true.

ldsfaqs,

If you would read the Science News article cited in my earlier post on this thread, you would see that, in fact, there is NO Lehite DNA in the pre-Columbian genome of the New World - period.

As I stated above, this is the evidence backed scientific consensus, and the evidence supporting it seems to mount every year.

The paper I mentioned is Here.

[_Stormy Waters]

As I stated above, this is the evidence backed scientific consensus, and the evidence supporting it seems to mount every year

Maybe scientists are lying anti-Mormons as well.

[_ldsfaqs]

Thus, either way you cut it, anti-mormon claims concerning the DNA somehow "debunking Mormonism" is ONE BIG LIE!!!!

ldsfaqs,

You need to be careful when you characterize the evidence backed consensus of the scientific community on the issue of pre-Columbian New World DNA as just one big lie.

You look especially silly making this claim when better and more precise the analytical techniques become available(especially for mtDNA) and continually provide yet more evidence that supports the consensus scientific view. This view is that there were no contributions to the pre-Columbian genome by trans-oceanic migrations. If the Lehites even existed (and there is no evidence whatsoever that the ever did), they certainly did not make it to the New World before Columbus.

Here is an article that explains, in very simple terms, what is going on here. If you do not wish to actually read about the scientific findings that contradict your unfounded belief, then perhaps a look at the picture below will help.

pic......

This is a graphic put together by Dr. Southernton that shows that, in direct contradiction of LDS Church claims for more than 150 years, the Polynesians are not related to the "Lamanites" of the New World. There is no New World DNA (and hence no "Lamanite" DNA) in any of the Polynesian native populations.

This finding alone shows that the whole Book of Mormon narrative, as well as published revelations, claims and statements by prophets of the Church and Church leaders, and the tall tales told by LDS missionaries to the Polynesian people, were all (and I don't know how else to put this) lies. There was not, and is not, a scintilla of truth in these claims.

DrW..... I've studied EVERY WORD of nearly every anti-mormon that has ever said a word about Mormonism. I know Southertons claims well.

I'm not contending against DNA science, only anti-mormon claims and misuse of it, and false claims against Mormonism.

You also clearly aren't paying attention. DNA doesn't show EVERY SINGLE ANCESTOR..... Do you comprehend that????
It only shows the dominant. In other words, most natives of the Islands and the America's being of Asiatic decent is irrelevant and perfectly normal. A small group of people Lehi, incerting themselves into a larger continent and peoples ARE not going to ever be the "dominant" DNA. Mormons have never expected them to be so.

Further, anti's don't even know what Lehi's DNA looked like, they only ASSUME.
Further, anti's pervert our religion.
Further, they ignore the DNA science that debunks their claims, such as I've already mentioned now, Genetic Drift. Due to Genetice Drift, Lehi's DNA is 100% likely to be in nearly EVERY Native American and the Islands. Yes, it wouldn't show because it's not the "dominant" DNA, but he would certainly be in there.

So, no matter how you want to interpret Mormonism, our leaders words, whatever, either way, DNA claims and anti-mormon claims against the Church are simply false.

[_Darth J]

Oh, look: it's Gordon B. Hinckley's book, Truth Restored. Since it is published by the Church, the following is official doctrine:

http://www.LDS.org/manual/truth-restore ... d?lang=eng

The second general conference of the Church was held in September, 1830. Among matters of business was the call of Oliver Cowdery to undertake a mission “into the wilderness, through the western states, and to the Indian territory.” Peter Whitmer, Parley P. Pratt, and Ziba Peterson were later called to accompany him. This mission charted much of the future history of the Church.

In October the four men left their families and set out on foot. Near the city of Buffalo they met with members of the Catteraugus Indian tribe, to whom they told the story of the Book of Mormon, explaining that it contained a history of their forefathers.

http://www.LDS.org/manual/truth-restore ... t?lang=eng

Respect for the natives arose out of the Book of Mormon. This volume declares that the Indians are descendants of Israel. Their progenitors are known in that volume as the Lamanites, and, in a prophetic vein, the book speaks of a hopeful future for these people.

And....???

Nothing here debunks anything we are saying.

Natives of the America's ARE among the lost tribes of Israel.
Natives of the America's HAVE always been called "Lamanites", just as they were in the Book of Mormon.

Further, even IF you want to ignore the "various" usages of the words in Mormonism, and just interpret Lamanite as ONLY being Lehi descended, then the Church STILL is true. Because a small group inserting itself into a larger continent would by today due to genetic drift, Lehi's DNA WOULD in fact be in nearly every single Native American.

Thus, either way you cut it, Mormonism is true, out leaders words are true.

I look forward to your citing your favorite passage or passages where the Book of Mormon refers to any people living in the Americas who are not descended from Lehi. Perhaps you could explain to me how in 3 Nephi and 4 Nephi, all of the descendants of Lehi living in peace together, and then dividing themselves again into groups called Lamanites and Nephites, somehow negates the word "Lamanites" referring exclusively to descendants of Lehi (since the commingling and division still only involved descendants of Lehi, and the Book of Mormon specifically designates the survivors of the genocidal war as Lamanites).

Also, if you would be so kind, please explain who the official Church publication Truth Restored unequivocally identifies Lamanites as the American Indians and the descendants of Lehi ("A Mission to the Lamanites"), and yet I am the one who is supposedly ignoring the various usages of the word Lamanite in the Book of Mormon (you have yet to demonstrate a usage applied to anyone not descended from Lehi).

If Lehi's DNA would in fact be in nearly every single Native American, then we would be seeing it in nearly every single Native American.

[_ldsfaqs]

Further, I can easily debunk your claim/interpretation. What about the Jaredites?

Are you positing that the Tower of Babel happened 11,000 to 19,000 years before the time that Adam and Eve left the Garden of Eden, since that is what would be required for the Jaredites to account for the Asian DNA?

What about the "other" peoples that the Book of Mormon mentions that clearly were here outside of the Nephites?

You're right. Please cite your favorite verse(s) that talks (or talk) about the millions of natives who were already in America and who interbred with the children of Lehi.

My point was that the "article" posted by BRADE doesn't say anything about the Jaredites.
Yet, the article only focuses on the Lamanites. Brade and the article gives the impression that no one else existed in the America's. Well, at minimum the decedents of the Jaredites did.

In other words, I was debunking his claim that the Church ONLY believed natives of the america's were ONLY from Lehi.

As to articles of my claim, I don't have time to find them for you, but frankly, if you aren't aware of them, then clearly you aren't as informed in LDS scholarship as you like to claim.

Do a Google search for "others in the Book of Mormon" and you will find a bunch.

haa haa.... and you all claim "I'm" the ignorant one.

[_brade]

DrW..... I've studied EVERY WORD of nearly every anti-mormon that has ever said a word about Mormonism. I know Southertons claims well.

I'm not contending against DNA science, only anti-mormon claims and misuse of it, and false claims against Mormonism.

You also clearly aren't paying attention. DNA doesn't show EVERY SINGLE ANCESTOR..... Do you comprehend that????
It only shows the dominant. In other words, most natives of the Islands and the America's being of Asiatic decent is irrelevant and perfectly normal. A small group of people Lehi, incerting themselves into a larger continent and peoples ARE not going to ever be the "dominant" DNA. Mormons have never expected them to be so.

Further, anti's don't even know what Lehi's DNA looked like, they only ASSUME.
Further, anti's pervert our religion.
Further, they ignore the DNA science that debunks their claims, such as I've already mentioned now, Genetic Drift. Due to Genetice Drift, Lehi's DNA is 100% likely to be in nearly EVERY Native American and the Islands. Yes, it wouldn't show because it's not the "dominant" DNA, but he would certainly be in there.

So, no matter how you want to interpret Mormonism, our leaders words, whatever, either way, DNA claims and anti-mormon claims against the Church are simply false.

Ok, in all seriousness folks, ldsfaqs is most likely trolling.

[Guest]

Faqs,
Here's a shovel as you have hit rock bottom and have started to dig.

Angry, empty rhetoric in which you outright dismiss facts and then produce no evidence to support your own claims will make you no headway.

Having been a convert, then an anti an now a tbm apologist proves what? Outside of demonstrating that you are easily led and swayed. Like a ship without a tiller in the seas of opinion. Naked appeals to your own proclaimed majesty and authority without demonstrating any knowledge are also not making any headway for your assertions. I am supposed to believe you on your own self proclaimed knowledge....... Right. I am sure you are amassing disciples.

You are good for amusement however, like a monkey flinging its own poo.

[_ldsfaqs]

Further, even IF you want to ignore the "various" usages of the words in Mormonism, and just interpret Lamanite as ONLY being Lehi descended, then the Church STILL is true. Because a small group inserting itself into a larger continent would by today due to genetic drift, Lehi's DNA WOULD in fact be in nearly every single Native American.

Thus, either way you cut it, Mormonism is true, out leaders words are true.

ldsfaqs,

If you would read the Science News article cited in my earlier post on this thread, you would see that, in fact, there is NO Lehite DNA in the pre-Columbian genome of the New World - period.

As I stated above, this is the evidence backed scientific consensus, and the evidence supporting it seems to mount every year.

The paper I mentioned is Here.

And I repeat for the moron inclined....... DNA science DOES NOT detect "every single ancestor", it only detects the "dominant" and maybe a couple of lessers.

Thus, Lehi's genome due to the time since and genetic drift WOULD be in the natives, simply not detectable. Further, you don't even know what that genome was. You're just guessing.