My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _Darth J »

ldsfaqs wrote:
SteelHead wrote:Faqs,
You like to throw about the word liar a lot.... so let's see how honestly you can answer a simple yes or no questions.

The brethren (meaning apostles and prophets) have repeatedly, persistently and consistently in official church publications taught that Lehi is the father of the American Indians and the Polynesian people.

Yes or no?

It is a binary question. There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who can count to 1023 on their fingers and those who can't.

Can you?


Actually it's NOT a "binary" question, it's a worded question which can have variations varaiables etc. depending on context..... Friggen idiots! :(

The answer is YES..... "however", when the Church speaks, it's most often referring to who is ones "spiritual" Father, not "literal" genetic Father.


I look forward to where I might find this.

Lehi IS the Father of the people's of the America's and the Islands spiritually speaking.
But, there is also like I've said also likely a literal/genetic tie, because of genetic drift.


What is "genetic drift" again? I would really like you to explain this in your own words.

God is also my Father..... And I and every other Mormon always just says it.... We don't make the "distinction" of it being "spiritual only", but I'm not clearly not genetically related. The Church tends to speak the same on other issues such as Lehi.


Lehi is the god of the Native Americans?

Again, this is all anti-mormon ignorance, false assumptions, false judgments, etc. strawmen that they then tear down with DNA.


It's all a moot point anyway, since the ability to show DNA lineages in humans back to thousands of years before Adam and Eve allegedly left the Garden of Eden negates the Church's truth claims (and that's before even talking about a universal flood).
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _SteelHead »

ldsfaqs wrote:
SteelHead wrote:Faqs,
You like to throw about the word liar a lot.... so let's see how honestly you can answer a simple yes or no questions.

The brethren (meaning apostles and prophets) have repeatedly, persistently and consistently in official church publications taught that Lehi is the father of the American Indians and the Polynesian people.

Yes or no?

It is a binary question. There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who can count to 1023 on their fingers and those who can't.

Can you?


Actually it's NOT a "binary" question, it's a worded question which can have variations varaiables etc. depending on context..... Friggen idiots! :(

The answer is YES..... "however", when the Church speaks, it's most often referring to who is ones "spiritual" Father, not "literal" genetic Father.

Lehi IS the Father of the people's of the America's and the Islands spiritually speaking.
But, there is also like I've said also likely a literal/genetic tie, because of genetic drift.

God is also my Father..... And I and every other Mormon always just says it.... We don't make the "distinction" of it being "spiritual only", but I'm not clearly not genetically related. The Church tends to speak the same on other issues such as Lehi.

Again, this is all anti-mormon ignorance, false assumptions, false judgments, etc. strawmen that they then tear down with DNA.



Faqs,
you are demonstrating your own ignorance. A binary question is one that either has a yes or no answer. A or B, true or false. One of two possibilities. Binary logic is the basis for all modern computation. How are you claiming that we lack knowledge again?

I presented a question with a simple yes or no answer. You answered yes and then qualified it. Brade has posted an official church publication that directly contradicts your interpretation of Lehi's being the actual ancestor of the American Indians and the Polynesians.

Another binary question. Which is wrong: The church publication provided by Brade, or your assertion that Lehi is the "spiritual father" of these people?

--Edit--

God is also my Father..... And I and every other Mormon always just says it.... We don't make the "distinction" of it being "spiritual only", but I'm not clearly not genetically related. The Church tends to speak the same on other issues such as Lehi.


Oh, and according to Brigham Young, you are in fact directly genetically related to God. Guess you do not know your own doctrine. Does that make you a Liar?
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_Nightlion
_Emeritus
Posts: 9899
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 8:11 pm

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _Nightlion »

Let me get my biggie toe wet here. Specifically, what Asia is being spoken of? Indochina, China, Mongolia, Korea, Japan, India, Iran, Afghanistan, where exactly are Native Americans linked to in all of the Asian Continent? It would have to be specific somehow as Asia is filled with genetic variations. Perhaps science is just stuck with that damn Bering Strait Land Bridge notion and cannot read nothing without Democrat blinders on.

Then please consider that both migrations cited in the Book of Mormon left from Asia. I know BYU thinks that Lehi left from the Arabian Peninsula but that is just dumb because they wadded through much tribulation for many years before they reached the Land of Bountiful where Nephi built his ship. I think in Indochina somewhere. That's a nice country. We are not taking into consideration the sons of Ishmael and their FAMILIES. Who's is to say some of them did not take Asian wives as they passed through those coasts? Did some remained of both migrations and could they have become the dominant races in Asia?

Okay. And since the Book of Mormon only accounts of what was happening on the South American Islands of the Andes Mountain Range regarding both Jaredite and Nephite/Lamanite histories, the entire MesoAamerican and North American regions were populated with stragglers from both migrations and any other possible migrations of which there should have been many.
Who is to say what the Jaredites developed in trade with Asia having come from there? Also whether an even greater Jaredite Civilization..... North of Book of Mormon Islands,,,, might have been the Atlantians who may have traded all around the globe? Woah!

No genocidal wars in the Northern regions because the land is more expansive and not confined to Islands surrounded by seas which nearly force genocide if and when war gets too crazy. And it is easy to believe that the decimated Lamanite population was soon over-run by stragglers who came down from the North afterward or up out of the Amazon Basin as they were now easy pickin's and known to be rich with much gold.

I think eventually the great wisdom of the wise in today's DNA science will get sufficiently sophisticated to detail DNA more precisely. The conclusions made against the Book of Mormon will be proven false. Not before the LDS fall out and embarrass themselves horribly before the scriptures are vindicated. They deserve it for all their lightness of heart and trampling upon the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 29: 14
14 Therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid.
The Apocalrock Manifesto and Wonders of Eternity: New Mormon Theology
https://www.docdroid.net/KDt8RNP/the-apocalrock-manifesto.pdf
https://www.docdroid.net/IEJ3KJh/wonders-of-eternity-2009.pdf
My YouTube videos:HERE
_tapirrider
_Emeritus
Posts: 893
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 8:10 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _tapirrider »

ldsfaqs wrote:
SteelHead wrote:Faqs,
You like to throw about the word liar a lot.... so let's see how honestly you can answer a simple yes or no questions.

The brethren (meaning apostles and prophets) have repeatedly, persistently and consistently in official church publications taught that Lehi is the father of the American Indians and the Polynesian people.

Yes or no?

It is a binary question. There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who can count to 1023 on their fingers and those who can't.

Can you?


Actually it's NOT a "binary" question, it's a worded question which can have variations varaiables etc. depending on context..... Friggen idiots! :(

The answer is YES..... "however", when the Church speaks, it's most often referring to who is ones "spiritual" Father, not "literal" genetic Father.

Lehi IS the Father of the people's of the America's and the Islands spiritually speaking.
But, there is also like I've said also likely a literal/genetic tie, because of genetic drift.

God is also my Father..... And I and every other Mormon always just says it.... We don't make the "distinction" of it being "spiritual only", but I'm not clearly not genetically related. The Church tends to speak the same on other issues such as Lehi.

Again, this is all anti-mormon ignorance, false assumptions, false judgments, etc. strawmen that they then tear down with DNA.


Did Joseph Smith lie? Did the resurrected Moroni that came into Joseph Smith's bedroom lie? Smith's own words are in his journal.

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... %931836#25

"he [Moroni] said the indians, were the literal descendants of Abraham"

That is "literal", not spiritually speaking. If Joseph Smith did not lie, an ancestor of American Indians came to Joseph Smith and told him who the Indians were, "literally".

And ldsfaqs, when you talk about dominant ancestors you are referring to people that lived long before Adam and Eve. People whose descendants were not killed in a world wide flood. When you talk about Lehi and the Mulekites mixing with other people, those others would not have even originated with Adam and Eve. bcspace thinks that they did not have spirits that were even the children of God. What do you think about that?
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _SteelHead »

tapirrider wrote:Did Joseph Smith lie? Did the resurrected Moroni that came into Joseph Smith's bedroom lie? Smith's own words are in his journal.

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... %931836#25

"he [Moroni] said the indians, were the literal descendants of Abraham"

That is "literal", not spiritually speaking. If Joseph Smith did not lie, an ancestor of American Indians came to Joseph Smith and told him who the Indians were, "literally".

And ldsfaqs, when you talk about dominant ancestors you are referring to people that lived long before Adam and Eve. People whose descendants were not killed in a world wide flood. When you talk about Lehi and the Mulekites mixing with other people, those others would not have even originated with Adam and Eve. bcspace thinks that they did not have spirits that were even the children of God. What do you think about that?


Wisdom straight from the Tapir's mouth.
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_DrW
_Emeritus
Posts: 7222
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:57 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _DrW »

LDSFAQS, Nightlion, and any other science deniers who may be reading this:

If you look at Dr. Southerton's graphic in my post above, you will see that the pre-Columbian New World genome is represented in green, indicating that it is different and distinguishable from all of those shown in the Old World.

This came about because of more than 10,000 years of reproductive isolation from these Old World lineages. The pre-Columbian New World genome derives from four Old World lineages or clades with several subclades. While the pre-Columbian New World lineages represent the same haplogroups as the Old World lineages from which they descended, the New World populations are genetically distinct.

Best evidence now suggests that there was a 10,000 to 15,000 year "hold up" in migration during which these ancestors of the New World Native Americans were reproductively isolated, either in Siberia or Beringia, before they were able to move on in to North America and expand south and east.

During the 10,000 to 15,000 year reproductive isolation, they developed a distinct set of mutations or genetic markers in their mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA; which is inherited only from the mother).

Humans acquire and accumulate non-lethal mutations at a fairly constant and well understaood rate. It turns out, therefore, that DNA analysis, especially mtDNA and Y-DNA, mapping, can yield not only information about the approximate time that a mutation was acquired, but given the slow migrations of humans in ancient times, it is also possible to get an idea of where mutations were acquired, as well as where (and approximately when) the descendants that carried that mutation expanded.

The pre-Columbian New World genome indicated in Dr. Southerton's graph is shown as distinct from Old World DNAs. The article I cited earlier reports high resolution mtDNA analysis that shows these early migrations (comprised of the four lineages or clades and their subclades) were foundational for all of the mtDNA found in the pre-Columbian New World.

While there are slight variations in estimates as to how long ago the Beringia migration started and when it ended, there is complete consensus among mainstream scientists, based on genetics and archeology, that there were simply no trans-oceanic contributions to the pre-Columbian New World genome - period.

Without having a clue what he is talking about, ldsfaqs will no doubt invoke "genetic drift" and then say that we could never detect a contribution to the pre-Columbian genome represented by mere 20 people in the Lehite group after all this time.

If I told ldsfaqs that Neanderthal DNA that was inserted into the European genome some 38,000 year ago by a limited interbreeding was detectable today, he would find some apologetic excuse why this evidence is irrelevant.

If I told him that the descendants of single Amerindian woman brought to Iceland from North America, who bore a single child more than 1,000 years ago, could be identified today in Iceland and Northern Europe, he would probably say that this proves nothing.

In fact, both of these examples (and many others) show that genetic markers in mtDNA can be very persistent. In fact, as I am sure some folks know, it has been possible for population geneticists to identify and date mitochondrial "Eve" - an ancient female (our most common matrilineal ancestor) who has contributed to the mtDNA of every living human on the Earth today.

Mark Stoneking was one of the authors of the paper in Nature that first reported this result from a massive worldwide genetic mapping effort in 1987. His then-wife did a lot of the statistics work on the project in the early going. I know something about this because she and I have co-authored papers togther and in the course of our projects we have had long conversations about how this work was done. It was a truly massive effort (and may have cost Stoneking his marriage). In any case, there is a NOVA program about this work that features an interview with Dr. Stoneking. It is well worth watching.

While some of the details have been adjusted since 1987, the existence of the mitochondrial Eve and of a mitochondrial DNA "clock" is now accepted science. Some of the methods for using the "mitochondrial clock" that Stoneking and his colleagues (including his then-wife) developed during this work have helped to nail down and verify the dates of the Beringia migration that gave rise to the pre-Columbian New World genome.

The message from all of this to the TBMs is that you cannot possibly claim to be a rational thinker and still deny this science. As with evolution itself, this is another case where you clearly have to choose between science and religion - between rational thinking and irrational superstition.

ETA:

New Scientist Here is what I said, NL:
Best evidence now suggests that there was a 10,000 to 15,000 year "hold up" in migration during which these ancestors of the New World Native Americans were reproductively isolated, either in Siberia or Beringia, before they were able to move on in to North America and expand south and east.


Here is how the original authors stated this conclusion:
Or, to express this first conclusion another way, the ancestors of Native Americans who first left Siberia for greener pastures perhaps as much as 30,000 years ago, came to a standstill on Beringia – a landmass that existed during the last glacial maximum that extended from Northeastern Siberia to Western Alaska, including the Bering land bridge – and they were isolated there long enough – as much as 15,000 years – to maturate and differentiate themselves genetically from their Asian sisters.


If you disagree with these conclusions, as stated by me or by the original authors, then you are taking a position that is diametrically opposed to science, which is, of course, your right.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Jan 29, 2012 1:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."
_Nightlion
_Emeritus
Posts: 9899
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 8:11 pm

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _Nightlion »

DrW wrote:LDSFAQS, Nightlion, and any other science deniers who may be reading this:
.

Ya know, I could respect science a lot more if they would just stop arrogantly tossing in those billions and billions and thousands and thousands of years like fairy dust in their science. It is plain stupid with the utmost arrogant condescension to think you can play that fast and loose with time, just because.....ya know......who's gonna call you on it or better....who's can refute it?
And wouldn't ya know it, all that time is the GREAT DEFEATER of God's existence.....hmm?
B S.

The clock is ticking against your atheism shtick. You will discover yourself right out from under it. Perhaps you already have and keep the lid on it to make hay while your sun still shines.

Science loves to come off impressively precise where they CAN be precise and exhaustive where they can be to overwhelm and dazzle everyone. But then they also just fart like inbred dogs all day long where they have no precision and can't get none either.

You map DNA and can only PRETEND to read it. Like any dead language. Which it is. You can make up any crap you like. Who is going to read it better? So you take the prevailing accepted notions and read it into your map. Just to get published I suppose.
The Apocalrock Manifesto and Wonders of Eternity: New Mormon Theology
https://www.docdroid.net/KDt8RNP/the-apocalrock-manifesto.pdf
https://www.docdroid.net/IEJ3KJh/wonders-of-eternity-2009.pdf
My YouTube videos:HERE
_Ceeboo
_Emeritus
Posts: 7625
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 1:58 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _Ceeboo »

Hey NL (Good to see you back on the board. Hope all is well) :)

But then they also just fart like inbred dogs all day long



Do inbred dogs really fart all day long?

Peace,
Ceeboo
_Brackite
_Emeritus
Posts: 6382
Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:12 am

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _Brackite »

ldsfaqs wrote: I "laughed" at Murphy DNA (then Southerton).....

Mormons had LONG known that most natives of the America's were of Asiatic decent.
There was nothing "new" by such a revelation.
Lamanites were always everyone Non-Nephite, and the Book of Mormon's version of the Bibles "Gentile".

Mormons NEVER have believed that Lamanites were "only" those descended from Lamen/Lemuel.

That was an anti-mormon strawman created by Murphy and Southerton.



The Following is From the 12th President of the LDS Church, Spencer W. Kimball:


With pride I tell those who come to my office that a Lamanite is a descendant of one Lehi who left Jerusalem six hundred years before Christ and with his family crossed the mighty deep and landed in America. And Lehi and his family became the ancestors of all of the Indian and Mestizo tribes in North and South and Central America and in the islands of the sea, for in the middle of their history there were those who left America in ships of their making and went to the islands of the sea.
Not until the revelations of Joseph Smith, bringing forth the Book of Mormon, did any one know of these migrants. It was not known before, but now the question is fully answered. Now the Lamanites number about sixty million; they are in all of the states of America from Tierra del Fuego all the way up to Point Barrows, and they are in nearly all the islands of the sea from Hawaii south to southern New Zealand. The Church is deeply interested in all Lamanites because of these revelations and because of this great Book of Mormon, their history that was written on plates of gold and deposited in the hill. The translation by the Prophet Joseph Smith revealed a running history for one thousand years—six hundred years before Christ until four hundred after Christ—a history of these great people who occupied this land for that thousand years. Then for the next fourteen hundred years, they lost much of their high culture. The descendants of this mighty people were called Indians by Columbus in 1492 when he found them here.
The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. It is a large group of great people.



(Link: http://LDS.org/ensign/1971/07/of-royal-blood?lang=eng )




(Bold Emphasized Mine.)
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
_Nightlion
_Emeritus
Posts: 9899
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 8:11 pm

Re: My First Encounters with Institutional Mormonism

Post by _Nightlion »

DrW wrote:
While there are slight variations in estimates as to how long ago the Beringia migration started and when it ended, there is complete consensus among mainstream scientists, based on genetics and archeology, that there were simply no trans-oceanic contributions to the pre-Columbian New World genome - period.



LOL WHAT? LOL Oh my gosh, wiping tears from my eyes. LOL Oh, geez. LOL Oh, hell. Stop it.
Science has concluded that the New World remained isolated for over ten thousand years. Period.
How likely is that? LOL

Exaggerated for truth.
The Apocalrock Manifesto and Wonders of Eternity: New Mormon Theology
https://www.docdroid.net/KDt8RNP/the-apocalrock-manifesto.pdf
https://www.docdroid.net/IEJ3KJh/wonders-of-eternity-2009.pdf
My YouTube videos:HERE
Post Reply