From My Informant: Has Ugo Perego Been "Exiled" to Rome?

[_Simon Southerton]

Perego:
“With regard to the Book of Mormon, I explained already and in great detail that you cannot exclude the historical presence of an Israelite family arriving in the Americas 2600 years ago based on the genetic sampling of modern-day Native American populations. This is simple and plain population genetics at work. Any population geneticist would agree that when a small group of people become part of a large population, their genetic signature is destined to disappear quite rapidly within a handful of generations.”

Hemispheric apologists (e.g. Jeff Lindsay) and Heartland apologists (e.g. Rodney Meldrum) completely disagree with Perego’s disappearing Lehite apologetics. They disagree because they, like virtually all other Mormons, don’t for a moment believe that Lehi’s tiny band encountered massive Native American civilizations and then took control of them. They don’t believe the Book of Mormon says that and they are reluctant to dismiss many official statements by the prophets that contradict the vanishing Lehite apologetics.

Perego:
The "mental gymnastic" I have been accused of is the very piece of truth that those criticizing the historicity of the Book of Mormon from a DNA standpoint are unwilling to accept: WE DON'T KNOW WHAT LEHI'S DNA IS and therefore this is the main reason why it cannot be identified in the Americas. Everything else is pretty much irrelevant. Show me Lehi's DNA and then let's go about looking for it among past and present indigenous populations of the Western Hemisphere. Without it, you are missing the very piece of genetic evidence that anyone interested in a genetic perspective on the Book of Mormon (both in favor or against it) would need.

The problem is NOT that we don’t know what Lehi’s DNA looks like. The problem IS that 100% of Native American DNA didn’t come from the Middle East. 99.6% is Asian and arrived >15,000 years ago and 0.4% is European or African and arrived after Columbus. Over 1,100 Native Americans have been DNA tested in Mesoamerica, the Limited Geography hot spot, and it is exactly the same story.
http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com.au/ ... erica.html

The Limited and Heartland apologetics is being pulled along by the nose by science. The only reason we have these desperate theories is the massive amount of scientific data that contradicts the Book of Mormon narrative as it is plainly written. Science has revealed the true history of the colonization of the Americas. Native Americans migrated from Asia and built New World civilizations without any help from people from the Middle East.

[_Kishkumen]

The simple fact is that the Book of Mormon does not work as an ancient text.

[_Brackite]

The answer to these questions/criticisms is quite simple and I have addressed multiple times, including in some of my writings. DNA is not evidence only when it is convenient, but it is evidence when it is evidence. In the case of testing Joseph Smith purported children born to polygamous relationships, the genetic method employed was the uniparental marker Y chromosome, which is a section of DNA that is inherited exclusively from father to son, along an unbroken paternal line. Because of lack of recombination, Y chromosome testing can be ascertained to exact people in a person's pedigree chart. If the genealogy is known and the Y chromosome signature (called haplotype) of a number of male descendants of a specific ancestor can be collected and tested, then the Y chromosome profile of that ancestor can be inferred quite accurately, just as if a DNA sample could have been obtained from the ancestor himself. This process can be repeated over and over for any male ancestor (including Joseph Smith and his alleged biological sons) as long as living male descendants can be identified and a DNA sample collected from them. Then the game is quite easy. All you have to do is to line up and compare the inferred (or reconstructed) Y chromosome haplotypes for the two individuals you are trying to establish a connection along the paternal line. If the values match, then you probably have a biological relationship. If they don't, then you can be 100% confident that you are looking at two non-related individuals.

So, how could science be accurate in this instance, but it cannot be used to bring forth similar conclusions when it comes to the historicity of the Book of Mormon? The difference lays within the expectations from the genetic approach. In the case of Joseph Smith and his alleged posterity, the Y chromosome profiles that were reconstructed and used for that analysis were accurate genetic fingerprints that belonged to specific individuals that lived in the past. The known relationships obtained through the genealogical data were key to line up the proper candidates for the genetic testing necessary in the study. With regard to the Book of Mormon, I explained already and in great detail that you cannot exclude the historical presence of an Israelite family arriving in the Americas 2600 years ago based on the genetic sampling of modern-day Native American populations. This is simple and plain population genetics at work. Any population geneticist would agree that when a small group of people become part of a large population, their genetic signature is destined to disappear quite rapidly within a handful of generations. Moreover, we now know with great accuracy the Y chromosome haplotype of Joseph Smith and how it can be used as a standard for comparison against anyone who was claimed to be his biological child; however, we know nothing about the DNA profiles of the people of the Book of Mormon. The "mental gymnastic" I have been accused of is the very piece of truth that those criticizing the historicity of the Book of Mormon from a DNA standpoint are unwilling to accept: WE DON'T KNOW WHAT LEHI'S DNA IS and therefore this is the main reason why it cannot be identified in the Americas. Everything else is pretty much irrelevant. Show me Lehi's DNA and then let's go about looking for it among past and present indigenous populations of the Western Hemisphere. Without it, you are missing the very piece of genetic evidence that anyone interested in a genetic perspective on the Book of Mormon (both in favor or against it) would need.

Were there "others" in the Promised land among the Nephites according to the Book of Mormon???
Let Us Go to 1st Nephi Chapter 18, Verse 25:

1 Nephi 18:25:

[25] And it came to pass that we did find upon the land of promise, as we journeyed in the wilderness, that there were beasts in the forests of every kind, both the cow and the ox, and the ass and the horse, and the goat and the wild goat, and all manner of wild animals, which were for the use of men. And we did find all manner of ore, both of gold, and of silver, and of copper.

If there were "others" within the Promised Land when Lehi and his family first arrived in the Promised Land, why didn't Nephi mentioned about them in this Passage???



Let Us Now Go to Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26:

Jacob 7:26:

[26] And it came to pass that I, Jacob, began to be old; and the record of this people being kept on the other plates of Nephi, wherefore, I conclude this record, declaring that I have written according to the best of my knowledge, by saying that the time passed away with us, and also our lives passed away like as it were unto us a dream, we being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem, born in tribulation, in a wilderness, and hated of our brethren, which caused wars and contentions; wherefore, we did mourn out our days.

We can see by comparing 1st Nephi Chapter 18, verse 25 with Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26 that there were Not "others" in the Promised land when Lehi and his family first arrived there. The Prophet Jacob describes the people of Nephi as "being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem" towards the end of his life. The Prophet Jacob then goes on describing that the people of Nephi, his people, were "hated of our brethren," which means that all of the Lamanites were their fellow Israelite brethren. We must conclude in light of the Passages of 1st Nephi Chapter 18, verse 25 with Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26 that the Nephites were Not among "others" within the Promised land.

[_Buffalo]

Ugo's comment about "we don't know what Lehi's DNA looked like" is such a red herring. We know in general what it would look like, but moreover, we know what it WOULDN'T look like, which is east Asian.

So no solid affirmations or denials on Joseph Smith progeny, eh? That's telling.

[_bcspace]

We can see by comparing 1st Nephi Chapter 18, verse 25 with Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26 that there were Not "others" in the Promised land when Lehi and his family first arrived there. The Prophet Jacob describes the people of Nephi as "being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem" towards the end of his life. The Prophet Jacob then goes on describing that the people of Nephi, his people, were "hated of our brethren," which means that all of the Lamanites were their fellow Israelite brethren. We must conclude in light of the Passages of 1st Nephi Chapter 18, verse 25 with Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26 that the Nephites were Not among "others" within the Promised land.

Doesn't seem to be the case. Jacob is only one generation removed from Nephi.

[_Buffalo]

We can see by comparing 1st Nephi Chapter 18, verse 25 with Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26 that there were Not "others" in the Promised land when Lehi and his family first arrived there. The Prophet Jacob describes the people of Nephi as "being a lonesome and a solemn people, wanderers, cast out from Jerusalem" towards the end of his life. The Prophet Jacob then goes on describing that the people of Nephi, his people, were "hated of our brethren," which means that all of the Lamanites were their fellow Israelite brethren. We must conclude in light of the Passages of 1st Nephi Chapter 18, verse 25 with Jacob Chapter Seven, verse 26 that the Nephites were Not among "others" within the Promised land.

Doesn't seem to be the case. Jacob is only one generation removed from Nephi.

Could you cite chapter and verse where the Nephites encounter the descendents of Siberian nomads?

Meanwhile, please contemplate official church doctrine on whether or not there were other groups here in the Americas:

Jeffrey Holland:

Holy scripture records that “after the waters had receded from off the face of this land it became a choice land above all other lands, a chosen land of the Lord; wherefore the Lord would have that all men should serve him who dwell upon the face thereof.” (Ether 13:2.) Such a special place needed now to be kept apart from other regions, free from the indiscriminate traveler as well as the soldier of fortune.

To guarantee such sanctity the very surface of the earth was rent. In response to God’s decree, the great continents separated and the ocean rushed in to surround them. The promised place was set apart. Without habitation it waited for the fulfillment of God’s special purposes.

[_bcspace]

Could you cite chapter and verse where the Nephites encounter the descendents of Siberian nomads?

Just as soon as you cite chapter and verse which precludes the Nephites from having done so. Brackite's verses didn't do it. What else do you have?
lol

[_Buffalo]

Could you cite chapter and verse where the Nephites encounter the descendents of Siberian nomads?

Just as soon as you cite chapter and verse which precludes the Nephites from having done so. Brackite's verses didn't do it. What else do you have?
lol

Argument from ignorance. And the official doctrine is, the land was empty.

2 Nephi 1:6

Wherefore, I, Lehi, prophesy according to the workings of the Spirit which is in me, that there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord.

8 And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.

[_Kishkumen]

The Siberians are the Jaredites, silly! ;-)

Invaders often call the land they steal empty. That doesn't mean much.

[_Chap]

The Siberians are the Jaredites, silly! ;-)

Invaders often call the land they steal empty. That doesn't mean much.

Could you illustrate what you mean by a couple of historical examples, preferably with links to source texts?

And of course we need examples where invaders claim there is nobody there at all, not just a few insignificant people and where we have independent grounds for knowing that there was a substantial pre-existing population on the land.