New Essay: Book of Mormon And DNA Studies

[_Saw Skooh]

All of these mopologetic defenses of Book of Mormon DNA lean on the population genetics of LDS scientist Ugo Perego, whom they love to trot out with his combination of apparent faithfulness and his legit genetics science background. What isn't explicitly pointed out to the faithful, but which becomes apparent upon perusing the abstracts of Perego's own scientific papers, is that Perego's own scientific findings require ~15,000 years of continuous settlement of the Americas by populations of homo sapiens originating in Asia.

At the very least Perego's science clearly demolishes any remaining hope for the LDS doctrines of a literal Adam and Eve and a Missouri Eden followed by a Noachian flood, none of which Perego can possibly endorse. So you can have your Missouri Eden, Adam and Even, Noah, and a flood which relocated human civilization to the Middle East a few thousand years ago, or you can have your Ugo Perego and your Lamanite DNA. But you can't have both. Any coherent set of doctrines has to accommodate this dichotomy, and I'm not sure that all of the TBMs who eat up these apologetic arguments realize what they have to give up in the process.

[_ludwigm]

It is exceedingly unlikely (some would say not possible) that Mormon would have been a pure descendant of Lehi, after more than 800 years and some 40 generations, if ...

"pater semper incertus est"
From http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/pater_semper_incertus_est :

"The father is always uncertain" (i.e., the identity of a child’s father is always in question)

Freud in Family Romances (1909) states that pater semper incertus est while the mother is certissima –
Note: at the present time Genealogical DNA testing can establish paternity with certainty.

Even the ancient Jews knew it. See halakha.
From http://www.jewfaq.org/whoisjew.htm :

A Jew is any person whose mother was a Jew or any person who has gone through the formal process of conversion to Judaism.

by the way

I, too, would love to see the evidence that the royal families of Europe can accurately trace their lineage ...

The coachman of the countess, talking with the cook and the doorkeeper:
- We are living in an unfair world!
- Do you think?
- Yes. My father is a count, my son is a count, and I remain forever coachman.

[_ZelphtheGreat]

Just like all the other essays.

NO signatures of the First Presidency or the Twelve. Not one!

Keeps deniability on the table when they figure out what they want to change later.

[_Arrakis]

It's that it can't tell us much about population dynamics over long periods of time.

It isn't a reliable method of tracing populations over considerably longer periods of times (in the hundreds or thousands of years).

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/

You are incorrect.

The picture emerging from the latest studies is one that seems to suggest lots of contact between the "Old World" and the "New World" going clear back to Roman times and earlier.

You keep posting this. What studies support that claim?

[_MrSimpleton]

I think for any religious person, the issue will always be, science can not prove Divinity.

Christian, Muslim, Israelite, Mormon, science can not prove the Divine of them.

[_Chap]

...

The picture emerging from the latest studies is one that seems to suggest lots of contact between the "Old World" and the "New World" going clear back to Roman times and earlier.

You keep posting this. What studies support that claim?

There are circles in which "the picture emerging from the latest studies" means the picture emerging from publications in refereed journals in which professionals publish their work.

There are other circles in which "the picture emerging from the latest studies" means the picture I sorta recall from what this guy on the TV said the other day.

In the case of Ludd, I am not very doubtful about which sense of the expression is to be understood here.

Or perhaps he would like to refer us to some publications?

[_Themis]

I think for any religious person, the issue will always be, science can not prove Divinity.

Christian, Muslim, Israelite, Mormon, science can not prove the Divine of them.

Not really. If that were the case you would not see so many who are changing their religious beliefs. This is actually why these religions have a negative attitude towards science.

[_omni]

This essay is just the latest example of how of how the apologists are now driving the interpretation of doctrine and scripture rather than the prophets, seers, and revelators.

[_Sammy Jankins]

This essay is just the latest example of how of how the apologists are now driving the interpretation of doctrine and scripture rather than the prophets, seers, and revelators.

And the apologists are feeling so validated:

From the FAIR blog

1. For anyone who has been following this issue, there is nothing really new or groundbreaking with this article. It is, rather, a basic summarization of the work of John Sorenson, Ugo Perego, Michael Whiting, Matthew Roper, John Butler, and other scholars who have written on this subject.

...

3. The article approvingly cites the work of scholars and apologists associated with what was formerly known as the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS). This includes a volume edited by Daniel C. Peterson, former editor of the FARMS Review (now the Mormon Studies Review) and a prominent Mormon apologist. This should be clear indication that, contrary to the recently claims of some, the Church has not backed away from what is sometimes derisively called “classic FARMS” apologetics. To the contrary, the Church has appealed to “classic FARMS” scholarship in its own apologetic for the Book of Mormon.

We thank thee o God, for a prophet the FARMs review to guide us in these latter days.

[_palerobber]

This essay is just the latest example of how of how the apologists are now driving the interpretation of doctrine and scripture rather than the prophets, seers, and revelators.

i think it's more to the point to say scientific and social progress are driving the interpretation of doctrine.

the apologists are consultants, not theologians.