Libro de Mormón:ADN problemas

De FAIRMormon

Plantilla:ShortVersion

FAIRwiki portal
DNA and the
Book of Mormon
Image:DNA1.jpg
FAIRwiki articles
All portal articles
DNA: brief • long
Amerindians as Lamanites:
brief • long
Geography and DNA• Wiki
FAIR web site
Topical guide• Articles
FARMS web site
Online resources
Additional reading
Online • In print
Other portals
Book of Mormon
Book of Mormon Geography

Contenido

Critica

Las muestras de ADN tomadas de los Americanos nativos Modernos no concuerdan con los habitantes modernos del Medio Oriente. Los criticos argumentan que esto significa que lo que Critics argue that this means the Book of Mormon's claim that Native Americans are descended from Lehi must be false, and therefore the Book of Mormon is not an ancient record as Joseph Smith claimed.

Sources of the Criticism

  • 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 criticisms of the Church have received as much media attention as this criticism, with so little thought and science being applied to the question. DNA attacks against the Book of Mormon account fail on numerous grounds.

Geography

A variety of geographic models have been suggested for the Book of Mormon. Some geographic models introduce other difficulties for the DNA attacks. These issues are discussed in separate pages here.

Who are Lamanites?

When asked about the Church’s official position on this matter by a writer, a Church spokesman said:

As to whether these were the first inhabitants…we don't have a position on that. Our scripture does not try to account for any other people who may have lived in the New World before, during or after the days of the Jaredites and the Nephites, and we don't have any official doctrine about who the descendants of the Nephites and the Jaredites are. Many Mormons believe that American Indians are descendants of the Lamanites [a division of the Nephites], but that's not in the scripture.[1]

Note that this reply pre-dates any publication of DNA criticism. To read more about Amerindian origins, click here.

What are we looking for?

Genetic attacks on the Book of Mormon focus on the fact that Amerindian DNA seems closest to Asian DNA, and not DNA from "the Middle East" or "Jewish" DNA. However, this attack ignores several key points.

Lehi and his family are clearly not Jews. They belong to the tribe of Manasseh (Alma 10:3, 1 Nephi 5:14), and married into Ishmael's family, the tribe of Ephraim.[2] These tribes were carried away captive by the Assyrians, and did not contribute greatly to the current genetic mix of the Middle East.

Furthermore, the Middle East is located at the crossroads of three continents, and has seen a great deal of immigration, mixing, and intermarriage. To use modern Middle Eastern DNA as the "standard" against which to measure what Manasseh and Ephraim DNA must have been like 2600 years ago is extraordinarily sloppy science.

Articles which consider that "Asian" DNA and Lehite DNA may actually correspond due to an earlier common source:

What Jewish DNA?

Identifying DNA criteria for Manasseh and Ephraim may always be beyond our reach. But, even identifying markers for Jews—a group that has remained relatively cohesive and refrained from intermarriage with others more than most groups—is an extraordinarily difficult undertaking.

One author cautioned:

Studies of human genetic diversity have barely begun. Yet the fashion for genetic ancestry testing is booming. . . . Other groups, such as Jews, are now being targeted. This despite the fact that Jewish communities have little in common on their mitochondrial side—the maternal line down which Judaism is traditionally inherited. It's the male side that shows common ancestry between different Jewish communities—so, of course, that's what the geneticists focus on. . . . Geneticists—like preachers and philosophers before them—need to avoid promising more than they can deliver.[3]

Articles which discuss the various criteria (and the difficulties involved) for identifying "Jewishness" via DNA include:

90% death rate with European contact

Approximatley ninety perecent of the Amerindian population died out following contact with the Europeans; most of this was due to infectious disease against which they had no defense.Plantilla:Nc

Since different genes likely provide different resistances to infectious disease, it may be that eliminating 90% of the pre-contact gene pool has significantly distorted the true genetic picture of Lehi's descendants.

What about the Jaredites?

Critics often over-look the Jaredites, and assume (as in the hemispheric models type 2 and type 3) that the Jaredites can have contributed nothing of consequence to the Lehite DNA picture.

But, it is not clear that this must be the case. Some LDS have believed in a total eradication of the Jaredites, others have argued that Jaredite remnants survived and mixed with the Lehites. Bruce R. McConkie, while believing that the majority of Amerindian descent was from Israel (i.e. Lehi, Ishmael, and Mulek) nevertheless wrote:

The 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 through the period of destruction in which millions of their fellows perished. It is quite apparent that groups of orientals found their way over the Bering Strait and gradually moved southward to mix with the Indian peoples. We have records of a colony of Scandinavians attempting to set up a settlement in America some 500 years before Columbus. There are archeological indications that an unspecified number of groups of people probably found their way from the old to the new world in pre-Columbian times. Out of all these groups would have come the American Indians as they were discovered in the 15th century.[4]

The Jaredites are complete genetic unknowns. They cannot be Israelites, since they pre-date Israel. Some authors, such as Hugh Nibley, long ago argued that they were of Asian origin.[5]

Articles which discuss the relevance of Jaredite issues:

Fundamentalist "suicide bombing"

It should be remembered too that many sectarian critics use DNA science in a sort of "suicide bombing" attack on the Church.[6] The fundamentalist Christian critics are happy to use DNA as a stick to beat the Book of Mormon, but do not tell their readers that there is much stronger DNA evidence for concepts which fundamentalist Christian readers might not accept, such as:

  • evolutionary change in species
  • human descent from other primates

And, despite being inconsistent with DNA data, fundamentalist critics do not call on their congregations to abandon such literalistic Biblical concepts as:

  • the earth being only 6,000 years old
  • a Biblical Adam and Eve were the parents of all humanity only 4,000 years before Christ
  • a world-wide, Noachian flood which exterminated all life except that which was in the Ark, occurred approximately 5,000 years ago

The critics are often hypocritical—they claim the Saints should abandon the Book of Mormon on flimsy, dubious science, and yet do not tell their audience that they should (by the same logic) abandon religious beliefs of their own that have much more DNA evidence against them.

Discussions of this ironic twist are found in:

Conclusion

DNA attacks against the Book of Mormon are ill-advised, a "contrived controversy."[7] Various geographical models introduce issues unique to each model, but the DNA data is no where as conclusive as the critics claim, regardless of the geographical model chosen.

Critics tend to opt for the most naive, ill-informed reading possible of the Book of Mormon text, and then cry foul when the Saints point out that they have given much thought to these issues and come to more nuanced conclusions that are more faithful to the Book of Mormon text than the critics' poorly-considered caricatures.

Critics do not provide the "whole story" of the DNA data, and seem to want to use the certainty which DNA provides in modern crime-solving as a springboard to trick the Saints, the media, and investigators into thinking that their historical DNA conclusions are as solid.

The Church's statement on the matter of DNA is succinct and accurate:

The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ is exactly what it claims to be — a record of God's dealings with peoples of ancient America and a second witness of the divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. The strongest witness of the Book of Mormon is to be obtained by living the Christ-centered principles contained in its pages and by praying about its truthfulness.
Recent attacks on the veracity of the Book of Mormon based on DNA evidence are ill considered. Nothing in the Book of Mormon precludes migration into the Americas by peoples of Asiatic origin. The scientific issues relating to DNA, however, are numerous and complex.[8]

In fact, DNA data tells us nothing which we did not already know from archaelogical data—at present, the human settlement of the Americas is thought to date thousands of years before the advent of Lehi. Many of these settlers have links to east Asia. None of this is news, and none of it threatens the Book of Mormon's status as authentic history.

But, the critics hope that their listeners will be awed by the banner of DNA science, and conclude that something more impressive is going on. Informed members of the Church have not been persuaded by their tactics, and much has been written to help non-specialists understand the "numerous and complex" issues in the fascinating and valuable science of genetics.

Endnotes

  1. [back]  Stewart Reid, LDS Public Relations Staff, quoted by William J. Bennetta in The Textbook Letter (March-April 1997), published by The Textbook League (P.O. Box 51, Sausalito, California 94966).
  2. [back]  "The Prophet Joseph informed us that the record of Lehi, was contained on the 116 pages that were first translated and subsequently stolen, and of which an abridgement is given us in the first Book of Nephi, which is the record of Nephi individually, he himself being of the lineage of Manasseh; but that Ishmael was of the lineage of Ephraim, and that his sons married into Lehi's family, and Lehi's sons married Ishmael's daughters, thus fulfilling the words of Jacob upon Ephraim and Manasseh in the 48th chapter of Genesis..." - Plantilla:JoD23 1
  3. [back]  Martin Richards, "Beware the Gene Genies," Guardian (21 February 2003), accessed 7 July 2006. off-site; cited by Stewart, "DNA and the Book of Mormon."
  4. [back]  Nicholas Wade, "In DNA, New Clues to Jewish Roots," New York Times (14 May 2002): F1 (col. 1); cited by Stewart, "DNA and the Book of Mormon."
  5. [back]  See "Cohen Modal Haplotype," in Plantilla:FR-18-1-7
  6. [back]  See "Y-Chromosome Data," in Plantilla:FR-18-1-7 (Citations omitted)
  7. [back]  Plantilla:MD1 GL direct link
  8. [back]  See, for example, Plantilla:Nibley5 GL direct link
  9. [back]  The expression "suicide bombing" in this context comes from Stewart, "DNA and the Book of Mormon."
  10. [back]  Press Release, "Mistakes in the News: DNA and the Book of Mormon" (11 November 2003) off-site
  11. [back]  Plantilla:FR-18-1-6

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

Libro de Mormón "Anacronismos"
 [Trabajo de las necesidades]

 [Trabajo de las necesidades] Plantilla:DNAWiki

FAIR web site

Plantilla:DNAFAIR

External links

Plantilla:DNALinks

Printed material

Plantilla:DNAPrint

Obtenido de "http://es.fairmormon.org/Libro_de_Morm%C3%B3n:ADN_problemas"
Herramientas personales