It is currently Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:34 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 1:12 pm 
Valiant A
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 3:21 am
Posts: 169
Location: The 25th floor
mentalgymnast wrote:
GrandMoffTarkin wrote:

What is the use of having revelation if part of the time prophets are just giving opinion and other times they are wrong because the didn't understand the revelation? If individual members have to constantly pray to determine if something said by a prophet was: (a) personal opinion; (b) based on a real revelation but misunderstood by the prophet; or (c) based on revelation but properly understood by the prophet, I daresay that there is not much point of having prophets.


I'm going to quote from a blogpost I was reading yesterday.

Quote:
...it doesn’t have the feel of a question that’s meant to be used as a question. It feels, instead, like the kind of question you’re meant to ask when you already know the answer. It feels inherently rhetorical. It feels like the kind of question a missionary is supposed to ask Mr. Brown, a Boolean question meant to force a binary response.
http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/20 ... of-christ/


This "what is a prophet" question keeps coming up. And if a prophet doesn't fit strictly within the preconceived parameters/notions of a construct/creation which has been put in place by one who is thinking along binary lines of thought, then well, the prophet is not a prophet.

What if the purpose/function of a prophet varies depending on the time and place...the people...the doctrine already revealed...etc.? There seem to be those that would pigeonhole say, President Monson, into the same "restorationist" mode of operation/revelation that Joseph Smith functioned within.

Also, I haven't read through this whole thread (trying to spend less time in these parts), but here's a quote that might be looked at again if it hasn't already been referenced:

Quote:
In these respects we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular...whether the Lord found the earth empty and void, whether he made it out of nothing or out of the rude elements; or whether he made it in six days or in as many millions of years, is and will remain a matter of speculation in the minds of men unless he give revelation on the subject. If we understood the process of creation there would be no mystery about it, it would be all reasonable and plain, for there is no mystery except to the ignorant.
Brigham Young, (May 14, 1871) Journal of Discourses 14:116.


I'd guess Brother Brigham had read the scriptures which seem to dictate a very young earth. I'd guess Talmage and Co. had/have also. That didn't seem to prohibit them looking at a very old earth. And if you have a very old earth it seems to make sense that humans, in one form or another, have been around a very long time. Fact is (from the perspective of faith) we're only interested in the sons and daughters of Adam/Eve. The "Fall" and "Atonement" seem to apply only to them.

Regards,
MG




You haven't answered my question

_________________
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence - Hitch


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:17 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:57 pm
Posts: 7146
Location: Terra Nova
mentalgymnast wrote:
Fact is (from the perspective of faith) we're only interested in the sons and daughters of Adam/Eve. The "Fall" and "Atonement" seem to apply only to them.

Unless you can reliably distinguish those who are the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve from those who are not (and I doubt very much that you can), this statement is nothing more than anti-science mumbo-jumbo.

_________________
David Hume: "---Mistakes in philosophy are merely ridiculous, those in religion are dangerous."

DrW: "Mistakes in science are learning opportunities and are eventually corrected."


Last edited by DrW on Wed Oct 22, 2014 7:19 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:22 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: What does the fox say?
Eve is the mother of all living?

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 8:01 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 6579
Location: The Land of Lorn
mentalgymnast wrote:
GrandMoffTarkin wrote:

What is the use of having revelation if part of the time prophets are just giving opinion and other times they are wrong because the didn't understand the revelation? If individual members have to constantly pray to determine if something said by a prophet was: (a) personal opinion; (b) based on a real revelation but misunderstood by the prophet; or (c) based on revelation but properly understood by the prophet, I daresay that there is not much point of having prophets.


I'm going to quote from a blogpost I was reading yesterday.

Quote:
...it doesn’t have the feel of a question that’s meant to be used as a question. It feels, instead, like the kind of question you’re meant to ask when you already know the answer. It feels inherently rhetorical. It feels like the kind of question a missionary is supposed to ask Mr. Brown, a Boolean question meant to force a binary response.
http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/20 ... of-christ/


This "what is a prophet" question keeps coming up. And if a prophet doesn't fit strictly within the preconceived parameters/notions of a construct/creation which has been put in place by one who is thinking along binary lines of thought, then well, the prophet is not a prophet.

What if the purpose/function of a prophet varies depending on the time and place...the people...the doctrine already revealed...etc.? There seem to be those that would pigeonhole say, President Monson, into the same "restorationist" mode of operation/revelation that Joseph Smith functioned within.

Also, I haven't read through this whole thread (trying to spend less time in these parts), but here's a quote that might be looked at again if it hasn't already been referenced:

Quote:
In these respects we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular...whether the Lord found the earth empty and void, whether he made it out of nothing or out of the rude elements; or whether he made it in six days or in as many millions of years, is and will remain a matter of speculation in the minds of men unless he give revelation on the subject. If we understood the process of creation there would be no mystery about it, it would be all reasonable and plain, for there is no mystery except to the ignorant.
Brigham Young, (May 14, 1871) Journal of Discourses 14:116.


I'd guess Brother Brigham had read the scriptures which seem to dictate a very young earth. I'd guess Talmage and Co. had/have also. That didn't seem to prohibit them looking at a very old earth. And if you have a very old earth it seems to make sense that humans, in one form or another, have been around a very long time. Fact is (from the perspective of faith) we're only interested in the sons and daughters of Adam/Eve. The "Fall" and "Atonement" seem to apply only to them.

Regards,
MG


Brigham Young also said that the Bible was full of "baby stories" so your analogy is flawed. He didn't believe what was written in the Bible. Young believed that Adam was God himself (the Father of Men's Spirits) and created the earth for his "spirit children". He organized it out of existing matter. Therefore humans may not have been around for a long time HERE. He got this from Joseph Smith. So of course Young didn't believe what the Bible said about it. He also said that he (or Heber Kimball) would simply make up "scripture" and attribute it to the Bible and it was as good as any in there.

_________________

Riding on a speeding train;
trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain;
Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world
can change your direction:
One step where events converge
may alter your perception.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Tue Oct 21, 2014 10:27 pm 
tired, less active investigator
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:07 am
Posts: 10159
Location: Hungary
SteelHead wrote:
Eve is the mother of all living?

She is Mitochondrial Eve

_________________
- Whenever a poet or preacher, chief or wizard spouts gibberish, the human race spends centuries deciphering the message. - Umberto Eco
- To assert that the earth revolves around the sun is as erroneous as to claim that Jesus was not born of a virgin. - Cardinal Bellarmine at the trial of Galilei


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 10:41 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:57 pm
Posts: 3059
mentalgymnast wrote:
Fact is (from the perspective of faith) we're only interested in the sons and daughters of Adam/Eve. The "Fall" and "Atonement" seem to apply only to them.

Regards,
MG

In other words,
some humans don't count. Some are not real humans despite their rich language, sociality, family life and personal struggles. (???)

Bigotry on a cosmic scale.

_________________
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie

yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Wed Oct 22, 2014 9:53 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 8125
Tarski wrote:
mentalgymnast wrote:
Fact is (from the perspective of faith) we're only interested in the sons and daughters of Adam/Eve. The "Fall" and "Atonement" seem to apply only to them.

Regards,
MG

In other words,
some humans don't count. Some are not real humans despite their rich language, sociality, family life and personal struggles. (???)

Bigotry on a cosmic scale.


I qualified my statement as coming from a "perspective of faith". :smile:

On the other hand, moving from an assumption that there were sentient human beings that have been around for a long time before the creature we refer to as "Adam" may have existed...Adam's dad, grandad, and great grandpa...then I don't really know where to go from there. It becomes a conundrum with no reasonable explanation from the perspective of the earth being created to carry out the "plan of salvation" for the human family. Get's messy. It would be cool to know whether Adam had a belly button or not. That would help.

And then there's Eve's mom and dad, grandma and grandpa, etc. Although I suppose that's not as big of an issue since she was taken from Adam's rib. :smile:

This area of exploration is, as you might gather :wink: , a difficult one to resolve without getting lost...and derailed from faith... in the details. Have I mentioned I have some shelves that I've built? Adam and Eve, in the literal and/or the mythical/narrative sense, reside there. They're getting rather dusty.

Regards,
MG


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 3:35 pm 
God

Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:12 am
Posts: 6232
Location: Arizona
From That Article:

Quote:
The arrival of Europeans to the Americas in the 15th century was orders of magnitude worse than the combined effect of the Black Plague and the Spanish Influenza on Europeans. The consequences of rapidly reduced population and displacement has forever altered the demographic landscape of pre-Columbian America such that scientists from many disciplines are considerably limited in their ability to draw conclusions about the history, including the genetic history, of the New World. To model such an event, suppose that after an epidemic of smallpox, a hypothetical village of a thousand individuals experienced a 90% reduction; the 100 surviving subjects may or may not include at least one representative of all the original group genetic lineages. Although survival of many diseases also involves a genetic component,46 Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA variance have little known or no influence at all on the immunity of an individual affected by one of the several diseases Europeans brought to the New World.

With selection playing little or no recognizable role on specific ancestral lines, the drastic population reduction in the hypothetical village inevitably would have affected the number [Page 269]of surviving genetic lineages. Of course, the initial impact with Europeans was so severe that entire tribal groups, particularly on the Atlantic side of the Americas, were completely decimated, leaving no genetic trace of their existence. Native Y chromosomes were quickly replaced by those from the Old World, and mitochondrial DNA variation was greatly reduced.47

In the unlikely scenario that the descendants of the few migrants described in the Book of Mormon were able to “survive” genetic drift and therefore transmit a modest genetic signal to future generations, the devastating conquest by Europeans in the 16th and 17th centuries has created a situation in which even the most experienced researchers admit the limited knowledge available to properly infer the complete history of the pre-Columbian era.



However, The Book of Mormon states:

Quote:
1 Nephi 15:

[12] Behold, I say unto you, that the house of Israel was compared unto an olive-tree, by the Spirit of the Lord which was in our father; and behold are we not broken off from the house of Israel, and are we not a branch of the house of Israel?

[13] And now, the thing which our father meaneth concerning the grafting in of the natural branches through the fulness of the Gentiles, is, that in the latter days, when our seed shall have dwindled in unbelief, yea, for the space of many years, and many generations after the Messiah shall be manifested in body unto the children of men, then shall the fulness of the gospel of the Messiah come unto the Gentiles, and from the Gentiles unto the remnant of our seed --

[14] And at that day shall the remnant of our seed know that they are of the house of Israel, and that they are the covenant people of the Lord; and then shall they know and come to the knowledge of their forefathers, and also to the knowledge of the gospel of their Redeemer, which was ministered unto their fathers by him; wherefore, they shall come to the knowledge of their Redeemer and the very points of his doctrine, that they may know how to come unto him and be saved.

[15] And then at that day will they not rejoice and give praise unto their everlasting God, their rock and their salvation? Yea, at that day, will they not receive the strength and nourishment from the true vine? Yea, will they not come unto the true fold of God?

[16] Behold, I say unto you, Yea; they shall be remembered again among the house of Israel; they shall be grafted in, being a natural branch of the olive-tree, into the true olive-tree.



Quote:
2 Nephi 30:

[4] And then shall the remnant of our seed know concerning us, how that we came out from Jerusalem, and that they are descendants of the Jews.

[5] And the gospel of Jesus Christ shall be declared among them; wherefore, they shall be restored unto the knowledge of their fathers, and also to the knowledge of Jesus Christ, which was had among their fathers.



And Dr. Southerton has stated:

Quote:
Yes, the genetic landscape was changed but are we to believe that Lamanites died out at a vastly higher rate than other Native Americans? Over a thousand DNA lineages have been determined from pre-Columbian ancient remains. The results are the same. All the lineages to date come from Asia. It could be argued that the descendants of Book of Mormon people would be expected to carry more resistance to Old World infectious diseases because their ancestors had lived with these diseases for thousands of years. Smallpox, one of the major killers in Post-Columbus pandemics, has been present in the Old World for as long as 10,000 years. Middle Eastern populations would be expected to carry higher proportions of alleles conferring resistance to the disease.


http://simonsoutherton.blogspot.com/201 ... sroom.html

_________________
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 8:01 pm 
Nursery

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:26 am
Posts: 36
Tobin wrote:
I think the author of the article may be forgetting one small thing. It is not the job of the critics to prove the Book of Mormon is false. That should be the default position that anyone should take after all. However, if the proponents that the Book of Mormon is factually true wish to ever prove their case, then they will eventually have to demonstrate the Book of Mormon has a basis in fact. I don't think it is helpful to state that this can't be done as this article seems to be doing.

This is the most common straw man scenario I hear from the critics. The exact opposite is true. The position of the LDS church has never been that the Book of Mormon could be proven academically. Its position has always been the opposite, that the only way for proof is by the power of the Holy Ghost to the individual. No matter how many times this point is emphasized, critics continue to tear down the straw man that Mormons believe the divinity of the Book of Mormon is provable the way the critics claim it can't.

It is the critics that claim proof. It is the critics who claim that there are absolutely no evidences in favor of the Book of Mormon's claims about itself. All Mormons have to do to completely dismiss the claims of the critics is to show some plausibility or even one evidence academically that it might be true. This is reality.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 8:09 pm 
Nursery

Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:26 am
Posts: 36
DrW wrote:
The biggest problem here is that the authors were forced to throw Joseph Smith, Zelph the White Lamanite Warrior, much of the the Book of Mormon itself, and more than 100 years of teaching by Mormon prophets of God under the bus in order to even set up the premise for this piece of obfuscation.

As a scientist and published author, Perego should be ashamed of himself.

Actually this is not true. The only thing that really needed to be presented is the fact that we have no possible way of knowing the genetic information from Lehi in the first place. In fact, there is just as good a chance as any that his genetic code would be found in North Asia, since he descended from one of the lost 10 tribes who were scattered in that direction. With this inescapable fact in mind, the limited geography model is not even necessary to prove the critics wrong.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 8:52 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm
Posts: 8191
Location: What does the fox say?
Sorry DaddyB, but your understanding of the DNA evidences seems at best flawed. The indigenous population of the Americas has been traced to Siberia across the Berringa land bridge 17K years ago. There is no infusion of near eastern DNA 2500 years ago. And yes we know what 2500 year old Semitic DNA looks like.....

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: The DNA Issue and The Book of Mormon again
PostPosted: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:11 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 12:01 pm
Posts: 8417
Location: Get ready to feel the THUNDER!
DaddyB wrote:
Tobin wrote:
I think the author of the article may be forgetting one small thing. It is not the job of the critics to prove the Book of Mormon is false. That should be the default position that anyone should take after all. However, if the proponents that the Book of Mormon is factually true wish to ever prove their case, then they will eventually have to demonstrate the Book of Mormon has a basis in fact. I don't think it is helpful to state that this can't be done as this article seems to be doing.
This is the most common straw man scenario I hear from the critics. The exact opposite is true. The position of the LDS church has never been that the Book of Mormon could be proven academically. Its position has always been the opposite, that the only way for proof is by the power of the Holy Ghost to the individual. No matter how many times this point is emphasized, critics continue to tear down the straw man that Mormons believe the divinity of the Book of Mormon is provable the way the critics claim it can't.
Don't be obtuse. I'm speaking factually. Or are you really suggesting that there is NO factual basis for the Book of Mormon? The belief that the Book of Mormon is true by the power of the Holy Ghost doesn't mean a whole lot of beans if it NEVER happened.

DaddyB wrote:
It is the critics that claim proof. It is the critics who claim that there are absolutely no evidences in favor of the Book of Mormon's claims about itself. All Mormons have to do to completely dismiss the claims of the critics is to show some plausibility or even one evidence academically that it might be true. This is reality.
The only person suggesting there is no factual basis for the Book of Mormon seems to be you. Otherwise, why are you wasting my time by responding to my post?

_________________
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aristotle Smith, DarkHelmet and 14 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group