Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians/Further Reading

From FAIRMormon
Jump to: navigation, search
The FAIR Wiki

Defending Mormonism by providing well-researched answers to challenging questions within a faithful context

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

Book of Mormon: Claimed anachronisms

Animals

  • Animals—
    Critics claim that the Book of Mormon mentions animals which do not belong in a pre-Columbian New World. They cite this as evidence for Joseph Smith 'slipping up,' and revealing his forgery. Often attacked examples include: the ass (donkey), bees, the cow, the elephant, the horse, silkworms, and swine (pigs). Some sport is also had at the expense of two unknown animals, which are given untranslated names cureloms and cumoms (Link)
    • Jaredites added to explain New World animals—Critics charge the the story of the Jaredites, as described in the Book of Ether, was added by Joseph Smith as an "afterthought" in order to account for the variety of animals present in the New World at the time of arrival of Lehi's group. Critics suggest that the Book of Ether was simply an "afterthought" added by Joseph Smith to the Book of Mormon in order to explain the presence of a wide variety of animals in the New World at the time of the arrival of Lehi's party. (Link)
  • Serpents and drought (Link)

Biblical

Claimed anachronisms and other KJV text issues in the Book of Mormon

  • Malachi text in the Book of Mormon—
    Critics claim that the Book of Mormon cannot be an ancient work because it quotes Malachi hundreds of years before Malachi was written (i.e, they claim that Mal. 4:1 is quoted in 1 Nephi 22:15). However, the Book of Mormon claims to be a "translation." Therefore, the language used is that of Joseph Smith. Joseph could choose to render similar (or identical) material using King James Bible language if that adequately represented the text's intent. The translation language may resemble Malachi, but the work is not attributed to Malachi. Only if one presumes that the Book of Mormon is a fraud at the outset is this proof of anything. If one accepts that it is a translation, then the use of Bible language tells us merely that Joseph used biblical language. (Link)
  • New Testament text?—
    Critics claim that the Book of Mormon cannot be an ancient work because it contains material that is also found in the New Testament. In the Book of Mormon, Jesus quotes a paraphrase of Moses' words found in Acts 3:22-26. (Link)
  • Deutero-Isaiah—
    The "Deutero-Isaiah" theory is the claim that parts of Isaiah were written later than others. This theory claims that there were three individual authors, whose works were later compiled together under the name of the first author Isaiah (referred to as "Proto Isaiah"). The critical issue raised is that the Brass Plates of Laban quote from sections of Isaiah that this theory ascribes to Deutero-Isaiah, so how could the Nephites have these writings if they weren't written until after they left Jerusalem? (Link)
  • Firstling sacrifices—
    Critics claim that the Book of Mormon report that Nephites offered burnt offerings of the firstlings of their flocks is not consistent with Jewish law or practice. While firstlings were not used for every sacrifice, they certainly did have a role in the sacrificial practices of Israel. The critics have misunderstood the Bible on this point. (Link)
  • Holy Ghost—
    Why is the Holy Ghost mentioned so many times in the Book of Mormon prior to the time of Christ (e.g., 1 Nephi 10:17) and yet in the Old Testament there is hardly any mention of the Holy Ghost, especially with regard to his mission of bearing witness of the truth? (Link)
  • Jeremiah in prison—
    Critics claim that Nephi's mention of Jeremiah being put into prison (1 Nephi 7:14) is anachronistic, since Jeremiah would not have been in prison when Lehi left Jerusalem. (Link)
  • Jerusalem as site of Jesus' birth—
    Critics point out that Alma 7:10 says that Jesus would be born "at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers." Yet, every schoolchild knows that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. They claim that this is a mistake, and evidence that Joseph Smith forged the Book of Mormon. However, it is important to note what Alma's words were. He did not claim Jesus would be born in the city of Jerusalem, but "at Jerusalem which is the land of our forefathers." Bethlehem is located only five miles from Jerusalem. Thus, the Book of Mormon makes a distinction here between a city and the land associated with a city. (Link)
  • Josephites and Jerusalem—
    Critics claims that the fact that Lehi was not of Judah, but of the tribe of Joseph, makes it absurd for him to have been living in Jerusalem before the Babylonian captivity: "The tribe of Joseph at Jerusalem! Go, study scripture-geography, ye ignorant fellows, before you send out another imposition, and make no more such foolish blunders." (Link) [needs work]
  • Book of Mormon plagiarized from Bible? (Link)
  • Mainly altered italics in the KJV?—
    Critics claim that in the Book of Mormon material which parallels the KJV, Joseph Smith generally modified the italicized text. (Link)
  • Book of Mormon "translation errors" from KJV?—
    Critics wonder why many of the quotes from Isaiah in the Book of Mormon are identical to the King James version. The Book of Mormon incorporates text which seems to be taken from the King James Version, including passages which are now considered to be mistranslations in the King James Version. If the Book of Mormon is an accurate translation, critics claim that it shouldn't contain these translational errors. (Link)
  • Book of Mormon translation (Link)
  • Book of Mormon and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Link)


Climate

Culture

DNA

  • DNA issues—
    DNA samples taken from modern Native Americans do not match the DNA of modern inhabitants of the Middle East. 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. 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. (Link)

Doctrine

  • Modalism—
    Critics claim that the Book of Mormon teaches the trinitarian heresy of modalism or Sabellianism. This reading misinterprets some Book of Mormon verses, and ignores Book of Mormon texts which clearly contradict this reading. (Link)
  • Pre-Christian Christianity—
    Critics claim that it is an anachronism that the Book of Mormon teaches that Christians existed before Christ’s birth. (Link)
  • Temple in the New World—
    Critics attack the presence of an Israelite temple built by the Nephites. They do so on one or more of the following grounds: 1) They claim that Israelites considered the Jerusalem temple the sole legitimate site of worship, and so would not have reproduced it. 2) They claim that the Nephite population would have been too small to match the work required to built a temple "like unto Solomon's temple" (2 Nephi 5:16). 3) They claim that the temple built was "similar in splendor" to Solomon's temple. 4) They claim that the sacrifices and rituals as presented are not consistent with Jewish ritual. (Link)
  • Two natures of Christ (Link)

Events

Geography

  • Bethabara—
    Alexander Campbell, an early Book of Mormon critic, complained that the Book of Mormon "makes John [the Baptist] baptize in the village of Bethabara." The Book of Mormon, however, uses the same term as the King James Bible: "These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing." (John 1:28) (Link)
  • River runs into a fountain (Link) [needs work]

Government

Items

  • Chariots—
    Critics claim that the Book of Mormon mentions "chariots" which they claim must be a "wheeled vehicle." They also note that no draft animals existed to pull such chariots. 3 Nephi 3:22 notes that the Nephites "had taken their horses, and their chariots" to a central fortified area for protection against robbers. It should be noted that we are not told if these chariots served a purpose in riding, or if they were for transport of goods, or if they had a ceremonial function. One assumes some sort of practicality or ritual importance in war, since they brought chariots to the siege. Conspicuously absent is any role of the chariot in the many journeys recorded in the Book of Mormon. Nor do horses or chariots play any role in the many Nephite wars; this is in stark contrast to the Biblical account, in which the chariots of Egypt, Babylon, and the Philistines are feared super-weapons upon the plains of Israel. (Link)
  • Coins—
    Critics claim that Book of Mormon references to Nephite coins is an anachronism, as coins were not used either in ancient America or Israel during Lehi's day. However, the word "coins" was only added to the chapter heading of Alma 11 much later, and the text of the Book of Mormon itself does not mention coins. The pieces of gold and silver described in Alma 11:1-20 are not coins, but a surprisingly sophisticated system of weights and measures that is entirely consistent with Mesoamerican proto-monetary practices. (Link)
  • Compass—
    Critics charge that the description of the Liahona as a "compass" is anachronistic because the magnetic compass was not known in 600 B.C. However, believing it was called a compass because it pointed the direction for Lehi to travel is the fault of the modern reader, not the Book of Mormon. As a verb, the word "compass" occurs frequently in the King James Version of the Bible; and it generally suggests the idea of surrounding or encircling something (Link)
  • "Gold" plates?—
    Critics claim that Joseph Smith, Jr. manufactured some metal plates out of tin, copper, or some other metal in order to trick witnesses into thinking he had gold plates. Gold plates of the dimensions described by the witnesses would be too heavy (on the order of 200 lbs) to be realistically lifted and carried as Joseph and others described. This assumption, however, assumes a solid block of gold in the dimensions described, and does not account for the fact that pure gold would have been too fragile to form the thin leaves necessary for engraving. (Link)
  • Gunpowder!—
    Some critics claim that the Book of Mormon mentions "gunpowder," and "pistols and other firearms," which are clearly anachronisms. The claim is false. There is no mention of "gunpowder" or firearms, or anything like them, in the Book of Mormon. (Link)
  • Temple in the New World—
    Critics claim that Israelites would not have built a temple in the New World outside of Jerusalem. This ignores Israelite temples built in the Old World outside Jerusalem. (Link)
  • Windows—
    Critics claim that the mention of "windows" implies the existence of glass in Book of Mormon times. (Link)

Language

  • Language—
    Claimed anachronisms related to language used in the Book of Mormon. (Link)
    • "Adieu"—Jacob 7:27 ends with the phrase, "Brethren, adieu." Critics claim that because adieu is French, it shows that Joseph Smith composed the Book of Mormon, and not an ancient author. There are at least three problems with the adieu argument against the Book of Mormon. 1) Critics overlook the fact that the word adieu was not on the plates. 2) The translator of a work can use words from any language he chooses in order to convey the meaning of the text to his readers, so that even if "adieu" had been a foreign word (e.g., French) to Joseph Smith, there is nothing either unusual or problematic with his choosing that word in his translation. 3) Critics mistakenly think the word "adieu" is not used as an English word. (Link)
    • And it came to pass—Critics have often complained about the frequent repetition of "and it came to pass" in the Book of Mormon.[1] Mark Twain famously joked that if the phrase were omitted, Joseph would have published a pamphlet instead of a book. As it turns out, however, this much-maligned phrase is actually evidence of the Book of Mormon's authentic antiquity. (Link) [needs work]
    • Greek words: alpha and omega?—Critics claim that the Book of Mormon cannot be an ancient work because it contains "Greek words" ("alpha and omega"). However, the Book of Mormon claims to be a translation. Therefore, the language used is that of Joseph Smith. Joseph could choose to render similar (or identical) material using King James Bible language if that adequately represented the text's intent. (Link)
    • Modern phrasing—Critics maintain that Book of Mormon phrases or language is too "modern" to be of ancient origin. The Book of Mormon is a translation. As such, it may well use phrases or expressions that have no exact ancient counterpart. Modern Bible translations use similar expressions or phrases, and yet remain translations of ancient documents. (Link)
    • Hebrew and Native American languages—Is there any evidence that Old World languages (such as Hebrew) had an influence on the languages of the New World? Critics claim that the Book of Mormon provides too short a time for the disappearance of the Nephite/Lamanite Hebrew language. (Link)
    • Red Sea vs Reed Sea—Critics cast doubt on Moses' miraculous parting of the Red Sea by asserting that this belief arose due to a mistranslation of the Hebrew phrase yam sûp. The critics argue that the phrase should read "the Reed Sea," and that the Israelites actually just crossed a marshy inlet while the Egyptians' chariots got stuck in the mud. Having "proved" that the popular understanding of the KJV is inaccurate, the critics then conclude that the Book of Mormon's use of "Red Sea" is evidence that Joseph was not producing an inspired translation, but simply copying from the (mistaken) King James text. (Link)
    • Reformed Egyptian—Critics claim that Jews or Israelites (like the Nephites) would not have used the language of their slave period — Egyptian — to write sacred records, that there is no evidence in Egyptology of something called "reformed Egyptian," and that the Book of Mormon's claim to have been written in this language is therefore suspect. However, the claim that Israelites would not use Egyptian is clearly false. By the ninth to sixth centuries before Christ, Israelites used Egyptian numerals mingled with Hebrew text. The Papyrus Amherst 63 contains a text of Psalms 20:2-6 written in Aramaic (the language of Jesus) using Egyptian characters. This text was originally dated to the second century B.C., but this has since been extended to the 4th century B.C. (Link)
      • Egyptian would not be shorter than Hebrew on the plates—Critics claim that Egyptian would be too lengthy and bulky on the plates to account for the Book of Mormon [Egyptian would take] "perhaps four times, or even more than four times, as much room as the English, and it is quite certain that, as the Book of Mormon is 600 pages thick, it would take at least a thousand plates to hold in the Egyptian language, what is there written." (Link)
  • Names—
    Critics claim some Book of Mormon names are used improperly or in an inappropriate context. Examples include using "Alma" as a man's name, rather than a woman's name and using names of Greek origin, such as "Timothy" (Link)
    • Comoros Islands and Moroni—Comoros is a small nation made up of three islands off the southeast coast of Africa. Its capital city is Moroni. Some critics have claimed that Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon names Cumorah and Moroni by copying them from a map of the Comoros islands. (Link)
  • Synagogues (Link)

Masonry

  • Gadianton Robbers as Masons?—
    Critics claim that the Gadianton robbers are thinly disguised references to the anti-Masonic panic of Joseph Smith's era. Joseph's contemporaries did not embrace the "obvious" link between the Book of Mormon and masonry. Proponents or opponents of Masonry simply tended to blame their opponents for Mormonism. Given Joseph Smith's long family involvement with the institution of Freemasonry and the fact that he would, in 1842, become a Mason himself, it seems unlikely that anti-Masonry was the "environmental source" of the Gadianton robbers found in the Book of Mormon. The members of his day likewise had little enthusiasm for anti-Masonic sentiments. (Link)

Materials

  • Cement—
    Critics claim that the Nephites in the land northward building out of cement in Helaman 3:7-11 (circa 47 B.C.) is not valid. As critic John L. Smith put the claim, "There is zero archaeological evidence that any kind of cement existed in the Americas prior to modern times" (John L. Smith, "What about those Gold Plates?" The Utah Evangel 33:6 (September 1986): 8.) In this case, however, an attack on an 'absence of evidence' backfired. Cement is not anachronistic. The Book of Mormon places it in exactly the right spot and time period for Mesoamerican use of this building material. (Link)
  • Metals—
    Critics attack the Book of Mormon's mention of metal and metalworking in the Americas: 1) they claim no metal use occurred in the Americas prior to A.D. 900, and 2)they claim certain metals mentioned in the Book of Mormon were not available in the Americas. (Link)
  • Metal Plates (Link)

Plants

  • Plants—
    Critics claim that plants mentioned in the Book of Mormon are not found in the New World, and are thus evidence that Joseph fabricated the text based upon his own cultural background. (Link)

Population

  • Demographics—
    Critics charge that the initial Lehite colony is too small to produce the population sizes indicated, and that Lehi's group was sent to a land which was kept from the knowledge of other nations, therefore, according to the Book of Mormon, there could not have been "others" present. A superficial reading of the Book of Mormon leads some to conclude that the named members of Lehi's group were the only members of Nephite/Lamanite society. However, the Book of Mormon contains many mentions of "others" that made up part of both societies; indeed, many Book of Mormon passages make little sense unless we understand this. (Link)

Science

Text

  • Chapter divisions—
    Critics claims that the fact that the Book of Mormon has chapters demonstrate that it is a modern production. The table of contents was a modern insertion; it had no counterpart in the dictated text of the Book of Mormon. It was added just as it is in modern Bibles. However, the first edition of the Book of Mormon did contain chapters (though much longer than the modern chapters), and chapter markers were part of Joseph's dictated text. (Link)

Warfare and weapons


DNA and the Book of Mormon

  • Relationship of Amerindians to "Lamanites"—
    Who are the 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. (Link)
    • Statements—A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Amerindian origins/identity (Link)
    • Are the Maya and the Olmec the Lamanites and the Jaredites?—A common criticism is that LDS associate the Nephites and/or Lamanites with the Maya, and the Jaredite civilization with the Olmec. It is easy, based upon typical artistic representations used by the Church, to see why LDS typically associate the Nephites or Lamanites with the Maya. The assumption by critics that LDS associate the Nephites and the Lamanites with "the Maya" is an oversimplification of the facts. Most Church members view "the Maya" as a single, homogeneous group of people whom they associate with the magnificent ruins of the Classic Mayan civilization found in Mesoamerica. However, the Classic period occurs after Book of Mormon times. LDS research has focused on identifying the characteristics of the Preclassic Mayan culture, which does indeed cover the time period addressed by the Book of Mormon. (Link)
    • Statements by Church leaders related to the identity of the Lamanites—A collection of all known statements made by Church leaders regarding the identity of the Lamanites (Link)
      • 19th century statements—A collection of statements made by 19th-century Church leaders regarding the identity of the Lamanites. (Link)
      • 20th century statements—A collection of statements made by 20th-century Church leaders regarding the identity of the Lamanites. (Link)
      • 21st century statements—A collection of statements made by 21st-century Church leaders regarding the identity of the Lamanites. (Link)
    • Is Lehi the exclusive ancestor or among the ancestors of Amerindians?—LDS leaders have expressed a variety of opinions regarding whether or not all Amerindians are literal descendants of Lehi. Population genetics indicate that Lehi can likely be counted among the ancestors of all native Americans—a position that the Church has reinforced by changing the 1981 Book of Mormon introduction from "principal ancestors" to "among the ancestors." (Link)
  • Relationship to Polynesians (Link)
    • Statements—A collection of various statements from Church leaders about Polynesian origins/identity (Link)
  • Geography issues—
    A variety of geographic models have been suggested for the Book of Mormon. Some geographic models introduce other difficulties for the DNA attacks. (Link)
    • Haplogroup X2a—Some have tried to use a genetic group called haplotype X2a as proof of the Book of Mormon, but the science at present cannot support this. (Link)
  • Are all Amerindians "Lamanites"?—
    Critics have claimed that DNA tests mean that all Amerindians cannot be "Lamanites," and even some Church authors have conceded this point too readily. (Link)
  • What is Lehi's ancestry?—
    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, among which is the fact that the Book of Mormon states that Lehi and his family are clearly not Jews. (Link)
  • How does one identify "Jewish" or "Middle Eastern" 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. (Link)
    • Lemba and Cohen modal haplotype—Some critics use the "Lemba" as an example of a group proven to be Jewish via DNA testing as proof that such a testing should be possible for Book of Mormon people. But, this example is misleading. The Lemba were identified as Jewish because of a marker called the "Cohen modal haplotype." This marker is carried by about half of those who claim descent from Aaron, Moses' brother, and only 2-3% of other Jews. But, the Book of Mormon does not suggest—and in fact seems to exclude—the idea that Levites (the priestly family of Aaron) were among the Lehi party. (Link)
  • What methods of DNA tests are available?—
    DNA issues can be complex for the non-specialist (especially those who were in high school more than twenty years ago, before much of the modern understanding of DNA was available). In this article we review the methods of DNA testing that are available, along with their strengths and their limitations. (Link)
  • New World death rate after European contact—
    Approximately ninety percent 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.[2] 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. (Link)
  • Jaredite influence—
    Critics often over-look the Jaredites, and assume (as in the hemispheric models 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." (Link)
  • 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.[3] 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, or human descent from other primates. (Link)

FAIR web site

DNA FAIR articles on-line
  • FAIR Topical Guide: DNA and the Book of Mormon FAIR link
  • "Is an Historical Book of Mormon Incompatible with DNA Science?" PDF link
  • David Stewart, "DNA and the Book of Mormon" FAIR link
  • Allen Wyatt, "Motivation, Behavior, and Dissention" (background on Thomas Murphy's anti-Mormon activity). FAIR link

Video

The Book of Mormon and New World DNA, FAIR Video, (Link to all FAIR Videos)
The Children of Lehi: DNA and the Book of Mormon, D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, 2003 FAIR Conference
DNA & the Book of Mormon as Examined by a Molecular Biologist, Ryan Parr, 2005 FAIR Conference, (Link to all FAIR Videos)
DNA and the Book of Mormon, Dr. David Stewart, 2006 FAIR Conference

External links

DNA on-line articles
  • John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003): 36–37. off-site PDF link wiki
  • John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 101–108. off-site PDF link wiki
  • Glen M. Cooper, "Appendix, On Aping Aristotle: Modern-day Simplicios," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): lxiii–lxiii. off-site PDF link
  • Brant Gradner, "This Idea: The "This Land" Series and the U.S.-Centric Reading of the Book of Mormon (A review of "This Land: Zarahemla and the Nephite Nation; This Land: Only One Cumorah!; and This Land: They Came from the East" by: Edwin G. Goble and Wayne N. May; Wayne N. May; and Wayne N. May)," FARMS Review 20/2 (2008): 141–162. off-site PDF link wiki
  • David A. McClellan, "Detecting Lehi's Genetic Signature: Possible, Probable, or Not?," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 35–90. off-site PDF link
  • D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, "Who Are the Children of Lehi?," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003): 38–51. off-site PDF link wiki
  • Ryan Parr, "Missing the Boat to Ancient America . . . Just Plain Missing the Boat (Review of: Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church)," FARMS Review 17/1 (2005): 83–106. off-site PDF link
  • Ugo A. Perego, "The Book of Mormon and the Origin of Native Americans from a Maternally Inherited DNA Standpoint," FARMS Review 22/1 (2010): 191–227. off-site PDF link wiki
  • Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): ix–lxii. off-site PDF link
  • Daniel C. Peterson, "Prolegomena to the DNA Articles," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 25–34. off-site PDF link
  • Matthew Roper, "Nephi's Neighbors: Book of Mormon Peoples and Pre-Columbian Populations," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 91–128. off-site PDF link
  • Matthew Roper, "Swimming the Gene Pool: Israelite Kinship Relations, Genes, and Genealogy," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 129–164. off-site PDF link
  • James E. Smith, "Nephi's Descendants? Historical Demography and the Book of Mormon (Review of Multiply Exceedingly: Book of Mormon Population Sizes by John C. Kunich)," FARMS Review of Books 6/1 (1994): 255–296. off-site PDF linkGL direct link
  • John L. Sorenson, "The Problematic Role of DNA Testing in Unraveling Human History," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 9/2 (2000): 66–74. off-site PDF link wiki
  • Gregory L. Smith, "Often in Error, Seldom in Doubt: Rod Meldrum and Book of Mormon DNA (A review of "Rediscovering the Book of Mormon Remnant through DNA" by: Rod L. Meldrum)," FARMS Review 22/1 (2010): 17–161. off-site PDF link wiki
  • John L. Sorenson and Matthew Roper, "Before DNA," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003): 6–23. off-site PDF link wiki
  • David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 109–138. off-site PDF link wiki FAIR link
  • David Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon Rebuttal to Signature Books," cumorah.com off-site
  • John A. Tvedtnes, "Reinventing the Book of Mormon (Review of: “Reinventing Lamanite Identity,” Sunstone, March 2004, 20–25)," FARMS Review 16/2 (2004): 91–106. off-site PDF link
  • Michael F. Whiting, "DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003): 24–35. off-site PDF link wiki

Printed material

DNA printed materials
  • Blake T. Ostler, "Assessing the Logical Structure of DNA Arguments Against the Book of Mormon," Sunstone no. (Issue #135) (December 2004), 70–72. off-site
  • Blake T. Ostler, "DNA Strands in the Book of Mormon," Sunstone no. (Issue #137) (May 2005), x–y. off-site
  • Blake T. Ostler, "Reply to David A. Anderson (letter to the editor)," Sunstone no. (Issue #138) (September 2005), 8–10. off-site PDF link

Copyright © 2005–2013 Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research. This is not an official Web site of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The content of this page may not be copied, published, or redistributed without the prior written consent of FAIR. The Foundation for Apologetic Information & Research (FAIR) is a non-profit organization formed in late 1997 for the purpose of defending the Church. FAIR is staffed completely by volunteers, all of whom are dedicated to defending the Church. FAIR is not owned, controlled by, or affiliated with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All research and opinions provided on this site are the sole responsibility of FAIR and should not be interpreted as official statements of LDS doctrine, belief, or practice.
If you have a question or feedback on this article, please feel free to pose your question to the FAIR Apologetics list at "Ask the Apologist"

Retrieved from "http://en.fairmormon.org/index.php?title=Book_of_Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship_to_Amerindians/Further_Reading&oldid=92745"
Personal tools
In other languages