Array

Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church: Difference between revisions

(→‎Further reading: Suggestions)
mNo edit summary
 
(71 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{AuthorsDisclaimer}}
{{Main Page}}
 
 
{{To learn more box:responses to: Simon Southerton}}
{{H1
|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church
|H=Response to "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church"
|S=
|L1=
|T=Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church
|A=Simon G. Southerton
|<=
|>=
}}
{{ChartLosingSummary}}
<onlyinclude>
{{H2
|L=Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church
|H=Response to claims made in "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church" by Simon G. Southerton
|S=
|L1=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Introduction"
|L2=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 1: A Chosen Race in a Promised Land"
|L3=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 2: Race Relations in Colonial America"
|L4=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 3: Lamanites in the Latter Days"
|L5=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 4: The Lamanites of Polynesia"
|L6=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 6: Science and the First Americans"
|L7=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 9: The Outcasts of Israel"
|L8=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 10: The Lord's University"
|L9=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 11: Plausible Geography"
|L10=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 12: Faith Promoting Science"
|L11=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 13: LDS Molecular Apologetics"
|L12=Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 14: Moving the Spirit"
|L13=Source Analysis of "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church," Sorted by Page Number
|L14=About this work
|L15=
}}
</onlyinclude>
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Introduction}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 1}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 2}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 3}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 4}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 6}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 9}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 10}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 11}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 12}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 13}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 14}}
{{:Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Use of sources}}


==About this work==
==About this work==
Author: Dr. Simon G. Southerton


:'''1984''': One problem some Latter-day Saint writers and lecturers have had is ''confusing the actual text of the Book of Mormon with the traditional interpretation of it''. For example, a commonly heard statement is that the Book of Mormon is “the history of the American Indians.” This statement contains a number of unexamined assumptions—that the scripture is a history in the common sense—a systematic, chronological account of the main events in the past of a nation or territory; that “the” American Indians are a unitary population; and that the approximately one hundred pages of text containing historical and cultural material in the scripture could conceivably tell the entire history of a hemisphere. ''When unexamined assumptions like these are made, critics respond in kind, criticizing not the ancient text itself, but the assumptions we have made about it.''
:'''1984''': One problem some Latter-day Saint writers and lecturers have had is ''confusing the actual text of the Book of Mormon with the traditional interpretation of it''. For example, a commonly heard statement is that the Book of Mormon is “the history of the American Indians.” This statement contains a number of unexamined assumptions—that the scripture is a history in the common sense—a systematic, chronological account of the main events in the past of a nation or territory; that “the” American Indians are a unitary population; and that the approximately one hundred pages of text containing historical and cultural material in the scripture could conceivably tell the entire history of a hemisphere. ''When unexamined assumptions like these are made, critics respond in kind, criticizing not the ancient text itself, but the assumptions we have made about it.''
Line 12: Line 59:
===Quotes by the Author===
===Quotes by the Author===


:'''2004''': ''My wish is not to offend or to offer advice in matters of faith''.
;'''2004''': ''My wish is not to offend or to offer advice in matters of faith''.
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, ''Losing a Lost Tribe'', p. viii.  
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, ''Losing a Lost Tribe'', p. viii.  


:'''2008''': ''Here are some of the stars in the current apologetic circus juggling dubious claims in support of the Book of Mormon's historicity''.
;'''2008''': ''Here are some of the stars in the current apologetic circus juggling dubious claims in support of the Book of Mormon's historicity''.
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, "Cirque Du Apologetique - starring Sasquatch and UFOs", posted to anti-Mormon discussion board, July 11, 2008.
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, "Cirque Du Apologetique - starring Sasquatch and UFOs", posted to anti-Mormon discussion board, July 11, 2008.


:'''2004''': ...''most Native American Latter-day Saints throughout the Americas regard the Israelite Lehi to be a blood relative.''
;'''2004''': ...''most Native American Latter-day Saints throughout the Americas regard the Israelite Lehi to be a blood relative.''
:&mdash;Dr.Simon Southerton, ''Losing a Lost Tribe'', p. 37.
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, ''Losing a Lost Tribe'', p. 37.


:'''2005''': In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites entered such a massive native population it would be very, very hard to detect their genes 200, 2000 or even 20,000 years later. ''But does such a scenario fit with what the Book of Mormon plainly states or what the prophets have taught for 175 years? Short answer. No! Long answer. Nooo!''
;'''2005''': In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites entered such a massive native population it would be very, very hard to detect their genes 200, 2000 or even 20,000 years later. ''But does such a scenario fit with what the Book of Mormon plainly states or what the prophets have taught for 175 years? Short answer. No! Long answer. Nooo!''
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, Feb. 15, 2005 {{ea}}
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, Feb. 15, 2005 {{ea}}


:'''2008''': ''They also set up the straw man that I am arguing that according to the Book of Mormon all American Indians are descended from Hebrews. I have never claimed this''. The vanishing geography theory is utter desperation.
;'''2008''': ''They also set up the straw man that I am arguing that according to the Book of Mormon all American Indians are descended from Hebrews. I have never claimed this''. The vanishing geography theory is utter desperation.
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, July 5, 2008. {{ea}}
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, July 5, 2008. {{ea}}


:'''2008''':In case anyone from FAIR is unclear I will repeat what I wrote four years ago…“IF A SMALL GROUP OF ISRAELITES ENTERED SUCH A MASSIVE NATIVE POPULATION (SEVERAL MILLIONS) IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HARD TO DETECT THEIR GENES.” Now that FAIR has finally conceded that American Indian DNA is essentially all derived from Asia, I also agree with them that the debate should be about the theology.  
;'''2008''':In case anyone from FAIR is unclear I will repeat what I wrote four years ago…“IF A SMALL GROUP OF ISRAELITES ENTERED SUCH A MASSIVE NATIVE POPULATION (SEVERAL MILLIONS) IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HARD TO DETECT THEIR GENES.” Now that FAIR has finally conceded that American Indian DNA is essentially all derived from Asia, I also agree with them that the debate should be about the theology.  
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, "Finally, I agree with LDS scientists-apologists," posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, Sept. 6, 2008. {{eo}}
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, "Finally, I agree with LDS scientists-apologists," posting to an ex-Mormon discussion board, Sept. 6, 2008. {{eo}}
 
==Claims made in this work==
*[[Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Index|Index to claims made in ''Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church'']].
 
==Quote mining, selective quotation and distortion==
{{QuoteDisclaimer}}
 
<!--
===The changing ancestry of Lehi?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. xiii
||The book is '''primarily devoted to a small group of Jews''' who, we are told, sailed from Jerusalem in 600 B.C. '''The descendants of these colonists multiplied rapidly, splitting into two large nations.''' {{ea}}
||
*Lehi was not a Jew: he was a descendant of Manasseh, which the author does not correctly state until page 5.
*The "two large nations" were actually related not only to Lehi's group, but to the people of Mulek, which the author does not correctly state until page 4.
||None. The author is drawing upon his own knowledge of the Book of Mormon, having claimed to once be an active member of the Church.
|}
'''Commentary'''
*In his introduction, the author initially gives the impression of being unfamiliar with the text of the Book of Mormon itself, incorrectly identifying Lehi's ancestry and implying that all of the people described in the Book of Mormon descended from Lehi's small group. He does, however, later acknowledge multiple groups on page 4, where he states "The Book of Mormon relates the story of three groups of Middle Eastern refugees on the American continent," and he eventually identifies Lehi's correct lineage on page 5 as being from Manasseh. For a book that claims to provide more precise information regarding the ability of genetic research to determine whether or not Lehi was a progenitor of the Native American people, such imprecision is surprising to say the least.
{{parabreak}}
-->
 
===LDS Scholars only recently reacting to genetic claims?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. xv-xvi
||'''Over the past decade''', there has been a marked shift among these scholars away from the views of the wider LDS community. Most LDS scholars today want to limit the Israelite colonization to the region of Mesoamerica, '''while a growing subset shrinks the book's claims even further.'''
||
*Dr. Southerton's book was published in 2004. Dr. Sorenson published his limited Mesoamerican geography in a two-part series in the ''Ensign'' in 1984. In addition. Dr. Sorenson published his book ''An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon'' in 1985.
||
*The author fails to acknowledge the most well known source of the limited geography theory, which was published ''twenty years'' before his book. He eventually indicates, on page 154, that limited geography theories for the Book of Mormon have been proposed since the 1920's.
*No source is provided at all for the claim that "a growing subset" wishes to further shrink the geographical area of the Book of Mormon.
|}
'''Commentary'''
*The author, who likes to mockingly refer to this as the "vanishing geography theory," {{ref|southerton.rfm1}}  would like to make it appear as if LDS scholars are ''reacting'' to recent genetic claims. In reality, Book of Mormon [[Book of Mormon geography/New World/Limited Geography Theory|limited geography theories]] have been proposed as early as 1927 (Sjödahl), with LDS scholar Hugh Nibley arguing for such a geography as early as 1952. The author simply ignores this in order to bolster his argument that LDS scholars are reacting to a recent challenge.
{{parabreak}}
 
===Worship of multiple deities and human sacrifice not Book of Mormon cultural characteristics?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. xv
|In Mesoamerica, which is regarded by Mormon scholars to be the setting of the Book of Mormon narrative, research has uncovered cultures where the '''worship of multiple deities and human sacrifice were not uncommon.''' These cultures lack any trace of Hebrew or Egyptian writing, metallurgy, or the Old World domesticated animals and plants described in the Book of Mormon. {{ea}}
||And they did also march forward against the city Teancum, and did drive the inhabitants forth out of her, and did take many prisoners both women and children, and '''did offer them up as sacrifices unto their idol gods.'''
 
---
 
Thus they were a very indolent people, '''many of whom did worship idols''', and the curse of God had fallen upon them because of the traditions of their fathers;
 
---
 
And now behold, he had got great hold upon the hearts of the Nephites; yea, insomuch that they had become exceedingly wicked; yea, the more part of them had turned out of the way of righteousness, and did trample under their feet the commandments of God, and did turn unto their own ways, and '''did build up unto themselves idols of their gold and their silver.'''
||
*{{scripture||Mormon|4|14}}
*{{scripture||Alma|17|15}}
*{{scripture||Helaman|6|31}}
|}
'''Commentary'''
* In an attempt to contrast ancient Mesoamerican culture with that of the Book of Mormon, the author chooses cultural characteristics that actually ''appear'' in Book of Mormon. He overlooks the fact that whenever the people fell into wickedness, they demonstrated those very same characteristics that he attributes only to ancient Mesoamerican culture.
{{parabreak}}
 
===A temple "similar in splendor" to Solomon's?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. 8
|They [the Nephites] build a temple '''similar in splendor''' to Solomon's. {{ea}}
||And I, Nephi, did build a temple; and I did construct it '''after the manner of the temple of Solomon''' save it were '''not built of so many precious things'''; for they were not to be found upon the land, wherefore, '''it could not be built like unto Solomon’s temple'''. But the manner of the construction was like unto the temple of Solomon; and the workmanship thereof was exceedingly fine.
||
*{{scripture|2|Nephi|5|16}}
|}
'''Commentary'''
* The author flatly contradicts what Nephi states about the temple that was built. The implication is that the temple built by Nephi was on a similar scale to that of Solomon, thereby raising a standard criticism of how such a [[Book of Mormon anachronisms:Temple in New World|spectacular edifice similar to Solomon's Temple]] could have been constructed by such a small group of people.
{{parabreak}}
 
===Steel breastplates, arm and head shields?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. 8
||They produce steel and fashion it into swords, breastplates, and arm and head shields to defend against the warring Lamanites.
||The only references to ''steel'' in the Book of Mormon are in:
*1 Nephi 4:9 (sword of Laban)
*1 Nephi 16:8 (Nephi's bow)
*2 Nephi 5:15 (Nephi teaches his people to use steel)
*Jarom 1:8 (to make tools and weapons of war: arrows, darts and javelins)
*Ether 7:9 (Jaredite swords of steel).
||
The author does not provide sources for his claims regarding steel breastplates, arm and head shields.
|}
'''Commentary'''
*The author once again shows his imprecise interpretation of Book of Mormon text by stating that steel was used to construct breastplates, arm and head shields. Of the items mentioned, only swords are confirmed by the text itself. The remaining assumptions that the breastplates and shields are made of steel is something that a modern reader would naturally infer, similar to the assumption that the Book of Mormon occurred on a continental scale rather than in a limited region.
{{parabreak}}
 
===LDS scripture asserts that being born with white skin was the result of actions in pre-earth life?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. 12
||'''LDS scripture''' asserts that those who are "blessed" with a white skin are favored because of '''what they did as spirits in a pre-earth life'''. {{ea}}
||LDS scripture does ''not'' tie skin color with actions performed in the premortal existence.
||No sources given.
|}
'''Commentary'''
*The author uses a common argument that can be found in anti-Mormon sources, but does not back it up with a source.
'''Further reading'''
*[[Blacks and the priesthood/Pre-existence]]
{{parabreak}}


===The Book of Mormon predicts the arrival of the Gentiles "eleven centuries later?"===
;'''2014''':I made the original statement at a time when whole genome sequence analysis was a long way off. It's true that if a small group (say 10 people) entered a massive population (say 1 million), that it would be hard to detect their mitochondrial or Y chromosome DNA. Your odds would be roughly 1 in 100,000 (10 in 1 Million). But technology has moved very rapidly and whole genome studies are now almost routine. So, my original statement is no longer true.  
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
:&mdash;Dr. Simon Southerton, explaining his 2008 statement to FAIR, February 2014.
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. 14
||The Lamanites are apparently still in a degraded state when they clash with the gentile Europeans who, '''it is known in the Book of Mormon, will arrive eleven centuries later'''. {{ea}}
||The Book of Mormon makes no specification regarding the identity of the gentiles or the exact time that they would arrive in the New World.
||
*{{s|2|Nephi|30|3-6}}
|}
'''Commentary'''
*Once again, the author demonstrates either a lack of precision or a lack of knowledge regarding what the Book of Mormon actually says.
{{parabreak}}
 
===Mesoamerican city of Palenque was built after 600 A.D.?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. 168||Joseph Smith found the book so inspiring, he declared Palenque a Nephite city. '''Modern scholarship indicates this Mayan center was built after A.D.600''', over 200 years after the Lamanites exterminated the Nephites; but dating details aside, Mormon scholars continue to find the remains of Mayan cities to be prime candidates for where Lehi's people might have lived. {{ea}}
||
*A massive period of ''rebuilding'' occurred in 600 A.D., however, the earliest recorded ruler was was K'uk Balam (Quetzal Jaguar), who governed Palenque for four years starting in the year 431 A.D.
*The site is known to have been inhabited since 100 B.C., and pottery shards show that Palenque may have been occupied as early as 300 B.C.
||
*No source given by the author.
*A known reference to Joseph's statement about Palenque is {{TS1 | author=Joseph Smith (editor) | vol=3|num=22|article=Extract from Stephens' 'Incidents of Travel in Central America'|date=15 September 1842|start=915|start=915}}
|}
'''Commentary'''
*The statement made by the author about Palenque is incorrect, and demonstrates a superficial knowledge of what he terms "modern scholarship" regarding this city. The author simply wants to show how "Mormon scholars" are willing to ignore obvious dating anomalies. In attempting to do so, however, he simply demonstrates his suprisingly poor research skills in an age in which typing the name "Palenque" into a web search engine can easily bring the correct information to light.
*If one assumes, as Joseph apparently did, that Palenque ''was indeed'' a Nephite city, and knowing as we do now the tendency for Mesoamerican conquering rulers to destroy the monuments or records of previous ones, it would not at all be surprising to see the record go back only to the time that the Lamanites conquered the Nephites (approximately 400 - 420 A.D.).
*See also: [[Book of Mormon geography/Statements#15 Sept. 1842: Speculation that Palenque is a Nephite city|Book of Mormon geography&mdash;Statements&mdash;15 Sept. 1842: Speculation that Palenque is a Nephite city]]
{{parabreak}}
 
===Limited geography not granted the Church's blessing in any official way?===
{| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
!width="5%"|Reference
!width="35%"|Author's claim...
!width="35%"|The rest of the story...
!width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
|-
|p. 202, 205
||('''2004''') "Most LDS apologists now accept that Native American are principally descended from Siberian ancestors who migrated across the Bering Strait thousands of years before Lehi and that the descendants of Lehi made up an infinitesimally smaller proportion of the New World populations. However, this change in perspective '''has not been granted the Church's blessing in any official way'''. The general membership would not believe that Lehi's descendants could have made such a minimal impact in the Americas."
 
"Publically, '''the Church urges members to steer clear of any attempt to link the Book of Mormon with current geographical locations'''."
||('''1984''') John L. Sorenson said the following in the Sept. 1984 ''Ensign'':
"One problem some Latter-day Saint writers and lecturers have had '''is confusing the actual text of the Book of Mormon with the traditional interpretation of it'''. For example, a commonly heard statement is that the Book of Mormon is “the history of the American Indians.” This statement contains a number of unexamined assumptions—that the scripture is a history in the common sense—a systematic, chronological account of the main events in the past of a nation or territory; that “the” American Indians are a unitary population; and that the approximately one hundred pages of text containing historical and cultural material in the scripture could conceivably tell the entire history of a hemisphere. '''When unexamined assumptions like these are made, critics respond in kind, criticizing not the ancient text itself, but the assumptions we have made about it'''." {{ea}}
||
*{{Ensign1 | author=John L. Sorensen | article=Digging into the Book of Mormon: Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture|date=Sept. 1984|start=27|}}  (first of a two-part series)
|}
'''Commentary'''
*The author would like us to believe that the proposal of a limited Book of Mormon geography is a recent reaction to the genetic challenge, and that the general Church membership "would not believe" it. He even says that the Church discourages members from attempting to determine where the Book of Mormon occurred. Yet, a full ''twenty years before the author makes this claim'', the Church, through its official magazine the ''Ensign'', ''devoted a two-part series of articles to this very subject'': the limited geography model. This is the very same model about which the author recently stated: "The vanishing geography theory is utter desperation." The ''Ensign'', of course, is the very same magazine in which the General Authorities talks are distributed to the Church, which on page 52 the author states are treated like scripture.
{{parabreak}}
 
==Endnotes==
#{{note|southerton.rfm1}}Term used in a post to an anti-Mormon discussion board on July 5, 2008. See quote at the beginning of this article.


==Reviews of this work==
==Reviews of this work==
*{{FR-17-1-5}}
{{PerspectivesBar
 
|link=http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/publications/a-brief-review-of-murphy-and-southertons-galileo-event
==Further reading==
|title=A Brief Review of Murphy and Southerton’s “Galileo Event”
===DNA and the Book of Mormon===
|author=Kevin L. Barney
* {{FR-15-2-6}} <!-- McClellan - Detecting-->
|authorlink=http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/authors/barney-kevin
* {{JBMS-12-1-5}}<!--Meldrum and Stephens - Who Are-->
|publication=FairMormon Papers
* {{FR-15-2-7}} <!--Roper - Nephi's neigh-->
|summary=Murphy and Southerton appear to be nice guys. They are sincere, and they believe in what they are doing. Both seem to have had a similar experience. They apparently grew up with narrow, fundamentalist assumptions about the Book of Mormon, believing in and presumably knowing only of the hemispheric model. When they learned that the hemispheric model was scientifically untenable, each experienced unfulfilled (unrealistic) expectations and an ensuing crisis of faith, upon which each lost his belief in the antiquity and historicity of the Book of Mormon, and the Church with it.1 Now they desire to enlighten others under the banner of science.
* {{FR-15-2-8}} <!-- Roper - Swimming-->
}}
* {{JBMS-12-1-2}}<!-- Sorenson and Roper--> {{NB}}
{{MaxwellInstituteBar
* {{FR-16-2-5}} <!--Tvedtnes Reinventing-->
|link=https://publications.mi.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1430&index=4
* {{JBMS-12-1-3}} {{NB}}<!--Whitting – DNA and BoM-->
|title=Missing the Boat to Ancient America . . . Just Plain Missing the Boat
 
|author=Ryan Parr
{{SpecificAuthorsAndWorks}}
|publication=The FARMS Review
 
|vol=17
{{Suggestions}}
|num=1
|date=2005
|summary=According to a widely circulated media piece, "Plant geneticist Simon Southerton was a Mormon bishop in Brisbane, Australia, when he woke up the morning of Aug. 3, 1998, to the shattering conclusion that his knowledge of science made it impossible for him to believe any longer in the Book of Mormon."[2] He now claims that the Book of Mormon is strictly a fictitious invention composed and orchestrated by Joseph Smith—with no inspiration, no angels, no revelation (he remains silent about Joseph's motives). However, Southerton strives to explain the scientific rationale supporting his feelings (although, incidentally, individuals belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are criticized for using their feelings as a criteria of belief; pp. 44-45). He draws heavily on current population genetics data of Native Americans and Polynesians, specifically mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y chromosome information, which he insists indicates an Asian, as opposed to an ancient Near Eastern origin for these groups. In addition, he proposes that Latter-day Saint scholars, particularly those associated with the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), are attempting to alter what he considers official church views that Native Americans and Polynesians are exclusively descendants of those groups described in the Book of Mormon. He argues that the Latter-day Saint view of Native American ancestry is being changed not by revelation but by contemporary research.
}}

Latest revision as of 04:44, 12 May 2024


To learn more about responses to: Simon Southerton
Wiki links
Online
  • 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] link
Navigators

Response to "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church"



A FAIR Analysis of: Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church, a work by author: Simon G. Southerton
Claim Evaluation
Losing a Lost Tribe

Response to claims made in "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church" by Simon G. Southerton


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Introduction"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 1: A Chosen Race in a Promised Land"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 2: Race Relations in Colonial America"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 3: Lamanites in the Latter Days"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 4: The Lamanites of Polynesia"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 6: Science and the First Americans"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 9: The Outcasts of Israel"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 10: The Lord's University"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 11: Plausible Geography"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 12: Faith Promoting Science"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 13: LDS Molecular Apologetics"


Jump to details:


Response to claims made in Losing a Lost Tribe, "Chapter 14: Moving the Spirit"


Jump to details:


Source Analysis of "Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church," Sorted by Page Number

Summary: An examination and response to how the author of Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church interprets the sources used to support this work, indexed by page number.



About this work

1984: One problem some Latter-day Saint writers and lecturers have had is confusing the actual text of the Book of Mormon with the traditional interpretation of it. For example, a commonly heard statement is that the Book of Mormon is “the history of the American Indians.” This statement contains a number of unexamined assumptions—that the scripture is a history in the common sense—a systematic, chronological account of the main events in the past of a nation or territory; that “the” American Indians are a unitary population; and that the approximately one hundred pages of text containing historical and cultural material in the scripture could conceivably tell the entire history of a hemisphere. When unexamined assumptions like these are made, critics respond in kind, criticizing not the ancient text itself, but the assumptions we have made about it.
—Dr. John L. Sorenson, "Digging into the Book of Mormon: Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture," Ensign, September, 1984 (The presentation of the limited geography theory in the official Church magazine) (emphasis added)

Losing a Lost Tribe was published some twenty years after Dr. Sorenson made the statement above. Dr. Sorenson's warning about the critics responding to the "traditional interpretation" of the Book of Mormon, rather than to the text itself, appears to have been fulfilled in this work. Ironically, out of the eight works authored by Dr. Sorenson that Dr. Southerton quotes as references on pages 249–250, the Ensign article quoted above is not included among them. The author clarified in September 2008 that the focus of the debate is not about the genetic origin of Native Americans, but the LDS theology associated with it. Indeed, a full third of Losing a Lost Tribe is devoted to a discussion of what the author calls The Troubled Interface Between Mormonism and Science, and the role of FAIR, the Maxwell Institute (formerly FARMS) and LDS apologists.

Quotes by the Author

2004
My wish is not to offend or to offer advice in matters of faith.
—Dr. Simon Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe, p. viii.
2008
Here are some of the stars in the current apologetic circus juggling dubious claims in support of the Book of Mormon's historicity.
—Dr. Simon Southerton, "Cirque Du Apologetique - starring Sasquatch and UFOs", posted to anti-Mormon discussion board, July 11, 2008.
2004
...most Native American Latter-day Saints throughout the Americas regard the Israelite Lehi to be a blood relative.
—Dr. Simon Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe, p. 37.
2005
In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites entered such a massive native population it would be very, very hard to detect their genes 200, 2000 or even 20,000 years later. But does such a scenario fit with what the Book of Mormon plainly states or what the prophets have taught for 175 years? Short answer. No! Long answer. Nooo!
—Dr. Simon Southerton, posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, Feb. 15, 2005 (emphasis added)
2008
They also set up the straw man that I am arguing that according to the Book of Mormon all American Indians are descended from Hebrews. I have never claimed this. The vanishing geography theory is utter desperation.
—Dr. Simon Southerton, posting to an anti-Mormon discussion board, July 5, 2008. (emphasis added)
2008
In case anyone from FAIR is unclear I will repeat what I wrote four years ago…“IF A SMALL GROUP OF ISRAELITES ENTERED SUCH A MASSIVE NATIVE POPULATION (SEVERAL MILLIONS) IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY HARD TO DETECT THEIR GENES.” Now that FAIR has finally conceded that American Indian DNA is essentially all derived from Asia, I also agree with them that the debate should be about the theology.
—Dr. Simon Southerton, "Finally, I agree with LDS scientists-apologists," posting to an ex-Mormon discussion board, Sept. 6, 2008. (emphasis in original)
2014
I made the original statement at a time when whole genome sequence analysis was a long way off. It's true that if a small group (say 10 people) entered a massive population (say 1 million), that it would be hard to detect their mitochondrial or Y chromosome DNA. Your odds would be roughly 1 in 100,000 (10 in 1 Million). But technology has moved very rapidly and whole genome studies are now almost routine. So, my original statement is no longer true.
—Dr. Simon Southerton, explaining his 2008 statement to FAIR, February 2014.

Reviews of this work

Kevin L. Barney, "A Brief Review of Murphy and Southerton’s “Galileo Event”"

Kevin L. Barney,  FairMormon Papers

Murphy and Southerton appear to be nice guys. They are sincere, and they believe in what they are doing. Both seem to have had a similar experience. They apparently grew up with narrow, fundamentalist assumptions about the Book of Mormon, believing in and presumably knowing only of the hemispheric model. When they learned that the hemispheric model was scientifically untenable, each experienced unfulfilled (unrealistic) expectations and an ensuing crisis of faith, upon which each lost his belief in the antiquity and historicity of the Book of Mormon, and the Church with it.1 Now they desire to enlighten others under the banner of science.

Click here to view the complete article

Ryan Parr, "Missing the Boat to Ancient America . . . Just Plain Missing the Boat"

Ryan Parr,  The FARMS Review, (2005)

According to a widely circulated media piece, "Plant geneticist Simon Southerton was a Mormon bishop in Brisbane, Australia, when he woke up the morning of Aug. 3, 1998, to the shattering conclusion that his knowledge of science made it impossible for him to believe any longer in the Book of Mormon."[2] He now claims that the Book of Mormon is strictly a fictitious invention composed and orchestrated by Joseph Smith—with no inspiration, no angels, no revelation (he remains silent about Joseph's motives). However, Southerton strives to explain the scientific rationale supporting his feelings (although, incidentally, individuals belonging to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are criticized for using their feelings as a criteria of belief; pp. 44-45). He draws heavily on current population genetics data of Native Americans and Polynesians, specifically mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and Y chromosome information, which he insists indicates an Asian, as opposed to an ancient Near Eastern origin for these groups. In addition, he proposes that Latter-day Saint scholars, particularly those associated with the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies (FARMS), are attempting to alter what he considers official church views that Native Americans and Polynesians are exclusively descendants of those groups described in the Book of Mormon. He argues that the Latter-day Saint view of Native American ancestry is being changed not by revelation but by contemporary research.

Click here to view the complete article

Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Criticism_of_Mormonism/Books/Losing_a_Lost_Tribe:_Native_Americans%2C_DNA%2C_and_the_Mormon_Church&oldid=257877"