|
|
| Line 26: |
Line 26: |
| | *[[/Chapter 9|Claims made in "Chapter 9: The Outcasts of Israel"]] | | *[[/Chapter 9|Claims made in "Chapter 9: The Outcasts of Israel"]] |
| | | | |
| − | ===Chapter 10: The Lord's University===
| + | *[[/Chapter 10|Claims made in "Chapter 10: The Lord's University"]] |
| − | {| valign="top" border="1" style="width:100%; font-size:85%"
| |
| − | !width="5%"|Page
| |
| − | !width="40%"|Claim
| |
| − | !width="30%"|Response
| |
| − | !width="25%"|[[Use of sources]]
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | style="width:5%"|
| |
| − | ====135====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Mormons believe that if there is a conflict between science and religion, that the science is incorrect.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * ''Some'' Mormons may believe this. Many others believe that there is no true conflict between science and religion, but realize that scientific ideas may be inaccurate based on limited data, ''or'' that religious understandings or preconceptions may need to be modified. The Church believes that the Lord "will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God" ({{s||A+of+F|1|9}}), which presupposes that previous ideas may be inadequate.
| |
| − | * [[Mormonism and science]] | |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Most Mormons}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *{{MD1|start=no page number given}}
| |
| − | * ''Note'': this reference is useless for establishing what statement of Elder McConkie's is being referenced.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====135-136====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Mormonism reserves the right to identify scientific truth.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{Absurd}}: the author presents no evidence of this assertion.
| |
| − | * [[Mormonism and science]]
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Most Mormons}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources provided.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====136====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Mormonism declares that it "corners the market" on religious truth.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{FalseStatement}}: Latter-day Saints recognize that there is truth and good in all religions, and that God works through men of science to reveal truth as well.
| |
| − | * [[Salvation of non-members]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *{{s||JS-History|1|19}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====136====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Joseph Smith declared that all other religions were false.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[MormonFAQ/Myths and Questions#"But Joseph Smith said that all churches were wrong, and that they were an 'abomination' in God's sight. Doesn't that sound bigoted?"|"Joseph Smith said that all churches were wrong, and that they were an 'abomination' in God's sight. Doesn't that sound bigoted?"]]
| |
| − | * Joseph also said:
| |
| − | : Have the Presbyterians any truth? Yes. Have the Baptists, Methodists, etc., any truth? Yes. They all have a little truth mixed with error. We should gather all the good and true principles in the world and treasure them up, or we shall not come out true "Mormons."{{ref|hc.5.517}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *{{s||JS-History|1|19}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====136====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil"
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{FalseStatement}}
| |
| − | * [[Whore of the earth]]
| |
| − | * [[Salvation of non-members]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *{{s|1|Nephi|14|10}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====136====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * The current generation of Mormons is taught a selective view of Church history
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * ''All'' teaching is selective, in any domain or field.
| |
| − | * {{SourceDistortion}}: [[One_Nation_Under_Gods/Use_of_sources/Boyd_K._Packer_on_the_truth|Boyd K. Packer — Mantle and Intellect]]
| |
| − | * [[Censorship and revision of LDS history]]
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Most Mormons}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *Boyd K. Packer, "The Mantle is Far, Far Greater than the Intellect," ''BYU Studies'', 21:259 (1981)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====137====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Many church members are "blissfully unaware" of Brigham Young's practice of polygamy
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{MindReading}}: how does the author know what members know? Brigham Young's polygamy is well known ''out'' of the Church. How likely is it that members remain unaware?
| |
| − | * [[Brigham Young and polygamy]]
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Most Mormons}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *''Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young'', 1997
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====137====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Senior church leaders prefer that members not question changes in temple ordinances.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Church leaders "prefer" that members keep their covenants and not discuss the temple ordinances outside the temple.
| |
| − | * {{MindReading}}: members may discuss the endowment only in the temple; they may ask any question they like there of the temple president.
| |
| − | * [[Temple endowment changes]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====138====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * LDS ecclesiastical leaders expect "unquestioning obedience" of church members.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Most bishops and stake presidents would find this unlikely, if not laughable.
| |
| − | * The author is a former LDS bishop. Did he go contrary to Church teaching and demand this? If so, his action was wrong. If not, he is evidence against his own claim.
| |
| − | * [[Authoritarianism and Church leaders]]
| |
| − | * {{Ensign1|author=Dallin H. Oaks|article=Unselfish Service|date=May 2009|start=93–96}} {{link|url=http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=118b230bac7f0210VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD}}
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Leaders}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====139====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * The Church "unofficially" discourages prayer to "Mother in Heaven"
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Surely it is the Church's privilege to instruct its members in what it believes and condones, and what it does not? Members then make their own decision.
| |
| − | * [[Heavenly Mother]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *AAUP Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure. 1998. "Report of Committee A," ''Academe: Bulletin of the American Association of University Professors.'' Sept./Oct.: 71-4.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====140====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Church leaders are "loath" to make unequivocal statements of doctrine.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{Absurd}}: a review of any general conference demonstrates that leaders are quite happy to make unequivocal statements.
| |
| − | * If an area has no unequivocal statements, this is probably because it is not "doctrine," and the Church has no official position. Leaders are rightly wary of being misconstrued in such areas.
| |
| − | * [[Changing doctrine]]
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Leaders}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====140====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * BYU's emphasis is on conformity rather than personal freedom.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{Absurd}}: the only source is the student honor code. How does this erode personal freedom? Every prospective student is aware of it, and agrees to abide by it. If he/she wants to do otherwise, he/she can easily choose to go elsewhere.
| |
| − | * [[Authoritarianism and Church leaders]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *Student Honor Code, Brigham Young University
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====141====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * CES insists that gospel learning takes precedence over secular learning.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{Absurd}}: Why is it strange that a group hired for ''religious'' instruction to supplement college or university work should want ''religion'' taught?
| |
| − | * [[Mormonism and education]] {{nw}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *The only sources referred to are "parents."
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====142====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * CES instructs students not to attempt to locate Book of Mormon geographical locations
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Members discouraged}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * No source provided.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | | |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====142====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Limited geography theories advanced by FARMS are "much too controversial" for CES students
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{Prejudicial}}: where is the evidence for this claim?
| |
| − | * [[Book of Mormon geography/New World/Limited Geography Theory]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====142====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Spencer W. Kimball believed in a hemispheric Book of Mormon geography
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Leaders}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *A talk by President Kimball given in 1977 (not listed in "Works Cited" section)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====142====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Church members are shocked at the "limited archaeological evidence" for the Book of Mormon
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[Book of Mormon archeology]]
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Most Mormons}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====143====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * LDS apologists continue to tell members how "scientists continue to get it wrong."
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Apologists}}
| |
| − | * {{Absurd}}: Some LDS DNA apologists, for example, are world-class experts in their field. These authors object to the misappropriate and misapplication of science, including that found in the work here under review:
| |
| − | * {{JBMS-12-1-3}}<!--Butler-->
| |
| − | *{{FR-18-1-6}}<!--Butler-->
| |
| − | * {{JBMS-12-1-4}}
| |
| − | * {{JBMS-12-1-5}}
| |
| − | * Note that the author merely dismisses these experts, he does not engage their evidence or arguments.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====143====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Most members follow their leaders without question.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Most bishops and stake presidents would find this unlikely, if not laughable.
| |
| − | * The author is a former LDS bishop. Did he go contrary to Church teaching and demand this? If so, his action was wrong. If not, he is evidence against his own claim.
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Most Mormons}}
| |
| − | * [[Authoritarianism and Church leaders]]
| |
| − | * {{Ensign1|author=Dallin H. Oaks|article=Unselfish Service|date=May 2009|start=93–96}} {{link|url=http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=118b230bac7f0210VgnVCM100000176f620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====143====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * LDS theology supports a literal interpretation of the creation of man.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[Evolution]]
| |
| − | * [[Mormonism and science]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====143====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * LDS theology supports a literal interpretation of the tower of Babel.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[Mormonism and science]] {{nw}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====143====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * LDS theology supports a literal interpretation of the Flood
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[Global or local Flood]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====143-144====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * The perception is that the Church has officially denounced evolution.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * This perception, however, is false.
| |
| − | * [[Evolution]]: all official statements.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *McConkie, ''Mormon Doctrine'', 1979.
| |
| − | *Boyd K. Packer, "Our Moral Environment," ''Ensign'', May 1992, p. 66. (This talk does not specifically mention the theory of evolution - Packer is stating that we are not simply "advanced animals," which the author includes in his quote.)
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | 144
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Henry Eyring (father of Henry B. Eyring) indicated that he could accept evolution.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * If a well-known scientist could publicly express support for evolution and differ with some Church leaders, how does this contribute to the "perception" that the Church has "officially denounced evolution"?
| |
| − | * The book cited was published and distributed to LDS youth—hardly the act of a Church trying to stamp out any support for evolution.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', 1998.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====145====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Eyring "avoided singling out senior leaders of the church for the bad press that evolution has received in LDS circles."
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Eyring was not shy about demonstrating where he and (say) President Joseph Fielding Smith differed on this subject.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *Henry Eyring, ''Reflections of a Scientist'', 1998.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====146====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * The Garden of Eden was in Jackson County, Missouri
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[Garden of Eden in Missouri?]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *{{s||DC|116|}}
| |
| − | *{{s||DC|117|8-11}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====146====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Mormons believe that the continents separated only after a global flood.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * ''Some'' Mormons believe this. Others do not. The Church has no official view on the matter.
| |
| − | * [[Global or local Flood]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *{{s||DC|133|23-24}}
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====146====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * Mormons are "compelled" to believe in a global flood as symbolizing the "baptism of the earth"
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{Absurd}}: how can Mormons be "compelled" to believe in anything?
| |
| − | * ''Some'' Mormons believe this. Others do not. The Church has no official view on the matter.
| |
| − | * [[Global or local Flood]]
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | <!--
| |
| − | |148
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * FARMS reviews of books by General Authorities or FARMS staff are always given favorable reviews.
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * [[Apologetics]] {{nw}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *No sources given.
| |
| − | |-
| |
| − | -->
| |
| − | |
| |
| − | ====148====
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * FARMS' goal is to deter members from reading any book that challenges their faith
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | * {{MindReading}}
| |
| − | * [[Does the Church discourage reading critical material?]]
| |
| − | {{CriticalWork:Southerton:Losing:Repeat:Apologists}}
| |
| − | ||
| |
| − | *
| |
| − | *The author states that this is an "obvious" conclusion.
| |
| − | |}
| |
| | | | |
| | ===Chapter 11: Plausible Geography=== | | ===Chapter 11: Plausible Geography=== |
This is an index of claims made in this work with links to corresponding responses within the FAIR Wiki. An effort has been made to provide the author's original sources where possible.
| Page
|
Claim
|
Response
|
Use of sources
|
153
|
- B.H. Roberts' manuscripts "Book of Mormon Difficulties" and "A Book of Mormon Study" were "clearly intended for publication."
|
|
-
- Brigham H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, 2nd edition, 1992.
|
153
|
- Roberts' concluded that a 19th-century origin for the Book of Mormon was "entirely plausible"
|
|
-
- Brigham H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, 2nd edition, 1992.
|
154
|
- LDS scholars have made a "steady retraction" of claims regarding the scale of the Nephite/Lamanite presence since the 1920's.
|
|
|
156
|
- All Church presidents, General Authorities and "most church members" have believed in a hemispheric Book of Mormon geography
|
- The author's claim is false: leaders and members have differed on a point about which the Church has no official doctrine.
- Author(s) impose(s) own fundamentalism on the Saints
Logical Fallacy: False Cause—The author assumes that a real or perceived relationship between two events means that one caused the other.The author consistently argues that LDS scholars or apologists are "adjusting" their view on the Book of Mormon because they are being driven back in a rear-guard action by science. But, in fact, some LDS leaders and scholars have argued for a restricted geography and small numeric contribution of Lehites for over one hundred years.These beliefs were not held because of scientific "pressure," but because of their reading of the Book of Mormon text. In fact, the author admits that this has occurred since at least the 1920s (see p. 154)—long before any pressure from genetics issues. Yet, he continues to make the contradictory claim that the Church's defenders are now "on the ropes" and desperate for a solution.
|
|
156
|
- The Book of Mormon states that the Lamanites are "the principal ancestors of the American Indians"
|
|
-
- 1981 introduction to the Book of Mormon.
|
156
|
- A hemispheric geography most closely aligns with an "uncontrived" reading of the Book of Mormon.
|
|
|
159
|
- Moroni makes no mention of traveling from Central America to New York in the Book of Mormon.
|
- Misrepresentation of source: the author cites Sorenson, but does not explain how Sorenson responds to this very issue.
- The final battle of the Jaredites makes it clear that they did not migrate a long way from the starting point (e.g., Ether was able to observe matters from a cave and return easily to hide.)
- Plates to New York
|
-
- John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, 1985.
|
160
|
- There is no indication that the Book of Mormon people came in contact with others in the land.
|
- The author cites Sorenson's work, but does nothing to engage his arguments for just such indications.
Logical Fallacy: Strawman—The author sets up a weakened or caricatured version of the opponent's argument. The author then proceeds to demolish the weak version of the argument, and claim victory.Since scholars have long pointed to many textual clues which point to the existence of other non-Lehites in the New World, the author must dispense with such ideas if he is to succeed in portraying the Book of Mormon at odds with science. However, he does not engage the textual evidence that Latter-day Saints have found in abundance—he merely insists there is no evidence there.
The work repeats itself on p. 160, 193., 195., and 204.
|
-
- Brigham H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, 2nd edition, 1992.
- John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon, 1985.
|
163
|
- The shrinking of Book of Mormon geographical models corresponds with the growing research showing that ancient Americans came from Asia.
|
Logical Fallacy: False Cause—The author assumes that a real or perceived relationship between two events means that one caused the other.The author consistently argues that LDS scholars or apologists are "adjusting" their view on the Book of Mormon because they are being driven back in a rear-guard action by science. But, in fact, some LDS leaders and scholars have argued for a restricted geography and small numeric contribution of Lehites for over one hundred years.These beliefs were not held because of scientific "pressure," but because of their reading of the Book of Mormon text. In fact, the author admits that this has occurred since at least the 1920s (see p. 154)—long before any pressure from genetics issues. Yet, he continues to make the contradictory claim that the Church's defenders are now "on the ropes" and desperate for a solution.
- Double standard: Even if the author's claim was true, why complain? He has argued that Mormons always make their religious beliefs trump science. But, if Mormons respond to science in changing their perceptions, this is seen as a bad thing!
- Limited geography theory
|
|
164
|
- A limited Book of Mormon setting is at odds with "a straightforward reading" of the Book of Mormon.
|
- Others have disagreed. The limited model came out of a reading of the text, not out of scientific pressure or apologetic need.
- Limited geography theory
|
|
164
|
- The limited Book of Mormon setting contradicts D&C 54:8
|
|
|
| Page
|
Claim
|
Response
|
Use of sources
|
168
|
- LDS scholars believe that Mayan cities are prime candidates for where Lehi's people lived.
|
|
|
168
|
- The Jaredites are usually identified as the Olmec
|
|
|
168
|
- Joseph Smith declared the city of Palenque was a Nephite city, but modern scholarship indicates this city wasn't built until 600 A.D.
|
|
-
- No source given by the author.
- The statement made by the author about Palenque is incorrect. The earliest recorded ruler was K'uk Balam (Quetzal Jaguar), who governed Palenque for four years starting in the year 431 A.D.
- Pottery shards show that Palenque was occupied as early as 300 B.C.
- 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.).
- A known reference to Joseph's statement about Palenque is Joseph Smith (editor), "Extract from Stephens' 'Incidents of Travel in Central America'," Times and Seasons 3 no. 22 (15 September 1842), 915. off-site GospeLink
|
168
|
- The history of Book of Mormon archaeology is "littered with apostacy"
|
|
-
- Michael D. Coe, "Mormons and Archaeology: An Outside View," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 8:40-48 (1973).
|
170
|
- Thomas Ferguson was one of the better known early "Mormon archaeologists"
|
|
|
172
|
- There is no evidence of iron or steel smelting in the ancient New World
|
The work repeats itself on p. 8, 172., and 199.
|
-
- Michael D. Coe et al., Atlas of Ancient America (1986).
|
| 172
|
- There were no wheeled vehicles in ancient America
|
|
|
172
|
- There were no draft animals to pull wheeled vehicles
|
|
|
172
|
- There are no archaeological remains of wheat or barley in Mesoamerica. The barley found in Arizona doesn't count because it was only in a limited region.
|
- The fact that barley was unknown in the Americas before the 1980s demonstrates that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Would we want to bet on barley never being found outside that restricted area?
- Book of Mormon anachronisms—Plants—Barley
|
|
173
|
- Deer or tapir were never ridden by Native Americans, therefore they could not be the "horses" referred to in the Book of Mormon
|
- "Horses" are never said to be ridden in the Book of Mormon. They never act like "old world" horses. They are often treated as a foodstuff. This might match some other animal quite well. The author has here proven the Book of Mormon advocates' point.
- Book of Mormon anachronisms/Animals
-
The work repeats itself on p. xiv, 7-8., 173., and 199.
|
|
173
|
- Dee Green said in 1973 that Book of Mormon archaeology does not exist
|
- Misrepresentation of source: Green argued—in 1969—that the requisite work had not been done (the author also gets the date wrong by four years).
- Dee F. Green on Book of Mormon archaeology
- It is telling that the author must resort to a source that is 35 years old. A more current assessment is available:
- John E. Clark, "'Archaeology, Relics, and Book of Mormon Belief'," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 14/2 (2005). [38–49] link
- Book of Mormon archaeology
|
-
- Citation error: Dee F. Green, "Book of Mormon Archaeology: The Myths and the Alternatives," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 4:71-80 (1973).
- The correct citation is: Dee F. Green, "Book of Mormon Archaeology: The Myths and the Alternatives," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 4 no. 3 (Summer 1969), 72-80.
- This claim is also made in Becoming Gods, p. 66, 362n88
|
175
|
- "Book of Mormon archaeology" has yielded little credible evidence
|
- If the author is going to cite these sources, he needs to engage their evidence, not simply declare it not credible.
- Book of Mormon archaeology
|
-
- John E. Clark, "Book of Mormon Geography," Encyclopedia of Mormonism (1992).
- Hugh W. Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon (1964).
- Hugh W. Nibley, Lehi in the Desert: The World of the Jaredites; There Were Jaredites, (1988).
- Bruce W. Warren, Review of F. Richard Hauck, Deciphering the Geography of the Book of Mormon: Settlements and Routes in Ancient America, and John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon in BYU Studies 30:127 (1990).
- David J. Johnson, "Archaeology" Encyclopedia of Mormonism (1992).
|
176
|
- The Smithsonian issues a statement that discredits the Book of Mormon
|
|
|
177
|
- LDS apologists claim that the simplification of the Smithsonian statement indicates that the original statement is now inconsistent with the current knowledge of Mesoamerican archaeology
|
|
|
177
|
- There is little evidence of a cultural link between Polynesia and the Americas. A linguistic link between a South American variety and Polynesian variety of sweet potato is not yet explained.
|
- It is not necessarily reasonable to expect much of a cultural link if a small group (e.g., Hagoth) entered the larger Pacific cultural sphere.
- Polynesians as Lamanites
|
|
| Page
|
Claim
|
Response
|
Use of sources
|
180
|
- Most Mormons have had their ancestors posthumously "baptized into the Mormon faith."
|
- The author's claim is false: Those who receive baptism for the dead are not "baptized into the faith." Members believe that non-members are thereby given the ability to accept or reject the gospel when they hear it. Baptism for the dead does not make them "Mormons."
- Baptism for the dead
|
|
181
|
- FARMS has downplayed the potential of James Sorenson's "global molecular genealogy project."
|
- The author needs to provide actual evidence of this claim.
|
|
181
|
- The Molecular Genealogy Foundation may reveal disconcerting "surprises" in LDS family trees that trace back to "well known polygamists" in the early church.
|
|
-
- Author's opinion that the project may reveal embarrassing information about the descendants of Joseph Smith and other Church leaders through plural wives.
|
184
|
- The Indian Student Placement Program was an attempt to turn them "white and delightsome."
|
|
-
- Thomas Murphy, doctoral thesis.
|
184
|
- "Mormon folklore" claims that Native Americans and Polynesians carry a curse based upon "misdeeds on the part of their ancestors."
|
|
-
- Thomas W. Murphy and Simon G. Southerton. 2003. "Genetic Research: A 'Galileo Event' for Mormons," Anthropology News, 44:20.
|
185
|
- LDS scholars experienced in DNA research have spoken only to Mormon audiences.
|
- The author's claim is false
- Absurd claim: one LDS author on DNA matters is John Butler, an internationally recognized expert in the use of forensic DNA—he literally wrote the textbook used by law enforcement on this matter. Butler has spoken to many audiences about DNA matters.
- John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [36–37] link
- John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 101–108. off-site wiki
|
-
- Scott R. Woodward, "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FAIR. (2001)
|
185-186
|
- In response to the DNA issue, the Church linked to an article written by Jeff Lindsey, "a chemical engineer with no professional training in DNA research."
|
- This is classic ad hominem. What matters are not Lindsey's credentials, but whether his argument is accurate. The author never engages Lindsay's evidence or argument; he simply treats it as unworthy of attention.
- Ironically, the author of the book here under review has no professional training in population genetics (he is a plant biologist), and yet he expects us to accept his assessment.
- Book of Mormon and DNA evidence
Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument.<The author wishes to discredit anything he labels "apologetic" (i.e., any work that might contest his naive and ill-informed reading of LDS scripture). He does not engage their arguments, but uses a variety of tactics to avoid or dismiss them. The author sometimes claims that "apologetic" answers are not endorsed or promoted by the Church (allowing him to suggest that either such answers don't count because they aren't "official," or such answers are radical and therefore ultimately unacceptable—and the Church knows it.
Yet, the author knows that this claim is false, since he cites Jeff Lindsay on p. 185-186. Lindsay is an "apologist," and his work is cited by the Church's official website. There are also other examples of the Church using "apologetic" responses in a formal way.
The work repeats itself on p. 185-186, 202., and 205.
|
|
186
|
- LDS scientists have responded to DNA findings by claiming that it would be improbable to find evidence of an Israelite presence in the Americas.
|
- The author has actually elsewhere expressed his agreement with this claim, noting that LDS scientists have argued that "Bottleneck effect, genetic drift, Hardy-Weinberg violations and other technical problems would prevent us from detecting Israelite genes [in Amerindians]. I agree entirely. 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."[1]
- Interestingly, this admission was later removed from the website of Southerton's publisher. Southerton goes on to argue that the Book of Mormon "doesn't say this," but as we've noted some leaders and scholars have been reading the text that way for at least a century. The author even admits as much on p. 154.
- So, this attack works only if one reads the text in the most naive, ill-informed way possible—as the author seems determined to do.
- Book of Mormon and DNA evidence
Logical Fallacy: False Cause—The author assumes that a real or perceived relationship between two events means that one caused the other.The author consistently argues that LDS scholars or apologists are "adjusting" their view on the Book of Mormon because they are being driven back in a rear-guard action by science. But, in fact, some LDS leaders and scholars have argued for a restricted geography and small numeric contribution of Lehites for over one hundred years.These beliefs were not held because of scientific "pressure," but because of their reading of the Book of Mormon text. In fact, the author admits that this has occurred since at least the 1920s (see p. 154)—long before any pressure from genetics issues. Yet, he continues to make the contradictory claim that the Church's defenders are now "on the ropes" and desperate for a solution.
|
|
186
|
- LDS writers claim that the presence of other people in the Americas actually supports "careful readings of the Book of Mormon."
|
|
-
- Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): ix–lxii. off-site
- Matthew Roper, "Nephi's Neighbors: Book of Mormon Peoples and Pre-Columbian Populations," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 91–128. off-site
|
186
|
- LDS scholars "have come to the conclusion" that Book of Mormon populations comprised a very small part of a much larger group of people on the continent.
|
|
-
- Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): ix–lxii. off-site
|
187
|
- LDS suggest that it would impossible to use DNA technology to identify a small local colony of individuals.
|
|
-
- D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, "Who Are the Children of Lehi?," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [38–51] link
|
188
|
- The author claims that it is not likely that "founders effect" or "genetic drift" would "completely frustrate the identification of Israelite DNA in the Americas."
|
|
|
188
|
- The author claims that Book of Mormon states that the Lehite/Mulekite groups were both descended from Jewish ancestors
|
- The author's claim is false: Lehi was a descendant of Manasseh, and was not a Jew, however, author later makes the correct statement regarding Lehi's ancestry on page 5. The author makes the same error, however on p. xiii. This is our another hint that the author's familiarity with the necessary detail in the Book of Mormon is not adequate.
- Book of Mormon and DNA evidence—What are we looking for?
-
The work repeats itself on p. xiii and 188.
|
|
189
|
- The author claims that the ancestry of Israelites living today will all "meet at the Caucasian branch of the human family tree."
|
- It is not clear what this has to do with the Book of Mormon.
|
|
190
|
- The Lemba prove that it is possible to detect Middle Eastern genes in a foreign environment
|
- The Lemba are a special case, only made possible by their links to Jewish priestly families. 98% of known modern Jews cannot be identified by genetic testing.
- Lemba and Cohen modal haplotype
-
The work repeats itself on p. 128-129 and 190.
|
-
- John L. Sorenson, "The Problematic Role of DNA Testing in Unraveling Human History," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 9/2 (2000). [66–74] link
|
190
|
- Church leaders have consistently associated Lamanites with Central America.
|
|
|
191
|
- The Mayan Empire is claimed to considered by Mormons to the closest to the people of the Book of Mormon.
|
|
|
191
|
- There is too much genetic variation in the X lineage to account for Book of Mormon people to have arrived as recently as 2600 years ago.
|
|
|
192
|
- The X lineage occurs in North America and is not found in Central America.
|
|
-
- Hauswirth et al., 1994
- Ribeiro-dos-Santo et al., 1996
|
192
|
- LDS writers have overlooked the fact that Mitochondrial DNA research shows that 99.6% of Native Americans migrated to the American continent thousands of years before the Israelites came into existence, and none of these are candidates for Israelite origin.
|
- LDS authors have anticipated such findings by at least a century (see, again, p. 154).
- This attack works only if one reads the text in the most naive, ill-informed way possible—as the author seems determined to do.
- Book of Mormon and DNA evidence
|
|
192
|
- The remaining 0.4% is likely the result of genetic mixture with people who came to the New World after Columbus
|
|
|
193
|
- LDS scholars claim that the impact of Book of Mormon immigrants to the New World made an impact "so small that they barely mattered."
|
- The author has actually elsewhere expressed his agreement with this claim, noting that LDS scientists have argued that "Bottleneck effect, genetic drift, Hardy-Weinberg violations and other technical problems would prevent us from detecting Israelite genes [in Amerindians]. I agree entirely. 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."[2]
- Interestingly, this admission was later removed from the website of Southerton's publisher. Southerton goes on to argue that the Book of Mormon "doesn't say this," but as we've noted some leaders and scholars have been reading the text that way for at least a century. The author even admits as much on p. 154.
- So, this attack works only if one reads the text in the most naive, ill-informed way possible—as the author seems determined to do.
- Book of Mormon and DNA evidence
- Amerindians as Lamanites
Logical Fallacy: False Cause—The author assumes that a real or perceived relationship between two events means that one caused the other.The author consistently argues that LDS scholars or apologists are "adjusting" their view on the Book of Mormon because they are being driven back in a rear-guard action by science. But, in fact, some LDS leaders and scholars have argued for a restricted geography and small numeric contribution of Lehites for over one hundred years.These beliefs were not held because of scientific "pressure," but because of their reading of the Book of Mormon text. In fact, the author admits that this has occurred since at least the 1920s (see p. 154)—long before any pressure from genetics issues. Yet, he continues to make the contradictory claim that the Church's defenders are now "on the ropes" and desperate for a solution.
|
|
193
|
- A great number of Native Americans are now assumed to have been absorbed into New World Israelite civilizations.
|
|
|
193
|
- "Other people" in the Book of Mormon have "remained invisible" to most readers.
|
- Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this.
- Just because someone does not notice something does not mean it was there. Again, the author seems determined to ignore any solution to his problem, and read the text in the most blinkered, ill-informed way possible.
- Book of Mormon demographics
Logical Fallacy: Strawman—The author sets up a weakened or caricatured version of the opponent's argument. The author then proceeds to demolish the weak version of the argument, and claim victory.Since scholars have long pointed to many textual clues which point to the existence of other non-Lehites in the New World, the author must dispense with such ideas if he is to succeed in portraying the Book of Mormon at odds with science. However, he does not engage the textual evidence that Latter-day Saints have found in abundance—he merely insists there is no evidence there.
The work repeats itself on p. 160, 193., 195., and 204.
|
|
193-194
|
- "Gentiles who inhabited the Americas before, during and after the Book of Mormon period are potential Lamanites."
|
|
-
- 2 Nephi 1꞉5
- John L. Sorenson and Matthew Roper, "Before DNA," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [6–23] 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] link
|
194
|
- Mormons have "traditionally thought" that any Asian presence in the New World occurred after the Book of Mormon period.
|
- The author needs evidence for this claim.
- Even Bruce R. McConkie (a good example of "traditional views") say many sources and influence on Amerindian populations:
- The American Indians, however, as Columbus found them also had other blood than that of Israel in their veins. It is possible that isolated remnants of the Jaredites may have lived through the period of destruction in which millions of their fellows perished. It is quite apparent that groups of orientals found their way over the Bering Strait and gradually moved southward to mix with the Indian peoples. We have records of a colony of Scandinavians attempting to set up a settlement in America some 500 years before Columbus. There are archeological indications that an unspecified number of groups of people probably found their way from the old to the new world in pre-Columbian times. Out of all these groups would have come the American Indians as they were discovered in the 15th century.[3]
- In any case, if the "traditional view" does not match the Book of Mormon text, then it should be set aside.
|
|
195
|
- The children of Lehi were to be "kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves."
|
- Misrepresentation of source: This promise applies only as long as the children of Lehi were righteous. They lost this blessing even within Book of Mormon times.
- Amerindians as Lamanites
- Book of Mormon demographics
- John L. Sorenson, "When Lehi's Party Arrived in the Land Did They Find Others There?," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 1/1 (1992). [1–34] link
|
|
195
|
- There are no explicit references to non-Israelites living near the Lehites or Jaredites.
|
- Only critical work is cited; no engagement with LDS scholarship on the topic occurs.
Logical Fallacy: Strawman—The author sets up a weakened or caricatured version of the opponent's argument. The author then proceeds to demolish the weak version of the argument, and claim victory.Since scholars have long pointed to many textual clues which point to the existence of other non-Lehites in the New World, the author must dispense with such ideas if he is to succeed in portraying the Book of Mormon at odds with science. However, he does not engage the textual evidence that Latter-day Saints have found in abundance—he merely insists there is no evidence there.
The work repeats itself on p. 160, 193., 195., and 204.
- See response to source: 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
|
-
- Brent L. Metcalf, "Reinventing Lamanite Identity," Sunstone, 131:20-25 (2004).
|
195
|
- Five hundred years after their arrival, groups were still identified as having descended from Laman, Lemuel, Ishmael, etc.
|
|
|
196
|
- Familial terms used in the Book of Mormon imply a genetic link.
|
|
|
197
|
- Joseph Smith and other leaders taught that the Book of Mormon described the origins of the Indians in the western hemisphere.
|
|
-
- Matthew Roper, "Nephi's Neighbors: Book of Mormon Peoples and Pre-Columbian Populations," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 91–128. off-site
- Matthew Roper, "Swimming the Gene Pool: Israelite Kinship Relations, Genes, and Genealogy," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 129–164. off-site
|
197
|
- Mormons "tend to be hazy" regarding what past Church leaders have said regarding geography.
|
Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
The work repeats itself on p. 42, 135., 135-136., 136., 137., 142., 143., 197., 200., and 202-203.
|
|
Copyright © 2005–2024 FAIR. 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.
