Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 10

Chapter 9

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

Chapter 11

Claims made in "Chapter 10: The Lord's University"

Page	Claim	Response	Use of sources
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" (A+of+F 1꞉9), which presupposes that previous ideas may be inadequate. Mormonism and science 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?	Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 2nd edition, (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1966), no page number given. GL direct link 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 claim: the author presents no evidence of this assertion. Mormonism and science 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?	No sources provided.
136	Mormonism declares that it "corners the market" on religious truth.	The author's claim is false: 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	JS-History 1꞉19
136	Joseph Smith declared that all other religions were false.	"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."[1]	JS-History 1꞉19
136	LDS think that all other religions are the "whore of the earth" and "church of the devil"	The author's claim is false Whore of the earth Salvation of non-members	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.  Misrepresentation of source: Boyd K. Packer — Mantle and Intellect Censorship and revision of LDS history 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?	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	Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this.: 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 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?	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.  Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this.: 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 Dallin H. Oaks, "Unselfish Service," Ensign (May 2009): 93–96. off-site Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently. The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?	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 claim: 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 Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently. The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?	No sources given.
140	BYU's emphasis is on conformity rather than personal freedom.	Absurd claim: 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 claim: Why is it strange that a group hired for religious instruction to supplement college or university work should want religion taught? Mormonism and education  [needs work]	The only sources referred to are "parents."
142	CES instructs students not to attempt to locate Book of Mormon geographical locations	Logical Fallacy: Black-or-White—The author presents two alternative states as the only two possibilities, when more possibilities exist. Members are encouraged not to focus on the geography to the exclusion of the Book's more important spiritual message. BYU and FARMS (now the Maxwell Institute) have published a great deal of member scholarship on geography, however. If the Church opposed this, it could easily be stopped. Ironically, the author knows that there is no official geography (see p. 205) but continues to act as if it scandalous that the Church does not preach a non-official idea as official—perhaps hoping we will conclude that the model he describes is the official one which the Church dare not renounce.	No source provided.
142	Limited geography theories advanced by FARMS are "much too controversial" for CES students	Prejudicial or loaded language: 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	Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently. The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?	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 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?	No sources given.
143	LDS apologists continue to tell members how "scientists continue to get it wrong."	Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument. <Rather than interact with arguments the author labels "apologetic" (i.e., any interpretation which does not suit his naive view of the matter), the author hopes to marginalize them and reject them from consideration by claiming they are somehow novel, contrary to the Book of Mormon's plain meaning, or driven by desperation. Many statements indicate that these ideas are generally not novel, and were certainly developed well before any pressure from DNA arguments—they arose from the Book of Mormon text itself.  Absurd claim: 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: Michael F. Whiting, "DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [24–35] link John M. Butler, "Addressing Questions surrounding the Book of Mormon and DNA Research," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 101–108. off-site wiki John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts From a Believing DNA Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12/1 (2003). [36–37] 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 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. 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? Authoritarianism and Church leaders Dallin H. Oaks, "Unselfish Service," Ensign (May 2009): 93–96. off-site	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  [needs work]	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?	DC 116 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	DC 133꞉23-24
146	Mormons are "compelled" to believe in a global flood as symbolizing the "baptism of the earth"	Absurd claim: 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' goal is to deter members from reading any book that challenges their faith	Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this. Does the Church discourage reading critical material? Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument. <Rather than interact with arguments the author labels "apologetic" (i.e., any interpretation which does not suit his naive view of the matter), the author hopes to marginalize them and reject them from consideration by claiming they are somehow novel, contrary to the Book of Mormon's plain meaning, or driven by desperation. Many statements indicate that these ideas are generally not novel, and were certainly developed well before any pressure from DNA arguments—they arose from the Book of Mormon text itself.	The author states that this is an "obvious" conclusion.