Dr. Simon Southerton's Response To The Recent Change I The Bofm Introduction

[Brant Gardner]

The proselytizing under this premise was norm 30 years ago when I was converted. It was the major attraction in Temple Square then. Doesn't any of you remember the short movie of Quetzalcoatl prominently shown with a MesoAmerican Temple? Telling people Lamanites were descendents of of BoM people?

I remember "American Speaks" - I think that was the title. Terrible film. Of course I thought it was great at the time. I also read "One Fold One Shepherd" and thought it was great. After I had learned a bit more, I remember sitting with several LDS archaeologists who considered the film a sad comedy.

Unfortunately, there are similar works 30 years later. I don't believe those either.

History is messy stuff. It resists neat packages.

[alex71va]

..... nothing in the Book of Mormon precludes "others" from being present. He knows that, but it just didn't fit his agenda.

Whoa there ..... here are a few quotes.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/1_ne/13/10-15#10

vs 10 dividing of the Lamanites from the Europeans

vs 12 Christoper Columbus

vs 15 white skin of Europeans -vs- dark skins of Lamanites (i.e. Native Americans)

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/2_ne/1/8-11#8

vs 8 kept from the knowledge of other nations

vs 11 alluding to 1 Ne 13:10-15

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/2/7-12#7

vs 9 serve God or be swept off

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/13/2#2

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/13/21#21

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/13/25#25

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/14/21#21

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/ether/15/2#2

We can't expect to be blessed with credibility unless we strive to honestly look at the whole context.

[Tramper]

Is there a link for this? Thanks!

No links to anti sites. ~Mods

[Tramper]

So, to tie this in with your other active thread, does DNA fall under the problems with "religion," and how does spirituality overcome it?

Those who practice LDS religion have a problem. We "new" Mormons see the DNA-issue as way of reaching a better understanding of our sacred scripture. I am grateful for the efforts of Simon S and Thomas M. The God is closer than anyone can imagine. He is inside of us.

[Brant Gardner]

And LDS Prophets and leaders have never once indicated to the general membership of the church and to the Native Americans that the Native Americans are descended from father Lehi. No not once. Never happened. It's a myth spread by anti-mormons.

I have thought about this response for a while and originally declined to respond. Obviously, I changed my mind.

In the hands of those who don't agree with the Book of Mormon, the process is predictable:

1) Use DNA, assuming that it is science versus religion. Then, when that is trumped with not only better science but a better and more historical/archaeological interpretation of the data, fall back to -

2) A very naive picture of history and religion.

I find it extremely ironic that the appeal of DNA should be that it is science, but that the immediate response dumps modern historical methods on their head and promotes the most naive form of religion. One would think that anyone attempting to use science in the discussion of religion ought to be consistent in the application of the principles and that should include a proper understanding of history.

The "prophets have taught - ergo you must believe" argument is a distortion of LDS religion and a complete misunderstanding of the history of religion, including (and especially) the New Testament. If there is any reason to have a prophet, it is to manage change, not provide unalterable decisions. The story of Acts is one of change, where a Jewish sect became modern Christianity. Some of the internal conflict is still visible in the story. The Christian church was founded on the principle of prophetic change with social/relgious circumstances. Now, however, some assume that a church must defend a principle of inerrant constancy. Never happened.

It is also poor theology. The idea that any member of the church should have preternatural understanding of the world is also contrary to history and to stated doctrine. There is no reason to condemn the Old Testament as a false religion because they believed that the sun orbited the earth.

I find it absolutely inconsistent that one would argue that science contradicts the church and then so immediately dismiss all modern understanding and revert to pseudo-religious dogma as soon as the science won't do the job. It is a clear indication that the issues have nothing to do with science. This argument about DNA and the Book of Mormon (becoming "you can't believe that" or some other form of required inerrancy) is nothing more than an old-fashioned theology, and not a very sophisticated one.

[cdowis]

"Question: Have you looked up the word 'principal' in the dictionary before making these comments, or do you prefer to sound like a idiot!?"

"Answer: Obviously I have not bothered looking at a dictionary. After all, I do have a PhD. 'DOCTOR Southerton' says it all."

[Jessicka]

No links to anti sites. ~Mods

Thank you!

[Aquilifer]

Those who practice LDS religion have a problem. We "new" Mormons see the DNA-issue as way of reaching a better understanding of our sacred scripture. I am grateful for the efforts of Simon S and Thomas M. The God is closer than anyone can imagine. He is inside of us.

I've been intrigued by the arrival of New Order Mormonism. If your views are a typical example of New Order Mormonism, I think my interest has peaked -- just another form of apostasy.

[thesometimesaint]

Aquilifer:

What is a "New Order Mormon"?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

With these guys, it is like a bad marriage. Dam_ed if you do and Dam_ed if you don't.

[Aquilifer]

Aquilifer:

What is a "New Order Mormon"?

Others here can probably give a better explanation, but I understand it as members of the Church who have little or no testimony of the truthfulness of the Church, but see it's social and cultural aspects as good reasons to stick around.

A leading example would be John Dehlin, the new editor of Sunstone.

[cdowis]

Perhaps I am being somewhat redundant:

1. We have no indication of Lehi's and Sarah's DNA. The scientists are using *modern* Jew DNA to represent pre-exilic DNA from Joseph. Their analysis is based on faulty assumption.

2. The Nephites were, in large part, destroyed so they would have little representation among the modern Amerindians. Also, there is good evidence from the BOM text that the Lamanites mingled with the "others" who lived in the Americas even prior to the great destruction. As mentioned elsewhere, this mingling continued.

3. Large populations of the amerindians perished after the coming of Columbus. (See details in the book "1491"). Thus, a large part of the amerindian gene pool simply disappeared.

4. Researchers have found a direct link between a full-blooded amerindian and a woman from Greece. They have done a song and dance to attempt to explain the relationship between the "asian" DNA and this discovery. The BOM gives a possible explanation by the migration of the Mulekites to America (possibly using Greek sailors), and the presence of Greek names in the BOM text after the discovery of the Mulekites.

I have brought several of these items to Southerton's attention in an email, but he chose to dismiss them without comment.

[Lachoneus]

I have brought several of these items to Southerton's attention in an email, but he chose to dismiss them without comment.

What did you expect? Admitting the truth would destroy his personal paradigm.

[alex71va]

.............

I have brought several of these items to Southerton's attention in an email, but he chose to dismiss them without comment.

Doesn't the D&C say that where much is given then much is required? If this is the case then it sure makes sense that where people are giving devotion then an equivalent level of accountability to lead/guide with answers is required. What level of devotion are people giving to the church with anticipation of an eternal reward? What level of devotion are people giving to Dr. Southerton in anticipation of some reward?

What questions have you raised to LDS church leaders on this subject? What answers has the church given? Why should Dr. Southerton have any obligation to answer questions in any more quantity than does the church?

[alex71va]

What did you expect? Admitting the truth would destroy his personal paradigm.

That's the exact argument that many critics make against the LDS church for its failure to answer many of the questions that this whole Lamanite/DNA issue has raised. Its been over 9 years since Southerton alerted the church to his own concerns over this issue. And to this day not one answer from any official spokesperson or member of the FP/12 has addressed this issue.

[urroner]

Its been over 9 years since Southerton alerted the church to his own concerns over this issue. And to this day not one answer from any official spokesperson or member of the FP/12 has addressed this issue.

Why should they? Is Southerton that important? Besides, his concerns have been addressed by the scholars, but if he refuses to accept what they say, why would he accept what any of the FP/12 would have to say?

[Sanpitch]

Why should they? Is Southerton that important? Besides, his concerns have been addressed by the scholars, but if he refuses to accept what they say, why would he accept what any of the FP/12 would have to say?

There is one little item I often think of when these discussion come up. And I can't document it right at this moment but I think that anthropologists or other science that deal with the origin of the natives, have claimed for over a hundred years that the native americans came from Asia. I have not read of any who agree with the claims of the apologists or the church leaders. I think they would, in general agree with Southerton. There are items besides DNA to look at.

Ed: Probably shouldn't include apologists in my statement with their claims of a small group etc. However I always thought the church was guided from the top, the Prophet and the 12 apostles and their claims are what you can depend on, apparently not.

[livy111us]

There will be in a few weeks.

[alex71va]

.... Besides, his concerns have been addressed by the scholars ....

The biggest selling point of Mormonism is that the church leaders have the Mantle of the Lord upon their shoulders and that they speak for HIM as living prophets. The scholars/pharisees in LDS academic circles have no such mantle upon their shoulders. Their words are not official words of living prophets.

[Dale]

Southerton ingores a genetic link between Native Americans and modern Jews. He tries to explain it away by blaming it on the very ancient migration. The link may have originated 2,000 years ago which is closer to the Book of Mormon account. I linked to an rebuttal to Signature Book's on the issue by David Stewart. Somebody with the genetic relationship with modern Jews had to have migrated here.

The Lord if he doesn't want to speak an answer through the prophet take it up with the Lord. Why is such a response needed? How many LDS person's feel a need exists for such an official response? The only reason i hear is from certain people who want to challenge the Lord to prove how smart he is. If the Lord would prove out how smart he is then i suppose they would instantly believe.

[thesometimesaint]

alex71va:

When the Lord is silent even Prophets are entitled to their own opinions, or to even have no opinion at all on any given subject.

[Mormon Vader]

The biggest selling point of Mormonism is that the church leaders have the Mantle of the Lord upon their shoulders and that they speak for HIM as living prophets. The scholars/pharisees in LDS academic circles have no such mantle upon their shoulders. Their words are not official words of living prophets.

An Apostle's main calling is to be a special witness for Christ, not to be an apologist on changing issues. Testifying of Christ and encouraging faith in Him saves us, DNA doesn't.

[falasha]

There is more semitic ancestry in the black lemba jews of Ethiopia than in the good guatemalan saints.

So why favor the native americans and islanders and deny Elijah Abel his temple endowment?

If Enoch's son Elijah was ordained an Elder in 1935 then why not take the truth of Galations 3:29 seriously?

Sometimes people can't afford a PatriClan test!

Come on white caucasians reading this - can you prove your Ephraim ancestry here? - send me your autosomal DNA file and let's review it together.

If we're so concerned with DNA then why not test Yeshua's Y chromosome data to obtain the genealogy of the El Elyon

infinite series?

I can't recall which cord blood registry Mary used.

Maybe the Plant geneticist Southerton should take a few notes from someone like Kieth Crandall, who is a population geneticist, a real expert, on the issue.