How do Mormons reconcile American Indian origins?

[Sevenbak]

No offense Obiwan, but there are plenty of other scriptures that speak just the opposite, that this land was preserved and kept from all other nations as an inheritance for Lehi's seed. The "there were others here" works well for those believing in a limited geography model, either Meso or Great Lakes... but not for everyone... including myself.

I'm also not aware of any teachings that say, either scripturally, or in official talks or otherwise, that there were other peoples here, outside the Mulekites and the lone survivor from Ramah.

[katherine the great]

Also, has anyone brought up the genetic change that came upon the Lamanites, so that those they mixed their seed with had the same change? If there are no pre-change (pre-curse) people to compare DNA with today's native populations, both old world and new, I can see a big problem. It's the elephant in the room that no one talks about when bringing up DNA.

Because it is so ludicrous. God doesn't curse people by making their Y chromosome and MT DNA look identical to far east Asians who are known definitively to have already existed in the same area for thousands of years. Modern descendants of Lehi who belong to one of the Asian haplogroups don't reflect a Semitic ancestry because of early intermarriage. Its the only possibility that includes all of the evidence.

[Sevenbak]

Ludicrous? Are you saying you know all the ins and out of the curse upon Laman, Lemuel, and the Ishmaelitish women? I don't know of anyone who has ever made that claim to know how it all worked.

But If I had to guess, I would think that since God generally follows a pattern, he's done this before. Perhaps even to scattered tribes in the Mongolian regions.

Wow, why the hostility?

Interesting study here on FARMS, btw. For the record, I've not read this before this post, but I brought it up as it makes sense to me since the seed of Israel is scattered thorough the world.

DNA and the Book of Mormon

David G. Stewart Jr.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=18&num=1&id=602

"I had confirmed from missionaries and members that modern patriarchal blessings have identified members of all the tribes of Israel in Mongolia

[katherine the great]

Ludicrous? Are you saying you know all the ins and out of the curse upon Laman, Lemuel, and the Ishmaelitish women? I don't know of anyone who has ever made that claim to know how it all worked.

But If I had to guess, I would think that since God generally follows a pattern, he's done this before. Perhaps even to scattered tribes in the Mongolian regions.

Wow, why the hostility?

I don't know all the "ins and outs of the curse" but I can make an educated guess that God didn't send body snatchers from outer space to inhabit their bodies. I don't see that silly elephant and I don't see your equally silly one, but you are right, there definitely is one. Are you aware that ancient Native Americans not only look Asian, but they have the exact same "mongolian blue spot" birthmark and incisors that are almost unique to Asians? The same coarse, straight black hair and lack of facial and chest hair. They have similar to identical ancestral DNA. The DNA that is not only found in modern Native Americans, but ancient remains as well. They had identical tools found on both sides of the land bridge that is now under water. Their DOGS even have the same DNA as their Asian counterparts. Did God change the dog's DNA too? Also, the Y chromosome and MT DNA that is cited in these studies has nothing to do with the coloring or physical appearance of people. It only places them in a group with a common ancestor along the direct female or male line. If their DNA changed, it changed because of very early intermarriage in to a much larger group--not because God cursed them.

[Sevenbak]

I don't know all the "ins and outs of the curse" but I can make an educated guess that God didn't send body snatchers from outer space to inhabit their bodies. I don't see that silly elephant and I don't see your equally silly one, but you are right, there definitely is one. Are you aware that ancient Native Americans not only look Asian, but they have the exact same "mongolian blue spot" birthmark and incisors that are almost unique to Asians? The same coarse, straight black hair and lack of facial and chest hair. They have similar to identical ancestral DNA. The DNA that is not only found in modern Native Americans, but ancient remains as well. They had identical tools found on both sides of the land bridge that is now under water. Their DOGS even have the same DNA as their Asian counterparts. Did God change the dog's DNA too? Also, the Y chromosome and MT DNA that is cited in these studies has nothing to do with the coloring or physical appearance of people. It only places them in a group with a common ancestor along the direct female or male line. If their DNA changed, it changed because of very early intermarriage in to a much larger group--not because God cursed them.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Body snatchers from space?

The seed of Israel is scattered throughout the earth. It's in the promises going clear back to Abraham. For there to be DNA similarities between Lamanites and Mongolians doesn't bother me one bit.

If we had a Nephite available to test, that might be interesting, but we don't.

And one can't make the claim that God's curse wasn't genetic in nature. Of course it was, how can we read it any differently?

Alma 3:9

And it came to pass that whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed.

2 Nephi 5:23

And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing.

Alma 3:14

Thus the word of God is fulfilled, for these are the words which he said to Nephi: Behold, the Lamanites have I cursed, and I will set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed, from this time henceforth and forever, except they repent of their wickedness and turn to me that I may have mercy upon them.

Alma 3:15

And again: I will set a mark upon him that mingleth his seed with thy brethren, that they may be cursed also.

[katherine the great]

I have no idea what you are talking about. Body snatchers from space?

The seed of Israel is scattered throughout the earth. It's in the promises going clear back to Abraham. For there to be DNA similarities between Lamanites and Mongolians doesn't bother me one bit.

I don't think you understand. We cannot get around the fact that the Lehites came to a continent that was already heavily populated with people who's ancestors came from the Far East. The genetic similarities in their DNA cannot be explained by saying that the Lehites were the source for it. That is a physical impossibility and anyone who says otherwise is either being intellectually dishonest or is shoving their fingers in their ears and singing "lalalalalalalala" at the top of their lungs.

[Sevenbak]

I don't think you understand. We cannot get around the fact that the Lehites came to a continent that was already heavily populated with people who's ancestors came from the Far East. The genetic similarities in their DNA cannot be explained by saying that the Lehites were the source for it. That is a physical impossibility and anyone who says otherwise is either being intellectually dishonest or is shoving their fingers in their ears and singing "lalalalalalalala" at the top of their lungs.

Or you could accept the teachings of the church over the teachings of evolving science and not accuse others of walking around with fingers in their ears. And yes, you can get around what you think is impossible, if you don't put your trust in the arm of flesh. That may sound pretty harsh, but you've attacked me tonight for having faith in what has been taught. There is no need for that.

[katherine the great]

Or you could accept the teachings of the church over the teachings of evolving science and not accuse others of walking around with fingers in their ears. And yes, you can get around what you think is impossible, if you don't put your trust in the arm of flesh. That may sound pretty harsh, but you've attacked me tonight for having faith in what has been taught. There is no need for that.

I'm not attacking you for having faith. I'm challenging your pseudo-scientific viewpoint. Please do not attempt to use any type of scientific argument that includes the terms "DNA" or "genetics" because you have a gross lack of understanding of biology. You seem to know your scriptures and I would urge you to simply make your argument from there until you understand the other.

[Sevenbak]

I'm not attacking you for having faith. I'm challenging your pseudo-scientific viewpoint. Please do not attempt to use any type of scientific argument that includes the terms "DNA" or "genetics" because you have a gross lack of understanding of biology. You seem to know your scriptures and I would urge you to simply make your argument from there until you understand the other.

You know nothing about me, please don't make such assumptions. I've recently spent hours discussing some of these very issues with the head of the Sorenson Molecular Foundation in a work related capacity.

If you want to accept the ever changing science as superior to what is taught by the church, that's your prerogative, but please try not to belittle those of us who don't.

Have a good evening... morning.

[katherine the great]

You know nothing about me, please don't make such assumptions. I've recently spent hours discussing some of these very issues with the head of the Sorenson Molecular Foundation.

Discussing "these very issues" with the head of the Sorenson Molecular Foundation is interesting but without the basics, you won't understand. You need to spend time reading instead--at least a couple of years. You know I'm right. Goodnight to you too. (sweet dreams.)

[Sevenbak]

Discussing "these very issues" with the head of the Sorenson Molecular Foundation is interesting but without the basics, you won't understand. You need to spend time reading instead--at least a couple of years. You know I'm right. Goodnight to you too. (sweet dreams.)

You are assuming I haven't. Perhaps not as much as you, but I'm aware of the arguments and why. G'night to you too.

[Ron Beron]

And one can't make the claim that God's curse wasn't genetic in nature. Of course it was, how can we read it any differently?

I have to agree with Katherine on this one. Scripturally, God does not curse generations. It is axiomatic in our faith..."We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression." To state that a race or ethnic group is "cursed" by genetics is speaking against the faith. Secondly, we presume in making the assumption that any genetic disposition is scientifically a "curse".

[Palador]

Just a random thought here, but might it be possible that the curse mentioned in the Book of Mormon on the Lamanites might be just spiritual in nature, and not physical nor genetic?

A second random thought here, but why does there need be this dichotomy between scripture and science? Call me crazy, but favoring one over the other is something that I would call dogmatism.

[Jeff K.]

Is this the "injun" that moves the motor of anti Mormons?

[katherine the great]

Is this the "injun" that moves the motor of anti Mormons?

nyuck nyuck nyuck

[erichard]

...To state that a race or ethnic group is "cursed" by genetics is speaking against the faith. Secondly, we presume in making the assumption that any genetic disposition is scientifically a "curse".

Hi Ron,

What about the possibility that the "curse" that came upon the descendents of Lamen and Lemuel WAS that the intermarried with the locals who were from Asia?

The BoM does not say that, but the fact that the lamanites after a few generations so far outnumbered the Nephites seems to imply it. Below is a MADB post I made (but cannot now link to) where I talked about this idea.

As for the OP, here is an article claiming modern Hebrew DNA has been found in South America.

Richard

Remember that the Nephites eventually came to the land of Zarahemla

from their earlier home in the land of Nephi-- and united with the

Mulekites. They collectively are called Nephites after that. However

Mosiah 25 says there were more Mulekites than Nephites. It also notes

that there were twice as many Lamanites as Nephites and Mulekites

together.

QUOTE

2 Now there were not so many of the children of Nephi, or so many of

those who were descendants of Nephi, as there were of the people of

Zarahemla, who was a descendant of Mulek, and those who came with him

into the wilderness.

3 And there were not so many of the people of Nephi AND of the people

of Zarahemla as there were of the Lamanites; yea, they were not half

so numerous. --Mosiah 25

So a question arises: why were there so many Lamanites?

Around 550 BC, at the time of separation after Lehi died:

QUOTE

Wherefore, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did take my family, and

also Zoram and his family, and Sam, mine elder brother and his

family, and Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren, and also my

sisters, and all those who would go with me. And all those who would

go with me were those who believed in the warnings and the

revelations of God; wherefore, they did hearken unto my words.

--2 Nephi 5:6

Nephi, Zoram and Sam were married and had families. It does not sound

like Jacob and Joseph, nor his sisters were married. Possibly, some

of these sisters of Nephi left their husbands who were sons of

Ishmael because of the rift. We can be sure that Jacob and Joseph did

eventually marry. So among the Nephites there were at least 5

families bringing children-- probably more. Furthermore we know that

this group practiced some plural marriage for a time.

Those who did not go with Nephi were Laman, Lemuel and the Sons of

Ishmael. 2 Nephi 4 shows that Laman and Lemuel were married and had

familes. And possibly some or all of the Sons of Ishmael. So among

the Lamanites there could have been 5 or more families bringing

children.

However, it does not sound like there were twice as many Lamanite

families at the start. So why in Mosiah 25 --around 430 years later

in 120 BC-- are the Lamanites not only twice as numerous as the

original Nephites, but of these Nephites AND the even more numerous

Mulekites?

If the Mulekites were twice as numerous as the Nephites, then the

Lamanites were six times as numerous as the original Nephites. Yet at

the time of the division there does not seem to be any reason to

suspect this would happen. For a lot of reasons, one would think the

Nephites would have been more prolific.

So one possibility, even though the Book of Mormon does not mention

it, is that the Lamanites mixed with another heathen race (or races)

in the land.

And like those who joined with the Nephites became also known as

Nephites, so likewise those who joined with the Lamanites were all

called Lamanites.

This could also be the source of this curse that came upon the

Lamanites, rather than God changing their DNA:

QUOTE

21 And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore

cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened

their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint;

wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome,

that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause

a skin of blackness to come upon them.

22 And thus saith the Lord God: I will cause that they shall be

loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their

iniquities.

23 And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed;

for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord

spake it, and it was done. -- 2 Nephi 5

What other explantion could there be for there being so many more

Lamanites by the time of Mosiah, and for the genetic change that came

upon them as a people?

[katherine the great]

As for the OP, here is an article claiming modern Hebrew DNA has been found in South America.

Richard

Thank you for posting that. I will highlight the most important part of the article:

"When a small group of people intermarry into a large population, the DNA markers that might identify their descendants could entirely disappear -- even though their genealogical descendants could number in the millions.

This means it is possible that almost every American Indian alive today could be genealogically related to Lehi's family but still retain no identifiable DNA marker to prove it. In other words, you could be related genealogically to and perhaps even feel a spiritual kinship with an ancestor but still not have any vestige of his DNA."

[alter idem]

Also, has anyone brought up the genetic change that came upon the Lamanites, so that those they mixed their seed with had the same change? If there are no pre-change (pre-curse) people to compare DNA with today's native populations, both old world and new, I can see a big problem. It's the elephant in the room that no one talks about when bringing up DNA.

It's only a problem for those who believe there was a genetic change. Not everyone believes this.

[alter idem]

No offense Obiwan, but there are plenty of other scriptures that speak just the opposite, that this land was preserved and kept from all other nations as an inheritance for Lehi's seed. The "there were others here" works well for those believing in a limited geography model, either Meso or Great Lakes... but not for everyone... including myself.

I'm also not aware of any teachings that say, either scripturally, or in official talks or otherwise, that there were other peoples here, outside the Mulekites and the lone survivor from Ramah.

While we don't know for certain that there were others, it is the most logical conclusion and believing there were others does not change the Lord's words or the prophecies--unless a person reads them as a literalist, which really is not a good idea when reading scripture. One look at Isaiah and Revelation proves shows the folly in this.

[alter idem]

Just a random thought here, but might it be possible that the curse mentioned in the Book of Mormon on the Lamanites might be just spiritual in nature, and not physical nor genetic?

A second random thought here, but why does there need be this dichotomy between scripture and science? Call me crazy, but favoring one over the other is something that I would call dogmatism.

I believe they were cursed 'spiritually' and that curse was easily lifted when they became righteous. But was their dark skin a 'curse' that chameleon like, it could lighten and darken throughout the righteous to wicked cycle they went through?--I don't believe it for a minute and because of that, I don't believe their skin darkening was a 'curse'-it seemed to set them apart and make them unattractive to the Nephites--but only when they were wicked. Later they intermarried freely and I suspect they were a mix of shades, like they are today.

The scriptures seem pretty clear that their dark skin was not figurative--but was this a curse or just a natural consequence of their lifestyle or intermarrying with others. We don't know.

Genetic science is still pretty new and I don't think we can draw any conclusions from it yet.

[AntiCitizen]

Actually it doesn't. It never mentions the term "American Indians". That is an assumed conflation.

This is untrue. The D&C passages I linked make specific references to American Indians and call them "Lamanites." Other passages then link Lamanites with Jews.

[AntiCitizen]

Thank you for posting that. I will highlight the most important part of the article:

"When a small group of people intermarry into a large population, the DNA markers that might identify their descendants could entirely disappear -- even though their genealogical descendants could number in the millions.

This means it is possible that almost every American Indian alive today could be genealogically related to Lehi's family but still retain no identifiable DNA marker to prove it. In other words, you could be related genealogically to and perhaps even feel a spiritual kinship with an ancestor but still not have any vestige of his DNA."

I think such discussions as this are missing the point. The D&C very plainly equates Lamanites with American Indians and Jews. It is a stretch to the start suggesting that really, Lehi's group just inter-mixed with the locals. In order to suggest this, you are basically telling me that direct revelation from God was expressed in very ambiguous ways. You are free to continue holding your faith, but it is not a very compelling case for the clarity of God's word.

Or to put it another way, consider what the "Local Geography" model implies:

1) Lehi's family leaves Jerusalem before it is destroyed. They then construct a ship and sail to the New World. All of this is plainly spelled out in great detail in the Book of Mormon.

2) Lehi's family reaches the new world and begins setting up camp. Again, much of their internal struggles are plainly spelled out in great detail in the Book of Mormon.

3) Lehi's family starts interacting with the locals, even though it is heavily implied that this is really the "promised land" set aside for Lehi's group. Lehi's group even starts inter-marrying with the locals, despite the massive cultural and linguistic obstacles they would have naturally faced. None of this is mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

4) Lehi's group, despite being total strangers to this alien world, they somehow manage to convert the locals to Christianity. This is not mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

5) After converting the locals to Christianity, Nephi somehow manages to exercise enough political influence on the locals that future generations actually refer to them as Nephites. None of this is mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

6) Meanwhile, Laman/Lemuel do the exact same thing, somehow dragging their own group of local natives into a petty family blood-feud. Future generations even start referring to this group as Lamanites. Again, none of this is mentioned in the Book of Mormon.

Are you beginning to notice the problem here? The Local Geography theory is nothing more than a giant cork designed to plug the hole of Native American origins. There is virtually nothing in the entire Book of Mormon to even barely hint at this stuff unless you really dig and bend the plain meaning of the words. Yet this is what you have to believe if you expect the Book of Mormon to retain some plausibility. It is not enough to just plug the gaps, however. What positive evidence can you offer me about any of this, other than the vain hope that it reconciles the previous 100 years of erroneous LDS beliefs?

[AntiCitizen]

Let me clear it up for you.... In the Church, "Lamanites" primarily in the BOM is what ALL the Natives of the America's and the Islands are called from a scriptural perspective. Lamanites also were anyone Non-Nephite. Lamanites in the Church and the BOM are like the "Gentiles" of the Bible. Lamanite is the BOM equivalent. As I mentioned above, you are under a false assumption that Lamanite is someone "only" blood descended from Lehi. LDS make no distinction save in certain circumstances. If you actually knew the Church, you would know for example that when LDS leaders visit certain areas of the America's and the Islands, they sometimes tell the people the are speaking too that they are literally blood descended from Lehi. Other times, they are adopted.

I gave you several passages in the D&C that plainly equate Lamanites to Jews and American Indians. You cannot just pretend these do not exist. God Himself has given revelation to Joseph Smith that flatly contradicts what you are telling me here. If you want to re-interpret the plain meaning of the text, then fine. Let me hear how you take God's word to mean something other than what it obviously implies.

[Senator]

This is untrue. The D&C passages I linked make specific references to American Indians and call them "Lamanites." Other passages then link Lamanites with Jews.

I'm aware of those passages. If you care to, please be more specific on how you derive "American Indians" from those passages. More specifically, how they equate Lamanites with Jews.

Thanks,

[AntiCitizen]

Darth J, I think you have probably given one of the best responses yet to this question. So I would like to just address this statement:

The fourth thing I would do is try to come up with a testable hypothesis of what genetics you should be looking for, how you're going to (a) find them and (b) recognize them, and then actually do research on that hypothesis instead of extrapolating unrelated research and try to draw conclusions based on a set of assumptions about The Book of Mormon instead of what it actually says and some idea of some kind of what you're even looking for in the first place.

Rather than, say, thinking about DNA the same way the scriptwriters do on CSI.

The "testable hypothesis" is simple. If there is a strong influence of Middle-Eastern lineages mixed in with Native Americans, then sooner or later it should pop up in all the genetic data being taken from the populations. It not, then we should expect to find no sign of it.

Nevertheless, I do not pretend to be an expert in genetics, but I do at least trust the experts when they say that "Native Americans of Mongoloid descent." I have at least taken a cursory look at some of the technical literature and found that everything seems to be in order from the genetic end. So real issue here may be better explained in the following list:

1) The prevailing belief among LDS is that Native Americans are really Jews. Many of those who do real research do not necessarily hold to this view, but you cannot honestly tell me that such information has been openly disseminated among the members. This alone is not so bad, but the Church should really take a vested interest in quelling mis-information like this. I feel it makes the Church look bad, but what are your thoughts on this?

2) The Book of Mormon does not specifically mention any interaction among locals. Every justification I have seen so far feels more like a giant plug designed to maintain plausibility, but no one has offered any positive evidence from scripture to suggest that Lehi's group intermarried with local natives and converted them all to Christianity. This is a glaring omission when you consider how much the Book of Mormon loves to go into great detail about successes in converting people to Christ. Given that Lehi's family would have literally been aliens in a strange land, this is a conspicuously absent account, especially when you consider how so many other details of Lehi's family are chronicled from the same time-frame.

3) It is mis-leading to suggest that the Book of Mormon is open and frank about any interaction with locals. If anything, the Book of Mormon is hugely suggestive that Lehi's family fell onto a completely empty wilderness, set aside by God specifically for them. So really, I am asking you for some positive evidence in favor of the inter-mingling idea.

I am interested in your thoughts.