Doctor Ninja Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 It's interesting to me that when it proves that JS did not father a child, DNA evidence is accepted by LDS apologists.However, as it applies to the question of Native American ancestry, it suddenly becomes unreliable.Apples (phylogenetics) to oranges (paternity DNA testing). Unless of course - you have Lehi's DNA stored somewhere?
Doctor Ninja Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 For the record and even if the DNA proved otherwise, I (as does the Lord) stand completely behind Joseph Smith and his prophetic calling. I hope that doesn't expose my TBM colors or offend the world.
baddonkey Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 What about Josephine Lyon? Are her relatives not fully testable? Any updates about her case? I haven't kept up on it.
Thinking Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 I'm told by a certain type of critic, fairly often, that LDS apologists dismiss and vilify the science of genetics in defense of the Book of Mormon.Having edited almost all of the articles on the subject from believing Latter-day Saints (and even edited a book on the subject), I confess that I've not seen such dismissals from any of the LDS geneticists and others with whom I've worked.Could you supply a reference?I would be fascinated to see where, say, John Butler or Michael Whiting or David McClellan rejects the science of genetics.If you read my post again, you'll notice I used the word unreliable. When you can't attack the science, attack the source. If the source is in question, the science, though not rejected, becomes unreliable.Thus, we are left without enough information from the Book of Mormon record itself to identify definitively an appropriate genetic source population that could be used to calibrate the claims of the Book of Mormon. (John Butler)Mitochondrial DNA studies have had little success in linking different Jewish groups, leading geneticists to discount mtDNA as being notoriously unreliable in ascertaining "Jewish" roots. (David G. Stewart)
TAO Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 Joseph Smith was Brigham Young's predecessor, was he not? As cinepro pointed out over here, BY apparently encouraged wife swapping (pardon the blunt expression but what else can you call it?) in order to increase the seed of infertile men.Hehe, haven't heard of that one, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Ares Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 Two types of comments were removed from this thread.1) Discussion of the sexual practices and predilictions of board members and Joesph Smith.2) Posts that continue personal feuds between board members.Don't do it again.
Xander Posted July 11, 2011 Posted July 11, 2011 Where did you copy and paste this from?I didn't cut and paste anything. Again, in that thread I made two claims.1. Joseph Smith was accused of cowardice by his followers.2. A Jailer said Joseph Smith thought the mob was the Mormons coming to rescue him.This is off topic as was the original comment by Dr. Ninja.If either of you has updated information (not speculation or personal comments) then put it on the other thread. -Ares
kolipoki09 Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 I'm not entirely sure why the question of whether or not Joseph Smith had children from his plural wives is so important to either side. I am aware of a few thousand former members of the Community of Christ who now float along the fringes in Restoration Branches who have made it a life and death effort to prove Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, simply because he is believed (in some circles) to have never fathered any children by plural marriage. Unfortunately, some Latter-day Saints also buy into it.
mfbukowski Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 I am aware of a few thousand former members of the Community of Christ who now float along the fringes in Restoration Branches who have made it a life and death effort to prove Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, simply because he is believed (in some circles) to have never fathered any children by plural marriage. Unfortunately, some Latter-day Saints also buy into it.Very interesting.Yet another evidence that History is often "his-story".
baddonkey Posted July 12, 2011 Posted July 12, 2011 I remember reading back in like 2007 that they had already tested many of Josephine Lyon's relatives and that they would have results in a couple of years. I remember that the relatives said the data so far was "promising" or something, which I took to mean that it might confirm their family tradition about her paternity. I haven't tried to keep abreast of what is happening in this case, but I'm wondering why it is taking so long, besides just because it involves a different type of test than Y-chromosome.
Popular Post Loran Blood Posted July 13, 2011 Popular Post Posted July 13, 2011 (edited) Joseph Smith had a tendency to pick the younger, attractive women for a reason. His affair with his teenage housekeeper, Fanny Alger, upset Oliver Cowdery a great deal, and led to his excommunication.There is not a shred of documentary or other evidence that Joseph Smith ever had an "affair" with Fanny Alger, or anyone else. Fanny is alwasy the easiest for critics to "pick on" precisely, one suspects, because she is the one plural marraige we have the least actual historical knowledge of.To think these were just spiritual marriages that would involve no sexual relations until their reunion in the spirit world, is a nice assumption I suppose, but I think the most reasonable conclusion is quite different. This simply will not do. One can respect what you might think about Joseph's various practices relative to the doctrine of plural marriage and what you might believe is the "most reasonable" conclusion to this problem, and at the same time be able to point out the utter lack of evidence brought to the table in support of what one "thinks" to be the case, when actual evidence is what is needed.Given the charges and the stakes involved, a higher bar than speculative conjecture and subjective leaps of bias is required. Edited July 13, 2011 by Loran Blood 5
Thinking Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 "Have you checked the children?" is a virtually iron-clad argument against those who accuse JS of lust as the reason for multiple sealings/wives. How could a 19th century horndog (ostensibly) get away with not having some children under these circumstances?Birth control?
kolipoki09 Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 (edited) There is not a shred of documentary or other evidence that Joseph Smith ever had an "affair" with Fanny Alger, or anyone else. Brant Gardner once said, "I'll readily admit that it is much easier to hold firm opinions on something you know little about."May I suggest some light reading? George D. Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy: "...but we called it celestial marriage," Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2008, 39-43; Gary James Bergera, "Identifying the Earliest Mormon Polygamists, 1841-44," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 38 (Fall 2005): [1-74] 30 n75; Janet Ellingson, "Alger Marriage Questioned," Letter, Journal of Mormon History 23 (Spring 1997), vi-vii; Don Bradley, "Mormon Polygamy Before Nauvoo?: The Relationship of Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger," The Persistence of Polygamy: Joseph Smith and the Origins of Mormon Polygamy, Independence, John Whitmer Books, ed. Newell G. Bringhurst and Craig L. Foster, 2010, 14-58. In my opinion, Bradley's article is the best treatment on the Fanny Alger story thus far. Edited July 13, 2011 by kolipoki09
DonBradley Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Just how many children did this man not father? I've never heard of so many children not belonging to one man...!Don 1
Storm Rider Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Just how many children did this man not father? I've never heard of so many children not belonging to one man...!DonExactly how many men have been alleged to have been fathered by Joseph Smith? It is not even close to the number children BY fathered. It is odd that there were so many that obviously wanted to be the progeny of the JS or at least their mothers wanted them to be known as children of the prophet. It is also strange that none of their allegations have been based in reality.
ERayR Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Birth control?Yep, just run down to the corner drug store and get the pill. Oops, about a hundred years too soon.
mfbukowski Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Exactly how many men have been alleged to have been fathered by Joseph Smith? It is not even close to the number children BY fathered. It is odd that there were so many that obviously wanted to be the progeny of the JS or at least their mothers wanted them to be known as children of the prophet. It is also strange that none of their allegations have been based in reality.Such a scenario is certainly consistent with an organized plot to discredit the prophet, as believed by some.All one has to do is get a group of women who agree and have a motive.
Ares Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Ahhh...your comment suggest that you took my comment seriously...(this is the place where I would normally make a take away comment, but due to moderator's warnings to all of us, … I will refrain from doing so…but will point out that your comment in not in keeping with that warning…but maybe that warning only applied to non-believers)The last person banned was a believer who couldn't resist making smart alek comments. Keep it up and the banned group will be more balanced...and Folks, it doesn't matter which side of the Faithful/Critic coin you are on. Don't retaliate to stupidity. Report it and let the mods handle it. This will keep situations from spiraling out of control and making the board an unpleasant place.
Thinking Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Yep, just run down to the corner drug store and get the pill. Oops, about a hundred years too soon.Oops not! The first American book on birth control was published in Dec. 1830 by Robert Dale Owen.
Ares Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Please refrain from sophomoric speculation about the sex lives of dead prophets or the thread will be closed.
katherine the great Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Yep, just run down to the corner drug store and get the pill. Oops, about a hundred years too soon.People have practiced "birth control" in one form or another for thousands of years. (Remember Onan?) Certainly "the pill" is one of the most wonderfully effective in most cases, but it isn't the only thing people have ever used.
kolipoki09 Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 Exactly how many men have been alleged to have been fathered by Joseph Smith? It is not even close to the number children BY fathered. It is odd that there were so many that obviously wanted to be the progeny of the JS or at least their mothers wanted them to be known as children of the prophet. It is also strange that none of their allegations have been based in reality.Didn't Ugo Perego's study have two children believed to have been fathered by Joseph Smith, from which no DNA samples could be gathered? I'm still leaving the door open that he could have fathered others.
ERayR Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 People have practiced "birth control" in one form or another for thousands of years. (Remember Onan?) Certainly "the pill" is one of the most wonderfully effective in most cases, but it isn't the only thing people have ever used.I am well aware of that and I know that abstinence is the only really effective form of birth control. All others have a failure rate.
Anijen Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 (edited) Didn't Ugo Perego's study have two children believed to have been fathered by Joseph Smith, from which no DNA samples could be gathered? I'm still leaving the door open that he could have fathered others.IIRC Ugo Perego's work which is the most extensively done for a genetic connection to Joseph, has yielded no other descendants of Joseph other than that from him and Emma (thus far). He has ruled out many thought to have previously been from Joseph. Here is a wonderful site about DNA and Joseph (it is Ugo's site) Edited July 13, 2011 by Anijen
katherine the great Posted July 13, 2011 Posted July 13, 2011 I am well aware of that and I know that abstinence is the only really effective form of birth control. All others have a failure rate.Yes but they also have a "success" rate (and the pill is highly successful if used properly.)
Recommended Posts