Blacks And The Priesthood, Bom Archaeology, And Dna

[Anakin7]

Today I went out with our local Zone leaders to a nearby college [Which is next door to another local college] as per there request to assist them in talking with students and others on campus. One man walking by there remembered me from 10 years ago in which we conversed at that time about LDS Church topics which he remembered as a friendly conversation.

Another man came by in which the Elders and he have had conversations before there on campus. After the introduction between he and I he stated that he had questions that he asked last week of which an Elder became upset and mad and asked him to leave [One of the Elders there stated that did in fact happen]. I asked him what were the questions ?- #1 Blacks from the beginning of the LDS Church would not allow any Blacks to hold the Priesthood ant there curse was a black skin, #2 Book Of Mormon Archaeology, #3 Book Of Mormon DNA [ I did find it strange an Elder would become upset over these questions but it is what it is ].

#1 Part of the explanation to him I gave was the restriction of Priesthood in the O.T to the Tribe of Levi [ Of which he stated there is a difference between a "Tribe" and a "Race of people"]

#2 Book of Mormon Archaeology and Bible Archaeology methodology are different and we have not surveyed much of Pre/mid classic period mesoamerica sites [ He stated that much archaeology has been done and --- NOTHING.

#3 DNA science now shows that Jews can trace there DNA back more that 3-4 generations with markers and can link to O. T times.

I had to leave to pick upy wife but he stated that he would bring me material on the DNA. I did mention to him of the work of LDS Genetics of which he repried that they were Mormon and that no DNA geneticist or Archaeologist outside the LDS church acknowledges LDS claims. We are meeting again next week if I do not need to work that day. Any references to material I can give him ? [ he is going to give me a gift of his polemics next week ] thanks in advance.

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin 7 LDS JEDI KNIGHT

[Kevin Christensen]

Some suggested material:

For cultural perspective on the ban:

https://byustudies.byu.edu/showtitle.aspx?title=7674

And of course, FAIR has important information. Elijah Abel is important, as are the cultural backgrounds of everyone and everything.

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_racial_issues/Blacks_and_the_priesthood

For Book of Mormon archeology:

Hamblin on basic problems:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=2&num=1&id=25

Clark on trends:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=14&num=2&id=376

And Sorenson for the latest:

http://www.fairlds.org/fair-conferences/2012-fair-conference/2012-reading-mormons-codex

And Gardner and Poulson, and many others.

On DNA:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/display/topical.php?cat_id=488

Particularly this:

An interesting study reported in the June 2003 issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics leads me to believe that it is possible for Book of Mormon peoples to be ancestors of modern Native Americans and yet not be easily detected using traditional Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA tests. This study, conducted by a group of scientists from a company called deCODE Genetics, used the extensive genealogies of people from Iceland combined with probably the most massive population study ever performed. They traced the matrilineal and patrilineal ancestry of all 131,060 Icelanders born after 1972 back to two cohorts of ancestors, one born between 1848 and 1892 and the other between 1742 and 1798.⁶

Examining the same Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA markers used in other genetic studies, these 131,060 Icelanders "revealed highly positively skewed distributions of descendants to ancestors, with the vast majority of potential ancestors contributing one or no descendants and a minority of ancestors contributing large numbers of descendants."⁷In other words, the majority of people living today in Iceland had ancestors living only 150 years ago that could not be detected based on the Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA tests being performed and yet the genealogical records exist showing that these people lived and were real ancestors. To the point at hand, if many documented ancestors of 150 years ago cannot be linked to their descendants through Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA tests from modern Iceland, then it certainly seems possible that the people who are reported in the Book of Mormon to have migrated to the Americas over 2,600 years ago might not have left genetic signatures that are detectable today.

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=18&num=1&id=601

And Roper here:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=2&id=505&cat_id=488

Tvedtnes on the racism charge, regarding the Book of Mormon, for starters. (Also see Gardner and Nibley, among others. FAIR etc.)

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=2&id=508

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[Freedom]

People far more qualified than me will respond so I will only make a few comments.

#1 Part of the explanation to him I gave was the restriction of Priesthood in the O.T to the Tribe of Levi [ Of which he stated there is a difference between a "Tribe" and a "Race of people"]

#2 Book of Mormon Archaeology and Bible Archaeology methodology are different and we have not surveyed much of Pre/mid classic period mesoamerica sites [ He stated that much archaeology has been done and --- NOTHING.

#3 DNA science now shows that Jews can trace there DNA back more that 3-4 generations with markers and can link to O. T times.

When people say nothing has been found, what they are saying is that no old world or contemporary christian artifacts have been found. This is of course a flawed criticism. The question to respond with is, according to your sources, what has been found? They might respond by saying that there is evidence of human sacrifices. The response to this is how many? Where? When? Of course, the amateur expert has no idea and they are stumped right away, proving that they got their info from an anti-mormon website and not from an actual archaeology journal. Another question is: what are the main limitations to carrying out archaeology research in southern mexico? Again, if they cannot answer, then they can be advised that perhaps they are not as well informed as they thought and that their sources are not being entirely truthful.

Can Jewish DNA be traced back thousands of years? Apparently, but only 2-3% of the Jewish population can say this. Why? Because they married within their own culture. As soon as they start to marry outside their genetic group, their dna fades away. The research tends to focus on jewish groups that are easy to identify, those who remain genetically secluded from the rest of society. They do this to ensure that something can be found, to reduce contamination. Candidates that do not have pure lines are excluded from the study. My common response is, however, if we can trace back their DNA so far, and if DNA is so conclusive, why haven't we found all the lost tribes of Israel? If we can track them back to the great scattering, we should be finding descendants of Dan and Naphtali all over the place. The reality is, they have disappeared.

If a russian family of 15 people with unique dna moved to New York, for how many generations would their dna be discernible? It is profoundly ridiculous to suggest that all dna of every ancestor should be found all the time. Just imagine what we would look like if we had our mothers, fathers, grandfathers, grandmothers, great grand fathers ect ect ect eyes. I have a daughter that has my mothers lips, my fathers forehead, my mother-in-laws cheeks and my father-in-laws chin and eyebrows. In one generation, half of my dna has been lost. I recognize that this is an over simplification of genetics, but hopefully you get the idea.

[rpn]

My response on the first issue is that there is a human desire to always have an answer. And for years church leaders and members proposed reasons for the ban. But to this day we do not know why. What we do know is that (1) priesthood has been given by God to specific groups of people anciently (Tribe of Levi), without explanation of why (so the modern ban could be more of the same, but that is pure speculation: we don't know why). (2) Joseph Smith approved ordination of Elijah Able, and Walker Lewis (prominent family in Massachusetts), and several other men of color. (3) JS asked Jane Manning James to be sealed to him and Emma (which she was considering at the time of his martyrdom) --- in exactly what relationship, we do not know --- but at least a clear acknowledgement of equal rights to temple blessings. (4) In the 1880's Elijah Able's son was ordained to the priesthood, after the church verified Bro. Able's ordination and sent him on another mission to Ohio. (5) Brigham Young heard of the marriage of Walker Lewis' son to a white woman after that became legal in his state, AND an apostate member of color (McCrary)'s new church at Winter Quarters where admission required white women sleeping with him in daylight at about the same period of time, and not long before the first statements about blacks that we now find objectionable (which could suggest BY thought the church couldn't deal with polygamy and interracial marriage at the same time). (6) Brigham Young refused to produce a slave for his owner's widow when she wanted to sell him, saying in a letter that still exists, that he didn't know where to find Green Flake, who had been serving as BY's driver since 1847. (Like he couldn't have found him if he wanted to.) Lastly we have Elder McKonkie saying to ignore everything that was said before the revelation because it was wrong. Which has in more recent years resulted in our leaders saying more often, that we just don't know why on lots of Heavenly Father's commandments.

[Lamanite]

Being forthright and completely honest is the best approach in my opinion. Here's how I would have handles the questions.

#1 We have no idea why that policy was instituted.

#2 There is no archaeological proof for the BoM.

#3 DNA science is inconclusive and cannot be used to prove or disprove the Book of Mormon.

I then would have followed up with something like this. "Aside from those very interesting issues, I would like to tell you that the gospel brings me and my family immeasurable joy. I would love for you to come and see if the gospel might bring you the same type of happiness that it has brought me...."

Then proceed according to their response and as the Spirit directs.

Big UP!

Lamanite

[TAO]

Well first off, I'd point out that it's inappropriate of him to dismiss LDS geneticists just because they are LDS. That doesn't dismiss their genetic work anymore than any other group. Interpretations, possibly, but interpretations have always been something that is based on small assumptions, not fact.

Then do some of the things Canadian said, more or less (although don't be harsh about it). You have to get him to realize that using anti-info just doesn't work.

I'd also tell him that we have only discovered about 2% of the urban area the Mayas inhabited (they were very population dense). While we know a lot about them, we really don't know THAT much about them. Especially about their lower classes. Or so I've heard (will someone verify?).

[williamsmith]

#1 Part of the explanation to him I gave was the restriction of Priesthood in the O.T to the Tribe of Levi [ Of which he stated there is a difference between a "Tribe" and a "Race of people"

I would say no there isn't. A "race" is a specific Genetic Lineage. Race is not skin color. Thus, the Tribes of Levi were in fact races, because they were specific and individual lineages entirely separate from each other. Indonesians and Filipino's look basically the same, yet they are different races. Irish and Germans look basically the same, but they are different races. There is no "white race" and "black race".

The Priesthood ban had nothing to do with skin color, save only as a "sign" of the curse. There ban was based entirely on those of the "African" lineage, black or white or otherwise. There were plenty of blacks who were in fact given the Priesthood who were not of the banned lineage, who were of different cultures and races but just as black and everything otherwise. And likewise, there were a few whites and otherwise who were not given the Priesthood because of their African Lineage. Thus, the Tribe of Levi example is a perfect example of the issue.

Even more, ask this man if Christ himself was a racist when he banned the Gospel to be preached to the Gentile, to be only given to the Jew while he was alive, save a couple of exceptions? Joseph Smith and a couple of other leaders also had a couple of exceptions to the rule.

I would further ask what changed around the same time the priesthood ban ended? People got rid of their racism. Thus, isn't it possible that the ban existed because of man's sin, and not a sin by the Church itself?

#2 Book of Mormon Archaeology and Bible Archaeology methodology are different and we have not surveyed much of Pre/mid classic period mesoamerica sites [ He stated that much archaeology has been done and --- NOTHING.

Mesoamerican archaeology is only in it's infancy, and it doesn't have history and continuous ties behind it like Arabia, it doesn't have the dryness, and more. Mesoameria is being discovered from scratch, not at all having the long history behind it. Entire civilizations were lost and disappeared. Anyone who tries to compare the two is incredibly ignorant. Even more, they are ignorant of what has been found and known that relates to Mormonism. They are also ignorant of the years of Biblical scholarship which was mostly only done by Christians and Jews, as well the years and years most Christians and Jews had to believe on the Bible scriptures by faith, and not by "archaeology". The non-religious didn't take the Bible seriously for a very long time. Why does he expect the BOM to all of a sudden while so young to be so popular among the secular scholars?

#3 DNA science now shows that Jews can trace there DNA back more that 3-4 generations with markers and can link to O. T times.

I had to leave to pick upy wife but he stated that he would bring me material on the DNA. I did mention to him of the work of LDS Genetics of which he repried that they were Mormon and that no DNA geneticist or Archaeologist outside the LDS church acknowledges LDS claims. We are meeting again next week if I do not need to work that day. Any references to material I can give him ? [ he is going to give me a gift of his polemics next week ] thanks in advance.

Well yes. That's because we are still so small that we are the only ones interested in seeking out the facts related to our belief system. Ask him to name a single scholar that is not Mormon that studies Mormonism and seeks for the evidences? (and make sure he knows that polemics and anti-mormon bigotry is not professional scholarship by respected scholars, of any field) So of course non-Mormon scholars are going to discount us, they know nothing about us. Also ask him why he is so willing to discount Mormon scholars? After all, they are some of the most respected and professional in their fields. And they bring that professionalism to their study of Mormonism, no matter the field of study, Linguistics, culture, archeology, etc. Mormons are not known as "quacks" in their professional lives.... Only anti-mormon bigotry considers mormon scholars quacks.

Bottom line is that most non-LDS scholars don't acknowledge LDS claims because they first know nothing of LDS scholarship, and they know nothing of Mormonism. They haven't studied how the BOA materials relate to Egyptology for example. They've only studied what the common Egyptian theory's are. What single non-LDS Egyptian scholar has studied Mormonism to look for evidences of it's claims from Egyptian history and evidences? ZERO!!! How can you judge a thing you haven't even studied? You can't. You are judging in ignorance. Anti-mormon videos on this subject create a stawman that they then tear down.

Ask him how much LDS scholarship, that being actual professional publications and books on Mormonism and the sciences that he has actually studied? It's likely ZERO!!! Thus, how can he judge something he knows nothing about? He's told by others how to think, rather than seek out the facts for himself. Take his "DNA articles" he's bringing you. It's just anti-mormon bigotry disguised as science. See, he won't even read LDS scholarship on the same subject, because after all, it's by Mormons. Yet, to him, anti-mormon publications are okay to believe and study. Tell him he's already unrighteously pre-judged the Church without objectively finding out the truth for himself. He's already in his box. And frankly, your discussing with him would be just a waste of time because it will go know where. He has his views already. He isn't actually interested in the truth.

Tell him if he want's the truth, then put away his judgments, and step into an LDS bookstore and start studying and comparing for himself.

[Anakin7]

I just wanted to thank my LDS JEDI KNIGHT Masters so far for your Thoughts and Statements.

In His Eternal Debt/Grace

Anakin7

LDS JEDI KNIGHT