New Lds.org Article On Dna And The Book Of Mormon

[maklelan]

Offered without comment:

 

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-and-dna-studies?lang=eng&cid=facebook-shared

[Bob Crockett]

Certainly is a lot there. Rare to see the Church stray off into areas way beyond its expertise, such as population genetics. 

[Freedom]

There was a link for some time to an article by Jeff Lindsay about this same subject. This is part of an ongoing effort to address controversies rather than letting the enemies set the agenda. 

[gtaggart]

I'll comment: The article footnotes to a piece by Matthew Roper in the FARMS Review and to two other journal articles published by the old Maxwell Institute. Apparently, Church authorities think the old MI/FARMS did some good: 

 

2. This article uses the terms Native American and American Indian to refer to all the indigenous peoples of both North and South America. For more on the relationship of DNA studies and the Book of Mormon generally see Ugo A. Perego, “The Book of Mormon and the Origin of Native Americans from a Maternally Inherited DNA Standpoint,” in Robert L. Millet, ed., No Weapon Shall Prosper: New Light on Sensitive Issues (2011), 171–216; Michael F. Whiting, “DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12, no. 1 (2003), 24-35; Daniel C. Peterson, ed., The Book of Mormon and DNA Research (2008).

 

6. John L. Sorenson, “When Lehi’s Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Others There?”Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 1, no. 1 (Fall 1992), 1–34. These arguments were summarized more recently in John L. Sorenson, Mormon’s Codex: An Ancient American Book (2013). Sorenson suggests that indicators in the book’s text makes it “inescapable that there were substantial populations in the ‘promised land’ throughout the period of the Nephite record, and probably in the Jaredite era also” (“When Lehi’s Party Arrived,” 34).

 

9. For a review of statements on this subject, see Matthew Roper, “Nephi’s Neighbors: Book of Mormon Peoples and Pre-Columbian Populations,” FARMS Review 15, no. 2 (2003), 91–128. 

Edited January 31, 2014 by gtaggart

[Buckeye]

I'm admittedly fairly ignorant on the science, but I found the article persuasive for its underlying point - that DNA doesn't prove anything pro or con and likely never will.  I'll be interested to see what Southerton, et al responds with in substance.  I'm sure they will argue that many church leaders, including Joseph, believed and taught that all native americans descended from Lehi's group.  But if that's the best they can do, I'll consider the issue closed. 

[Helen47]

2nd Nephi 1:8-9

[theplains]

Offered without comment:

 

https://www.lds.org/topics/book-of-mormon-and-dna-studies?lang=eng&cid=facebook-shared

 

Interesting article. I suspect if it came out earlier, the LDS Church would not have felt

the need to change the wording in the Introduction page about the Lamanites being

the principal ancestors of the American Indians. Maybe science trumped revelation.

 

Regards,

Jim

[cinepro]

Much as critics and defenders of the Book of Mormon would like to use DNA studies to support their views, the evidence is simply inconclusive. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples.

 

Might not be a good day for Rodney Meldrum...

[Danzo]

2nd Nephi 1:8-9

And?

[Freedom]

2nd Nephi 1:8-9

Yes, no nation became aware of this land until the 1600's or so. But, as the warning states, people came from time to time to molest them and eventually they did loose their inheritance. 

[erdoch]

Glad the Church addressed this! 

 

The article certainly makes a good case for us not necessarily ever being able to tell, based on the current level of DNA evidence, if there was a subset Lehite population in Ancient America. It explicitly argues against using current DNA studies to either disprove or even prove the Book of Mormon. 

 

It may be possible, however, to move toward some more robust suggestive conclusions in the future (NOT near future). I'm talking about the sequencing of the dead here, not the living. While 30,000+ human genomes have been sequenced (http://www.sfgate.com/business/article/30-000-full-human-genomes-have-been-mapped-3558103.php), only a very few extinct human genomes have been sequenced. I'm not sure how many, but seeing February 2010 was the first time an extinct human's genome had been sequenced there can't be many (this was in a study conducted by the University of Copenhagen on a 4000 year old male in Greenland, see http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/02/100210131948.htm and http://sams.scientificamerican.com/article/ancient-human-genome/). Indeed, sequencing dead people presents its own challenges (see http://stanfordcehg.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/we-sequence-dead-people/). Such sequencing may have its rewards in illuminating the history of genetics and human migrations, however. After all it was the recent sequencing of a 24,000 year old Siberian male that revised our understanding of Native American ancestry to include not just Siberian/East Asian descent, but that up to one third of Native American DNA comes from Europe/West Asia. 

 

In other words, the more we sequence dead people from Book of Mormon lands - in the Old World and the New World - the closer we'd get to evaluating Book of Mormon historicity via DNA. Hypothetically, all we'd need to do is sequence the genomes of a significant amount of people in Israel ca. 600 BC and in Book of Mormon lands in Ancient America from before 600 BC to the centuries/millennium after. That way we'd be able to compare genomes for the time period, and not just read today's genomes back into history when there are serious problems doing so. 

 

I'm sure we're decades away from this being possible - and we probably need more developed technology for sequencing dead people - as well as more sequencing of dead people, period. I'm not sure how long it takes to do such sequencing but I imagine it takes a while...

 

If anybody here is more familiar with this subject - sequencing dead people and whether researchers are looking at this potentially bearing more fruit in learning about human migrations than sequencing living people - I'd be interested in your thoughts. 

[canard78]

It's great, but almost surreal, to be able to read things like this on LDS.org:

 

...the migrations mentioned in the Book of Mormon did not occur because the majority of DNA identified to date in modern native peoples most closely resembles that of eastern Asian populations... the majority of Native Americans carry largely Asian DNA... a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska. These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians.

 

It means that if I want to discuss the topic with other church members I can start the conversation based on an official source - not by reference what they would consider unreliable websites.

[aznative]

Since the science of DNA is so inconclusive regarding this subject, the church needs to henceforth cease and desist any and all work in relation to posthumous ordinances and reject any and all genealogical work in which DNA was used to correlate genealogical records. 

Likewise the leadership should cease to be moral cowards and denounce all state sanctioned executions since the science of DNA is ultimately unreliable.

[ALarson]

Simon Southerton's response so far:

 

"A few responses on the essay:

 

LDS Newsroom
The conclusions of genetics, like those of any science, are tentative, and much work remains to be done to fully understand the origins of the native populations of the Americas.

SGS
The DNA science is not tentative or inconclusive. It is consistent with scientific conclusions about Native American origins from numerous other scientific disciplines. 


LDS Newsroom
Scientists theorize that in an era that predated Book of Mormon accounts, a relatively small group of people migrated from northeast Asia to the Americas by way of a land bridge that connected Siberia to Alaska. These people, scientists say, spread rapidly to fill North and South America and were likely the primary ancestors of modern American Indians.

SGS
The truth is that Native Americans have occupied the New World for at least 13,000 years. This is an indisputable fact that the LDS Newsroom overlooks. They widely colonised North and South America for TEN THOUSAND years before Lehi allegedly arrived. For over a century mainstream archaeologists, geneticists and anthropologists studying Native Americans have believed there ancestors migrated from Asia across dry land (Beringia) exposed during the last ice age. The DNA evidence suggests a slightly earlier arrival date of about 16,000 years ago. It hasn’t changed things much.


LDS Newsroom
The Book of Mormon itself, however, does not claim that the peoples it describes were either the predominant or the exclusive inhabitants of the lands they occupied. In fact, cultural and demographic clues in its text hint at the presence of other groups. 

SGS
The claim of the first sentence is demonstrably false.
2 Nephi 1:8-9 "And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance. Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever."
We are not told what the cultural and demographic clues are. But we are meant to accept the “clues” and overlook the scripture above. 

LDS Newsroom
At the April 1929 general conference, President Anthony W. Ivins of the First Presidency cautioned: “We must be careful in the conclusions that we reach. The Book of Mormon … does not tell us that there was no one here before them [the peoples it describes]. It does not tell us that people did not come after.”

SGS
I find it hard to pay attention to the words of a member of the First Presidency from 85 years ago because the words of many, more recent, prophets are RINGING IN MY EARS. 

LDS Newsroom
At the present time, scientific consensus holds that the vast majority of Native Americans belong to sub-branches of the Y-chromosome haplogroups C and Q and the mitochondrial DNA haplogroups A, B, C, D, and X, all of which are predominantly East Asian. But the picture is not entirely clear. Continuing studies provide new insights, and some challenge previous conclusions. For example, a 2013 study states that as much as one-third of Native American DNA originated anciently in Europe or West Asia and was likely introduced into the gene pool before the earliest migration to the Americas. This study paints a more complex picture than is suggested by the prevailing opinion that all Native American DNA is essentially East Asian.

SGS
The 2013 study in question was on nuclear DNA (not mitochondrial or Y-chromosome) isolated from 24,000-year-old remains recovered in Siberia. It was observed that about one-third of the individuals DNA originated in Europe or West Asia. That is not very surprising for someone living 24,000 years ago in Siberia and it certainly does not challenge any of the conclusions derived from mitochondrial or Y-chromosome DNA. 

I hate to be picky but Native American DNA is essentially Siberian, not East Asian. 

LDS Newsroom
While Near Eastern DNA markers do exist in the DNA of modern native populations, it is difficult to determine whether they are the result of migrations that predated Columbus, such as those described in the Book of Mormon, or whether they stem from genetic mixing that occurred after the European conquest. This is due in part to the fact that the “molecular clock” used by scientists to date the appearance of genetic markers is not always accurate enough to pinpoint the timing of migrations that occurred as recently as a few hundred or even a few thousand years ago.

SGS
Clearly, this section of the essay was written (or at least approved) by Rodney Meldrum, who is making a small fortune on the back of misleading molecular clock claims. In the early years of dating using DNA there was considerable debate about which method was the most accurate. The debate has been resolved for 15 years but Rodney Meldrum insists on dragging out a paper from 1998, the peak of the debate, and using it as evidence that dating is unreliable. Meldrum doesn’t understand the science he writes about. He is a snake-oil salesman exploiting elderly Mormons.

The “Near Eastern DNA” being referred to here is the Native American mitochondrial X lineage. LDS scientist Ugo Perego, who has undoubtedly helped in the writing of the essay, has dated Native American X lineages using very robust modern methods, and it arrived in the New World about 15,000 years ago. I wonder how Perego felt about the essay undermining his own research? 

LDS Newsroom
Scientists do not rule out the possibility of additional, small-scale migrations to the Americas. For example, a 2010 genetic analysis of a well-preserved 4,000-year-old Paleo-Eskimo in Greenland led scientists to hypothesize that a group of people besides those from East Asia had migrated to the Americas. Commenting on this study, population geneticist Marcus Feldman of Stanford University said: “Models that suggest a single one-time migration are generally regarded as idealized systems. … There may have been small amounts of migrations going on for millennia.”

SGS
Scientists are well aware that many small-scale migrations have occurred and may even still occur in sub-Arctic populations. The Bering Strait is not a complete barrier to migration (if you have a kayak or two) and Eskimo/Inuit groups have crossed in both directions over recent millenia. This is what the 2010 Paleo-Eskimo paper was about and that is the context of Marcus Feldman’s comments. He wasn’t talking about Amerindian migrations down south.

LDS Newsroom
One reason it is difficult to use DNA evidence to draw definite conclusions about Book of Mormon peoples is that nothing is known about the DNA that Lehi, Sariah, Ishmael, and others brought to the Americas.

SGS
No. The problem is all that Asian DNA (99.5%) which arrived in the Americas in excess of 15,000 years ago. The only non-Asian DNA (0.5%) is either European or African and derived from post Columbus admixture. We don’t see any orphan DNA lineages which may have come from somewhere else. It is also ridiculous to claim that we know nothing about the likely DNA lineages of the Book of Mormon founders. They came from the Middle East so they would have carried Middle Eastern DNA lineages, which are well characterised.

LDS Newsroom
In addition to the catastrophic war at the end of the Book of Mormon, the European conquest of the Americas in the 15th and 16th centuries touched off just such a cataclysmic chain of events. As a result of war and the spread of disease, many Native American groups experienced devastating population losses. One molecular anthropologist observed that the conquest “squeezed the entire Amerindian population through a genetic bottleneck.” He concluded, “This population reduction has forever altered the genetics of the surviving groups, thus complicating any attempts at reconstructing the pre-Columbian genetic structure of most New World groups.”

SGS
Yes, the genetic landscape was changed but are we to believe that Lamanites died out at a much higher rate than other Native Americans? Over a thousand DNA lineages have been determined from pre-Columbian ancient remains. All the lineages to date come from Asia. 

LDS Newsroom
Moreover, the shuffling and recombination of autosomal DNA from generation to generation produces new combinations of markers in which the predominant genetic signal comes from the larger original population. This can make the combinations of markers characteristic of the smaller group so diluted that they cannot be reliably identified.

SGS
Twice in the last 3 years scientists have discovered hidden ancestors in our autosomal DNA. They discovered that people in non-African populations have a small percentage (1-4%) of Neanderthal DNA in their genome. Then more recently it was discovered that Melanesians and Australian Aboriginals carry a small proportion of DNA from Denisovans, a related hominid species that lived in Asia. These small proportions of “foreign” DNA entered our lineage 30-40 thousand years ago. If Middle Eastern DNA entered Native American populations in the last 3 thousand years there is no reason to believe that Middle Eastern markers would disappear completely. 

LDS Newsroom
Genetic profiles may be entirely lost, and combinations that once existed may become so diluted that they are difficult to detect. Thus, portions of a population may in fact be related genealogically to an individual or group but not have DNA that can be identified as belonging to those ancestors. In other words, Native Americans whose ancestors include Book of Mormon peoples may not be able to confirm that relationship using their DNA.

SGS
This is complete nonsense. If people are genealogically related they MUST share genetic material, especially autosomal DNA. 

LDS Newsroom
As Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles observed, “It is our position that secular evidence can neither prove nor disprove the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.”

SGS
Then why the essay? 

The Book of Mormon makes scientifically testable claims that science has continuously shown to have no basis in fact. The DNA evidence has exposed the true ancestry of Native Americans with amazing clarity and also, unfortunately for the LDS Church, the dubious history of the Book of Mormon."

[Stone holm]

Very dangerous for the Church to get involved in discussing science like this, science by its very nature is constantly testing and discarding theories. Any of the theories analyzed as supporting the B of M today, may get thoroughly refuted tomorrow.

[Okrahomer]

Very dangerous for the Church to get involved in discussing science like this, science by its very nature is constantly testing and discarding theories. Any of the theories analyzed as supporting the B of M today, may get thoroughly refuted tomorrow.

 

From the article:

 

"Basic principles of population genetics suggest the need for a more careful approach to the data. The conclusions of genetics, like those of any science, are tentative, and much work remains to be done to fully understand the origins of the native populations of the Americas. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples, and even if their genetic profile were known, there are sound scientific reasons that it might remain undetected. For these same reasons, arguments that some defenders of the Book of Mormon make based on DNA studies are also speculative. In short, DNA studies cannot be used decisively to either affirm or reject the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon."

[Tacenda]

Very dangerous for the Church to get involved in discussing science like this, science by its very nature is constantly testing and discarding theories. Any of the theories analyzed as supporting the B of M today, may get thoroughly refuted tomorrow.

Definitely a rabbit hole, that lead many to becoming agnostic or atheist. We just need to understand that all scriptures in general are manmade and can come from inspiration.  And they aren't reliable all the time.  Geez, Joseph Smith translated the whole of the BoM and BoA from inspiration mostly, without using the plates/papyri.  And that inspiration can have many conduits.  Science can put it all in perspective, which forces one to have faith, and that is probably what the whole deal is, the Lord needs that from us.  I don't believe anyone has seen His face, explicitly for this purpose.            

[mormonnewb]

I wonder if the church really thinks that further developments in DNA methodologies will work in favor of the BOM or are we just stalling for time.

Over the last 50 years, the advances in technology have only bolstered the claims that the earth is more than 6 (or 7) thousand years old. In fact, the earth seems to be getting older by the day (you know what I mean!).

In fact, didn't the Catholic Church try the same thing at one point in the heliocentric controversy? ("Astronomy hasn't developed fully enough to confirm or deny that the earth revolves around the sun."). In hindsight, it might have been better to give in to science sooner rather than later.

[Stone holm]

I wonder if the church really thinks that further developments in DNA methodologies will work in favor of the BOM or are we just stalling for time.

Over the last 50 years, the advances in technology have only bolstered the claims that the earth is more than 6 (or 7) thousand years old. In fact, the earth seems to be getting older by the day (you know what I mean!).

In fact, didn't the Catholic Church try the same thing at one point in the heliocentric controversy? ("Astronomy hasn't developed fully enough to confirm or deny that the earth revolves around the sun."). In hindsight, it might have been better to give in to science sooner rather than later.

I am more concerned that we will be seen to back some currently acceptable scientific postulate that later gets totally blown away. Right now there is considerable debate going on as to when and from where America was settled. The still predominant theory is the bridge across the Bering straights, but the idea that was the sole passageway is under attack from a variety of sources. In addition understanding the human genome is in its infancy, and we have a lot of blank holes in our Biblical history as well such as where the wise men came from. We have to tread very carefully here.

[TrespassersW]

 

Simon Southerton's response so far:

 

The claim of the first sentence is demonstrably false.

2 Nephi 1:8-9 "And behold, it is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations; for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance. Wherefore, I, Lehi, have obtained a promise, that inasmuch as those whom the Lord God shall bring out of the land of Jerusalem shall keep his commandments, they shall prosper upon the face of this land; and they shall be kept from all other nations, that they may possess this land unto themselves. And if it so be that they shall keep his commandments they shall be blessed upon the face of this land, and there shall be none to molest them, nor to take away the land of their inheritance; and they shall dwell safely forever."

We are not told what the cultural and demographic clues are. But we are meant to accept the “clues” and overlook the scripture above. 

But that isn't all Lehi had to say about it. We shouldn't omit verse 5 (emphasis mine):

 

But, said he, notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is  choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord.

 

First of all, I'm not at all convinced that Lehi is necessarily talking about the entire continent.  Second, Lehi explicitly allows for the presence of others who were brought from other countries, so long as they were brought by the hand of the Lord. Yes, he focuses on his seed, as that is the group he cares about, but I don't see how one could possibly interpret these verses as some sort of absolute exclusion of any other migrations. Lehi himself explicitly says they are not.

[thesometimesaint]

It's a problem for both SGS and some Saints. Primarily both sides that maintain that all Amerids were Jews.

[omni]

But that isn't all Lehi had to say about it. We shouldn't omit verse 5 (emphasis mine):

But, said he, notwithstanding our afflictions, we have obtained a land of promise, a land which is choice above all other lands; a land which the Lord God hath covenanted with me should be a land for the inheritance of my seed. Yea, the Lord hath covenanted this land unto me, and to my children forever, and also all those who should be led out of other countries by the hand of the Lord.

First of all, I'm not at all convinced that Lehi is necessarily talking about the entire continent. Second, Lehi explicitly allows for the presence of others who were brought from other countries, so long as they were brought by the hand of the Lord. Yes, he focuses on his seed, as that is the group he cares about, but I don't see how one could possibly interpret these verses as some sort of absolute exclusion of any other migrations. Lehi himself explicitly says they are not.

Growing up when one could be looked upon with suspicion for stating they believed Asians crossed the land bridge into the Americas, I was always taught this scripture referred to immigrants post 1492.

[Freedom]

Southerton is an idiot. He is creating a strawman argument. Claiming the correct argument that DNA cannot be used to establish the genetic make up of an ancient people is not the same as claiming that DNA cannot be used to prove your parenthood. No geneticist would claim that you could drop 30 people into a population of 1 million and be certain to find their DNA 3,000 years later. 

[Danzo]

Growing up when one could be looked upon with suspicion for stating they believed Asians crossed the land bridge into the Americas, I was always taught this scripture referred to immigrants post 1492.

 

Did they explain why it would refer to post 1492?

[Danzo]

Since the science of DNA is so inconclusive regarding this subject, the church needs to henceforth cease and desist any and all work in relation to posthumous ordinances and reject any and all genealogical work in which DNA was used to correlate genealogical records. 

Likewise the leadership should cease to be moral cowards and denounce all state sanctioned executions since the science of DNA is ultimately unreliable.

?