Simon Southerton Latest

[cdowis]

Irrelevant.

 

 

Still waiting for him to give us the DNA characteristic for Lehi, et al.  Lehi was a descendant of the House of Joseph and the DNA of the modern Jews are indeed irrelevant.

 

I asked him that question over five years ago, and I guess he is still working on it. 

Edited June 11, 2014 by cdowis

[why me]

And the acquisition of greater knowledge.

I would also love it if there could be more evidence of the miracles of christ. But alas, we only have the bible. One would think that somewhere there would have been first hand accounts. The church was not exactly successful in Judea. The membership was poor and few. One would think that with the mass of gatherings that jesus drew and his miracles, the church would have been more successful there. My point is simple: the bible also takes much faith since there is absolutely no proof that it is true or what the gospel writers etc claim to be true.

 

Such is faith. Something that simon seems to have forgotten. However, what evidence do we have of the book of mormon? We know that 11 people excluding Joseph Smith had some sort of spiritual experience when they saw the plates and backed it up with a joint testimony and kept that testimony regardless of their standing in the church. Is that evidence?

[cdowis]

I would also love it if there could be more evidence of the miracles of christ. But alas, we only have the bible. One would think that somewhere there would have been first hand accounts. The church was not exactly successful in Judea. The membership was poor and few. One would think that with the mass of gatherings that jesus drew and his miracles, the church would have been more successful there. 

 

As I remember of the history of the Crusaders, they did not discriminate on those whom they murdered and pillaged, Christians as well as unbelievers.

[thesometimesaint]

Still waiting for him to give us the DNA characteristic for Lehi, et al.  Lehi was a descendant of the House of Joseph and the DNA of the modern Jews are indeed irrelevant.

 

I asked him that question over five years ago, and I guess he is still working on it. 

 

Agreed.

[thesometimesaint]

I would also love it if there could be more evidence of the miracles of christ. But alas, we only have the bible. One would think that somewhere there would have been first hand accounts. The church was not exactly successful in Judea. The membership was poor and few. One would think that with the mass of gatherings that jesus drew and his miracles, the church would have been more successful there. My point is simple: the bible also takes much faith since there is absolutely no proof that it is true or what the gospel writers etc claim to be true.

 

Such is faith. Something that simon seems to have forgotten. However, what evidence do we have of the book of mormon? We know that 11 people excluding Joseph Smith had some sort of spiritual experience when they saw the plates and backed it up with a joint testimony and kept that testimony regardless of their standing in the church. Is that evidence?

 

We all see through that glass darkly.

[Robert F. Smith]

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

 

Yes, yes, yes- to all of those who say, what does Lehi`s DNA look like.  Lehi was a descendant of Joseph, not Judah.  Modern Jewish DNA data may not look like a descendant from a different tribe.  .................................................................  So where can we get a sample to say what the DNA that Lehi and his family had?  What about Jaredites and Mulekites?

 

One obtains samples of ancient DNA during archeological excavations. I provide some useful sources in posts 22 & 23, above. 

 

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

 

I will go a step farther.  If you believe in the BOM as a modern expansion of an ancient document, how literal can any DNA evidence be taken.  I like the modern expansion model.  I know others don`t, but it does bring up further issues.

It is irrelevant to the DNA question whether the Book of Mormon was expanded in transmission and translation.  The question is whether ancient Israelite DNA fits any ancient people in the New World.  Or whether a New World people (such as the Olmec) match the DNA of any north Mesopotamian peoples.

[Robert F. Smith]

If the Tower of Babel is a myth what then about Jared. If Solomon's Temple was nothing like described in the Bible (Finkelstein) what then of the temple Nephi and his family built (along with others?)

 

http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/otesources/01-genesis/text/articles-books/seely_babel_wtj.pdf

Whether the "Tower of Babel" story is a myth, Paul Seely's article (which you cite) provides food for thought, since temple towers (ziggurats) were common to Mesopotamia for thousands of years.  That's where the Jaredites came from.

 

What should interest us most is that biblical scholars consider the phrase "Tower of Babel" to be a late glosse, and that it is absent from the Book of Mormon, which is earler than the Bible, and instead refers to the Great Tower.  Thus, that and the “confusion of tongues” episode in both Genesis 11:1-9 and Ether 1:33-37, recall the much earlier Sumerian “Golden Age” passage in which “the whole universe, the people in unison, to Enlil in one tongue (eme-aš-àm) gave praise,” followed shortly by the struggle between Enlil and Enki, lord of Eridu, who “changed the speech in their mouths, put contention into it, into the speech of man that (until then) had been one.” -- S. N. Kramer, Sumerian Mythology, rev. ed. (Harper & Row, 1961/reprint Univ. of Penn. Press, 1972), xiv,107 n. 2; S. N. Kramer, “The ‘Babel of Tongues’: A Sumerian Version,” in W. W. Hallo, ed., Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser, AOS 53 (New Haven, 1968):108-111.

 

As to Israel Finkelstein's  views on the Temple of Solomon, the excavators of Jerusalem doe not share his minimalist opinion.

[Robert F. Smith]

Still waiting for him to give us the DNA characteristic for Lehi, et al.  Lehi was a descendant of the House of Joseph and the DNA of the modern Jews are indeed irrelevant.

 

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

Lehi and his Clan were Israelites, and our primary concern ought to be the DNA test results for ancient Israelites.  As it happens, the DNA of modern Jews and their priests (Levi & Kohen) fits rather well into that ancient Israelite category.

 

Whether we are able to distinguish such ancient Israeltie DNA in skeletal remains from Mesoamerica is the harder question.

[Robert F. Smith]

I would also love it if there could be more evidence of the miracles of christ. But alas, we only have the bible. One would think that somewhere there would have been first hand accounts. The church was not exactly successful in Judea. The membership was poor and few. One would think that with the mass of gatherings that jesus drew and his miracles, the church would have been more successful there. My point is simple: the bible also takes much faith since there is absolutely no proof that it is true or what the gospel writers etc claim to be true.

 

Such is faith. Something that simon seems to have forgotten. However, what evidence do we have of the book of mormon? We know that 11 people excluding Joseph Smith had some sort of spiritual experience when they saw the plates and backed it up with a joint testimony and kept that testimony regardless of their standing in the church. Is that evidence?

To be sure, one cannot prove scientifically that the miracles of the Bible happened.  However, one can in fact verify a multitude of secular events via science in both the Bible and the Book of Mormon.  Such empirical verification of biblical events does not prove the Bible true in a religious sense, but the situation is vastly different for the Book of Mormon.  Since the Book of Mormon came to us by preposterous means, and therefore cannot possibly be true, the objectively true historical & archeological content of the Book of Mormon is convincing evidence for the miracles of that book and of the Restoration.  Indeed, because the Book of Mormon is supported by convincing secular evidence, it also buttresses the claims of the Bible, making its status as a second witness all the more credible.

 

What is the nature of such convincing evidence?  Read John Sorenson's Mormon's Codex, and see.  At the end of the day, the preponderance of evidence provides a convincing case for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.  Bayesian probabllity carries the day.

[Tiki]

Did Adam's & Eve's DNA dissolve into the larger population?

I thought this whole DNA issue was to discredit the LGT Theory which claims Lehi, et al, lived among the Maya or "others" yet tests indicate no "Israelite" DNA has been found in Mesoamerica. Thus the counter claim by the LGT is that Lehi's DNA may have dissolved into and for the greater good of the larger population of "others" as the excuse for Lehi's DNA not being found in Mesoamerica.

But since early church documents published at JosepSmithPapers.org indicate the Hill Cumorah is in New York, which discredits the LGT Theory, then why all the fuss?

[cdowis]

Lehi and his Clan were Israelites, and our primary concern ought to be the DNA test results for ancient Israelites.  As it happens, the DNA of modern Jews and their priests (Levi & Kohen) fits rather well into that ancient Israelite category.

 

Whether we are able to distinguish such ancient Israeltie DNA in skeletal remains from Mesoamerica is the harder question.

 

Can you document tht Lehi was descended from Levi, Kohen, or the ancestors of the modern Jews.

 

You are aware that Lehi left Jerusalem before the Babylonian captivity.  Are you aware how that would affect the modern Jews, as descendants of those who were able to return to Jerusalem?  You are aware that Ephraim and Manassah were the offspring of Joseph and an Egyptian princess.  

 

Tell us the DNA characteristics of Lehi, et al. Give us some supporting evidence for your assertion, please.

Edited June 12, 2014 by cdowis

[Gray]

Still waiting for him to give us the DNA characteristic for Lehi, et al.  Lehi was a descendant of the House of Joseph and the DNA of the modern Jews are indeed irrelevant.

 

I asked him that question over five years ago, and I guess he is still working on it. 

 

I don't think from a genetic standpoint any particular tribe would be genetically different from other Semitic peoples in the region (obviously each individual is unique, but the population markers would be the same across tribes). 

Edited June 12, 2014 by Gray

[cdowis]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and feelings on a matter of scientific investigation and facts.  

 

You might want to share your feelings with Southerton as well.

[Robert F. Smith]

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

I thought this whole DNA issue was to discredit the LGT Theory which claims Lehi, et al, lived among the Maya or "others" yet tests indicate no "Israelite" DNA has been found in Mesoamerica. Thus the counter claim by the LGT is that Lehi's DNA may have dissolved into and for the greater good of the larger population of "others" as the excuse for Lehi's DNA not being found in Mesoamerica.

But since early church documents published at JosepSmithPapers.org indicate the Hill Cumorah is in New York, which discredits the LGT Theory, then why all the fuss?

Hi Tiki,

The negative DNA claims from some sources were originally based on the ridiculous assumption that all Amerinds (native Americans) were descendants of Lehi, so that only a cursory look at the DNA of any native Americans could be used to falsify the Book of Mormon.  The genetic effects of inserting the Lehites into a large gene pool of very different peoples, genetic drift, and the bottleneck effect of severe reduction of the population during the Spanish Conquista (from 12 million to only 1 million), may also have made it very difficult to find Israelite DNA in the modern population.  The answer to that is to examine ancient DNA

 

Scholars tend to read more closely than non-scholars, so scholars had long since (before DNA testing) determined that only Mesoamerica had the advanced civilization and the large populations at the right time periods to accommodate the various Book of Mormon peoples.  Moreover, the time-distance information in the Book of Mormon required that the lands occupied by those peoples could not be much larger than the Holy Land in the Middle East.

 

I know of no early Mormon documents which show that the original Hill Cumorah was in New York State.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't think from a genetic standpoint any particular tribe would be genetically different from other Semitic peoples in the region (obviously each individual is unique, but the population markers would be the same across tribes). 

Correct.  Except for the special markers for priests (kohens) this is generally true.

[Robert F. Smith]

Can you document tht Lehi was descended from Levi, Kohen, or the ancestors of the modern Jews.

 

You are aware that Lehi left Jerusalem before the Babylonian captivity.  Are you aware how that would affect the modern Jews, as descendants of those who were able to return to Jerusalem?  You are aware that Ephraim and Manassah were the offspring of Joseph and an Egyptian princess.  

 

Tell us the DNA characteristics of Lehi, et al. Give us some supporting evidence for your assertion, please.

Ancient Israelites, along with Canaanites in general, Phoenicians, Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites (and probably Midianites) all shared similar DNA and similar physiognomy.  They inhabited the same areas, spoke the same language, and intermarried.  Their DNA likely differed noticeably from Hurrians, Hittites, and Philistines, but perhaps not so noticeably from other Semites -- such as Arabs and Aramaeans.  This is the thrust of the citations I provided in posts 22 & 23.

 

Lehi was a Manassite, not a Levi or Kohen (the priests).  That Joseph begat Manasseh and Ephraim by the daughter of an Egyptian priest a thousand five hundred years before Lehi, means that any DNA effect would be immersed in the larger Israelite gene pool and mostly lost over time.

[ERayR]

Lehi was a Manassite, not a Levi or Kohen (the priests).  That Joseph begat Manasseh and Ephraim by the daughter of an Egyptian priest a thousand five hundred years before Lehi, means that any DNA effect would be immersed in the larger Israelite gene pool and mostly lost over time.

 

Kind of like Lehi's Israelite DNA being immersed in the larger gene gene pool of the indigenous peoples they found and joined with.  Is that kind of how that works?

[Zakuska]

I think people miss the point in these discussions that Jerusalem and Israel lie at the crossroads between east and west and was a major battle ground an many occasions. (babylon, Persia et al.)  So what exactly did 600BC "hebrew" DNA look like anyways?  I mean we have Mongols rulling in Egypt  for how many hundreds of years. It was a melting pot just like the Americas.  All the Ad hoc DNA mixtures from the East could have just as easily taken place thousands of years in the old world.  The problems that I see with Southertons analysis and graphs is it doesn't take these things into consideration.

[Robert F. Smith]

Kind of like Lehi's Israelite DNA being immersed in the larger gene gene pool of the indigenous peoples they found and joined with.  Is that kind of how that works?

It certainly could, which is why I advocate DNA testing of ancient DNA from skeletal remains obtained during controlled archeological excavation.

 

On the other hand, I particularly recommend a look at “Mixed genes: Interactive world map of human genetic history reveals likely genetic impacts of historical events,” ScienceDaily.com, February 13, 2014, online at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140213142305.htm  .  Here is only one of the many provocative conclusions using the so-called "Globetrotter" method of DNA analysis:

 

"Each population has a particular genetic 'palette'," said Daniel Falush of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, co-senior author of the study. "If you were to paint the genomes of people in modern-day Maya, for example, you would use a mixed palette with colours from Spanish-like, West African and Native American DNA. This mix dates back to around 1670AD, consistent with historical accounts describing Spanish and West African people entering the Americas around that time. Though we can't directly sample DNA from the groups that mixed in the past, we can capture much of the DNA of these original groups as persisting, within a mixed palette of modern-day groups."

 

Largely based on the work of the Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, and article by Garrett Hellenthal, George B.J. Busby, Gavin Band, James F. Wilson, Cristian Capelli, Daniel Falush, Simon Myers. "A Genetic Atlas of Human Admixture History," Science, 14 February 2014 DOI: 10.1126/science.1243518.

 

 

[Robert F. Smith]

I think people miss the point in these discussions that Jerusalem and Israel lie at the crossroads between east and west and was a major battle ground an many occasions. (babylon, Persia et al.)  So what exactly did 600BC "hebrew" DNA look like anyways?  I mean we have Mongols rulling in Egypt  for how many hundreds of years. It was a melting pot just like the Americas.  All the Ad hoc DNA mixtures from the East could have just as easily taken place thousands of years in the old world.  The problems that I see with Southertons analysis and graphs is it doesn't take these things into consideration.

I think that you are confusing the Ottoman Turks in Egypt with the Mongols, Zakuska, but your point is still valid.  The way to deal with such genetic input is to examine ancient DNA and to compare it to that of modern DNA -- as geneticist Spencer Wells did in Lebanon, with the result that (despite all the supposed admixture from elsewhere) modern Lebanese have the same DNA as their Phoenician and Canaanite ancestors of thousands of years ago.  That was a surprise for the researchers, although the result for Phoenician/Punic Carthage was no surprise at all:  Only 20 % of modern inhabitants showed any Phoenician DNA.

[cdowis]

Ancient Israelites, along with Canaanites in general, Phoenicians, Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites (and probably Midianites) all shared similar DNA and similar physiognomy.  They inhabited the same areas, spoke the same language, and intermarried.  Their DNA likely differed noticeably from Hurrians, Hittites, and Philistines, but perhaps not so noticeably from other Semites -- such as Arabs and Aramaeans.  This is the thrust of the citations I provided in posts 22 & 23.

 

Lehi was a Manassite, not a Levi or Kohen (the priests).  That Joseph begat Manasseh and Ephraim by the daughter of an Egyptian priest a thousand five hundred years before Lehi, means that any DNA effect would be immersed in the larger Israelite gene pool and mostly lost over time.

 

Yes, I do indeed see your point ==>>  "perhaps", "maybe", "probably", "similar", "in general", "likely", and that telling word "mostly".

 

Did I miss anything?

Edited June 15, 2014 by cdowis

[why me]

The problem with simon and his dna theory is Joseph Smith. If simon is correct, joseph smith needed to be a little crazy. Here we would have a young man secretly writing a book in order to start a religion based on that book. And in his mind, he needed to invent angels with names, a first vision story, find several  dupes to go along with it and never give it up and begin to organize a church. And  within the book itself tell people to pray about it to receive a witness that it is true.

 

What would be the odds of all this being a success? And yet, joseph continued to write the book of mormon with the understanding that all would succeed. And do so in secret, disposing of all the paper that would become drafts and revisions etc without being seen. He was an amazing guy if he did manage to do this if simon's theory is correct.

 

And of course, still continue with the con after facing execution by firing squad etc and tarred and feathered etc. Why bother?

Edited June 15, 2014 by why me

[Zakuska]

I think that you are confusing the Ottoman Turks in Egypt with the Mongols, Zakuska, but your point is still valid. The way to deal with such genetic input is to examine ancient DNA and to compare it to that of modern DNA -- as geneticist Spencer Wells did in Lebanon, with the result that (despite all the supposed admixture from elsewhere) modern Lebanese have the same DNA as their Phoenician and Canaanite ancestors of thousands of years ago. That was a surprise for the researchers, although the result for Phoenician/Punic Carthage was no surprise at all: Only 20 % of modern inhabitants showed any Phoenician DNA.

Carthage seems to have been an ancient equivalent of Newyork or LA. I can see how the back woods DNA home lands would remain pretty clean and unchanged. But these big urban centers really do a lot of melting. Perhaps that fact might play into the Nephite DNA defusion theories? Edited June 15, 2014 by Zakuska

[Robert F. Smith]

Yes, I do indeed see your point ==>>  "perhaps", "maybe", "probably", "similar", "in general", "likely", and that telling word "mostly".

 

Did I miss anything?

Yeh, but getting people to actually read my citations can be like herding cats.  You don't see my point because genetics is highly statistical in nature, and you didn't bother to read my citations.  If you want absolute knowledge, you are in the wrong place, cdowis.

[Robert F. Smith]

Carthage seems to have been an ancient equivalent of Newyork or LA. I can see how the back woods DNA home lands would remain pretty clean and unchanged. But these big urban centers really do a lot of melting. Perhaps that fact might play into the Nephite DNA defusion theories?

In the case of Carthage (in North Africa), of course, the Roman Army came and destroyed the city and its inhabitants and then sowed salt in what remained.  Some of the Punic inhabitants who had fled clearly returned and tried to eke out a living there, along with a large mixture of odd latecomers from other places.  Lebanon on the other hand continued to be the large gene pool of Canaanite-Phoenician patrimony.