canard78 Posted July 24, 2015 Author Posted July 24, 2015 The biggest problem I have with DNA studies of ancient people of the Americas, is that mortals and modern science have no idea of the extent or specifics of the genetic change placed upon the Lamanites by the Lord. Unless a comparison sample is made using Nephite bones, the hole that remains in the science is big enough to hide a Curelom in.Doesn't it somewhere say that God follows the laws of science? Perhaps it's possible to change an entire group's genetic makeup... but you've made my mind boggle at the thought.
thesometimesaint Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 The biggest problem I have with DNA studies of ancient people of the Americas, is that mortals and modern science have no idea of the extent or specifics of the genetic change placed upon the Lamanites by the Lord. Unless a comparison sample is made using Nephite bones, the hole that remains in the science is big enough to hide a Curelom in. Appeals to the supernatural don't help. IE; Why have Nephi build a ship at all? God could easily have just teleported Lehi and his family to the New World.
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Doesn't it somewhere say that God follows the laws of science? Perhaps it's possible to change an entire group's genetic makeup... but you've made my mind boggle at the thought.No, God doesn't follow the laws of science he follows natural laws. Science does it's best to interpret natural laws and to understand them but mankind is not God, and no matter how hard we try his ways are not our ways. Even the DNA science can't agree, look at that this OP, it's conflicting. The scriptural text tells us that Laman and his party had a change which affected them and also all subsequent generations, that is a genetic change, period. we don't know the extent of the genetic change or how it would affect's modern interpretations in science. I am very cautious about embracing the understandings of man as truth above God I think it's a trap we sometimes fall into. Boggles the mind, indeed. Edited July 24, 2015 by Sevenbak 1
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Appeals to the supernatural don't help. IE; Why have Nephi build a ship at all? God could easily have just teleported Lehi and his family to the New World.Supernatural is a silly word, we believe that God is a God of miracles. What God did to Laman and Lemuel in the eyes of man shouldn't be any different than the parting of the Red Sea or water into wine or a Liahona on the ground or any number of things we can't explain. And yet the eyes of man mortal eyes can't comprehend it and so we try to justify it. Be careful we don't fulfill Mormon's prophecy about us Gentiles in the last days about miracles being done away. Edited July 24, 2015 by Sevenbak 1
readstoomuch Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 I think there were far more groups of explorers, immigrants and trading between the Americas and Asia than we are taught or has been acknowledged by authorities. John Sorenson called those "diffusionist theories," which he was of that school. In other words there were mass migrations across the Bering Straight and a number of other groups coming by sea. I think this is being better described each year. The evidence of doesn`t always have timeframes or areas that fit with how we have interpreted in the Book of Mormon. The general pattern of the Lehites is starting to sound familiar and viable. If for no other reason than the fact that the Book of Mormon symbolically tells the story of this continent. I find the pattern and new information insightful and maybe faith-promoting. At least to me. 1
CA Steve Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 No, God doesn't follow the laws of science he follows natural laws. Science does it's best to interpret natural laws and to understand them but mankind is not God, and no matter how hard we try his ways are not our ways. Even the DNA science can't agree, look at that this OP, it's conflicting. The scriptural text tells us that Laman and his party had a change which affected them and also all subsequent generations, that is a genetic change, period. we don't know the extent of the genetic change or how it would affect's modern interpretations in science. I am very cautious about embracing the understandings of man as truth above God I think it's a trap we sometimes fall into. Boggles the mind, indeed.The problem is that a deus ex machina device can be used justify any personal belief. For example I can claim that the lost ten tribe actually do live inside the hallowed out earth or on the moon and dismiss any evidence against that claims by saying God can do what ever he wants. It is much more likely that it is my understanding of what is going on that is flawed.
thesometimesaint Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Supernatural is a silly word, we believe that God is a God of miracles. What God did to Laman and Lemuel in the eyes of man shouldn't be any different than the parting of the Red Sea or water into wine or a Liahona on the ground or any number of things we can't explain. And yet the eyes of man mortal eyes can't comprehend it and so we try to justify it. Be careful we don't fulfill Mormon's prophecy about us Gentiles in the last days about miracles being done away. Supernatural just means pertaining to God. Science is just the best explanation of a natural event in our world/universe we have so far. So if you want to believe Vishnu, Jesus, Thetan's, or whatever God you want controls this physical universe you are free to believe it, Just call it what it is, a belief in the supernatural. Edited July 24, 2015 by thesometimesaint
Robert F. Smith Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) You are both wrong:(1) If the skeletal remains of Lehi & Nephi (or any of their immediate descendants) were found, and DNA could be extracted, they would be readily identifiable as Israelite/Canaanite. Finding such ancient DNA (aDNA) is quite difficult, and one must look in sites most likely to have been occupied by Nephites & Lamanites. The genetic bottleneck, genetic drift, etc., over time, would make detection in modern populations very difficult. The same applies to a north Mesopotamian group, such as the Jaredites, arriving even earlier. As Simon Southerton correctly observed: “In 600 BC there were probably several million American Indians living in the Americas. If a small group of Israelites entered such a massive native population it would be very, very hard to detect their genes 200, 2,000, or even 20,000 years later.” http://mormanity.blo...l-mystery-.html , and a link the MDDB administrator does not allow. (2) It is no support for the Book of Mormon to insist that nothing can be known, or that nothing will be found. Burying one's head in the sand is as dangerous for the anti-Mormons as it is for the Mormons.Sure just find the identified Lehi's bones, and all the problems disappear. i eagerly await you doing it.My reply did not predict that they would be found, and merely addressed the false notion that we would not know Israelite DNA if we found it. I always recommend that we allow archeology to be what it really is, and not more nor less. I am interested in even-handed evaluations. Others may be primarily interested in polemics. Edited July 24, 2015 by Robert F. Smith
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) The problem is that a deus ex machina device can be used justify any personal belief. For example I can claim that the lost ten tribe actually do live inside the hallowed out earth or on the moon and dismiss any evidence against that claims by saying God can do what ever he wants. It is much more likely that it is my understanding of what is going on that is flawed.Yep. In other words, natural laws, we don't always understand... but that doesn't mean we get to redefine them as man understands them. The point here, again, is the Lord's curse was genetic in nature, and we don't know the specifics of that change. Edited July 24, 2015 by Sevenbak 1
Robert F. Smith Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) ............................................................................................ mortals and modern science have no idea of the extent or specifics of the genetic change placed upon the Lamanites by the Lord. ............................................................................ .......................................the Lord's curse was genetic in nature...................................................The Lord changed the DNA of the Lamanites? Wow !! Edited July 24, 2015 by Robert F. Smith
thesometimesaint Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 My reply did not predict that they would be found, and merely addressed the false notion that we would not know Israelite DNA if we found it. I always recommend that we allow archeology to be what it really is, and not more nor less. I am interested in even-handed evaluations. Others may be primarily interested in polemics. I seriously doubt that we would know Israelite DNA if we found it in the New World. IE; Joseph in Egypt married and had children from an Egyptian. So any DNA we would find would of necessity belong to no more than half the Lehite side, and most likely far less. Don't get me wrong I would love to find confirming evidence, but at present I see no way to verify it. Who knows maybe tomorrow we will.
thesometimesaint Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 Yep. In other words, natural laws, we don't always understand... but that doesn't mean we get to redefine them as man understands them. The point here, again, is the Lord's curse was genetic in nature, and we don't know the specifics of that change. No one has said we understand all the laws of nature. Heck we still don't fully understand gravity. But few believe it doesn't exist. We don't know if it was genetic. That is simply speculation not supported by the text.
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Supernatural just means pertaining to God. Science is just the best explanation of a natural event in our world/universe we have so far. So if you want to believe Vishnu, Jesus, Thetan's, or whatever God you want controls this physical universe you are free to believe it, Just call it what it is, a belief in the supernatural.I disagree. I don't think science is the best explanation, I think it is man's best explanation. I also think that as good as it is it falls short and in the realm of the arm of flesh when it comes to being the arbiter of truth.If that's what u prefer to believe, that's fine, we're all free. Edited July 24, 2015 by Sevenbak
CA Steve Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 Yep. In other words, natural laws, we don't always understand... but that doesn't mean we get to redefine them as man understands them. The point here, again, is the Lord's curse was genetic in nature, and we don't know the specifics of that change.I think the point here is that it might be your speculation of the change being genetic that may be flawed.
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 The Lord changed the DNA of the Lamanites? Wow !! Was the curse a genetic change or not? Laugh it up.
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 No one has said we understand all the laws of nature. Heck we still don't fully understand gravity. But few believe it doesn't exist.We don't know if it was genetic. That is simply speculation not supported by the text.If it wasn't a genetic change, why did anyone who mixed their seed with them receive the same change/curse in all future generations? How is that not genetic, and when did this become a mock fest? 1
Robert F. Smith Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) Supernatural is a silly word, we believe that God is a God of miracles. What God did to Laman and Lemuel in the eyes of man shouldn't be any different than the parting of the Red Sea or water into wine or a Liahona on the ground or any number of things we can't explain. And yet the eyes of man mortal eyes can't comprehend it and so we try to justify it. Be careful we don't fulfill Mormon's prophecy about us Gentiles in the last days about miracles being done away.Supernatural just means pertaining to God. Science is just the best explanation of a natural event in our world/universe we have so far. So if you want to believe Vishnu, Jesus, Thetan's, or whatever God you want controls this physical universe you are free to believe it, Just call it what it is, a belief in the supernatural.Probably not the best definition of "supernatural," which does not assume the action or concern of a god, but rather of metaphysical or non-natural explanations for events, or concerns outside of science. While it is the case that a rocket scientist "controls" gravity by constructing a rocket which can achieve escape velocity, he is really not controlling it, but only functioning within natural forces upon which his scientific understanding and engineering exercise "control." Science and engineering are not magical or supernatural, except to those from a primitive culture. Since normative religions (whether theistic or non-theistic) frequently posit a belief in supernature, it is not really possible to conduct a rational inquiry into their premises. The advantage of LDS theology is that it posits no such supernatural basis for reality. It is basically a humanistic, natural religion, with a naturalistic god(s). Edited July 24, 2015 by Robert F. Smith 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 Cultural affectation. IE; The Hatfields and McCoys bloody feud lasted generations but there was nothing genetic about it. I'm not mocking your LDS beliefs. I'm simply disagreeing with some of your conclusions. At several points in the Book of Mormon Nephites and Lamanites were indistinguishable. IE; "There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God".SEE 4 Nephi 1:17 1
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 Cultural affectation. IE; The Hatfields and McCoys bloody feud lasted generations but there was nothing genetic about it. I'm not mocking your LDS beliefs. I'm simply disagreeing with some of your conclusions. At several points in the Book of Mormon Nephites and Lamanites were indistinguishable. IE; "There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God".SEE 4 Nephi 1:17To say that the curse was only a cultural affiliation also ignores the text. I think we tend to bend over backwards to be politically correct, and that's fine but the point is that a physical change happened. The irony here to me, is that when I try to say a genetic change is a scientific principle that explains what happened to them, it gets poo-pooed away. Maybe yall believe in miracles after all. :-) 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) To say that the curse was only a cultural affiliation also ignores the text. I think we tend to bend over backwards to be politically correct, and that's fine but the point is that a physical change happened.The irony here to me, is that when I try to say a genetic change is a scientific principle that explains what happened to them, it gets poo-pooed away. Maybe yall believe in miracles after all. :-) I'm probably the least PC person there is. I take a pretty dim view of most peoples actions. What we have is the claim that the Lamanites were lazy, dirty, uncivilized, and a host of other non-genetic attributes that have been placed on different groups throughout human history. Edited July 24, 2015 by thesometimesaint 1
Sevenbak Posted July 24, 2015 Posted July 24, 2015 I'm probably the least PC person there is. I take a pretty dim view of most peoples actions. What we have is the claim that the Lamanites were lazy, dirty, uncivilized, and a host of other non-genetic attributes that have been placed on different groups throughout human history.As one who thinks PC is going to be the death of us, I agree. But I also think what you're describing is the curse itself the separation of God and all the gunk the follows that. The mark of the curse however was a physical thing that happened to the Lamanites, and no matter how bad we don't want to say it, it was a mark of dark skin. It happened to Laman and company while they were alive, it happened to their children, happened to the grandchildren etc, and any of the Nephites that intermingled with them sexually, it happened to their children. I really don't understand how some folks on this thread can mock me for saying it was a genetic change. If one's genetic makeup is changed, it is passed onto their children. 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 As one who thinks PC is going to be the death of us, I agree. But I also think what you're describing is the curse itself the separation of God and all the gunk the follows that. The mark of the curse however was a physical thing that happened to the Lamanites, and no matter how bad we don't want to say it, it was a mark of dark skin. It happened to Laman and company while they were alive, it happened to their children, happened to the grandchildren etc, and any of the Nephites that intermingled with them sexually, it happened to their children. I really don't understand how some folks on this thread can mock me for saying it was a genetic change. If one's genetic makeup is changed, it is passed onto their children. How would a separation from God cause a genetic change? Did David of Bible fame wake up with dark skin when he sinned with Bathsheba? I'm darker than any of my sibs. What grave sin as a baby did I commit to warrant my darker skin?
Sevenbak Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) How would a separation from God cause a genetic change? Did David of Bible fame wake up with dark skin when he sinned with Bathsheba? I'm darker than any of my sibs. What grave sin as a baby did I commit to warrant my darker skin? Doesn't work that way. God doesn't curse and he doesn't set a mark on every sinner. But he did the Lamanites, because it was necessary to keep his people separate. Darker skin doesn't make one less righteous or less deserving, but in this instance, it was the mark chosen by God to distinguish the Lamanites from the Nephites. There is simply no justification in scriptures or otherwise to assume darker skin a universal mark of unworthiness. That's not what this is about, so please don't go down that road. The idea that the mark was a genetic change isn't mine alone, and it isn't new, it just makes complete sense. Just found this on BYU Religious Studies Center, it's a great read and says it way better than I could: The Lamanite Mark, Rodney Turner https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/book-mormon-second-nephi-doctrinal-structure/7-lamanite-mark Here's a snip: The darkened pigmentation of their skins became a dominant genetic trait that was inherited by their posterity from that time forth.Respecting skin color, ... Mormon wrote that the Lord employed that term in telling Nephi three things: “Behold, the Lamanites have I cursed, and I will set a mark on them. . . . I will set a mark upon him that mingleth his seed with thy brethren, that they may be cursed also I will set a mark upon him that fighteth against thee and thy seed” Nephi quoted the Lord on the second point as follows: “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” This really is a fantastic read on the mark, the curse and everything associated with it. I'd recommend reading the whole thing. But again, if y'all want to think that all I'm saying was that the Lord changed their DNA to make us stumble, do as you will. Edited July 25, 2015 by Sevenbak 1
Sevenbak Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 (edited) Another snip from the BYU Religious Studies article: "There can be no question but that their altered skin color was a miraculous act of God; it cannot be understood in purely metaphoric terms, nor as being nothing more than the natural consequence of prolonged exposure to the sun. Nephi was explicit that “the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them” (2 Nephi 5:21; emphasis added). The prophet Jacob later spoke of how the Nephites hated the Lamanites “because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins,” and warned the immoral Nephites that unless they repented, the Lamanites’ “skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God” (Jacob 3:5)" Edited July 25, 2015 by Sevenbak 1
neohillbilly Posted July 25, 2015 Posted July 25, 2015 I accidentally posted this response in the wrong thread at first. This is where it fits best, for forgive me for sharing it again. I haven't had time to read this entire thread, but it ties in with stories I heard years ago. I served a mission in Hawaii and one native there who was very much into both the church and Hawaiian culture and history once gave a talk at a private meeting with the elders at the mission home, at the invitation of the mission president. One part of that (I really wish I had a recording of that talk) was that the ships of Hagoth in Alma wound up sailing to Hawaii and that in fact they were buried in the hills behind the Hawaii Temple. Another part of the talk was that the "believers" came to be a small group that were persecuted and driven from island to island until they wound up on the south tip of the Big Island, Hawaii, where they wound up building seven canoes and set off. The ocean currents took them to what we now know as New Zealand, where corresponding oral traditions tell of the Maori arriving in seven canoes. 1
Recommended Posts