Old News, New Attacks

A front page LA Times story today by William Lobdell brings up the three-year old claim that DNA evidence somehow disproves the Book of Mormon.

Lobdell has written articles on Mormons before with varying degrees of fairness and accuracy.

Here are my questions and comments in response to the article:

Why is this coming out now? - The Southerton claim (and before it the Murphy claim) is nearly 4 years old. Why is this article surfacing now and on the front page? The high level immediate import alludes me.

Heresy? - I'm not certain where Lobdell claims that church leaders have "dismissed as heresy any suggestion that Native American genetics undermine the Mormon creed." I know of no major statements by church leaders to the same account. The Church press release in response to the article says:

Recent attacks on the veracity of the Book of Mormon based on DNA evidence are ill considered. Nothing in the Book of Mormon precludes migration into the Americas by peoples of Asiatic origin. The scientific issues relating to DNA, however, are numerous and complex.

This response (one of the only responses that the church has given) can hardly be described as "dismissed as heresy".

Get your Mormonism right - Lobdell claims: "Mormons believe these scriptures restored the church to God's original vision and left the rest of Christianity in a state of apostasy." Any Mormon will tell you that the church was restored through Joseph Smith as a prophet of God and not as some interpretation derived from the Book of Mormon. Eternal marriage, temple worship, genealogy research for proxy rites, lay priesthood... none of these are found in the Book of Mormon.

Mormons value the Book of Mormon for the insightful spiritual themes of the tome and as a vindication of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith. In short, if the Book of Mormon is true then Joseph Smith was a prophet, ergo, the Church is true. But the teachings of the Church were revealed primarily through the prophets, not from reading the Book of Mormon.

Native Americans or Peruvians? - Lobdell quotes President Gordon B. Hinckley speaking to a conference in Peru: "As I look into your faces, I think of Father Lehi [patriarch of the Lamanites], whose sons and daughters you are,... I think he must be shedding tears today, tears of love and gratitude…. This is but the beginning of the work in Peru."

What this has to do with a DNA study on American Indians is unclear. Mormons believe that certain decendents of the Americas do indeed come from the first family of the Book of Mormon. The study that Southerton explored speaks to Native Americans.

Hemispherical or Limited Geography - It is true that for the first 100 years of the church, leaders and members believed that the geography of the Book of Mormon encompassed both North and South America. The Book of Mormon speaks of a "narrow neck of land" connecting the Northern and Southern regions of the people. The assumption was that this "neck" was Panama. Lobdell implies that the church and church apologists changed their tune after the Southerton DNA studies. This is patently false. As early as the 1950s Mormon scholors were promoting a limited geographical model of the Book of Mormon.

Anti-Mormon - In his interview with Hugh Hewitt it was noted that Southerton is a ex-communicated Bishop. In the article Lobdell also alludes to the ex-communication of Thomas Murphy. It should also be noted that there was a very active anti-Mormon force helping (and in some cases funding) Murphy and Southerton. Credibility is not a strong factor.

The evidence - First, it should be noted that the "evidence" that Southerton and Murphy point to was never gathered for the specific hypothesis they support. It should also be noted that this same theory (that DNA evidence from people today should match to other DNA of other people from other ancestors) would also disprove many of the demographic assumptions in the Bible.

Here's my own take on the issue which was published two years ago:
http://www.ldsmag.com/ideas/040331battle.html

Next I give you the following; we've refuted this claim with serious scholarship for past 6 years. There's nothing new to the story:

"DNA and the Book of Mormon," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, 2003) Interviews, information, and overviews of the issues surrounding DNA and the Book of Mormon.

Michael R. Ash, Is An Historical Book of Mormon Compatible With DNA Science?. This FAIR Brochure summarizes the flaws in claims that recent DNA evidence shows the Book of Mormon to be non-historical.

Kevin L. Barney, "A Brief Review of Murphy and Southerton's "Galileo Event."," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, February 2003) A review of an article on DNA and the Book of Mormon that appeared in Anthropology News.

Brant A. Gardner, "The Tempest in a Teapot: DNA Studies and the Book of Mormon," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, January 2003) A review of what DNA studies can and, more importantly, cannot tell us about the Book of Mormon.

Cooper Johnson, "DNA and the Book of Mormon," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, March 2002) Some say that DNA research can disprove (or prove) The Book of Mormon. This article examines a presentation on the subject by Dr. Scott R. Woodward at the 2001 FAIR Conference.

Greg Kearney, "DNA and the Book of Mormon," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, October 2003) A very apt cartoon draws attention to the double-edged sword presented by criticisms of the Book of Mormon based on DNA studies.

D. Jeffrey Meldrum, "The Children of Lehi: DNA and the Book of Mormon," (Mesa, Arizona: FAIR, November 2005) In his 2003 FAIR Conference presentation, Meldrum addressed a number of the arguments being raised by anti-Mormon critics related to DNA and the Book of Mormon. Meldrum points out that the internal claims of the Book of Mormon text cannot be refuted using current DNA studies, despite the desire of critics to press such studies into service. The Book of Mormon text deals with the ideas of a covenant people being a blessing to genetically unrelated peoples and cultures, and allows for a genetic impact by the immigrant Israelites that would not be detectable today. Meldrum concludes by asserting, "Ultimately we are impressed by the realization that the fundamental question of the veracity of the claims of the Book of Mormon lies beyond the ken of modern DNA research."

Daniel Peterson, "Random Reflections on the Passing Scene," (2003 FAIR Conference presentation.) Dr. Peterson explores many current areas of interest including atheism, DNA studies, and the need for LDS apologetics.

David Stewart, DNA and the Book of Mormon.

Scott Woodward, "DNA and the Book of Mormon," (2001 FAIR Conference presentation.)

"The Problematic Role of DNA Testing in Unraveling Human History," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (Provo: FARMS, 2000), 66-84

John M. Butler, "A Few Thoughts from a Believing Scientist," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2003), 36-37 Recent claims concerning the supposed absence of DNA evidence in support of the Book of Mormon caused the author to investigate more closely what the record itself has to say on the topic. This short essay indicates why the author is still a believing member of the Church.

Jeff Lindsay, "Does DNA evidence refute the Book of Mormon," (December 2002) Lindsay's article addresses the DNA attacks that typically rely on several faulty assumptions about the Book of Mormon and leave out important scientific details about the DNA evidence.

Jeff Lindsay, "Does DNA Evidence Refute the Book of Mormon?," (2003) Updated from 2002

D. Jeffrey Meldrum and Trent D. Stephens, "Who Are the Children of Lehi," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2003), 38-51 The questions "Who are the children of Lehi?" and "How can we reconcile Book of Mormon perspectives with modern DNA data?" are issues of great importance to a number of Latter-day Saints and other people. The authors present this essay in an attempt to facilitate some reconciliation.

Brent Lee Shelton and Jonathan Marks, "Genetic Markers Not a Valid Test of Native Identity," (City Unknown: Council for Reponsible Genetics, 2002) While not directly citing DNA in relation to the Book of Mormon, this article provides an interesting viewpoint that indicates why DNA tests cannot provide conclusive proof of whether a person belongs to a specific ethnic group (such as Lamanites).

John L. Sorenson and Matthew Roper, "Before DNA," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2003), 6-23 This article provides a framework within which the quality and aptness of questions about DNA studies on Native Americans and their implications for Book of Mormon history should be approached. The authors raise a set of issues that anyone should confront when thinking clearly and honestly about the subject.

John A, Tvedtnes, "Interpreting the DNA Data and the Book of Mormon Part I," MeridianMagazine.com (17 July 2005) In this three-part series, LDS scholar, John Tvedtnes, examines the popular anti-Mormon claim that DNA research disproves the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

John A. Tvedtnes, "Interpreting the DNA Data and the Book of Mormon Part II,"

John A. Tvedtnes, "Interpreting the DNA Data and the Book of Mormon Part III,"

Michael F. Whiting, "DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 2003), 24-35 Some persons have announced that modern DNA research has conclusively proved that the Book of Mormon is false and that Joseph Smith was a fraud. These claims err scientifically in that they are based on the naive notion that DNA provides infallible evidence for ancestry and descent in sexually reproducing populations and that the results from such analyses are straightforward, objective, and not laden with assumptions. Moreover, proponents of this naive view blindly ignore decades of theory associated with DNA sequence evolution and data analysis and rarely speak to the extremely tentative nature of their conclusions.

Michael F. Whiting, "Does DNA Evidence Refute the Authenticity of the Book of Mormon?," (Provo, Utah: FARMS, January 2003) A 45-minute video presentation concerning DNA and the Book of Mormon. An excellent resource that explains the problems in drawing definitive conclusions about the Book of Mormon based on DNA findings.