DNA and the Book of Mormon/Bible

[GohModley]

Disvalidate is not a word my friend.

[royalty49]

The bible has genealogy in it.

The Native Americans are descendants of Shem but not of Israel.

the Native Americans are in the Q Haplogroup.

Descendants of Abraham are in the J haplogroup. Proven by studies of the Cohens and the Sharifs/Khalifs.

the Q haplogroup does not descend from J.

1.A Haplogroup 2.BT Haplogroup 3.CF Haplogroup 4.F Haplogroup 5.IJK Haplogroup 6.IJ Haplogroup 7. J Haplogroup Abrahams descendants 6.K Haplogroup 7.MNOPS 8.P

9. Q

[haidermann1]

It's pretty simple really. They looked for Jewish DNA, & Lehi was thru th tribe of Manasseh. A lost tribe. look at Asian "Mormons" They are usually Manasseh. In general DNA proves th book of Mormon to be true. If Joseph had faked it, he would have had Lehi be from the tribe of Judah not Manasseh. .Jews were the record holders. Plus Jews through Europe were were gaining power during his day. It would be an easier "sell". But th truth is that Lehi was Manasseh, through Joseph. BOM is true.

[GiftoAll]

What if the flood was over the known world? Asia, Europe, Africa? The tribes of Israel were going to be gathered from the 4 corners right? They have! This would be from the known Biblical 4 corners of the earth. You will never see any American Indians requesting to go back to Israel because of their heritage. It will never happen, they have no roots in Israel.

[CadjinGisclair]

The Book of Mormon states that the Jews are the "primary ancestors of the Native Americans"..."primary" in this case meaning earliest or primitive.

For instance, a long time ago, one of my ancestors married a woman from Haiti..Although one of my ancestors is black, I guarantee you won't find any African in me if you do a DNA test!

You may say.."Well, that's convenient"..but whatever.

I say, you receive no witness until after the trial of your faith.

[LDSTrueChurch]

fairmormon . org / Book_of_Mormon_geography / Old_World

&

fairmormon . org / Book_of_Mormon_geography / New_World

Great places to start researching. The Book of Mormon IS true. I have done so much research. I know it's true.

You mock all you want to. D & C 123 the LORD blesses us everytime you do!

Agendas don't reveal truth, but cover the eyes of the people.

[LDSTrueChurch]

The work on DNA done was funded by IRR anti-Mormon groups and the agenda set was to decieve. They found DNA in Guatemala of a small group that do NOT have asiatic DNA, but middle eastern DNA. The book of Mormon has got better than passing marks. Science and archaeology has all but proven the book of Mormon as true.

[Outlaw1257]

LDSTrueChurch;

How do you manage to dream up the asinine lies to keep telling??

[Maoritech]

Well said brother, well said!

[Undertaker202]

wait, we have DNA of Jews of all 12 tribes and we can compare those today, do you have the DNA of these those people? Can you compare them with people today? This is not the same test, not even close

[analoguetom]

Interesting that the same research that refutes the BOM also refutes the Bible.

[slu2com]

Certainly some assumptions are made here.

I've made a few videos on these topics. Not only DNA, but on anthropology.

Recently the LDS church changed the Book of Mormon to take out the statement that "Lamanites are the principle ancestors of Native Americans". Since Joseph Smith originally introduced this notion in the 1830's/40's it has been long assumed and even taught by LDS leaders and general authority that Lamanites ARE the principle ancestors of Native Americans. Interesting..

[fairldsorg]

Great video. Check out the DNA videos on our site, specifically from our recently released video entitled "The Book of Mormon and New World DNA". There is more evidence for The Book of Mormon than one would think.

[SpeckCipher]

In looking at scientific evidence of those in the ancient worlds I have learned of things that scientist have proven but has been disregarded by the belief of man. One of which is using the scientific method to make a clock that has been created to date the age of the human race. It is dated to roughly 6000 years old. But the scientific athority threw out that date. After some time, the scientific comunity settled on not dating the age of man through genetics.

What else was thown out?

[majorvoltage]

Our most recent matrilineal common ancestor dates back to 140,000 years ago about our most recent patrilineal common ancestor was about 60,000 years ago which is about the time of the first modern human migration out of Africa. Hominid fossils considered to be human enough to be classified as Homo sapiens go back as far as nearly 200,000 years and our last common ancestor with another living species lived about 6 million years ago.

Where are you getting 6000 years from? What clock?

[slu2com]

"Where are you getting 6000 years from? What clock? "

First. Who are you talking to? This isn't an arguement or a point I have made.

In the Bible there are many references that describe a definate difference between God's time and our own.

I don't have a particular point of origin for the time of creation.

Same people do. I don't.

[majorvoltage]

My message was in reply to SpeckCipher, which is why it is underneath his comment.

[SpeckCipher]

Calibrating the Mitochondrial Clock; Science 2 January 1998: Vol. 279. No. 5347, pp. 28-29

Inerestingly enough, I got to read more articals about the subject of age but I was not smart enough to write down my scorce. The 200,000 years estament ia a theoretical age based on how close man is to ape. So if man is evolved from ape that is when we split. Ironicaly man is missing 2 cromosones that all other primates have yet we are more advanced in our development.

[majorvoltage]

The chromosomes are not missing, they fused. Human chromosome 2 is a fusion of two ape chromosomes. And we are not more advanced that modern apes. That is a common misunderstanding of evolution. No organism is more advanced than any other organism at any given time. They have diverged from common ancestors to fill different ecological niches in different areas.

Humans are well adapted to grassland environments and other apes are well adapted to forests.

I'll check out that paper. Thanks.

[SpeckCipher]

Show me one ape that made a space ship that is not classified as homosapian and I will agree that man is not more advanced.

[TommyMonson]

Your testimony of the BOM is not because of historicity, but being born in Utah, just like the testimony of the Koran usually comes from being born in the middle-east.

[TommyMonson]

Very nice point. So if we are going to let go of Santa, we can't very well keep believing in his elves.

Haunsmill, when you come to your senses and let go of Mormonism, don't go running to other myths.

Science also disproves "the spirit". Study pscyhologists on self-deception.

[majorvoltage]

I completely agree with you. Both Noah's flood and Adam and Eve would have resulted in an extreme population bottleneck that we do not find in analyzing the human genome. DNA evidence falsifies the bible just as thoroughly as it does the book of mormon.

Therefore they are both wrong.

[slu2com]

I think it is supposed that the flood spoke about in the Bible did in fact cover the ENTIRE world.

But I think it would more accurately be stated and understood that it covered the entire world as Noah knew it.

[majorvoltage]

Noah didn't really exist, or at least not the Noah in the story. The flood story was based on a local flood of the Euphrates river. It was written down several times before it shows up in the bible. Search the net for a translation of tablet XI of the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh. The bible story was the third or more retelling with different characters.

[slu2com]

The Epic of Gilgamesh was a fictional story based on a true event. I've read up on it.

The sediment layers verify the notion of the localized/massive flood in that area.

[majorvoltage]

"The Epic of Gilgamesh was a fictional story based on a true event. I've read up on it."

Yes. And the bible story was written later and was based on the Epic of Gilgamesh. The genesis flood story is a retelling of a retelling of an exaggeration of a minor natural disaster.

[slu2com]

I think that the Epic of Gilgamesh is based on the verbal history of the Bible passed down for many years.

The sediment layers show a very real event.

drdino. com

[majorvoltage]

No no, it's the other way around. Gilgamesh came first. Yes there was a real event but it was only local.

And lol @ Kent Hovind. He's hilarious. Check my videos for some debunking of his nonsense.

[slu2com]

The oral history passed down from Biblical events came first IMHO.

Im not scholar, but the research I have done on it supports thats POV.

As for it being ONLY local? I don't think that is entirely true.

Native Americans have a story about a world wide flood from about the same period of time. The sediment layers in America (Grand Canyon, Zions Park, etc too) support a large flood in Americas, similar to the flood in the middle east.

[majorvoltage]

The sediment that makes up the grand canyon represents millions of years deposition in different environments and the canyon itself was carved by slow erosion, not a rapid flood. Flood canyons are wide and U-shaped while the grand canyon displays the narrow V-shape of slow erosion.

[slu2com]

We find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers that cover all the continents. For example, most of the rock layers in the walls of Grand Canyon (more than a mile above sea level) contain marine fossils. Fossilized shellfish are even found in the Himalayas.

We find extensive fossil "graveyards" and exquisitely preserved fossils. For example, billions of nautiloid fossils are found in a layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon.

answersingenesis. org

[slu2com]

answersingenesis. org/articles/am/v2/n4/geologic­-evidences-part-one

[majorvoltage]

Lol @ answers in genesis. Check out my videos for a debunking of an AiG video as well as Kent Hovind.

The fossilized shellfish come from marine deposits which have been uplifted over millions of years by tectonic plate movement. That's how mountains are formed.

The sorting of the fossils and dating of rock layers as well as geological features such as angular unconformities show that the geological column was deposited over vast periods of geological time, not in a rapid flood.

[slu2com]

"The sorting of the fossils and dating of rock layers as well as geological features such as angular unconformities show that the geological column was deposited over vast periods of geological time, not in a rapid flood. "

Thats where your logic and arguement is flawed.  All over the earth there are layers of massive rapid deposits.

[majorvoltage]

"All over the earth there are layers of massive rapid deposits."

There are deposits that were produced rapidly by local flooding, but these deposits are interspersed with long periods of slow deposition. This would not be found if all the layers were laid down in one massive flood.

Local flooding happens all the time and it's no surprise that we find evidence of previous events in the rocks.

[slu2com]

"There are deposits that were produced rapidly by local flooding, but these deposits are interspersed with long periods of slow deposition. This would not be found if all the layers were laid down in one massive flood."

I think if you review my original statement on the flood. That I agree that Noah referred to the "world as he knew it".

I am not one to say that Noah knew the entire world. Just his general area.

With that being said, the rest of the world would have seen a difference

[slu2com]

Hence, why native americans, and cultures throughout the world have a verbal history of massive floods from thousands of years ago, all generally dating back to the approximate time of Noah's flood.

The sediment layers and rapid deposits support the idea of massive flooding all over the world.

[majorvoltage]

And now you're back talking about native cultures as if the flood was global.

When you make up your mind about your own position let me know and we'll argue it.

[slu2com]

"And now you're back talking about native cultures as if the flood was global.

When you make up your mind about your own position let me know and we'll argue it. "

Only that the flood that Noah spoke about was a magnificent wonder. And even though I believe it was mostly local, it did have a ripple effect throughout the rest of the world. I mean, a flood of that significance would be like a major volcano blowing. It would spread out a bit and effect other parts of the world.

[slu2com]

And fact is, not only do Native American cultures/tribes have ancient stories (pre-dating columbus) about a major world flood story, but the sediment layers support the notion too.

[majorvoltage]

Native american flood stories are distinctly different from the middle eastern ones and flood stories are not surprising since most settlements are built around rivers.

And no, the sediments layers do not support a flood. I told you this already when you tried sending me a bunch of young-earth creationist bullshit.

[majorvoltage]

"I think if you review my original statement on the flood. That I agree that Noah referred to the "world as he knew it"."

Then why are you linking to Kent Hovind and AiG who support a global flood?

[majorvoltage]

Dessication cracks, animal burrows, footprints, rooted plants and meteorite craters are all found within the geological column.

Dessication cracks do not form underwater or when it's raining. Animal burrows take time to construct and would not be made underwater or during a torrential downpour. Footprints of land animals should not be found in layers supposedly deposited under deep water and there are too many meteorite craters for them to be simultaneous.

[majorvoltage]

Also volcanic ash, being very light, would not have had time to settle amongst a short global flood to form the thin ash layers we find throughout strata worldwide.

And the sorting of fossils would not be achieved in a single flood. We don't find dinosaurs above or below mesozoic deposits for example. This sorting applies to both animals and plants.

Before you claim hydrologic sorting as most creationists do, I will point out that this would also have sorted the sediments. They are not sorted.

[slu2com]

The Epic of Gilgamesh was a fictional story based on a true event. I've read up on it.

The sediment layers verify the notion of the localized/massive flood in that area.

[railsbach]

Does this mean that you dont believe in the bible?

[joshsybs]

Great Comments.

[nonephi]

You need to watch Murphy's video which can also be found on youtube, "Addressing the Arguments Against the DNA Evidence". Murphy states, "If you go back far enough, all humans are related." The problem for the BOM is that it requires a more recent connection between the American Indians (so-called Lamanites) and the Hebrews.