DNA mark­er x2a’j is prob­a­bly the great­est DNA evi­dence for the Book of Mor­mon thus far.

X2a’j is not found in North Amer­i­ca but its impor­tance to Native Amer­i­can DNA is vir­tu­al­ly unknown. It’s the 5‑ton ele­phant in the room that researcher’s geneti­cist do not want to talk about. Out­side of the Amer­i­can con­ti­nent it’s the most close­ly relat­ed genet­ic link to a found­ing Native Amer­i­can genet­ic DNA mark­er called hap­logroup X. X2a’j is found in Iran. One would expect that if cur­rent the­o­ries about world migra­tion and DNA dat­ing are cor­rect the clos­est genet­ic links to Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X would be in Siberia, East and cen­tral Asia. Hap­logroup X DNA relat­ed to Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X is not found in these coun­tries. Hap­logroup X found in the Altains is not relat­ed to Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X.

The dat­ing of hap­logroup X is trou­ble­some for the Book of Mor­mon but the geo­graph­i­cal dis­tri­b­u­tion of hap­logroup X is spot on. Galilee Druze of Israel have the most genet­ic diver­si­ty of hap­logroup X. It’s been pro­posed that this area in Israel is the place that hap­logroup x dis­persed from. For those who believe in the his­tor­i­cal nar­ra­tive of the Bible and Book of Mor­mon the idea that Native Amer­i­can DNA dis­persed from Israel match­es the scrip­tur­al nar­ra­tive of the Bible and Book of Mor­mon. But the real ques­tion becomes why would the clos­est hap­logroup X genet­ic link to Native of Amer­i­cans be in Iran?

Bor­row­ing from pre­vi­ous research the Bible and Book of Mor­mon explain as fol­lows. The tribe of Man­asseh which Lehi and Nephi are mem­bers of are invad­ed by the Assyr­i­ans and defeat­ed and half of the tribe of Man­asseh are deported.(2 Kings 17:6, 1Chronicles 5:26). In the final depor­ta­tions of Man­asseh, Sar­gon the II deports the north­ern tribes of Israel to the Assyr­i­an empire which includ­ed Media known today as the north­west part of Iran. The Medi­an tribes in 678BC made the first empire of Iran. With these depor­ta­tions it’s also believed the dis­per­sions of the lost ten tribes of Israel to the north begins.

2 Chron­i­cles 30:1–11 explains that the Tribe of Man­asseh was invit­ed back to Jerusalem to wor­ship back at the tem­ple. 2 Kings 17:34 states that they no longer wor­shipped the God of Israel, most like­ly influ­enced by the Assyr­i­an cul­ture and beliefs pro­vid­ed by the Assyr­i­ans. Lehi ances­tors very well could have been some of those invit­ed back to Jerusalem and recon­vert­ed back to their ances­tral Hebrew beliefs. Those who rebelled against Nephi such as Laman, Lemuel and the sons of Ish­mael prob­a­bly revert­ed back to pagan beliefs of Assyr­i­an ori­gin when they arrived in the promise land.

As to why this is the most con­cise DNA evi­dence for the Book of Mor­mon is twofold. There are cul­tur­al and DNA find­ings that match the Book of Mor­mon and Old Tes­ta­ment. The DNA and scrip­tur­al nar­ra­tive is noth­ing with­out the cul­tur­al evi­dence dis­played by Native Amer­i­can cul­ture. I believe not only did Lehi bring Hebrew like cul­ture but Laman and Lemuel or pos­si­bly the Mulekites brought over Assyr­i­an pagan beliefs. The Nez Pierce Indi­ans have the most con­crete exam­ples of Assyr­i­an cul­ture. The Mik Mak Indi­ans have the best exam­ples of Hebrew culture.

Ancient Mesopotami­an Cuneiform tablets were found on Chief Joseph. Cuneiform dates back thou­sands of years to Mesopotamia, to what is now mod­ern day Iraq. Assyr­i­ans also used a form of cuneiform. When Chief Joseph was asked where he got the tablets he said he received them from his fore­fa­thers. The tablet was trans­lat­ed as a bill of sale for animals.

Left: Inanna, Goddess of Love and Queen of Heaven. Right: Inanna in Dimlun

This is an ancient Assyr­i­an relief sculp­ture. The Assyr­i­an God Ash­er sits on his throne. In front of him is a four-point­ed star with a cir­cle in the cen­ter. Radi­at­ing out from between the four points of the star are rays of light. The rays of light radi­ate out in three ribbons:

https://mormonbandwagon.com/files/2015/10/image080.jpg

Assyr­i­an Flag

The Assyr­i­an flag is the flag cho­sen by the Assyr­i­an peo­ple to rep­re­sent the Assyr­i­an nation in the home­land and in the diaspora.

https://mormonbandwagon.com/files/2015/10/image081.jpg

Chief Joseph not only had Cuneiform tablets but his med­i­cine bag has what appears to have the Assyr­i­an Star of Ashur. The star in the mid­dle has four points and what would be the three rib­bons of light com­ing from the star.

http://www.assyriatimes.com/assyrian/knowledge/a‑common-history-of-assyrians-and-native-americans/3401

http://​www​.assyr​i​a​times​.com/​a​s​s​y​r​i​a​n​/​k​n​o​w​l​e​d​g​e​/​c​h​i​e​f​-​j​o​s​e​p​h​-​c​a​r​r​i​e​d​-​t​h​e​-​s​t​a​r​-​o​f​-​a​s​h​u​r/3461

We sur­veyed our Old World hap­logroup X mtD­NAs for the five diag­nos­tic X2a muta­tions (table 2) and found a match only for the tran­si­tion at np 12397 in a sin­gle X2* sequence from Iran. In a par­si­mo­ny tree, this Iran­ian mtD­NA would share a com­mon ances­tor with the Native Amer­i­can clade.”

(Ori­gin and Dif­fu­sion of mtD­NA hap­logroup X, http://​www​.ncbi​.nlm​.nih​.gov/​p​m​c​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​s​/​P​M​C​1​1​80497/)

NP 12397 is X2A’J. DNA proof explain­ing the mys­tery of Nez Pierce Indi­ans hav­ing Assyr­i­an cul­ture is iron clad evi­dence in my unpro­fes­sion­al opin­ion. That Assyr­i­an cul­ture to include oth­er old world cul­ture thrived among North Amer­i­can Native Americans.

Peo­ple have tried to explain away Chief Joseph hav­ing cuneiform tablets with seem­ing­ly impos­si­ble expla­na­tions. But to try and explain the cul­tur­al, cuneiform tablets and sup­port­ing DNA evi­dence will take a supreme effort of men­tal gymnastics.

Crit­ics will point out that Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X in North Amer­i­ca is prob­lem­at­ic it dates to between 11000–13000BC. Well before the Book of Mor­mon. This imme­di­ate­ly dis­qual­i­fies hap­logroup X as DNA evi­dence of the Book of Mor­mon unless of course dat­ing of Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X is incor­rect. If crit­ics are able to cred­i­bly explain away the Assyr­i­an links and DNA evi­dence found in Iran then the dat­ing of hap­logroup X2a has a leg to stand on oth­er­wise. Native Amer­i­can hap­logroup X can­not be dat­ed ear­li­er then Assyr­i­an cul­ture which start­ed around 3000BC. If you fol­low the scrip­tur­al nar­ra­tive than Ken­nwick man should date after 550BC. At this point the only expla­na­tion for Native Amer­i­can Iran DNA and Assyr­i­an cul­ture is scripture.

Much like the men­tal gym­nas­tics of call­ing a horse a tapir and oth­er exam­ples Mesoamer­i­can apolo­get­ics were laughed to scorn for their hope in the most unlike­li­est cir­cum­stances. Research­es best bet at this point is to con­tin­ue to ignore the DNA evi­dence and hope like Book of Mor­mon Mesoamer­i­can apol­o­gist that DNA evi­dence in their favor will arise.

To see more cul­tur­al links to the old world see link.

Tribe of Man­asseh — Native Amer­i­can DNA

To see tech­nolo­gies that are the equiv­a­lent or the same as old world tech­nolo­gies see link.

Tribe of Man­asseh — Tech­nol­o­gy and Animals


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

42 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Bridgett Austin
Bridgett Austin
6 years ago

I’d like to add to this dis­cus­sion. Maybe these genes are from the giants and that’s why they are most sim­i­lar to …I don’t know what I’m sup­posed to say here… white peo­ple. I know from my dreams of my past lives that there were giants that were white with red hair and curly beards. Large lamp-like blue eyes and I was a very tall man and only came up to around his waist. He lived on an island in around Ire­land. His habi­ta­tion was a large, cir­cu­lar wood­work and it was at the high­est point. It was some kind of fes­ti­val time around March and he seemed to be the pre­sid­ing dig­ni­tary. The island was teem­ing with the locals who were of medi­um height, blond hair and blue eyes. I was not from around there and seemed much more urban and sophis­ti­cat­ed. I Was very tall, thin and had green eyes and black hair. We were talk­ing about this demon I was hunt­ing and that’s why I had land­ed there in my ship. As we were walk­ing around we noticed a child alone pick­ing flow­ers I saw his eyes light on her and I knew he want­ed to eat her. I quick­ly said this lit­tle girl has lost her moth­er and took her away quick­ly to find her neg­li­gent moth­er. While I was away the demon land­ed and the giant betrayed me and my plans. I got back in time to see his ship sail­ing off and board­ed my… Read more »

Wes T
Admin
8 years ago

David, I’d love to hear more about your beliefs about car­bon dat­ing. You state that the X2AJ DNA has been dat­ed through the Ken­nwick skele­ton to a range from 3750 BC to 7000 BC. I under­stand that is a large range, how­ev­er not even the youngest date in that range aligns with the Book of Mor­mon timeline. You state that “Radio car­bon dat­ing is based on know­ing how much car­bon diox­ide is in the atmos­phere at the time there dat­ing the spec­i­men to and oth­er vari­ables. I frankly do not trust their vari­ables.” That is an impor­tant vari­able, and there is sol­id evi­dence indi­cat­ing the lev­els of car­bon diox­ide (C12 and C14) in the atmos­phere back at least 8000 years. By mea­sur­ing the C12 and C14 in very old dead trees and count­ing the thou­sands of rings of those trees, along with the thou­sands of rings of recent­ly alive trees, sci­en­tists have ver­i­fied that radio­car­bon is accu­rate with­in at least that peri­od. After about 20,000 years, there is so lit­tle car­bon left in pre­vi­ous­ly organ­ic objects that radio­car­bon dat­ing is not reli­able — the mea­sure­ment is essen­tial­ly indis­tin­guish­able from back­ground radiation. I of course can­not force you to accept the sol­id sci­ence of radio­car­bon dat­ing, but if you’d like some­where to start to under­stand it bet­ter, I found a fair­ly easy to read sum­ma­ry (com­pared to many of the oth­er more tech­ni­cal and bor­ing sources) refut­ing many of the com­mon cri­tiques of radio­car­bon dat­ing: https://​ncse​.com/​c​e​j​/​3​/​2​/​a​n​s​w​e​r​s​-​t​o​-​c​r​e​a​t​i​o​n​i​s​t​-​a​t​t​a​c​k​s​-​c​a​r​b​o​n​-​1​4​-​d​ating/. Again, I would love to hear why exact­ly… Read more »

Wes T
Admin
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

Ok, so to clar­i­fy, you are will­ful­ly dis­re­gard­ing strong evi­dence that dis­cred­its your hypoth­e­sis, just because you don’t like it? You are cher­ry-pick­ing the evi­dence that coin­ci­den­tal­ly sup­ports your posi­tion and ignor­ing all the evi­dence that doesn’t. Your hypoth­e­sis is con­sis­tent­ly not cred­i­ble because it is based on cher­ry-pick­ing what sup­ports your posi­tion rather than con­sid­er­ing all the evi­dence for and against your posi­tion. You can cher­ry-pick evi­dence in any cul­ture and make incred­i­ble claims. Sym­bols like your “Assyr­i­an flag” are, in my opin­ion, the most like­ly coin­ci­den­tal matches. Take for exam­ple, the Jew­ish “Star of David” — it is sup­posed evi­dence that “The Jews and all mod­ern reli­gious tra­di­tions orig­i­nat­ed in ancient India” accord­ing to this arti­cle: http://​www​.above​topse​cret​.com/​f​o​r​u​m​/​t​h​r​e​a​d​8​1​2​2​95/pg1. My point being that the use of sim­i­lar sym­bols is not gen­er­al­ly con­sid­ered evi­dence of the same ori­gin. I think we’ve all doo­dled some­thing sim­i­lar to the design on Chief Joseph’s med­i­cine bag, just because it is a fair­ly sim­ple pat­tern that can spon­ta­neous­ly occur, just like the Star of David symbol. Tying it back to the DNA evi­dence you present, all togeth­er it shows that there are a vari­ety of migra­tions from oth­er con­ti­nents. That specif­i­cal­ly refutes the Book of Mor­mon claims like 2 Nephi 1:6 and 9 that “there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord” and that “[Nephi’s fam­i­ly] may pos­sess this land unto themselves”. The only DNA evi­dence that one of the many migra­tions may have been… Read more »

Simon
8 years ago

David,

The same hap­logroup X found in liv­ing Native Amer­i­cans was present in Native Amer­i­can pop­u­la­tions that lived 8,000 years ago. This fact demon­strates your claims are false.

molly_miller
8 years ago

Did chief Joseph live in North Amer­i­ca or Cen­tral Amer­i­ca ? One won­ders where the Book of Mor­mon peo­ple lived since we have Book of Mor­mon tours in Cen­tral America

molly_miller
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

You are right they are the­o­ries with no con­crete facts

molly_miller
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

Mor­mons teach there god was a fall­en, exalt­ed, saved, finite man like Abra­ham, Isaac and Jacob So of course the Book of Mor­mon not true “The Gods who dwell in the Heaven…have been redeemed from the grave in a world which exist­ed before the foun­da­tions of this earth were laid. They and the Heav­en­ly body which they now inhab­it were once in a fall­en state.…they were exalt­ed also, from fall­en men to Celes­tial Gods to inhab­it their Heav­en for­ev­er and ever.” (Apos­tle Orson Pratt in The Seer, page 23) Would you think fall­en means sin­ner In the 1844 LDS pub­li­ca­tion, Times and Sea­sons, vol­ume 5, pages 613–614,… Joseph Smith reit­er­at­ed that God was an exalt­ed man and that Mor­mon men could also become Gods. This teach­ing is well doc­u­ment­ed, as is their claim that God is not a spir­it being, but that he has a body of flesh and bone. “God is a per­fect­ed, saved soul enjoy­ing eter­nal life.” (Sec­ond Coun­selor in the First Pres­i­den­cy, Mar­i­on G. Rom­ney, as per Salt Lake Tri­bune, April 3, 1977.) It appears ridicu­lous to the world, under their dark­ened and erro­neous tra­di­tions, that God has once been a finite being; and yet we are not in such close com­mu­nion with him as many have sup­posed. He has passed on, and is exalt­ed far beyond what we can now com­pre­hend. Brigham Young, Jour­nal of Dis­cours­es, vol. 7, p. 334 Doc­trine and Covenant’s 132: 20: 20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; there­fore shall they be from… Read more »

molly_miller
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

James Tal­mage, a Mor­mon Apos­tle, said Psalm 82:6 is notabout becom­ing gods. “In Psalm 82:6,judges invest­ed by divine appoint­ment are called ‘gods.’ To this scrip­ture the­Sav­ior referred in His reply to the Jews in Solomon’s Porch. Judges soau­tho­rized offi­ci­at­ed as the rep­re­sen­ta­tives of God and are hon­ored by the exalt­edti­tle ‘gods.’ Com­pare the sim­i­lar appel­la­tion applied to Moses (Exo. 4:16;7:1). Jesus Christ pos­sessed divine autho­riza­tion, not through the word of God­trans­mit­ted to Him by man, but as an inher­ent attribute. The incon­sis­ten­cy ofcall­ing human judges ‘gods,’ and of ascrib­ing blas­phe­my to the Christ who­called Him­self the Son of God, would have been appar­ent to the Jews but fortheir sin-dark­ened minds.” (James Tal­mage, Jesus the Christ, p. 501). –Mor­mons often quote Psalm 82:6 which Jesus quot­ed in John 10:30–34 to show thatwe can become gods. Rather than them believ­ing the truth from a Christian,perhaps they will believe it from their own apostle

tapirrider
tapirrider
8 years ago

“Peo­ple have tried to explain away Chief Joseph hav­ing cuneiform tablets with seem­ing­ly impos­si­ble explanations.” Non­sense. The only source that Chief Joseph had them and the things he alleged­ly said about them came from one per­son who wrote with­out sources for Chief Joseph’s alleged words to back up her claims. Mary Gin­dling’s post does not make it so. https://web.archive.org/web/20100131104033/http://www.helium.com/items/1636848-hisdtory-mystery-chief-josephs-cuneiform-tablet The Smith­son­ian Mag­a­zine of Feb­ru­ary, 1979 gives very plau­si­ble expla­na­tions. David, just because the tablet is authen­tic does not prove that Chief Joseph ever even owned it or had it in his pos­ses­sion. Edgar James Banks brought per­haps thou­sands of those items into the Unit­ed States and sold them, long after the Bat­tle of Bear Paw. The first time the tablet showed up was at West Point in a box of items labeled as Chief Joseph’s belong­ings. It is most like­ly and the best plau­si­ble expla­na­tion, that the tablet had been pur­chased in the ear­ly 20th Cen­tu­ry from Banks and end­ed up with those oth­er items, either before they were donat­ed or the muse­um itself screwed up and mis­placed and mis­labled one of its own artifacts. When a ratio­nal per­son con­sid­ers that your DNA claim is flawed and has stud­ied the geo­met­ric pat­terns of Amer­i­can Indi­an art and bead­work and is famil­iar with the cul­tur­al sig­nif­i­cance and mean­ings of the pat­terns and their uses by the var­i­ous dif­fer­ent tribes, your entire claim col­laps­es with the real­i­ty that the tablet was a com­mon item in the ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry Unit­ed States. It is… Read more »

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

David, there is no cred­i­ble cul­tur­al ties of the Nez Per­cé to Iran and your DNA claims are not in agree­ment with sci­ence. And giv­en that there is no 19th evi­dence via pho­to­graph or writ­ten doc­u­ment tying that tablet to Chief Joseph, all you have is a belief with no back­ing. Your faith is admirable but in this case it would seem misguided.

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

No David, your alleged cul­tur­al evi­dence is not cred­i­ble. My posi­tion is not a mat­ter of denial, nor is it a prob­lem I have. The facts and evi­dence sim­ply do not sup­port your claims. I can back up my posi­tion with reli­able, cred­i­ble and rep­utable sources, while you must twist the find­ings and con­clu­sions of sci­en­tists, archae­ol­o­gists and schol­ars to fit your ideas. You have to dis­re­gard radio­car­bon dates that dis­agree with your claims and ignore the improve­ments in the mol­e­c­u­lar clock mea­sure­ment. It is a fact that you use known hoax arti­facts and you have tried to attribute that valid arti­fact tablet from Mesopotamia to Chief Joseph when there is no evi­dence that he actu­al­ly ever had it, and you do this in the face of all indi­ca­tions that it entered the Unit­ed States in the ear­ly 1900s.

Denial is refus­ing to acknowl­edge cred­i­ble evi­dence, refus­ing to accept that lack of evi­dence to sup­port a claim indi­cates that one’s posi­tion might actu­al­ly be wrong, dis­put­ing and dis­agree­ing with the estab­lished con­sen­sus with­out valid or cred­i­ble grounds to stand on, and allow­ing one’s own bias and desire for some­thing to be true to inter­fere with accept­ing real­i­ty. My prob­lem is just the oppo­site. I can­not allow myself to believe in fan­ta­sy, no mat­ter how bad­ly I might want to.

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  tapirrider
8 years ago

David, I am not “try­ing to white wash” any­thing. My posi­tion is not an opin­ion, it is based on cred­i­ble evi­dence and facts, in line with the estab­lished con­sen­sus of sci­en­tists, archae­ol­o­gists, anthro­pol­o­gists, his­to­ri­ans and edu­ca­tors. The claims that you present are in error and entire­ly unnec­es­sary con­cern­ing the Book of Mor­mon. If Moroni 10:3–5 can’t estab­lish the truth then no amount of dis­tort­ed claims will either.

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

The Book of Mor­mon isn’t hold­ing its own any­more though. Con­ver­sion rates are at an all time low, reten­tion of new con­verts is extreme­ly prob­lem­at­ic and even long time mem­bers from multi­gen­er­a­tional fam­i­lies are leav­ing. Esti­mates of active mem­bers world wide come in at only about 5 mil­lion. The major­i­ty of those active mem­bers are in Utah and sur­round­ing regions. The out­look is dis­mal. Pseu­do claims like yours, Mel­drum’s, Wayne May’s, along with Fair­Mor­mon’s divi­sive claims of two Cumorahs and Meso­camer­i­can lim­it­ed geog­ra­phy do not help. In fact they hurt because ratio­nal, edu­cat­ed, think­ing indi­vid­u­als can quick­ly see that a hoax scrip­ture can only be propped up with more dis­tor­tions. This sit­u­a­tion is sad but true. When I final­ly real­ized that the Book of Mor­mon was not what I had been taught and that the things I had taught in LDS class­es through many years were not true or real, I was dev­as­tat­ed. It was one of the most dif­fi­cult things I ever had to face. David, if you want to help peo­ple, please stop dis­tort­ing sci­ence and archae­ol­o­gy. Please stop pre­sent­ing a fan­ta­sy inter­pre­ta­tion of science.

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

David, I know that the Book of Mor­mon is not true. My death will not make a work of fic­tion real for me in some pre­tend “next” life. And with that knowl­edge I also know that claims about Amer­i­can Indi­ans based on the Book of Mor­mon are not only false, they are part of the racism that I now speak out against. Please stop putting that ridicu­lous label of Cau­casian onto some of the most beau­ti­ful peo­ple in the world who need to be seen and under­stood for who they real­ly are. Stop rob­bing Amer­i­can Indi­an’s con­tri­bu­tions to the world by try­ing to claim that their ances­tors were Cau­casians. Their real ances­tors deserve full cred­it, but your fan­ta­sy his­to­ry does­n’t grant that to them. Its time for me to end my com­mu­ni­ca­tion with you because quite hon­est­ly, your twists and dis­tor­tions of sci­ence, archae­ol­o­gy and Amer­i­can Indi­an cul­tures makes my head hurt. If you come to a point where you want to live in the real world, shoot me an email.

molly_miller
Reply to  tapirrider
8 years ago

“What does the Bible mean by ‘you are gods’ / ‘ye are gods’ in Psalm 82:6 and John 10:34?” Answer: Let’s start with a look at Psalm 82, the psalm that Jesus quotes in John 10:34. The Hebrew word trans­lat­ed “gods” in Psalm 82:6 is Elo­him. It usu­al­ly refers to the one true God, but it does have oth­er uses. Psalm 82:1 says, “God pre­sides in the great assem­bly; he gives judg­ment among the gods.” It is clear from the next three vers­es that the word “gods” refers to mag­is­trates, judges, and oth­er peo­ple who hold posi­tions of author­i­ty and rule. Call­ing a human mag­is­trate a “god” indi­cates three things: 1) he has author­i­ty over oth­er human beings, 2) the pow­er he wields as a civ­il author­i­ty is to be feared, and 3) he derives his pow­er and author­i­ty from God Him­self, who is pic­tured as judg­ing the whole earth in verse 8. This use of the word “gods” to refer to humans is rare, but it is found else­where in the Old Tes­ta­ment. For exam­ple, when God sent Moses to Pharaoh, He said, “See, I have made you like God to Pharaoh” (Exo­dus 7:1). This sim­ply means that Moses, as the mes­sen­ger of God, was speak­ing God’s words and would there­fore be God’s rep­re­sen­ta­tive to the king. The Hebrew word Elo­him is trans­lat­ed “judges” in Exo­dus 21:6 and 22:8, 9, and 28. The whole point of Psalm 82 is that earth­ly judges must act with impar­tial­i­ty and true jus­tice, because even… Read more »

molly_miller
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

The Book of Mor­mon com­plete­ly con­tra­dicts Mormonismhttp://mmilly97.wordpress.com/

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago
molly_miller
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

The Book of Mor­mon isn’t hold­ing its own any­more though. Con­ver­sion rates are at an all time low, reten­tion of new con­verts is extreme­ly prob­lem­at­ic and even long time mem­bers from multi­gen­er­a­tional fam­i­lies are leav­ing. Esti­mates of active mem­bers world wide come in at only about 5 mil­lion. The major­i­ty of those active mem­bers are in Utah and sur­round­ing regions. The out­look is dis­mal. Pseu­do claims like yours, Mel­drum’s, Wayne May’s, along with Fair­Mor­mon’s divi­sive claims of two Cumorahs and Meso­camer­i­can lim­it­ed geog­ra­phy do not help. In fact they hurt because ratio­nal, edu­cat­ed, think­ing indi­vid­u­als can quick­ly see that a hoax scrip­ture can only be propped up with more dis­tor­tions. This sit­u­a­tion is sad but true. When I final­ly real­ized that the Book of Mor­mon was not what I had been taught and that the things I had taught in LDS class­es through many years were not true or real, I was dev­as­tat­ed. It was one of the most dif­fi­cult things I ever had to face. David, if you want to help peo­ple, please stop dis­tort­ing sci­ence and archae­ol­o­gy. Please stop pre­sent­ing a fan­ta­sy inter­pre­ta­tion of science.

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

David, your use of the word Cau­casian is out­dat­ed and racist. Even worse, the con­text you use it in is that ancient white peo­ple in Amer­i­ca accom­plished the great­est things but were destroyed by non-Cau­casians. That theme is down­right racist, sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly false and moral­ly condemnable. The LDS church is mak­ing efforts to water down and remove the racism of skin col­or. White now means pure, not skin col­or as explained in the LDS essays and even in offi­cial cur­ricu­lum mate­ri­als. But here comes Dave, parad­ing out Cau­casian and claim­ing that hap­logroup x is a genet­ic mark­er for it, using it to iden­ti­fy white as a genet­ic dis­tinc­tive­ness as evi­dence for proof of the Book of Mor­mon. This garbage from Dave is sick and racist. And like all oth­ers who do this kind of thing, he resorts to the most extreme pseu­do claims such as ancient giants mix­ing with peo­ple, use of known hoax arti­facts and the con­cept that white is supe­ri­or. There real­ly is no place for this in the 21st cen­tu­ry and most impor­tant­ly, when address­ing mat­ters of Amer­i­can Indi­ans. This would­n’t stand for one minute if it was about Blacks, but when it comes to Amer­i­can Indi­ans, one of the real­i­ties of racism against them is that things like this are still con­sid­ered accept­able by the igno­rant and unin­formed and Dave just keeps right on doing it. Here are the sources Dave uses that refer to Hap­logroup x as Caucasian: This arti­cle is from 1997 and most­ly ref­er­ences old­er… Read more »

molly_miller
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

The worst sin­ners, accord­ing to Jesus, are not the har­lot­sand pub­li­cans, but the reli­gious lead­ers with their insis­tence on prop­er dres­sand groom­ing, their care­ful obser­vance of all the rules, their pre­cious con­cern­for sta­tus sym­bols, their strict legal­i­ty, their pious patriotism…the hair­cut­be­comes the test of virtue in a world where Satan deceives and rules byap­pear­ances.” Hugh Nib­ley Approach­ing Zion Vol 9

tapirrider
tapirrider
Reply to  Dave Mack
8 years ago

David, it isn’t about me get­ting offend­ed or what I find palat­able. I gave you plen­ty of infor­ma­tion to read and explained how what you are doing is wrong. You don’t seem to get it so good­bye. I don’t have any more patience with your nonsense.

42
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x