|
|
| (117 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{question}} | + | {{Main Page}} |
| | + | <onlyinclude> |
| | + | {{H2 |
| | + | |L=Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians |
| | + | |H=The relationship of Native Americans to Lamanites |
| | + | |S= |
| | + | |L1=Identity of the Lamanites in the Book of Mormon |
| | + | |L2=Are all Native Americans descendants of Lehi? |
| | + | |L3=Relationship of the Maya and the Olmec to the Lamanites and the Jaredites |
| | + | |L4=Statements by Church leaders related to the identity of the Lamanites |
| | + | }} |
| | + | {{:Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians/Who are the Lamanites}} |
| | + | {{:Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians/Descendants of Lehi}} |
| | + | {{:Relationship of the Maya and the Olmec to the Lamanites and the Jaredites}} |
| | + | {{:Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians/Statements}} |
| | + | </onlyinclude> |
| | | | |
| − | ==Question==
| + | {{Critical sources box:Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians/CriticalSources}} |
| − | Are all Amerindians descendants of Lehi?
| + | {{endnotes sources}} |
| | + | <!-- PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE --> |
| | | | |
| − | ==Answer==
| + | [[es:El Libro de Mormón/Lamanitas/Relación con los Amerindios]] |
| − | | + | [[pt:O Livro de Mórmon/Lamanitas/Relação com os ameríndios]] |
| − | Newspaper accounts have sometimes dramatically recounted how Church members from various Amerindian groups (e.g. Navajo, Pacific Islanders) have expressed dismay at the idea that DNA has "proved" that they are not "really" descendants of Lehi as the Church has taught them. Critics have also insisted that LDS prophets who have mentioned such ideas are "wrong."
| |
| − | | |
| − | Regardless of the population model which one uses, or the geographical model, this claim is demonstrably false.
| |
| − | | |
| − | The popularity of Dan Brown's novel, ''The Da Vinci Code'', led many Christians to consider the question of whether (as the novel postulates) Jesus Christ could have sired children and have living descendants today.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Non LDS-writer Steve Olson (an expert in population genetics{{ref|olson1}}) wrote:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :If anyone living today is descended from Jesus, so are most of us on the planet. That absurd-sounding statement is an inevitable consequence of the strange and marvelous workings of human ancestry...Say you go back 120 generations, to about the year 1000 B.C. According to the results presented in our Nature paper, your ancestors then included everyone in the world who has descendants living today... If Jesus had children (a big if, of course) and if those children had children so that Jesus' lineage survived, then Jesus is today the ancestor of almost everyone living on Earth. True, Jesus lived two rather than three millenniums ago, but a person's descendants spread quickly from well-connected parts of the world like the Middle East...In addition to Jesus...we're also all descended from Julius Caesar, from Nefertiti, from Confucius...and from any other historical figure who left behind lines of descendants and lived earlier than a few thousand years ago. ''Genetic tests can't prove this, partly because current tests look at just a small fraction of our DNA.'' But if we're descended from someone, we have at least a chance—even if it's a very small chance—of having their DNA in our cells...People may like to think that they're descended from some ancient group while other people are not. But human ancestry doesn't work that way, since we all share the same ancestors just a few millenniums ago.{{ref|olson2}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | If Lehi existed, and if he left ''any'' descendants who survive to the modern day, then it is overwhelmingly likely—via the laws of population genetics—that virtually ''all'' modern Amerindians count Lehi among their direct ancestors. (If someone in the Middle East at the time of Christ would be the ancestor of everyone currently alive, then Lehi's entry to the Americas 600 years prior to ''that'' time almost assures that he would be the direct ancestor of all Amerindians.) In a similar fashion, it is even more certain that all Amerindians are descendants of "the Lamanites," regardless of whether one considers Lehi's group to have been "the whole show" genetically ''or'' a mere drop in a genetic sea.
| |
| − | | |
| − | And, by the same token, the chance of actually having "Lehi's DNA" or a DNA marker from Lehi is vanishingly small under most population models, unless (as in hemisphere model, type 3) Lehi is literally the ''only'' source of DNA for the continent, and even then not all descendants will have a given marker.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Another non-LDS author discussed the difficulties associated with using genetic tests to determine ancestory even a few generations back:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Many amateur genealogists are interested in whether they might have a Cherokee ancestor, for example. And for some people, admixture tests can give a relatively accurate answer about Native-American ancestry. But other people, including Greeks and Ashkenazi Jews, may have "Native American affinity," according to the tests, even if they and their ancestors have never been to America. As far as anthropologists know, there were no lost tribes connecting Greeks, Jews, and ancient Americans. [LDS readers might pause here and wonder!] So, maybe this "Native American affinity" reflects the scattering of alleles by prehistoric Asian nomads to the ancestors of Greeks and Jews as well as to American Indians.{{ref|howafrican1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ''Articles which address the phenomenon of how large groups (or the entire human population) can have fairly recent common ancestors include:''
| |
| − | | |
| − | * {{FR-18-1-6}} <!-- Butler - Addressing-->
| |
| − | * {{FR-15-2-8}} <!-- Roper - Swimming-->
| |
| − | * {{FR-15-2-9}} <!--Stubbs - Elusive Israel-->
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===So why does Lamanite lineage matter at all?===
| |
| − | | |
| − | One might ask, however, that if this is true, what is the point of identifying anyone as a "Lamanite," since much or all of the current population might be able to claim Lehi as an ancestor? President Spencer W. Kimball is known as a powerful advocate for the Native Americans, on the basis of their status as "Lamanites." He said:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :we would say that many, many of us are Lamanites, ''which includes the Indians'' and the mixtures of Indians with other races. ''Even I have been adopted into some of the Indian tribes'' and have been given Indian names...
| |
| − | | |
| − | :The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures…It is a large group of great people. The Church has always maintained a tremendous interest and concern for the Indian people and all of the Lamanites.{{ref|kimball1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | Thus, for President Kimball, the “Lamanites” and “Indians” are made up of both genetic descendants and those who have been adopted into the tribes, or added through “mixtures…with other races.” This goes a long way toward explaining why the critics' DNA attack is fundamentally misdirected—the participants are talking past each other. Church leaders are quite happy, generally, to extend “Lamanite” status to any Amerindian (or even a white of European descent like President Kimball) because gospel promises are the focus of their attention. The Church is not and has not been particularly worried about someone’s Lamanite ''genes'', but rather about their eligibility for the ''promises'' made to the Lamanites as members of the covenant people. Thus, President Kimball is quite happy to have all American Aborigines considered Lamanites, since he considers them all eligible for these promises—he is also quite pleased and proud to be considered a “Lamanite” not because of genes but because of covenant blessings.
| |
| − | | |
| − | This idea is familiar to Latter-day Saints, whose patriarchal blessings indicate a lineage in one of the houses of Israel. Genetically, it is probable that ''all'' people alive today share ''all'' of the sons of Jacob as genetic ancestors. Yet, the blessings of the gospel come to people because of the covenants, and thus one ancestor is focused on as the conduit for those covenant blessings. Having lineage declared from the tribe of Ephraim, for example, does not mean that a member of the Church has no genetic ancestry from another tribe. It means simply that the member's blessings, promises, covenants, and duties are being focused upon the Ephraimite lineage.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Lamanite is an inclusive, not exclusive, term in the Church. President Kimball even extends the label of “Lamanites” beyond “the Indian people,” and no wonder, since his goal is to teach that
| |
| − | | |
| − | :There are no blessings, of all the imaginable ones, to which you are not entitled—you, the Lamanites—when you are righteous.{{ref|kimball2}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | We should perhaps be cautious, then, in assuming (as the critics do) that gospel statements about Lamanite ancestry are mostly about genetics, when they are most likely primarily about covenant duties and promises.
| |
| − | | |
| − | ''Articles which discuss the nature of "Nephite" and "Lamanite" in the Book of Mormon:''
| |
| − | * {{JBMS-12-1-5}}<!--Meldrum and Stephens - Who Are-->{{NB}}
| |
| − | * {{JBMS-12-1-2}} <!-- Sorenson and Roper - before dna}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===How have LDS members understood Amerindian origins?===
| |
| − | | |
| − | ====Initial ideas====
| |
| − | It is not surprising that some Church members concluded that all Amerindians were descendants of Lehi/Mulek. In fact, this was the initial conclusion drawn by many contemporaries of Joseph Smith. For example:
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Lucy Mack Smith describing the Book of Mormon: "a history of the origin of the Indians."{{ref|lms1}}
| |
| − | * WW Phelps, 1833: "That wonderful conjecture, which left blank as to the origin . . . of the American Indians, was done away by the Book of Mormon…"{{ref|wwphelps1}}
| |
| − | * Parley P. Pratt [apostle], 1837: "reveals the origin of the American Indians, which was before a mystery." {{ref|pppratt1}}
| |
| − | * Orson Pratt [apostle], 1875: I refer to the American Indians, all remnants of Joseph and belonging to the house of Israel. {{ref|orsonpratt1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | And, many later members and leaders continued to emphasize this perspective (though, as discussed above, if Lehi had any descendants, then all present Amerindians are his descendants):
| |
| − | | |
| − | * LeGrand Richards [Apostle] 1954: The dark-skinned people who occupied this land of America from that time on were called "Lamanites," who are the people known generally as the American Indians, all of whom are of the house of Israel.{{ref|richards1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===A reevalution===
| |
| − | | |
| − | However, contrary to the claims of critics who attempt to use DNA evidence to discredit the Book of Mormon, some readers and leaders reconsidered these ideas.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Taught Elder Levi Edgar Young [First Council of the Seventy] in 1928 general conference:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :There must be a clear distinction, it grows every year more evident, ''between the origins of America's ancient people and the sources of their culture.'' The human material of the pre- Columbian societies probably came from Asia by way of Alaska, the orthodox route long accepted for the American Indians…Among many social belongings abandoned along the route seem to have been most of the things called intellectual. The men and women who peopled America arrived, intellectually, with the clothes they stood in…Dr. Uhle urges an alternative [theory for how high culture arose in the Americas]…Occasional cultured mariners from India, China, Japan or other lands may have landed, he believes, few in numbers, but full of ideas, to bring to the rude American societies…just the hint that culture was possible. ''Small numerically as this source of inspiration must have been, it may conceivably have been the seed from which sprouted the great achievements of Peru and Central America…''{{ref|young1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | A 1927 Book of Mormon study guide noted that:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :All Indians Are ''Not'' the Descendants of Lehi …Students of the Book of Mormon should be cautioned against the error of supposing that all the American Indians are the descendants of Lehi, Mulek, and their companions, and that their languages and dialects, their social organizations, religious conceptions and practices, traditions, etc., are all traceable to those Hebrew sources.
| |
| − | | |
| − | :Because the Jaredite record is very brief we are apt to forget that it embraces many centuries—how many, we have no means of ascertaining—and that it gives an epitome principally of the history of Moron, where the Jaredites first established themselves. It stands to reason that the Jaredites gradually settled in favorable localities all over the American continents, and that both Nephites and Lamanites came in contact with them, and that an amalgamation took place everywhere as in the case of the Nephites and Mulekites in Zarahemla. If so, the Jaredite culture must have become a factor in the development of the institutions and languages of the country. But the Jaredites came from some center of population in Asia…{{ref|sjodahl1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | In April 1929, President Anthony W. Ivins [Counselor in First Presidency] said in General Conference:
| |
| − | | |
| − | :We must be careful in the conclusions that we reach. The Book of Mormon teaches the history of three distinct peoples, or two peoples and three different colonies of people, who came from the old world to this continent. ''It does not tell us that there was no one here before them. It does not tell us that people did not come after. And so if discoveries are made which suggest differences in race origins, it can very easily be accounted for, and reasonably, for we do believe that other people came to this continent.''{{ref|ivans1}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Endnotes==
| |
| − | | |
| − | #{{note|olson1}} Olson is co-author of a letter to ''Nature'', in which he discusses these ideas in a more technical format. See Douglas L. T. Rohde, Steve Olson, and Joseph T. Chang, "Modelling the recent common ancestry of all living humans," 431 ''Nature'' (30 September 2004): 562–566. {{link|url=http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v431/n7008/abs/nature02842.html}} Olson provides a "semi-technical" description of his findings [http://www.slate.com/id/2138060/sidebar/2138061/ here].
| |
| − | #{{note|olson2}} Steve Olson, "Why We're All Jesus' Children," ''slate.com'' (15 March 2006). Last accessed 12 October 2006 (emphasis added). {{link|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2138060/}}
| |
| − | #{{note|howafrican1}} John Hawks, "How African Are You? What genealogical testing can't tell you," ''slate.com'' (15 March 2006), accessed 12 October 2006. {{link|url=http://www.slate.com/id/2138059/}}
| |
| − | #{{note|kimball1}} {{Ensign1|author=Spencer W. Kimball|article=Of Royal Blood|date=July 1971|start=7}} {{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1971.htm/ensign%20july%201971.htm/of%20royal%20blood.htm}}
| |
| − | #{{note|kimball2}} {{Ensign1|author=Spencer W. Kimball|article=Of Royal Blood|date=July 1971|start=10}} {{link|url=http://library.lds.org/nxt/gateway.dll/Magazines/Ensign/1971.htm/ensign%20july%201971.htm/of%20royal%20blood.htm}}
| |
| − | #{{note|lms1}}Lucy Mack Smith, ''Biographical Sketches of Joseph Smith the Prophet, and His Progenitors for Many Generations'' (Liverpool, England, 1853), 152.
| |
| − | #{{note|wwphelps1}}{{EMS1 | author=W. W. Phelps | article=The Book of Mormon|date=January 1833|start=?}}
| |
| − | #{{note|pppratt1}}Parley P. Pratt, ''A Voice of Warning and Instruction to All People, etc.'' (New York: W. Sandford, 1837), 135.
| |
| − | #{{note|orsonpratt1}}{{JoD17_1|author=Orson Pratt|title=?|date=7 February 1875|start=299}}{{nl}}
| |
| − | #{{note|richards1}} LeGrand Richards, ''Israel! Do You Know?'' (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1954), 37.{{nl}}
| |
| − | #{{note|young1}} {{CR|author=Levi Edgar Young|date=October 1928|start=103|end=106, italics added}}
| |
| − | #{{note|sojdahl1}}{{IE1|author=Janne M. Sjodahl|article=Suggested Key To Book of Mormon Geography|vol=30|num=11|date=September 1927|start=?}}
| |
| − | #{{note|ivins1}} {{CR1|author=Anthony W. Ivins|date=April 1929|start=15, italics added}}
| |
| − | #
| |
| − | ==Further reading==
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===FAIR wiki articles===
| |
| − | {{Book of Mormon anachronisms}}
| |
| − | {{DNAWiki}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===FAIR web site===
| |
| − | {{DNAFAIR}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===External links===
| |
| − | {{DNALinks}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ===Printed material===
| |
| − | {{DNAPrint}}
| |
