Index to claims made in Reinventing Lamanite Identity, by Brent L. Metcalfe
This is an index of claims made in this work with links to corresponding responses within the FAIRwiki. An effort has been made to provide the author's original sources where possible.
| Page
|
Claim
|
Response
|
Author's sources
|
20
|
- The author claims that "the Book of Mormon teaches—that "the Lamanites...are the principal ancestors of the American Indians."
|
|
- "Introduction," Book of Mormon (1981 edition).
|
20
|
- The author claims that LDS scholars have been led to "shrink and dilute" the Book of Mormon's "American Israelite" population as the result of DNA analysis showing that Native Americans have an Asian genetic signature.
|
- The author argues that LDS scholars or apologists are "shrinking and diluting" their view on the Book of Mormon because they are being driven back in a rear-guard action by science. But, in fact, some LDS leaders and scholars have argued for a restricted geography and small numeric contribution of Lehites for over one hundred years. These beliefs were not held because of scientific "pressure," but because of their reading of the Book of Mormon text.
- See: Limited geography theory
|
- The author quotes a number of genetic studies.
|
20
|
- Author's quote: As BYU geneticist Michael Whiting stipulates, a hemispheric colonization model for the Book of Mormon “is indeed incorrect” and “appears falsified by current genetic evidence.”
|
- The fragments quoted by the author in context:
If we grant that the global colonization hypothesis is the correct lineage history...the above hypothesis is indeed incorrect. To this point all we have shown is that the global colonization hypothesis appears falsified by current genetic evidence. But is the global colonization hypothesis the only hypothesis emerging from the Book of Mormon? This is the crux of the matter....if the above description of the lineage history in the Book of Mormon is oversimplified, then these genetic results demonstrate only that this oversimplified view does not appear correct. But Book of Mormon scholars have been writing about certain complicating factors for decades, so this conclusion about oversimplification really comes as no surprise. (emphasis added)
|
- Michael F. Whiting, “DNA and the Book of Mormon: A Phylogenetic Perspective,” Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 12, no. 1 (2003): 28, 31. off-site
|
