FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church/Chapter 3
| Chapter 2 | A FAIR Analysis of: Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church A work by author: Simon G. Southerton
|
Chapter 4 |
Claims made in "Chapter 3: Lamanites in the Latter Days"
37
Claim
- Mormonism does not assign value to native cultures, their histories or mythologies.
Author's source(s)
- No source given.
Response
- Mind reading: author has no way of knowing this.
- Latter-day Saint culture/Preserving diverse cultural traditions
37
Claim
- The Lamanite "family" has expanded to include Native Americans and Polynesians.
Author's source(s)
- Gospel Principles, 1997, p. 268.
Response
Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Ridicule—The author is presenting the argument in such a way that it makes his or her subject look ridiculous, usually by misrepresenting the argument or exaggerating it.
Taking the position that Lehi existed, then population genetics predicts that virtually all Amerindians and Polynesians are his literal descendants. They are simply not exclusively his descendants. The author wants to make Lehite links absurd or impossible.
38
Claim
- The patriarchal blessings of Native Americans and Polynesians often state that they are of the tribe of Manasseh (through Lehi).
Author's source(s)
Response
Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Ridicule—The author is presenting the argument in such a way that it makes his or her subject look ridiculous, usually by misrepresenting the argument or exaggerating it.
Taking the position that Lehi existed, then population genetics predicts that virtually all Amerindians and Polynesians are his literal descendants. They are simply not exclusively his descendants. The author wants to make Lehite links absurd or impossible.
38-39
Claim
- Modern day prophets repeatedly declare Native Americans and Polynesians to be descendants of Lehi.
Author's source(s)
- Gordon B. Hinckley, Church News, Mar. 13, 1999. (Colonia Juarez Chihuahua Temple dedication)
- James E. Faust, Church News, Mar. 18, 2000. (Tuxtla Gutierrez Mexico Temple dedication)
- Thomas S. Monson, Church News, May 27, 2000. (Villahermosa Mexico Temple dedication)
- Gordon B. Hinckley, Church News, Aug. 7, 1999. (Guayaquil Ecuador Temple dedication)
- Gordon B. Hinckley, Church News, May 13, 2000. (Cochabamba Bolivia Temple dedication)
Response
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.
The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
- If Lehi had any descendants, then all' Amerindians are his descendants.
- All from Lehi?
- Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Polynesians
40
Claim
- The Church believed that Lamanites who accepted the Gospel would become light-skinned.
Author's source(s)
- 3 Nephi 2꞉14-16
- Spencer W. Kimball, "The Day of the Lamanites," The Improvement Era, December 1960, 922-923.
Response
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.
The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
- Leaders were in some cases unaware of a clarification made by Joseph Smith in 1836.
- Lamanite curse—literal or metaphorical
41
Claim
- A general authority claimed that the writings of Ixtlilxochitl corroborated the Book of Mormon.
Author's source(s)
- Milton R. Hunter, sometime in the 1960's.
Response
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.
The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
42
Claim
- Most Mormons are unaware that the New World has been continuously inhabited for 14,000 years.
Author's source(s)
- No source given.
Response
- Do Mormons differ substantially from others? Do "most Americans" know this? Most people in the world?
- Book of Mormon/DNA evidence
Logical Fallacy: Bandwagon (Appeal to the Masses)—The author believes that this claim is true simply because all of his or her buddies believe that it is true, despite the lack of actual evidence supporting it.
The author frequently makes claims about what "most Mormons" believe. How does he know? What surveys has he done? The author strives to portray members as gullible, ill-informed, confused, and manipulated. But, he presents no evidence save his opinion. Why ought members trust someone who obviously has such a low opinion of them?
42
Claim
- The New World shows no sign of having experienced a universal flood.
Author's source(s)
- No source given.
Response
Logical Fallacy: Composition—The author assumes that something is true of the whole from the fact that it is true of some part of the whole.
The Church has no official position on the extent of Noah's Flood. Just because some members and leaders believe that the Flood was global in scope does not mean that everyone believes it.
42
Claim
- The Church employs apologists to defend the "myths" surrounding the Book of Mormon.
Author's source(s)
- No source given.
Response
- The author's claim is false: Apologetics
- This is a repeat of a claim on p. xv.
Logical Fallacy: Appeal to Emotion—The author attempts to manipulate the reader's emotional response instead of presenting a valid argument.
<Rather than interact with arguments the author labels "apologetic" (i.e., any interpretation which does not suit his naive view of the matter), the author hopes to marginalize them and reject them from consideration by claiming they are somehow novel, contrary to the Book of Mormon's plain meaning, or driven by desperation.
Many statements indicate that these ideas are generally not novel, and were certainly developed well before any pressure from DNA arguments—they arose from the Book of Mormon text itself.
43
Claim
- Members are encouraged not to try and determine where the Book of Mormon occurred.
Author's source(s)
- No source given.
Response
Logical Fallacy: Black-or-White—The author presents two alternative states as the only two possibilities, when more possibilities exist.
Members are encouraged not to focus on the geography to the exclusion of the Book's more important spiritual message. BYU and FARMS (now the Maxwell Institute) have published a great deal of member scholarship on geography, however. If the Church opposed this, it could easily be stopped.
Ironically, the author knows that there is no official geography (see p. 205) but continues to act as if it scandalous that the Church does not preach a non-official idea as official—perhaps hoping we will conclude that the model he describes is the official one which the Church dare not renounce.
45
Claim
- Church leaders "seem reluctant or powerless to curtail" the belief among Mesoamerican and South American saints that they are descendents of the Lamanites.
Author's source(s)
- Author's opinion.
Response
- Prejudicial or loaded language
Logical Fallacy: Tu Quoque/Appeal to Hypocrisy—The author tries to discredit the validity of someone's position by asserting their failure to act consistently.
The author is determined to represent LDS leaders as either bumbling, ill-informed, manipulative, or overwhelmed. The author never acknowledges that the LDS do not believe in infallibility in their leaders. The author finally admits on p. 205 that there is no official geography—why, then, does he bother to reiterate the views of various leaders as if this were some kind of problem? Since even he agrees there is no official geography, what difference does it make if members and leaders are of differing views, or if they even change their minds?
- Why would the Church wish to curtail such a belief, when all South American saints are descendants of Lehi if any descendants exist?
- All from Lehi?
- Book of Mormon/Lamanites/Relationship to Amerindians