Simon Southerton, who is struggling hard to be a critic of the Church in a long-since dead area is back again. Maybe his book had low sales last year, so he is trying to drum up some more buyers.
Anyhow, The Age had this, in part, to say:
Last year he published a rebuttal of the Book of Mormon teachings that Native American and Polynesian ancestors came from ancient Israelite tribes who had migrated to the Americas centuries before Christ.
In all the years I’ve read the Book of Mormon?¢‚Ç¨‚Äùin all the times I’ve read it from cover to cover?¢‚Ç¨‚ÄùI must have entirely skipped over the part where it teaches “Native Americans” and “Polynesians” are descended from Israelite tribes.
Maybe if Southerton focused more on what was in the Book of Mormon and less on how members of the Church have traditionally extrapolated the Book of Mormon, it wouldn’t be an issue that he “is facing possible ex-communication”.
I wonder why didn’t wait another week. If he had, he could have done double duty by bringing about press for his new book, and celebrating the first anniversary of the last time he brought this up.
Simon Southerton, geneticist and author of Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA and the Mormon Church, has taken up a crusade to â€œ[examine] church teachings that American Indians and Polynesians have a historic bond with ancient Israelites.â€ He does so by using DNA research and applying it to current popular opinion of members of the Church and writings of some scholars with the Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies.
This seems to be a thorny issue for Southerton. He left the Church because there seemed to be no conclusive evidence that supported the widely held notion among Latter-day Saints that Pacific Islanders and indigenous people of the Americas were descended from the Lamanites.
First, I find it unbelievableâ€”actually, I can believe it, but it still is dumbfoundingâ€”that someoneâ€™s conviction to the Church can be swayed by scientific evidence. The Book of Mormon is not a scientific journal. It does not establish scientific fact and does not even heavily support scientific theories. It is nothing more than a spiritual recordâ€”interspersed with select historical informationâ€”of a distinct, isolated group of people.
Second, there is no indication whatsoever in the Book of Mormon that the Lamanites and Nephites were completely alone in the Americas. To say otherwise is nothing more than speculation. It is entirely plausible and even likely that the Lamanites and Nephites encounteredâ€”and even mingled withâ€”other peoples already present in the Americas. This alone would reduce any existence of Israelite DNA. As well, it is entirely plausible that the Lamanite population died off or were exterminated; after all, the record of their history is incomplete.
Third, popular belief among Latter-day Saints does not equal doctrine. Just because many Latter-day Saints hold on to the archaic notion that all people indigenous to the Americas are descended solely from Lehi, does not make it church doctrine. I wish more people would understand this one principle. Tradition is not doctrine.
The Book of Mormon is primarily a religious book containing teachings and doctrine about God and Jesus Christ. To treat it primarily as anything else is to treat it as a very shaky foundation.
That being said, it only take a smidgen of logic to see that DNA research does not disprove the Book of Mormon. One would think a scientist like Southerton would understand that.