| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MESSAGE OF THE MORMON MISSIONARIES
Subj: RE: Jerry Stokes New Web Address
Date: 4/21/03 5:43:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: joel@irr.org
To: Geraldostokes@aol.com
BOOK OF ABRAHAM RESEARCH PAGE
Hi Jerry,
Thanks for the info on the new website address, I’ve bookmarked it for future reference.
I also wondered, after looking over the BOA info if you want to include some info on our new video on the BOA, or a link to our page on the film:
BOOK OF ABRAHAM VIDEO
http://www.bookofabraham.info/
Cordially in Christ,
Joel
PS. Most interesting what you noted on the lack of new stats at the 2003 Gen. Conf.
~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^~~^
Joel B. Groat ~~
Coordinator of Spanish-language Ministries
Coordinador de Ministerios Hispanoparlantes
Institute for Religious Research
1340 Monroe Ave. NW ~ Grand Rapids MI 49505
Tel. (616) 451-4562
Fax. (616) 451-8907
Email: joel@irr.org
Web: http://www.irr.org
^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^~^^
Hi Jerry,
Good to hear from you, Enjoyed your talk on the Mormon Church. Where abouts are you? I keep a file on ministries and where they are located to pass on to people in their area. Also if you want to do a short blurb on your site I will add it to our Link page.
Keep in touch,
Keith
jwfacts@macgregorministries.org
MacGregor Ministries
Visit our Web
www.macgregorministries.org
Box 294 Nelson B.C. V1L 5P9
Box 454 Metaline Falls WA 99153
Dear Jerry,
Praise the Lord for your good fortune of coming out of Mormonism. We have added your book and website to our sites:
http://a2zbookdepot.adelink.net
http://lds.cephasministry.com
Your website is great and very professional.
God be with you in getting many visitors to your site.
We have webrings you can join to get traffic.
See links on various pages to the webrings to join or go to
http://home.earthlink.net/~cephasmi
The webring has been in existence since Internet came in and there is plenty of traffic there. You can even start one yourself. They are easy to take care of and mostly automatic.
In Christ Jesus,
George & Rita Williams Cephas Ministry Inc.
Ron Leonard
Dear Jerry:
Hi there my precious brother,and greetings in the wonderful name of the Lord Jesus Christ!:) I just read your beautiful testimony as to how our Lord led you to him self out of Mormonism! I have through the years done a lot of research on Mormonism,and wrote a tract "To My Mormon Friend With Love"!:) My wife Marilyn and I live in Nashville,TN. I am 44,and she is 43. We both love the Lord Jesus,and like fellowshipping with others of like precious faith!:) Do you now have a family,or are you still single? Marilyn and I have no children. But... we have a wonderful dog named Gabby!:) Over the pass few months I have become good friends with a brother named Steve who is founder of "Missions To Mormons". He has moved to Navoo,but was reared in Oregon. Thought you may know who he is!:) Brother,I would love to know more about your life and ministry! Email soon,and have a good and Godly day!:)
Because Of Jesus love,
Ron
Dale Broadhurst
Hi, Jerry
I was happy to see that you are spreading the word that the Maya and other
Meso-American cultures were NOT descended from Book of Mormon peoples.
This is an important fact -- but one which I'm afraid that most Latter Day Saints simply will not understand and accept.
Still, it is good to know that there is one more voice supporting this truth.
Good luck in building your web-site. Feel free to quote from or link to anything
I have placed on-line, in regard to the Book of Mormon, Mormon orgins, etc.
Dale Broadhurst
Elizabeth & Dale < dbroadhu@gte.net >
Dear Jerry,
We are most pleased to hear from you. Actually, if you can make it to our
convention, we might well be interested in you sharing with us. Please
inform me shortly if you are interested.
In the REAL Jesus,
Duane Magnani
ANNA MAGNANI
Subj: I loved your testimony
Date: 3/14/03 12:59:45 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: fastfade@charter.net
To: geraldostokes@aol.com
Hello, my name is Melissa thiring, and I just read your testimony of coming out of Mormonism, and was touched. I was a mormon for 22 years, and in dec of 2001
I found Christ and left the Mormon Church. I am in the process of creating my own website to help warn people of the LDS faith. I would like your permission to post your testimony on my site. My web address is www.gospelhelp.com if you would like to check it out first. I would really appreciate your response.
God bless you,
Melissa
Subj: Re: Jerry Stokes New Web Address
Date: 4/26/03 4:01:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Rich@GodAndScience.org
To: Geraldostokes@aol.com
Jerry,
Thanks for letting me know about the change in your web address. I will change the link from my site.
May God continue to bless your outreach to Mormons.
Rich
A TEMPEST IN A TEAPOT:
DNA STUDIES & THE BOOK OF MORMON
DNA vs. The Book of Mormon VIDEO by Mormon Challenge.comby Brant Gardner
http://www.ldsmag.com/articles/030124fair.html
Editor’s Note: The following article is courtesy of FAIR, a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of LDS doctrine, belief and practice. FAIR can be found online at www.fairlds.orgThere has been a tremendous flurry of media attention over the scientific study of human genetic inheritance and the Book of Mormon. That attention has swirled around declarations made by Thomas W. Murphy, a doctoral candidate in anthropology, and current chair of the anthropology department at Edmonds Community College in Washington. The storm clouds can be seen in a news article in the Los Angeles Times that says of Mr. Murphy:
His conclusion is that "the Book of Mormon is a piece of 19th century fiction," said Murphy, a lifelong Mormon who calls himself a Latter-day skeptic. "And that means that we have to acknowledge sometimes Joseph Smith lied."1It is no wonder that with such conclusions it would appear that dark clouds are forming on the horizon of the Book of Mormon. The clouds appear especially dark when Murphy asserts that his conclusions are supported by modern science. Could it really be that science is proving the Book of Mormon wrong? This is Murphy's conclusion, but it is a conclusion that does not flow from the evidence examined. Critics of the Book of Mormon have come to the same conclusion as Murphy since the book was first published. The difference is that Murphy is claiming a new basis for his conclusion.
It is important to remember that Mr. Murphy is not citing his own original research in genetics, but rather library research into the work of others. He is synthesizing conclusions from his reading. This is a critical difference, for it helps us understand why the researchers can be right, but Mr. Murphy can be mistaken in his reading of those researchers. It will help us explain why Dr. Michael Whiting, an Evolutionary Biologist at Brigham Young University and "an authority on DNA"2 does not believe that Mr. Murphy has his science right.3 This is not a statement of fault in scientific method, because Murphy is not engaged in this type of work. It is rather a statement that his conclusions are not consonant with the science. When we examine the nature of the data available, we find that Murphy's particular conclusion does not flow from those data. He has asked the wrong questions of his data, and by asking the wrong questions, returns the wrong answers.
It should be understood by the reader that this article is not intended to be a review of Murphy's media-attention-grabbing essay, but an assessment of the available genetic data and it's implications relative to the Book of Mormon, in light of claims made by Murphy and other critics of the Book of Mormon.
To understand why Murphy's conclusions do not derive from the data, it is important that we understand what the DNA research can and cannot do. After we understand the science, we must correctly understand the Book of Mormon. Only with this foundation established, will we be able to make correct conclusions based on the data.
What can historical genetics do?
There are large numbers of different types of studies concerning DNA. To keep them straight, we will confine ourselves to discussing those aspects of DNA research that look at the historical ties of biology, or "historical genetics" as a shorthand description. The short response to the question of what historical genetics and DNA research can do is that it can do wonderful things. The uniqueness of various aspects of human DNA has led to the ability of DNA tests to positively identify the physical remains of unknown victims of accidents. Since we inherit our DNA from our parents (and they from theirs), DNA can be used to trace biological family ties.4 One of the more fascinating family connections came from the examination of a nine-thousand-year-old skeleton in England (known as Cheddar Man), whose direct genetic descendant was found living in that very vicinity.5 It is important to remember with this study, however, that it took a specific skeleton and matched it to a specific person through the use of multiple genetic "markers." It did not find the relationship by beginning with the modern man and tracing him back to the skeleton.Scientists have used the biological chemistry of genetic inheritance to trace certain sets of genetic materials that are shared widely through related populations. By examining particular pieces of DNA (markers) that are common, scientists may reconstruct the line of descent, or "umbilical line" that shows how that inherited marker traveled through time back to an early common ancestor.6 One study has traced mitochondrial DNA, which is inherited only from females, all the way back to a "genetic Eve." It is this type of research that Murphy is citing in his survey of the current research. These are remarkable new tools in our historical kit, and they do wondrous work. The real issue is to understand what they cannot do.
What can historical genetics not do?
Perhaps the most important caution about historical genetics is that it cannot yet say that all of the data have been collected and examined. For instance, in a recent radio interview, Dr. Scott Woodward, a professor of microbiology and head of the Molecular Genealogy Research Group at BYU,7 was asked about a study that indicated that the Ojibwa Indians possessed a genetic marker that was of unusual origin and appeared to indicate a possible European connection that was pre-Columbian. The study was published in 2001. That should be current science, shouldn't it? Dr. Woodward noted that more recent work has found that marker in Asia,8 highlighting the rapidly advancing and changing state of this particular science, and highlighting the difficulty of stating any conclusion as dramatically final as Murphy has. This is important not only because we should understand that our information is not complete, but because it also illustrates an important difference between researchers in a field and those who simply report on the research of others. Those who actually do the work typically show much more restraint in the types of conclusions they draw from the data. As witness to this caution, Dr. Woodward notes (speaking specifically of tracing back tot he Book of Mormon's Old World immigrants):
Have we made an adequate survey of the ancient population from which these individuals derived? No, we haven't. We've been very limited in our observation of the population structure based on mitochondrial DNA because there have been a number that have gone extinct. Perhaps the sampling isn't large enough; it doesn't contain all of the mitochondrial DNA types in a population. So, there are some real challenges in trying to reconstruct the past genetic patterns based on modern, present day DNAs that are collected.9Equally important, however, is that we must understand correctly what science is telling us. In the case of the "genetic Eve," the popular understanding of the science was that mankind had been traced back to a single woman, hence the "Eve." Similar to Murphy's work, that conclusion was not made by those doing original research, but by people reading that research and making spectacular (and unwarranted) conclusions. The reality of the science is slightly different. Rather than the image of this single progenitor of humanity, we have a single progenitor of a surviving line of mitochondrial DNA. It is a difference that is easy for the non-professional to miss. Dr. Stephen Oppenheimer discussed this misperception of what this line of genetic research could do in the context of the "genetic Eve:"
The confusion is to see genetic lines too literally as representing individual humans. The so-called "genetic Eve" was the ancestral mitochondrial genetic line for all modern living humans. Obviously it was carried ultimately by one real woman over 150,000 years ago. But she was only the common ancestor for mitochondrial DNA. She did not carry all the rest of our ancestral genes. We have 30,000 functioning genes and they could each have had a different individual ancestor living at different times in different places.
The mitochondrial Eve was therefore one woman among thousands living over 150,000 years ago. Our other genes derive from our members of that ancestral population. The real importance of the mitochondrial genetic tree is that it gives a clear line of descent that can be used as a trail marker of our spread round the world. But it is only one particular tiny part of our huge human genome.10
The scientific use of historical genetics is tracing the spread of humanity throughout the world. It can be used to discuss the flow of populations, but not the complete definition of populations. The "genetic Eve" can be used to discuss the direction of human migrations, but cannot be used to posit a single female ancestor. As Dr. Oppenheimer notes, there were thousands of other women living at the same time as this "Eve," whose mitochondrial line is the only one that survived to the present. The inherent problem with tracing historical lines is that they can only trace the information that survives. Dr. Woodward highlighted this very point in his discussion at the FAIR Conference in August of 2001:
If you see a traditional genealogy chart as you would construct it, often we have the males on top and the females going down the bottom. You can see the Y chromosome line going across the top. We can identify the males in that line based on your Y chromosome because it will all be the same. Likewise, we can identify all of the females on the mitochondrial line that comes down across the bottom because they will all be the same. But at this level of, 16 individuals, we've only identified two of the 16 and we've only analyzed the contribution of 1/8 of the ancestors of that individual by looking at the Y chromosome and the mitochondrial DNA. You need to keep that in mind when you read and see a lot of the DNA studies that have been done, out there on mitochondrial DNA or on Y chromosomal DNA. Understand that the picture that you are getting with that alone, is a very small part of the picture. Because at the next generation ... it's 1/16. At the next generation it's 1/32 of the information that you have.11The nature of the genetic research is necessarily reductive. To trace something back into the past one can match only the information that survives, and the information that reconstructs into the past becomes smaller and smaller. There is a parallel in the world of historical linguistics, which similarly works with present data to reconstruct historical information. Linguists can reconstruct some of the vocabulary of ancient populations based upon the survival of various words into the modern languages descended from that earlier language and population. However, the reconstructed vocabulary is in the hundreds of words if they are lucky. The actual vocabulary of that people would have been in the tens of thousands of words. Those other words existed, just as did all of the other women at the time of the "genetic Eve." The problem is that the traces of the other words and the other women have died out.
Another aspect of the analogy to historical linguistics is that data are reconstructed to particular time levels. While reconstructions exist for many different times, it is inappropriate to make comparisons from widely different time depths without carefully correlating the data. Collapsing time periods leads to inaccurate conclusions. This type of interpretive error in reading the data is not unusual in the readers and second-hand interpreters of the data, not the original researchers. This same problem of "time depth" exists in the science of historical genetics. Dr. Woodward specifically cautions:
I noticed in the conference last week that was referenced that there were some papers and some discussion on DNA. I think there were some very good things that were said there but I also have some concerns in that there was some mixing of the data across time scales that may not be appropriate. There is a lot of mitochondrial evidence that has to do with population structure very deep in the past; ten-, fifteen-, twenty-, thirty-, one hundred thousand years ago. The experiments that were set up to look at those were set up correctly to be able to answer those questions in those time frames. If we then extrapolate those to the very recent past, the last two- or three- or four thousand years, I think we have to be very careful in extrapolating some of those results.12The science on which Mr. Murphy is basing his conclusions is valid in the same way that Dr. Woodward discussed the underlying data of the papers in the referenced conference. The problem is not the science that produced the data. The problem is in the way one uses the disparate data to come to conclusions. With this background we can now turn to the application of historical genetics to the Book of Mormon.
What does historical genetics say about the Book of Mormon?
At this point we should carefully examine Mr. Murphy's conclusions in the published article that provides the support for those conclusions. He says:
Now that quantitative scientific methods can indeed test for an Israelite genetic presence in ancient America, we learn ...that virtually all Native Americans can trace their lineages to the Asian mi-grations between 7,000 and 50,000 years ago. While molecular an-thropologists have the technological capability to identify descen-dants of ancient Hebrews, no traces of such DNA markers have appeared in Central America or elsewhere among Native Americans...From a scientific perspective, the Book of Mormon's origin is best situated in early nineteenth-century America, and Lamanite gen-esis can only be traced historically to ca. 1828. The term Lamanite is a modern social and political designation that lacks a verifiable bio-logical or historical underpinning linking it to ancient American In-dians. The Book of Mormon emerged from an antebellum perspec-tive, out of a frontier American people's struggle with their god, and not from an authentic American Indian perspective.13
The problems begin with the very first phrase. He says, "Now that quantitative scientific methods can indeed test for an Israelite genetic presence in ancient America..." Murphy poses this as a given, a fact. It is a "fact" that Dr. Woodward, a researcher in the field, does not accept:
What did the genes of Lehi look like? How do we find out today what the genes of Lehi look like? I think that's a valid question to ask. Second is, who would you compare them with in living populations today? Where would you go to make the comparison? Would you go to modern day Israel today? What is the genetic composition of Israeli Jews today? Is it the same as it was two thousand years ago? Three thousand years ago? I would argue that it's not. Do we understand the population dynamics? What kinds of selection factors have been involved?14For his part, Murphy bases part of his "fact" on the kind of popular thinking that created a single "Eve" instead of the more accurate population of which that ancestor was one representative. In discussing one of the genetic markers used to identify "Israelites," he notes: "Researchers have uncovered distinctive genetic markers on the Y-chromosome that are useful in establishing linkages between ancient and contemporary Hebrew populations."15 The science was done correctly, but Murphy gives a dramatic reading of that science that suggests that we may now identify any possible remnant of an ancient Israelite population. That conclusion overreaches the data. What Murphy fails to make clear is that these are reconstructed markers. They go from the present to the past. They are not like the example of the Cheddar Man where the historical is compared to the present. Reconstructions are reductive. Finding one does not indicate that we have an ability to discern any Israelite heritage, hence the difference in the statements made by Murphy and Dr. Woodward. In this case, it should be clear that given the choice we should accept the caution of someone who does professional original research in the field over one who is simply extracting conclusions from written studies.
Disproving the Book of Mormon or Mythology?
Murphy's next statement in his conclusion is "that virtually all Native Americans can trace their lineages to the Asian mi-grations between 7,000 and 50,000 years ago." The implication is that since we are able to trace Asian migrations, and we haven't found distinctive Hebrew DNA, that therefore the Book of Mormon cannot be true. In this, Murphy comes close to a correct conclusion, but not quite. It is very common among long-time Latter-day Saints who were born into the Church to assume that the Book of Mormon describes the origin of all of the American Indians. That it is common, however, does not mean that it squares with what the Book of Mormon actually says. In fact, it does not.Additionally, this understanding among long-time Latter-day Saints does not indicate that this is a doctrine of the Church. Nevertheless, it provides an easy target for Murphy and anyone else who would attempt to apply "science" to the Book of Mormon. As opposed to Murphy disproving the foundation of the Book of Mormon claims, he has simply identified a mistaken assumption of some lay-members about the Book of Mormon, which is not a new discovery. LDS Book of Mormon scholars have held such a view for years, long before Murphy was even born.
Is it true that, as Murphy writes, "...virtually all Native Americans can trace their lineages to the Asian mi-grations between 7,000 and 50,000 years ago." It is true enough. What does this tell us? We may correctly conclude from the evidence that the popular opinion long held among Latter-day Saints that the Book of Mormon explains the origins of all Native American populations is mistaken. We may not conclude from that same evidence, however, that the Book of Mormon is incorrect. What is the difference?
Again, Mr. Murphy seems to present the results of his research as though this information about the hemispheric interpretation of the Book of Mormon is somehow new. The information about the Asian migrations into the New World is hardly new, and the faithful LDS scholars of the Book of Mormon have had that very understanding for a minimum of fifty years.16 The use of DNA evidence is new, but it doesn't tell us anything that was not already known about the Book of Mormon. In fact, a good result of this public attention will be that the general population of LDS will more rapidly come to understand the actual historical foundations of their sacred text rather than the mythology that has grown up around it.
It is not surprising that the popular understanding of the Book of Mormon should come more from what people thought about it than what it said about itself. As Terryl L. Givens notes concerning the early use of the Book of Mormon in the Church:
Looking at the Book of Mormon in terms of its early uses and reception, it becomes clear that this American scripture has exerted influence within the church and reaction outside the church not primarily by virtue of its substance, but rather its manner of appearing, not on the merits of what it says, but what it enacts. Put slightly differently, the history of the Book of Mormon's place in Mormonism and American religion generally has always been more connected to its status as signifier than signified, or its role as a sacred sign rather than its function as persuasive theology. The Book of Mormon is preeminently a concrete manifestation of sacred utterance, and thus an evidence of divine presence, before it is a repository of theological claims.17This tendency of Church members, in general, to use the fact of the book rather than the text of the book has finally given way to an intense study of the text as a text. One of the earliest results of that research into what the book says about itself led to a reassessment of the relationship of the Book of Mormon to the geography, and therefore history, of the New World. That we should learn more through a concerted study of the Book of Mormon should be no surprise. The Church has never proclaimed that it possessed all truth, all at once. In the case of the Book of Mormon, recent research is anchored in the text itself.
Dr. John E. Clark, an anthropologist at BYU, noted:
From textual evidence, one can approximate some spatial relationships of various natural features and cities. Distances in the Book of Mormon are recorded in terms of the time required to travel from place to place.18The results of careful study of what the Book of Mormon actually says about itself tells us that it covers an area dramatically smaller than the western hemisphere. John L. Sorenson notes:
We can now be certain that the Book of Mormon story took place in a limited portion of the western hemisphere shaped roughly like an hourglass. The size of that territory was measured in hundreds, not thousands, of miles. The movements of peoples, the individual journeys, and the times involved in travels recorded in the scripture fit reasonably in a land southward around 350 miles long and not much more than half that wide at one point north of Zarahemla. The land northward is less well specified but seems not so long.19That this more accurate understanding of the Book of Mormon may be seen as the more "official" understanding of the Church may be seen from both the publication of this information about the Book of Mormon in the Ensign in 198420 as well as in the article on "Book of Mormon Geography" in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism.
This deeper understanding of the internal geography of the Book of Mormon tells us that when we learn that the traditional hemispheric interpretation of the text is incorrect, it has no relevance to the Book of Mormon itself, because the text never says that. Part of Murphy's conclusion is incorrect simply due to his mistaken assumption that the data contradict the Book of Mormon, when they really speak only to the mythology we have created around the Book of Mormon. Science does not prove the Book of Mormon wrong, because the science is not addressing the particular history of the Book of Mormon.
Is the Lack of Evidence...Evidence?
There is, of course, more to the story. Murphy's next error in his conclusion is to assume that the absence of evidence equates to the impossibility of existence of peoples described in the Book of Mormon. There are two important points to understand concerning this erroneous assumption. The first is the probable nature of the mixing of early populations in the Book of Mormon, and the second is that the reductive nature of the evidence cannot dismiss the possible presence of valid genetic lines that have been lost.It has been understood from the beginning of this serious study of the Book of Mormon that there were people here when the Lehites arrived; lots of people. When we remember the small numbers of people mentioned in any of the Book of Mormon immigrations into the New World,21 we have a picture of a much smaller population entering an existing population that is significantly larger.22 This more accurate picture of what the Book of Mormon says must now be compared to the correct understanding of the scientific data so that we can understand just what historical genetics does and does not say about the Book of Mormon.
The first complication comes from the simple facts of inheritance. Steve Olson, a science journalist, reports the following:
In a 1999 paper titled "Recent Common Ancestors of All Present-Day Individuals," Chang showed how to reconcile the potentially huge number of our ancestors with the quantities of people who actually lived in the past. His model is a mathematical proof that relies on such abstractions as Poisson distributions and Markov chains, but it can readily be applied to the real world. Under the conditions laid out in his paper, the most recent common ancestor of every European today (except for recent immigrants to the Continent) was someone who lived in Europe in the surprisingly recent past--only about 600 years ago. In other words, all Europeans alive today have among their ancestors the same man or woman who lived around 1400. Before that date, according to Chang's model, the number of ancestors common to all Europeans today increased, until, about a thousand years ago, a peculiar situation prevailed: 20 percent of the adult Europeans alive in 1000 would turn out to be the ancestors of no one living today (that is, they had no children or all their descendants eventually died childless); each of the remaining 80 percent would turn out to be a direct ancestor of every European living today.23The mathematics of descent and mixing populations tell us two things. The first is that we seem to be related to virtually everyone else if we go back only 600 to 800 years. The second is that even though we are related, we can only trace a portion of that line of descent. The reductive nature of the research lops off huge branches of our ancestral tree and creates a simple ancestry out of what was, in reality, a tangled one. This should indicate the need for great caution in the way we understand historical genetics, particularly making conclusions on the absence of an "umbilical line."
This caution becomes more relevant to the types of studies upon which Murphy is basing his conclusions because they also represent this streamlined view of genetic ancestry. When Murphy adamantly proposes the lack of non-Asian immigration before European contact, he is drawing a conclusion not supported by the data. The data actually say that the traceable origin is Asia. This flow of migration is the proper conclusion from the data, as Dr. Oppenheimer noted above. The data do not, and cannot, say anything about any peoples who did not come from Asia, but whose genetic lines cannot be traced because of the vicissitudes of genetic survival.
The most important indication that there is important genetic material that has been lost comes from the recent analysis of skeletal remains from Mexico. Tests indicate that the remains are nearly 13,000 years old. What is most important is what they tell us about migration pattern: The two oldest skulls were "dolichocephalic" - that is, long and narrow-headed. Other, more recent skulls were a different shape - short and broad, like those from native American remains.
This suggests that humans dispersed within Mexico in two distinct waves, and that a race of long and narrow-headed humans may have lived in North America prior to the American Indians. Traditionally, American Indians were thought to have been the first to arrive on the continent, crossing from Asia on a land bridge.
Dr Gonzalez told BBC News Online: "We believe that the older race may have come from what is now Japan, via the Pacific islands and perhaps the California coast.24
The skull shapes tell us that there is a different genetic type making its migration into the New World. One of these types is more Caucasoid than Asian, as witnessed by the Kennewick Man.25 Similarly, a very Caucasian population existed in part of Asia where their well-preserved mummies clearly declare them distinct from the Asian populations that later inhabited that area.26 These findings complicate the genetic inheritance, as they either demonstrate how much genetic information may be lost, or that our definitions of Asian may have to be re-written to include populations that are not typically thought of as Asian. They also highlight that there is a difference in describing an Asian location and declaring "Asian" as a genetic type. The archaeological evidence tells us that these peoples existed in these places, but we appear to have lost their genetic inheritance.
Conclusion
The applicability to the Book of Mormon should be evident. The current state of historical genetics tells us what we already knew: the Book of Mormon does not explain the origins of all of the natives of the western hemisphere. However, it is no contradiction to the Book of Mormon, because that isn't what the Book of Mormon says. It is no contradiction of official Church doctrine, because the Church never had an official doctrine on Book of Mormon geography (or genetics), in spite of the rather obvious popular beliefs.27 Historical genetics cannot say anything about the current understanding of the text because the limited contributions of Book of Mormon Old World genetic material was both small and long enough ago that there are any number of reasons why it could have disappeared from the traceable genetic lines that have currently been discovered.There certainly are media storm clouds on the horizon, but they are more threat than real tempest. This media attention is really no more than a tempest in a teapot, and what rain comes from it may have the beneficial effect of washing away some traditional assumptions Mormons have held about their sacred volume that really do need to be replaced with a more solid understanding of what that text really says.
Notes
1 William Lobdell and Larry B. Stammer, "Mormon Scientist, Church Clash Over DNA Test," Los Angeles Times (December 8, 2002), A21.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid. Dr. Whiting responded to a statement by Maxine Hanks that Murphy was like Galileo. Dr. Whiting stated: "It's an inappropriate comparison. The difference is Galileo got the science right. I don't think Murphy has." It should also be noted that Whiting's DNA research has been featured in the weekly science journal, Nature (cover story, January 16, 2003).
4 The most powerful uses of DNA are to show biological relationships between an unknown and a known person. The issue of tracing biological families is the issue that will be discussed as we understand what DNA studies cannot do.
5 http://www.chattanooga.net/cita/mtdna.html
6 Thomas H. Roderick, PhD, uses the term "umbilical line," click here.
7 Dr. Woodward is a professor of microbiology and faculty member of the Molecular Biology Program at Brigham Young University. He is also head of the Molecular Genealogy Research Group at BYU. While completing his postdoctoral work in molecular genetics at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute at the University of Utah, he discovered a genetic marker used for the identification of carriers and the eventual discovery of the gene for cystic fibrosis. He was also involved with the identification of other gene markers for colon cancer and neurofibromatosis. He joined the faculty at BYU in 1989 and has been involved with several excavation teams in Seila, Egypt. While in Egypt, he directed the genetic and molecular analysis of Egyptian mummies, both from a commoners' cemetery and from Egyptian Royal tombs. Dr. Woodward has been the Scholar in Residence at the BYU Center for Near Eastern Studies in Jerusalem and a visiting professor at Hebrew University. His work has been featured both nationally and internationally on numerous programs including Good Morning America and both the Discovery and Learning Channels.
8 KUER: Radio West. "Science & Foundations of the Book of Mormon." Interview: Terryl L. Givens, Thomas Murphy and Scott Woodward. Host: Doug Fabrizio. Salt Lake City, December 19, 2002.
9 Scott Woodward. "DNA and the Book of Mormon." Presented at the FAIR Conference, August 2001. Dr. Woodward continues: "There are some ways that we may be able to approach that. And this is one of the approaches that we have taken in our laboratory at BYU. I wish that I could say that this was the magic bullet, and that it was going to be able to answer all our questions concerning ancient populations, but it turns out that the ability to recover ancient DNA and get useful information out of it is extremely difficult. It can be done. We have been able to do that in a number of limited situations. But for the most part, its going to be very difficult to go back in the past a thousand years, two thousand, four, five, ten, twelve, and recover DNA from individuals and say something about their ancient population structures."
10 "The Real Eve." Answers to questions by Dr. Stephen Oppenheimer. DiscoveryChannel.com. - click here
11 Woodward, "DNA and the Book of Mormon."
12 Ibid.
13 Thomas W. Murphy, "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics," American Apocrypha, edited by Brent Metcalfe and Dan Vogel (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), 68.
14 Scott Woodward, "DNA and the Book of Mormon." It is worth noting that when Woodward asks about Lehi's genetics, he is clearly referring to Lehi and his group (i.e. his wife, sons, daughters, their spouses and children) and not Lehi, the individual, only. Certainly, identifying Lehi's mitochondrial DNA would be useless, as it would not be passed down to his posterity. The mitochondrial DNA of his wife, daughters, and his son's wives would indeed be important. Dr. Woodward makes that distinction in his presentation. Dr. Woodward continues: "How much of Lehi's mitochondrial DNA would you expect to see in Native Americans? That's a trick question but you should know the answer because we just talked about it. Zero-right? It would be Sariah. Is that true? Why? Why is that true? Who were Sariah's children? Sariah's children were Laman, Lemuel, Nephi, Sam, Jacob, and Joseph. Do you see any mitochondrial carriers there? No, although in 2 Nephi, Chapter 5, Nephi mentions his sisters, so perhaps there were a couple of Sariah's daughters that survived and that then would produce a possibility but who would that be? Who would then be mitochondrial donors for these people who came from the Middle East? The wife of Ishmael, right? Who was the wife of Ishmael…So in reality, one of the questions we have to ask is, "What would we expect to see?" So how can we know whether or not we have Lehite DNA in Native Americans if we're not exactly sure what exactly it is that we're supposed to be looking for or if we could recognize it when we saw it?"
15 Murphy, "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics," 60.
16 An introduction to some of this history from the perspective of John L. Sorenson's involvement in it may be read in a biographical review. Davis Bitton, "Introduction," Mormon, Scripture, and the Ancient World. Studies in Honor of John L. Sorenson (Provo, Utah: FARMS, Provo, 1998), xxxiii-xxxviii.
17 Terryl L. Givens, By the Hand of Mormon (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002), 63-64. 18 John E. Clark, "Book of Mormon Geography," Encyclopedia of Mormonism, edited by Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1992), 1:177.
19 John L. Sorenson, An Ancient American Setting for the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1985), 22.
20 John L. Sorenson, "Digging into the Book of Mormon: Our Changing Understanding of Ancient America and Its Scripture," Parts 1 and 2. Ensign (September 1984): 26-37; (October 1984): 12-23.
21 Even being generous, it is difficult to identify more than thirty people in Lehi's party. Soon after their arrival they split into two groups, both of which would have been integrated into the larger populations in different regions of the country. Thus Murphy is suggesting that testing modern populations from all over the western hemisphere proves that these thirty people did not exist. There is no logic in such an assumption.
22 Dr. Woodward specifically notes that the smaller population would have an impact in the study of Lehite genetics, assuming that we knew what that meant. Continuing his list of important factors: "…The reduction of size…and the dynamics of the demographics of the population of America and what's happened to it; The huge bottlenecks that have happened; The selection factors that have been involved."
23 Steve Olson. "The Royal We," The Atlantic Monthly (May 2002), http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/05/olson.htm.
24 "Human skulls are 'oldest Americans" Tuesday, 3 December 2002, 15:22 GMT. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2538323.stm
25 Article at Archealogy.com
26 http://sln.fi.edu/inquirer/mummy.html
27 See the discussion in Clark, "Book of Mormon Geography," 1:178.
http://www.ldsmag.com/articles/030124fair.html
Subj: Pray for a Lost Mormon Friend
Subj: Re: Do You Believe Jesus Christ Died For Your Sins?
Subj: Follow-up from ChurchTransitions conference
Subj: Re: FEDAYEEN SIMILAR TO EARLY DANITES
The feature that I felt good about is its informative nature with a soft
Christian touch. My mother never turned to Christianity and taught us to
reject any group that claims to be the only truth. Any evangelistic
effort causes the walls to go up quickly and all communication is shut
down. Most of my siblings are very hostile toward the gospel. Elaine
became a widow seven years ago and all of her worldly distractions are
catching up with her. She is vulnerable. I didn't have the nerve to
forward your newsletter to any of the others yet.
Thanks again and God Bless you and your ministry.
Joel has applied for the pastor position with our church, Lincoln Street
Baptist Church in Portland, OR. He is doing most of the preaching these
days while the congregation regroups and gets moving on the process.
Please keep us in your prayers. We are excited about how God has been
moving in our lives and what will happen next. We took an easy load in
school this term because we could see these changes coming and expected
to be unusually distracted. The church has just been through a very
difficult time and it is a relief to be this far through the changes that
were inevitable.
Pastor Jeff Sackett
Philip W. Hiller
Mr. Stokes,
My parents and my sister have been mormons ever since I left for college and I am a Christian.
I am always looking for ways to witness to my parents, even though it seems like an impossible task. There are also some mormon missionaries that I am in contact with now and I really believe that God has used my parents to place a burden in my heart for LDS people.
I live in an area where mormonism has been made to look just like Christianty. And I appreciate your website. It is encouraging to be in contact with others who have a similair passion.
PRAYER REQUEST
SISTER LEAVING FOR MISSION
I wish that I could do anything to convince her not to go, but it seems hopeless sometimes. I know that she just wants to love God but I think that she is very mislead and confused.
The church found her as she was coming out of a very promiscous and scary lifestyle- and she was searching for something and the mormons played on her weaknesses.
She listens to contemporary Christian music and thinks that there is little difference between us and them. She couldn't understand why I cried when she told me about her decision to go on this mission.
Anyway, thank you for taking the time to read my email and I hope that you will be in touch with me. Thanks again for your ministry.
Jerry,
Hi Jerry-
Dear Mr. Stokes,
Dear Mr. Stokes,
Mr. Stokes,
Kathy ~ Daughter converted to LDS Church
Jerry
Jerry,
Jerry,
Hi Jerry:
Mr Stokes,
Mr Stokes
Jerry:
Hi Dave:
The Presbyterian Church in Canada (PCC) is having a web discussion on whether
Mormonism is a cult.??
Also, (in another thread) a PCC minister was asked (and accepted) to conduct a
funeral in a Mormon building. He didn't know any better.
The opportunity is open to any of your contacts to enlighten this denomination
and to minister to them about the demonic nature of the LDS church.
The site may ask you to register, but it is just a formality. Here is the website:
http://www.presbycan.ca/pcctalk/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?action=intro
Hi Brenda
Question about morman missionaries
Subj: I'M A LATTER-DAY SAINT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TO WHOM THIS MAY CONCERN,
1 FAITH IN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST!
WELL I GUESS THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY!!!
REPLY TO SCOT
Scott let me respond here brother. Did you say you believe in the Jesus Christ of the King James Bible as well as the Book of Mormon? Even though the Book of Mormon has many problems with its Christ, a careful study will not find radical departures from the Biblical Christ.
The problem brother is when you fast forward ahead from 1830 [the date the Book of Mormon was first published] to until later in Joseph Smith's life around 1842 when he presented the world with the Book of Abraham which was followed by his altered First Vision. The Christ in these accounts has serious problems. These problems are serious enough to place Mormonism outside of Christianity. The root problem is the way Christ is presented as being one of many gods.
The Book of Abraham makes Christ a created being! He was born to heavenly parents including a Celestial mother. It defines Christ as the brother of Satan. It also presents a council of gods. Go back to your King James Bible brother and you will never see Jesus Christ as a created being. Rather Christ is identified as Creator God active in Genesis and John 1.
Both the Genesis and John 1 accounts present a very Complex Person in God. But we never see the Bible anywhere claim there is, or ever has been, or ever will be more than One God. Brother we see the Holy Spirit active in creation. We see Christ there too as mentioned in John 1. But never as two or three GODS!!! This is forbidden in the King James Bible everywhere. Have you ever noticed Mormons never emphasize the Ten Commandments? The reason Scot is because polytheism is forbidden everywhere in the Old Testament! Christians love Mormons but we must refuse to share in worship that includes more than one God.
When Jesus began His ministry He went to the synagogue and presented Himself as their Messiah not their second god. Christ was a proper Jewish monotheist. He had to be because He was to be the Lamb of God. He was to die sacrificially. To do that He had to be perfect and it would have been a sin to be guilty of being a polytheist.
Scot please begin some research. You are making some dangerous spiritual decisions. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. He said He is standing outside the door of your heart today knocking. Open that door brother. I was so surprised when He came into my heart and life on October 14, 1985 at 4:20 in the afternoon. He personally began a transformation that is still going on. He has been there for me as more faithful than any human being. He said He will never leave me or forsake me. And you know Scot I am the kind of person if God were ever going to leave or forsake anyone it would be me.
Mormons know how to repent, but they do not know how to receive the second birthing from the Holy Spirit. Study and pray through the entire third chapter of John. The Bible says Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead on the third day. The Bible also says if we confess Jesus Christ with our mouth and believe in our heart that God raised Him from the dead we will be saved! It is really just that simple.
Come to the real Christ brother!!! He will give you a new life more abundantly than you can ever imagine. I understand that talking about having Jesus Christ dwell in your heart is problematic for Mormons [D&C 130:3], but He really is waiting to come and live there. He has been doing that for billions over the last 2,000 years why not you too?
Dear Mr. Stokes,
Subj: New Video. ( Mike )
Subj: DNA update and request
All glory and honor to Jesus Christ our Lord,
Pastor Joel P. Kramer
Subj: DNA & Book of Mormon Latest Breaking News
The outpouring of support from members of the LDS Church, former Mormons, Christians, students, relatives, and the Native American and Polynesian communities has demonstrated that people can make a difference. Supporters informed me that candle light vigils scheduled to coincide with my church disciplinary council had been planned in as many as ten different cities around the country. Edmonds Community College officials assured me that the college respected my academic freedom while students, faculty, and administrators rallied behind me in a quest for truth and justice.
Members of my doctoral dissertation committee at the University of Washington offered to testify on my behalf at the hearing. I have received hundreds of email messages, phone calls, and letters from people throughout the world, most of whom I had never met, expressing their support and encouragement.
Only a handful of such messages expressed negative perspectives on my scholarship. The postponement of this disciplinary council is truly a victory for all those who favor an honest search for truth and are willing to speak out against the injustices of racism, sexism, homophobia, and anti-intellectualism.
I have heard that some of my supporters still want to hold a rally in Salt Lake City to bring attention to the racism and sexism in Mormon scripture and to object to homophobia and intellectual intimidation in the LDS Church.
Kerrie, Jessyca, and I support those endeavors and will invite those supporters gathering in Lynnwood, Washington to come to our home in Edmonds for a thank you reception. Many people would like to see the LDS Church publicly acknowledge that it is no longer appropriate to label Native Americans as Lamanites or heathen Israelites. The genetic evidence I have summarized in my article "Lamanite Genesis, Genealogy, and Genetics" demonstrates that the belief that American Indians came from Israel is paramount to claiming the earth is flat.
Similar scientific evidence, to be outlined in future publications, likewise indicates the absurdity of the Book of Mormon's claim that a dark skin is a curse from God for wickedness.
I sincerely hope that the conciliatory approach taken by my stake president means that the LDS Church is willing to consider the possibility that Lamanites may not be the principal ancestors of the American Indians, that a dark skin is not a curse from God, and that scholars may now openly discuss the Book of Mormon as nineteenth century fiction.
Subj: (Son Going into Mormonism ~ Pray)
Date: 6/12/03 10:08:30 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: MTolbert
To: Geraldostokes
Hi I just read your testimony of coming out of the Mormon church....
My e mail address is cochran49@yahoo.com I am writing on someone else's computer so please use the cochran49@yahoo.com adress if you reply.
My middle son is getting married in august to a Mormon girl.
He has not been walking with the Lord for many many years so I believe he is ripe for the picking.
He is 23 and a deputy sheriff here in Montana.
We have shared with him that she is a very nice girl, but we have a problem with the Mormonism.
He says he sees very little difference between the Mormons and Christians.
I know he just does not know and I also know he will be pushed into it even more marrying a Mormon...He is very into money, so I can see where the fact they own so much and have so much money and are the fastest growing church in America would attract him.
Please pray for him as we are very concerned yet there is NOTHING we can do but PRAY.
I want to educate myself as much as I can about Mormons.
Can you advise me as to what to do.........
I would appreciate any help you could give......
Thank you
Sharon Cochran Subj:Concern and prayer
Subj: Re: Concern and prayer
Date: 6/15/03 7:59:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Geraldostokes
To: cochran49@yahoo.com
One suggestion for your son since his career is police work might be to mention the importance of evidence for solving crimes. Everyone agrees together when DNA links another predator to unspeakable crimes and gets them off the street. But what does DNA say about the Book of Mormon? Get that DNA Book of Mormon video as a gift for your son and ask him to evaluate it slowly and carefully. They have a wonderful invitation at the end that might prove very helpful sister to your son.. God bless you we are still praying and are concerned with you.
Jerry Stokes <
geraldostokes@aol.com
Answer His call, Tell His story, Change Your World
http://www.churches.net/churches/utmiss/Home/Mormonismhome.html
Date: 6/15/03 2:54:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: cochran49@yahoo.com
To: Geraldostokes@aol.com
Tell me more about this video and how to get a hold of it please....Yesterday we had a huge high speed chase in our valley which involved several counties.
He was on duty yesterday and got to be a part of this. In his 3 years in law enforcement this is the second situation he has been in. The first he had his side of the car shot up. When I saw the pictures from yesterday and saw where the bullet hole hit in the sheriff car, I asked him how the other guy got out.
He has seen angels as a little boy. He said someone was watching over him.
We are going to meet her folks tonight It will be interesting......
Please Please pray for him concerning the Mormon issue.
Let me know more about the video please......
Sharon
Please keep in touch Subj: Re: DNA Book Mormon Video
Date: 6/18/03 5:49:26 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Geraldostokes
To: cochran49@yahoo.com
CC: bfsloan@integrity.com
Dear Sharon,
The DNA Video can be located by just going to my home page and clicking down to the Book of Mormon issues area. Then find the section on DNA. There will be an area highlighted for that video just click on it and it will take you over to the ministry that produced it in Utah.
Here is that web location http://mormonchallenge.com/
While you are waiting for the video to arrive if you click on my own web pages on DNA you will find over a hundred pages of material that includes source material from the scientists themselves who made these discoveries. You will also find material from Mormon apologists in denial over what the evidence means. This is a large glaring smoking gun that has the potential for drastically changing the Mormon Church. You will see from my page that Mormons themselves use DNA for their own genealogical research projects. Some important DNA scholars are LDS. One from Washington State who is bold enough to tell the truth about how DNA must change LDS beliefs was scheduled for a trial for his membership by church leaders but the church backed down at the very last moment. There is much tension.
We will keep praying for your son and his girl friend in Montana but please pray for the entire Mormon Church that this issue might impact educators and leaders globally.
Jerry Stokes <
geraldostokes@aol.com
Answer His call, Tell His story, Change Your World
http://www.churches.net/churches/utmiss/Home/Mormonismhome.html
Date: 6/17/03 9:51:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: RHOFF56
To: Geraldostokes
Geraldo,
PRAISE GOD your Salvation Story is Precious.
Please pray for a Mormon woman named Ginger Waits.She is 47 yrs.old& part of a 7 Generation Mormon Family. I Lovingly shared GAL 1:6-9 & 2 COR.11:4 & other parts of the BIBLE to disprove Celestial Marriage(MARK 12:25) Salvation by works(Romans) No Priesthood for men(HEBREWS JESUS ONLY! has Priesthood!
After showing some openess for several days she then became very Defensive& RAN to her Local Bishop. All I can do is Back off. Scripture warns us to Rebuke false teachings 2 TIM.4:2 EZEK.33:7-9 It is so sad that she doesn't even know the Bible.
She was shocked when I showed her Mark 12:25 & also John 1:18(NO MAN HAS SEEN GOD) Just Pray for her, it has really given me a broken heart but I KNOW I did what GOD Led me to do. A great website that helped me is www.letusreason.org
Thank you Brother for your Wonderful Story,Your's in CHRIST,
Randy Hoffman
DALLAS,TX
Date: 5/7/03 8:08:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: bettyjoewright@earthlink.net
To: geraldostokes@aol.com
Dear Mr. Stokes:
I have read with interest your story and am extremely happy that you have been taught about and have accepted Jesus Christ as your Savior. I am a Christian, a member of the Church of Christ and have been for 44 years, since I was 16 years old.
I have been studying with the "young" Elders now for one year. I started to study with them to learn about the Mormon religion. I had never read the Book of Mormon because I had been told it was uninspired and that they were a cult. But in order to say that I had investigated it, I did read it. The missionaries usually change their territory pretty often so I've studied with several different ones. I am greatly impressed with these young men.
One of the things that caught my attention as I read your story was Your answer to the question, "Do you believe Jesus Christ died for your sins?" and you replied "No! But I would like to believe!" Was this just peculiar to you at that particular time in your life or is this a belief held by all of those of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints which most call the Mormon Church? Do they believe Jesus Christ died for their sins? I was just wondering about this because they do put more emphasis on Joseph Smith being a true prophet and giving their testimony about him than Jesus Christ but I assumed that was because they need to convince people of this fact to get them to accept the Book of Mormon as the word of God.
Also, I would like to ask, when you were a Missionary or when you were in the Priesthood, did you lay hands on those who were baptized to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit? When I receive your answer, I have something I would like to get your advice about.
Thank you for sharing your story.
Betty Wright
Date: 5/6/03 7:21:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: aymaster@alum.calberkeley.org
To: geraldostokes@aol.com
Hello Gerald,
I'm not sure if you remember me, but we spoke at the ChurchTransitions
conference in Redmond last week. I'm from The Salvation Army in San
Francisco, CA. We talked about Mormonism a bit, and I remember you
mentioning that you had a resource website set up that deals with
Mormonism. If you send me the address of that site, I'd love to browse the
material you have available.
Take care, and may God bless you and your church.
Andrew Yee
Date: 4/5/03 10:17:01 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: sandrasykes@juno.com
To: Geraldostokes@aol.com
Hello Jerry,
Thank you for the newsletter.
I passed it on to two of my sisters. One is a Christian and one believes there is a god. I have not heard back from Joan, the Christian, I'm sure she is very busy. I did hear back from Elaine. She was very positive and asked if she could take a copy to our mother, who is nearly blind and nearly deaf at 91 years of age. I had planned to send mother a copy soon, including my carefully written personal message, but was more happy to have Elaine take it to her personally.
In His Love,
Sandra (Joel too)
Jerry,
I really liked your site, I will use it quite often for information on
dealing with Mormons.
How are you and Kate doing? We sure miss you both a lot! We are going to try
to take vacation around the end of September, but we don't know if we will
be able to come back there or not. It's in God's hands, so keep it in
prayer. It would be really great to see you again.
How is school going? How much longer do you have left? what are you planning
on doing after you graduate?
Well, I have to go, as usual I have a list a mile long of things to do. Talk
to ya later! God bless you both.
Love ya!
Pastor Jeff Sackett
Black Hills Baptist Church
Jeff Sackett < jsack@mato.com >
Thanks for the link to your page. Great book. FAMILY CONVERTED WHILE AT SCHOOL
Subj: Converted Family
Date: 3/12/03 7:48:11 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: mandy_king7@yahoo.com
To: geraldostokes@aol.com
Hello. My name is Mandy King and I am a 22 year old student at Cumberland College in Williamsburg, Kentucky. The reason I am writing you is to thank you for your website about mormonism.
I have been able to write to Jim Robertson who operated Concerned Christians out of Mesa, Arizona. I just wanted to ask you if you would be in prayer for my mother, father, and sister. There name are Steve, Shari, and Stephanie Wells. I also have aunts, uncles, and cousins in the church. Please pray for them too if you have time.
My sister is leaving in May to start her mission. She will be in Los Angeles.
Sincerely,
Mandy King
Jerry,
Thank you for sending me the link to your web site - I logged on successfully and was up till 1:30am reading. What a powerful site! My neighbor & friend is a temple Mormon (very involved) and each day I am subjected to her quoting things out of her books (book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price and so on).
I have tried opening up some lines of gentle communication but she attaacks. I care so much for her and see her daily. I pray for her and although I feel a great amount of physical as well as mental stress when I am with her, I feel I must keep showing her love so that perhpas someday I will be able to be used by God to bring her out of this deceptive religion. I hope that I will be able to attend your seminars in March. In the meantime, I am going to keep studying your site. Again, thank you so much for your help!
Jacquelyn & Robin Hauck
Subject: MORMONISM SEMINAR
Hi! My names is Jacque. My husband Robin & I have spoken with you many times at Pilgrims. We are the ones who have bought so many leather Bibles. I spoke with you about a neighbor of mine who is Mormon and you gave me a card with your Web address on it. I tried to access the address and a blank page comes up. Am I doing something wrong? Please help if you can. Thank you so much!!
Jacque
I read your article on converting from Mormonism to Jesus Christ. My wife wants to become a mormon and I am scared that she will. Can you pleasegive me some things to make her aware of that will change her min.
Jeff Miller
Jeffery Miller
My name is Stephanie and I have a few questions for you. I have been a
Christian all my life and I have never had to go through the struggles of
another religion until recently in my life. I have made a lot of Mormon
friends and I have many unanswered questions. Right now I am in the process
of studying the Book of Mormon, D&C and Pearl of Great Price. You spoke in
your testimony of not knowing a personal relationship with Christ and that
becomes more and more evident in my friends lives as we get to know each
other.
I think one of the main questions I have is why does no one in the LDS
Church know how to completely answer a question without passing you to
someone hire up. I'm also reading a book that some of my friends gave me
called Gospel Principals. It's a very intriguing book and I'm learning much
about the church. Fortunantly I'm not a weak Christian who is thinking about
becoming a Mormon. I work for Lifeway Christian Bookstore and my family is
extremly strong Christians! I feel blessed that God has placed these friends
in my life but I'm longing for a way to get across to them that the Jesus I
know is alive and forgives you no matter what because one of my friends is
struggling with "will he ever be forgiven" because the churches teaches the
whole repentance cycle. Is there any advice you could give me. I would
greatly appreciate it.
Thank You
Stephanie
Thank you so much for the letter you sent me. I greatly appreciate it. I
knew that the book Gospel Principles I am reading was the basic basic
doctrine of the church but that's all any of them will give me. They
constantly suggest literature of theirs that is surface level literature I
can tell. I'm reading the Book of Mormon along with this book Gospel
Principles and I have to tell you I have discovered to many differences
between it and the Bible that are blatan difference that you'd almost have
to be blind not to see them.
I have another question for you though. I was talking with one of my Mormon
friends last night and I can tell that he has doubts about his faith. He
didn't come out and say that but he did say that he had many doubts and much
confusion. He wouldn't ever say what his doubts and confusion were about but
he kept telling me no matter how much he talked to God everyday he had a
slight void in him that felt like it needed to be filled. I know what that
void is and I know how to solve the problem but he won't completely listen.
He kept telling me that he'd made covenants and promises to God before he
came to this earth and I just can't begin to understand such and obserd
statement. How do I respond to such a statement?
I know a lot about Mormonism I have a friend that is an ex-Mormon and I've
been doing a lot of research. I haven't watched the Mormon Puzzel but I've
watched many videos that are similar and I just finished reading Judy
Robertson's book Out of Mormonism which was great. Everything she explained
in her book I have either heard them say or seen them do. There are things
that my friend said to me that I'm not quite sure how to respond to. I have
to pray everytime I'm with them that the words of Christ would come out of
my mouth because sometimes I'm just utterly clueless.
It dawned on me last night as well that they really don't grasp the concept
of forgiveness. My friend asked me if I had to think of all my sins of the
past and all my sins of the future and pretend as if they weren't forgiven
how close to the light could I stand. I told him for the depth of my soul
that without Christ and without the blood that he shared for me I'd never be
able to get close to the light but because Christ died on the cross for me
and completely washed my sins away and made me white as snow through his
grace I can stand in the light. My friend started crying and all I could do
was hold him in my arms and pray.
He also kept telling me that his weakness haunted his soul everyday and that
he felt the presence of Satan all the time. I don't know how to respond to
that and I really don't know how to help. If you could give any suggestions
I would appreciate it. I'm really needing some help. Thank you again for
your previous e-mail. Please e-mail me back.
In Christ
Stephanie Hawkins
Thank you so much!! I am a 32 year old woman who is married to a mormon. I have been raised Christian and plan to stay that way! We do serve an AWESOME and MIGHTY GOD!! This morning I had considered giving the mormon church a chance. I got a message that I had a new e-mail and so I went to check it out, it was from my best friend and it was your web-site. All I can say is PRAISE the LORD!!
My husband and I have been married for 3 1/2 years and have a 2 1/2 year old little girl. I love my husband very much and my heart aches that he won't and can't see what is wrong with the way he believes. I have tried to reach out to him and he just argues the point with me and the Lord has placed it upon my heart to be the kind of wife that is described in 2 Peter. I love our Lord Jesus Christ with all my heart and I will continue to pray that the Lord will remove the scales from my husbands eyes.
I would be more than appreciative if you would add my husband, Eric and our family to your prayers.
Your sister in Christ,
AnnaMarie Jones
Jerry,
Thank you for writing back to me. I was excited to hear from you. No one knows the pain of loosing a child into mormanism until it happens. She is so beautiful, she used to model in New York City. She is beautiful inside and out. Her husband has been in the morman church since birth and is very stubborn.
I prayed and God told me not to go to her wedding in Atlanta. She had her temple marriage a short time later. Everyone else in the family went except for my husband, myself and my son Ryan. Everyone thought that she would never speak to me.
She called 3 days later and wanted me to meet her in Atlanta to go shopping. She was late going down the aisle...I know she thought that we would show up at the last minute. I was not upset at not going because God did not want me to go. I had such a great peace about. How could I? SHe was a victim of date them, dunk them and drop them. . Drop them right into the morman church and someone is waiting to pick them up, have children so they can become God. This is abuse of women.
I would love to see you on Oprah. I could possiibly arrange this if you wanted to.
Thanks again and please write again sometime. I need a mentor in this.
Isn't it interesting that AMAZING GRACE will be sung in Utah during the olympics. I am sure they will be handing out Bibles to deceive people.
God bless you always...Kathy
Hi! I think your website it great and I think your doing a wonderful ministry!. God is doing some awesome things and it is good to know that there are people out there like you who are making great effort in reaching people in the Mormon religion. Thank you for this website and I will be praying for your ministry.
Sincerely,
Alicia Willms
rosewillms@msn.com
What an awesome testimony. Thanks for putting online, it really helps, and I hope it continues to touch others. I had another question. I live in Pedley, which is right next to mira loma. My best friend is in the mormon church and her dad is the stake pres of the jurupa stake, pres. Hicken. I was just wondering if you knew them. Thanks again and it was nice to meet you.
I am so thankful that you are saved. Your testimony was heartfelt.
I am praying for my daughter Tori Jan Williams-Gomm. She joined the mormon church and dated and married. Two months later she was pregnant with her first and so far only child.
She made A's and B's in college. She went three years. She stopped when she met the mormon man. She was the class president, played basketball, softball and won many beauty pageants. She did not want children and was on her way to becoming a doctor.
I do not believe that she is all in to mormanism. Of course, I could be wrong. She was a sunday school teacher in our baptist church. A great one at that. These decisions have stunned many people.
I am not sure where to turn, many ex mormons will not answer me. I have a book written about all of the rituals from a man that had taped the rituals. There again, I do not know what is new and what is old. She was shocked when I found out that she had changed her name in the temple. She did not know why her husband knew her new name, but she was not allowed to know his. She said she asked him and he did not know either.
I was told that there is fondling of women by other women in the temple. This is not religion. Why doesnt anyone go on television and tell the world about the mormons so that these people maybe will be saved? Are they afraid?
Could you please write back and tell me what I should do?
Sincerely, Kathy Williams
Praise the Lord for your freedom in Him. I always like to read about
how others left Mormonism and came to Jesus. Thank you for sharing.
My story is in article G-5 on my web page
http://www.frontiernet.net/~bcmmin
John
I have read your "Out of Mormonism." I am doing a book on different religions, and the Mormons will be featured. I want to give both sides [the followers] and those who have chosen not to and the reasoning behind their actions.
I have been studying them for just five months, and you have spent just about a lifetime with them.
From the material I have been able to obtain, I can find nothing that makes me feel Joseph Smith was not a false prophet.
My question is how can so many smart people be misled by this man?
Sincerely yours,
Vicki Leigh
I read your story and was moved to write to you. I too go way back on my father's side in the church. My great grandmother's grandfather was one of the men who went to jail in Joseph Smith place.
My mother however was a convert( due to my father's nagging after they were married) but she never really believed it and saw a lot of hypocrisy in the church. I myself remember a Sunday school teacher saying that anyone who wasn't a Mormon would not go the the celestial kingdom.
Now I loved my maternal grandmother dearly and that is when I decided that something was wrong with the church. I have went to church off and on but never let it interfere with my own personal belief until I came to southern Utah to my great regret. I married a local alcoholic and when he left me was so distressed that the church members offered friend-ship and came over often. I even went through the temple by myself.
After about a year or two not many people came over but they continued to counsel me to go to church. I then realized over the years that what I had really needed at the time was a friend not religion.
I was vulnerable at that time and was easy to manipulate. I haven't gone for four years and have been treated differently. Now that my youngest is almost ten and has had the missionaries over many times to baptize my son (he didn't want to at the time) Now I think he does just to fit in with the others as almost all of the people in this town of ____________ are LDS.
They tend to be very radical in their politics and religion. I don't want my son baptized but am afraid we will be ostracized and being a single woman I am afraid for my son. I have wanted to sell my home and move away but am on disability for now and can't lift things. i have been snubbed since I refused to have my son baptized when he was eight. What can a person like me do?
Lorraine CANADIANS CONFUSED ABOUT MORMONISM
Subj: Re: Be Encouraged Mormon Convert
Date: 4/6/03 7:58:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time
From: macmac@istar.ca
To: Geraldostokes@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Here's a note I sent to Dave earlier today. In case he is on one of his extended trips,
I am sending you a copy directly.
Here something of concern to me, being a Presbyterian.
Don MacMillan
Ottawa
macmac@istar
Question about morman missionaries
3/5/03
9:30:22 PM Pacific Standard Time
greerbrenda@hotmail.com
Dear Jerry, I ran upon your website while looking for an answer to the
following situation. I go to a very conservative Baptist church in a small
town. Two weeks ago after church my husband and another man were in front of
the church talking.
Two young morman elders drove up and asked about
services. My husband told them that he and I did a Bible Study for College
and Career Age on Wednesday nights and they were welcome to come.
Tonight they showed up. They were just as nice as they could be and said they might
come back. My question is: Do the Morman missionaries have to go to another
church to fulfill some kind of requirement or would they have been truly
seeking fellowship?
Thanks!
Thanks for your love for those Mormon elders. The experience you shared is similar to many today. Did you click on my pages about the LDS Missionary Message?
In February 2003 major changes were instituted.
When I was involved in LDS missionary work we taught very differently. We were open about what made Mormons distinct from our Christian neighbors.
We were allowed to visit Christian services waiting to share our testimonies about three things: the truthfulness of the church, the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith's first vision.
Did these elders get around to sharing their testimony? Did it have similar content.
Today, as part of their 2003 strategy they are trying to look more and more Christian. Thanks for your response
Jerry Stokes <
3/6/03
8:23:54 AM Pacific Standard Time
greerbrenda@hotmail.com
Thanks for the quick response. They didn't share their testimonies. We're
praying they come back to hear the True Word.
Thanks again for your help!
May God Bless You!
Brenda Greer
Date: 3/6/03
9:30:52 PM Pacific Standard Time
From: Scottsman2799@aol.com
To: geraldostokes@aol.com
CC: ckmccrary@hotmail.com
WELL I JUST GOT DONE READING SOMETHINGS FROM THE WEBSITE AND I HAVE NEVER LAUGHED MY HEAD OFF SO HARD BEFORE IN MY ENTIRE LIFE!!!!! THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS BELIEVES FULLY IN THE JESUS CHRIST OF THE KING JAMES VERSION OF THE HOLY BIBLE!!!!!
THAT SAME CHRIST " CAUSE THERE'S ONLY ONE" IS THE SAME CHRIST OF THE BOOK OF MORMON!!!!!!! I JUST RECENTLY RETURNED FROM SERVING A MISSION IN CHICAGO AND THAT WAS THE BEST TIME OF MY LIFE, SHARING THE TRUTH WITH PEOPLE!!!!!
I HAD THE CHANCE TO SERVE IN WHEATON ILLINOIS AND THAT WAS A VERY FUN PART OF MY MISSION!!!!! I HAD THE CHANCE AS WELL TO VISIT THE BILLY GRAHAM CENTER AT THE WHEATON BIBLE COLLEGE. WE WERE JUST WALKING AROUND AND READING THINGS ABOUT BILLY GRAHAM AND LEARNING ABOUT WHAT HE HAS DONE TO HELP PEOPLE OUT IN THE WORLD. WE WERE NOT THERE TO TALK TO PEOPLE ABOUT OUR RELIGION UNLESS SOMEONE ASKED US QUESTIONS.
HOWEVER WE WERE THERE ONLY ABOUT TEN MINUTES AND THEN THE SECURITY CAME AND ASKED US TO LEAVE FOR NO REASON!!!!! THEN WHEN WE WOULD KNOCK ON DOORS AND TALK WITH PEOPLE AND THE FIRST THING THEY WOULD SAY IS "YOU'RE A MORMON? YOU'RE GOING TO HELL BECAUSE YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN JESUS!!"
SURE IS FUNNY HUH? MY BIBLE SAYS THAT CHRIST IS THE JUDGE!!! MANY PEOPLE SAY THAT THE MORMON CHURCH TEACHES DAMNABLE DOCTRINES AND SAY THAT WE SAY BLASPHEMOUS THINGS? SURE IS FUNNY HUH? DIDN'T THE PHARISEES AND THE SADDUCEES SAY THE SAME THING TO CHRIST AND HIS APOSTLES!!!
AS A MATTER OF FACT THEY DID AND THEY WERE ALWAYS PERSECUTED!!! THE BIBLE SAYS THAT THE DISCIPLES OF CHRIST WILL ALWAYS BE PERSECUTED TIL HE COMES IN THE CLOUDS OF GLORY!!!! ALL THE CHURCHES THAT I HAVE COME ACROSS SAY THAT THERE IS NO MORE REVELATION!!!!
BUT ISN'T GOD THE SAME YESTERSDAY, TODAY AND FOREVER? IF HE USED PROPHETS AND APOSTLES BACK THEN WHY WOULDN'T HE NOW? DON'T LIMT GOD!!!
IF YOU COULDN'T TELL I AM A LITTLE UPSET ABOUT YOUR WEBSITE!!!! AT THE FIRST YOU STATED THAT THIS IS NOT TO "BASH" MORMONISM!!! WELL I'M A MORMON "LATTER-DAY SAINT" AND THIS WHOLE SITE BASHES ON THE MORMON CHURCH!!!!!
OH YEAH, I SAW THE LITTLE PRAYER TO SAY TO ACCEPT CHRIST BUT I HAVE ALREADY ACCEPTED HIM BY FOLLOWING THE FIRST 4 PRINCIPLES AND ORDINANCES OF THE GOSPEL: WHICH ARE
2 REPENTANCE
3 BAPTISM BY IMMERSION FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS
4 LAYING ON OF HANDS FOR THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST
OH YEAH DO SOMETHING MORE PRODUCTIVE THAN TEAR DOWN OTHER PEOPLES BELIEFS!!!!
Scottsman2799@aol.com
NOTE: Christians, please email Scot. Scot set his email account to reject my name and email address as I attempted to respond.
Jerry
The subject of Mormon church growth is currently a subject of lively debate on the Reachout Trust Forum at
http://www.reachouttrust.org/discus/
The following are some of my own thoughts on the subject for those who may be interested. At one point I received Rauni's valuable summary of the David Stewart report and this was also discussed and commented on. My thoughts on that are found below also.
The original question concerned President Hinckley's claim that the Mormon Church is the fastest growing church to come from American soil and my question was twofold:
1) With how many churches could this comparison be legitimately made? In other words, how many churches can claim to have been "home-grown" in America? The list I published (reproduced below) showed that the claim is relatively meaningless since most churches have their roots elsewhere. If you are the only one, or almost the only one, then the claim to being the biggest is nothing wonderful.
2) Is the claim about church growth genuine anyway? You have to ask yourself if it has any meaningful purpose if it doesn't take into account activity and retention (A Mormon contributor acknowledged this to be the case). The level of nominalism in the Mormon Church is high, as is the degree of apostasy. Of course, this is not peculiar to Mormonism, but it is relevant to the claim being made. If activity and retention are not taken into acount you are left with a claim to successful recruitment. This makes the claim weighted toward one end of a process.
Of course, such a claim does serve one purpose, i.e. good publicity. If a Mormon in good standing reads only church related literature then the impression will be gained that all is well in Zion. If an uncritical public only reads church produced literature then joining may seem a good proposition. After all these people seem to be going somewhere. Yes, but they are going in the front door and out the back.
There are wider concerns along the same lines. In comparing Mormon church growth with growth in other churches, Mormons might be given the impression that their version of history is borne out in fact, i.e. the idea that other churches are apostate and struggling while "the rock carved without hands" is set on its inexporable course to cover the earth. This is far from the case. In reality Mormonism is as much a victim of post-Christian secularism as any other church and, compared with some evangelical churches, fares none too well.
I thought the call to modernize in David Stewart's report (and I understand the discipline that denies missionaries mobile phones, etc) was too great a challenge for a church obsessed by control. But, of course, the centralised nature of the Mormon Church, is the very reason it finds itself on a plateau. I still believe that the claim to be the fastest growing has more to do with hype than hope, more good publicity than good news. Is it any wonder, given the career path of the present head of the church.
I have consulted The New York Public Library Desk Reference, third edition, copyright 1998, and find on pages 286-90 a list of "Major Protestant Denominations in the United States", along with information on their founders, followers and tenets. Those listed are:
Amish Mennonites - Founded in Switzerland, 1500's
Baptists - Founded in England, 1609
Church of Christ - Organised by Presbyterians (founded Scotland 1557) in Kentucky, 1804 and in Pennsylvania, 1809
Church of England - Founded in England, 1534
Disciples of Christ - Founded on the American frontier, 19th Century
Episcopal Church - Offshoot of the Church of England, first bishop installed 1784
Lutheran Church - Founded in Germany after the Augsberg Confession of 1530
Mennonites - see Amish Mennonites above
Methodist Church - Founded in England 1791
Pentecostal Churches - Grew from Methodists in the early part of the 20th Century
Presbytarian Church - Founded in Scotland, 1557
Reformed Churches - Grew out of the Swiss Reformation of the 16th Century
Seventh-Day Adventist Church - Founded in America, 1863
United Church of Christ - Formed from the union of the General Council of Congregational Christian Churches and the Evnagelical and Reformed Churches in 1957 (A hybrid of Eurpoean movements?)
The Church of Jesus Christ of latter-day Saints - Founded in America, 1830
Jehovah's Witnesses - Founded in America, 19th Century
Quakers - Founded in England, 17th Century
Unitarian Universalists - a merger 1961 of the Universalist Church of America 1779 and the American Unitarian Society 1825
By my reckoning that gives us the following "American" Churches:
Mormons
Jehovah's Witnesses
Disciples of Christ
Pentecostal Churches (came from Methodists)
Seventh-Day Adventists
United Church of Christ (Came from Congregational [England] and Reformed Churches [Germany])
Unitarian Universalists
We, therefore, have four churches "to come out of the soil of America". Five if you count the Pentecostals, and they could knock the claim of Mormons into a cocked hat since their number world-wide was over 200 million in 1998, according to the New York Library Desk reference. Looking at the figures according to the same book for the others we have
Mormons - 7.7 million since 1830
Jehovah's Witnesses - 4 million since 1870?
Disciples of Christ - 937,000 since 1833
Seventh-Day Adnventists - 8 million since 1863 Pentecostals - 200 million since 1906
These figures may be disputed, of course, but they come from a reliable and neutral source and, although they may be out of date, at least they reflect a level playing field in that they will be as reliable at the time printing for any group.
The point is how do we view, in light of the above, the claim of the Mormon prophet that, "No other church to come out of the soil of America has grown so fast nor spread so widely"? Is this claim inflated or have I overlooked some significant detail? Would others include groups I have left out?
The greatest problems highlghted in David Stewart's report seem to revolve around issues of authority and control. The reason that modern technology is banned, the reason Mormons have no experience in creating "autonomous local congregations", the reason they have no strategy for building congregations from scratch, is that this would all mean relinquishing control. Cell phones, Palm Pilots, congregations that don't rely on larger congregations, i.e. branches depending on wards, wards depending on stakes etc. are too dangerous to contemplate for a church that holds to absolute central control.
As Mormonism has grown (it is presently on a plateau) it has faced the problem all organisations face. How do you strike a balance between controlling an organisation that is "growing away" from you while, at the same time, allowing for the inevitable, i.e. what works in the centre does not always work at the edge? It is an interesting thing to think about as we consider the Mormon charge that denominations are a bad thing and a sign of apostasy. Maybe, flawed as they are, denominations are a good thing and are a sign of healthy diversity (this is a qualified observation on my part).
I suspect there is an optimum size for a church that seeks to maintain control from the centre and perhaps Mormonism is near that size. I also believe that the picture of central control as a sign of true unity is not a biblical model. In the Bible we see diversity, with Jews and Gentiles taking a different approach to working out the truths both hold as universal. This is clear from the fact that some were "free" to eat meat offered to idols because, to them, an idol is nothing in this world, while others were just as right to refuse to eat the same meat because it marked their conscience to do so. Romans 14 is an excellent demonstration of wisdom in respecting diversity.
The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him (Romans 14:3)
Of course, the Mormon Church could never take such a view.
Mike Thomas
Head Office:
REACHOUT TRUST
24 Ormond Road
Richmond
Surrey
TW10 6TH
England
Visit our web site regularly -
DNA vs. The Book of Mormon VIDEO by Mormon Challenge.com
I'd like to first say that your website is magnificent. The man hours involved in compiling so much information must have taken years in itself. On your DNA page you present the details very honestly and intricately. What a great resource.
Now to your questions. Living Hope Christian Fellowship is a non-denominational mission church on the mission field of Mormonism. We have a small store front on main street Brigham City, Utah where we worship and where we have compiled this documentary project to be used as a tool to reach Mormons for the gospel of Jesus Christ. Our congregation is full of ex-Mormons who now know the true Jesus.
We seem to have the same heart for ministry. Our heart is to equip Christians with this tool, but to get Mormons to the gospel is our end desire so they can make a choice for Jesus.
To get a better idea of what we are doing and who we are and what we have please go to www.mormonchallenge.com and then you can link to our Living Hope Ministries Site. We would be honored to have you put a link to us from your site.
If you would still like our sample support video then please let me know. All our videos are free, but donations are always gladly accepted. We want this whole project to be free so that Mormons can get this information and choose Christ! But obviously that takes the Body of Christ to support that endeavor.
We hope to have a complete video done sometime before the end of this year. We have one more interview with Dr. Simon Southerton this week. If you could be praying for this we would gladly appreciate it!
Thanks.
Your brother in Christ,
Aaron Lippard for Living Hope
livinghopeministries@msn.com
I sent a woman to your site today. Your DNA page is thorough! She wanted more evidence. So I sent her to the site link you sent. I hope she looks at it. Her name is Kim Hardcastle.
I'll send you a tape tomorrow.
God bless you.
Aaron
Date: 4/18/03 7:13:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: Stokesfrdm
To: Geraldostokes
Hey Dad.
We were at our local Christian bookstore the other day and they had some new videos on sale called " DNA vs The Book of Mormon " It is from a local ministry in Brigham city. It has about five interviews on it with mormon scholars that have found out that the American indians are not Hebrew at all, but that there DNA proves they are from East Asia. One of the interviews is with Gordon B Hinckley. Another interview is with a young LDS guy who wants the church to be honest about this instead of brush it under the rug. They did a great job on the video. There is not alot left for the mormon church to stand on. These videos our inexpensive if youd like i would mail one up to you. THey are 46 minutes long. I think it could be a awesome witnessing tool for alot of melissas family and friends. There was no making fun of mormons on the video or cutting down, just facts done with class. Anyways Id better go. Have a blessed day and let me know if you want a video and I will glady mail one to you.
Michael Stokes....
Date: 4/23/03 9:29:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: livinghopeministries@msn.com
To: livinghopeministries@msn.com
Hi everybody,
Thanks for continuing to support us through prayer and finances. We greatly appreciate all of you who have called and sent letters and email and we look forward to what God has for the future of this ministry.
Aaron Lippard for Living Hope
Dear Supporters,
We are raising about $5,000 to make a Spanish version of our DNA vs. The Book of Mormon video. We have been getting multiple requests from missionaries and churches in Spanish speaking countries asking us to help them fight against the Mormon invasion in their areas by providing a Spanish version. Mormonism has and continues to hit Latin America hard, making up a considerable percentage of their new converts each year.
I will be in Miami with Editor Scott Johnson May 4th – 15th working towards this new goal. Also, some of the $5,000 is allocated for inserting ‘closed captioning’ for the deaf and hearing impaired on all future copies. Your continued prayers and donations are a greatly appreciated! If you would like to send us a donation there is a self addressed envelope enclosed or we also have credit card payment capabilities on our websites now at: www.mormonchallenge.com and www.livinghopeministries.info.
God is truly blessing the distribution of DNA vs. The Book of Mormon. After six weeks and including those we sent to our community we have sent out around 15,000 copies.
Date: 12/7/02 8:52:56 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: livinghopeministries@msn.com
To: livinghopeministries@msn.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Dear Friends,
These last few days have been quite exciting in the office. I really want to keep this short and simple so that you have this news.
Sunday, December 8th, Thomas Murphy will be excommunicated from the Mormon Church for speaking out and telling the truth about the DNA Evidence that stands against the Book of Mormon's validity.
ABC News is saying they are going to air something about the situation on the Sunday night news. We don't know when or if they really are, but God knows.
Please keep Tom in your prayers. We have been in much contact with him, and we still pray that God would open the eyes of his heart to meet the True Jesus.
Please pray for us too. There is so much to be done. Various news articles have been written about Thomas Murphy, his upcoming disciplinary council hearing and his likely excommunication from the Mormon Church. The following are links to some of those articles.
CNN:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/West/11/29/mormon.scholar.ap/index.html
The Salt Lake Tribune:
http://www.sltrib.com/2002/nov/11302002/saturday/7024.htm
The Ogden Standard:
http://www.standard.net/standard/news/news_story.html?sid=00021129231016132659+cat%3Dnews+template%3Dnews1.html&TVS=1%24682290649%2450%24Wed+Dec+04+15%3A15%3A41+EST+2002-272085%240%247C70C1C1D11E1F8933A510B0EC8B95B3&CSBOX=1%24158%240%24USD%240.0%2410.0%2420.0%240.0%240%240%2433%3AUSD%3AUSD%3AL4%2C0%2C.05%2C.02%2C.05%2C10%2C0%2C.25%2418%3AUSD%3AUSD%3AL1%2C.02%2C.05&CSAK=CSAK%3A1039033651040%3A4ECAA0854B5705ABF8106523847EA03C
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/98020_mormon02.shtml
HeraldNet.com
http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/02/12/3/16181878.CFM
Also there are going to be several candle light vigils that have been planned by a man some of you know of, Steven Clark. He is a very aggressive Anti-Mormonism activist. He says that vigils are planned for Salt Lake City, Portland, Los Angeles, Logan (UT), and Lynnwood (WA). All except for Lynnwood will be next to LDS temples.
Please pray that God would reveal Himself to these Anti-Mormonism activists so that they too might know the Love and Truth of Jesus. We at Living Hope Christian Fellowship are not Anti-Mormon; we love Mormons and we desire them to know the Jesus of the Bible.
Please pray for all the Mormons who will be very confused about this truth revealed. May many come to the True Jesus for salvation and a deep love relationship with Him.
Our ministry website http://LivingHopeMinistries.info now has 2 Testimonies of Believers who came out of Mormonism into the wonderful love relationship with the True Jesus. We also have a statement of faith, a simple Gospel message, and a streaming video of Gordon B. Hinckley talking briefly of the DNA and Thomas Murphy's rebuttal. We are using Hinckley's video to draw people to the the ministry site from the scientist site.
Our Scientist website www.MormonChallenge.com is completely up-to-date as well. Please pray that many will come to Christ through an honest look at the DNA and instead of turning away from the Bible, may they turn to it for the Answer!
God bless you all. Thank you for your continued support of us. We are in awe of what God is doing. May the enemy, the devil, have no victories in this revealing of the DNA Evidence and the Book of Mormon.
Trusting in Christ,
Aaron Lippard for Living Hope Christian FellowshipLetter Thomas Murphy Church Discipline Delay
Subj: Fw: Letter from Thomas Murphy
Date: 12/11/02 9:43:08 AM Pacific Standard Time
From: jwfacts@netidea.com
Dear Family, Friends, Colleagues, and Supporters,
Earlier this evening I received a telephone call from Matthew Latimer, President of the Lynnwood LDS Stake, informing me that he had "indefinitely postponed" the church disciplinary council scheduled for the evening of Sunday, December 8th. Noting that this event had been receiving a lot of publicity, he stated that my public expression that it was difficult for me had encouraged him not to make a hasty decision. He wants to take some more time to get to know me and invited me to have some more private discussions before taking any further action. Expressing a desire to avoid an adversarial relationship that involved sparing in the press, he invited me to work together towards a mutually satisfactory outcome. He did not make his decision contingent upon any concessions from me.
Cordially,
Thomas W. Murphy
http://faculty.edcc.edu/~tmurphy JEWISH DNA
DNA JEWISHS Since strange things happen to scholarly findings when they get into the popular press, could we ask for citations to the scholarly sources of these claims?
Steve Oren
Chicago, IL
A year ago, I presented on the ANE list the results of a Y-chromosome study
conducted on Jews of various origins as published in the press. The study
showed that Jews of all communities, except for Ethiopian Jews, were more
closely related to each other than to the non-Jewish populations of the host
communities. Moreover, Jews taken together as a whole were shown to be most
closely related genetically to Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.
I then asked the following questions:
1) What is the importance of these findings for the history of the People of
Israel and the accuracy of Biblical traditions?
2) Is it now possible to write a genetic history of the peoples of the Ancient
Near East?
For this, I was roundly attacked amd called a racist, even a Nazi.
Only one of all the letters I received related specifically to my questions.
Today, on the "anniversary" of that auspicious event, I did a web search on
ProQuest on what had been written on the matter of Y chromosomes. I was
astounded by the vast number of research and other scientific articles that
had appeared in the past year on the subject of Y
chromosomes and their importance in traciong the genetic history of homo
sapiens, of whatever ethnic origins, in various continents of the world.
It is no longer possible for biblical and Ancient Near Eastern scholars to
ignore the flood of information now beginning to pour in on genetic history. I
realize that some of this is going to hurt the pet theories of some important
scholars, theories that have made their careers. But that's the way the cookie
crumbles. Darwin's "Origin of the Spedcies" hurt a lot of Creationists.
For starters, for all you non-biology majors, I refer you to:
Hillel Halkin, "Wandering Jews -- and their Genes", Commentary 110 (Sept.
2000), 54-61.
This article is couched in language that any educated layman can understand -
though he may not like its conclusions.
Sincerely,
Jonathan D. Safren
Chairman
Dept. of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl College
44905 Israel
Greetings jerry,
Thank you for writing us good job on this. shows that word faith concepts came even earlier than kenyon.
God bless
www.letusreason.org