Learning... and the Book of Mormon DNA Question

In this incredible information age, have you ever started looking up one thing, only to see something else that looks interesting, so you look at that, which then leads you to something else, and so on?

That happened to me this morning in my daily scripture study. Since the "Come Follow Me" program for this year is a study of the Book of Mormon, this morning I read Joseph Smith's testimony in the introductory section of the Book of Mormon. After I read it, I reviewed some of the information in the manual, and among other things, there was a recommendation to read "Book of Mormon Translation" in Gospel Topics. Accordingly, I went to Gospel Topics and scrolled down the list of topics until I came to the Book of Mormon topics, and although I intended to read the "Translation" topic, another Book of Mormon topic caught my eye: Book of Mormon and DNA studies.

I have long been aware of the lack of DNA evidence for the Book of Mormon, and I was curious what the Church had to say about this subject, so I clicked there instead. I was fascinated by what I read. In just the opening, it said:

Although the primary purpose of the Book of Mormon is more spiritual than historical, some people have wondered whether the migrations it describes are compatible with scientific studies of ancient America. The discussion has centered on the field of population genetics and developments in DNA science. Some have contended that the migrations mentioned in the Book of Mormon did not occur because the majority of DNA identified to date in modern native peoples most closely resembles that of eastern Asian populations.2

Basic principles of population genetics suggest the need for a more careful approach to the data. The conclusions of genetics, like those of any science, are tentative, and much work remains to be done to fully understand the origins of the native populations of the Americas. Nothing is known about the DNA of Book of Mormon peoples, and even if their genetic profile were known, there are sound scientific reasons that it might remain undetected. For these same reasons, arguments that some defenders of the Book of Mormon make based on DNA studies are also speculative. In short, DNA studies cannot be used decisively to either affirm or reject the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

There followed a discussion of the likelihood of the existence of other groups in the Americas, details about DNA structure and genetic oddities and influences such as founder effect, population bottleneck and genetic drift. In the end, the conclusion it draws is simply that the use of DNA can not be used to determine the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.

I looked up some of the additional resources listed at the end of this topic, and came across an article entitled The Book of Mormon and the Origin of Native Americans from a Maternally Inherited DNA Standpoint, which included this statement:

Over the past decade, critics of the Book of Mormon have promoted the idea that since the majority of Amerindian DNA lineages are closely related to Asian populations, and since no perfect genetic affinity to the Middle East has been found, it must be concluded that the Book of Mormon account is fictional. This argument is sometimes bolstered in part by a common sentiment among Latter-day Saints generally that all Native Americans are descendants of the Old World migrants described in the Book of Mormon text, particularly Lehi’s colony. To contend with these arguments, some Mormons dismiss DNA studies as being unreliable for reconstructing history, while others are quick to embrace any news of possible Middle Eastern DNA in the Americas as conclusive proof that the migrations to America described in the Book of Mormon are real.

As members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we are supposed to be seekers after truth - whether scientific or religious. What advantage do we gain when we dismiss scientific studies because they don't seem to agree with what we believe to be true religiously? Or dismiss religious truths because they don't seem to agree with what we believe to be true scientifically? I heard somewhere, and I believe it to be absolutely true, that where science and religion don't appear to agree it is because our understanding of one or the other, or BOTH is incomplete. Here is one evidence of this.

To those members of the Church who believe that "all Native Americans are descendants of the Old World migrants described in the Book of Mormon text" I would suggest that they read this other article I came across this morning entitled, “When Lehi’s Party Arrived in the Land, Did They Find Others There?” The abstract of this article states:

A number of statements in the Book of Mormon text indicate the presence in Lehi’s promised land of peoples other than those descended from Lehi’s party. Reasons the topic is not addressed more explicitly in the record include a focus on the Nephites (and not on other people), a generic treatment of Lamanites, and a desire not to waste space on something obvious or insignificant. Clear evidence for the presence of others in substantial populations is present in the Book of Mormon. The demographic or cultural history of Lehi’s literal descendants must take into account these other groups.

The actual article discusses the many clues in the Book of Mormon that give evidence that there were many peoples occupying the land where Book of Mormon people settled. The author suggests that the term "Nephite" was a political term meaning not just actual descendants of Nephi, but anyone subject to the Nephite king, and so the "people of Nephi" would include any native people that the Nephites may have conquered, while "Lamanites" were simply all those who opposed the Nephites, whether or not they were actual descendants of Laman and Lemuel. The article also suggests that when Mulek came to the promised land, the ship he voyaged in may have included a crew of Phoenicians. The Phoenician sailors most likely didn't bring wives with them, so would have had to find wives among the natives, and that this diverse group probably dispersed fairly early on in their history, and it was only one small group that Mosiah encountered and added to the ranks of his people in Zarahemla.

If the actual posterity of Lehi and Mulek in the Americas was only a very small fraction of the population in the area where they dwelt, it is no surprise that their DNA might have been lost in the course of population bottlenecks either in the wars that they fought or the European invasion, or via genetic drift as they interacted with other populations they encountered in the new world.

My point here is that the more we learn about the Book of Mormon - beyond what is explicitly stated, the more likely it is that we can accept the significance of scientific discoveries and not limit our understanding because it doesn't appear to fit in with what we already know. And often the scientific discoveries will increase our understanding of the Book of Mormon as well. The more we learn, the more we will discover that we have much more to learn.