Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/26/83; site ihuxk.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!eagle!hou5h!hou5a!hou5d!hogpc!houxm!ihnp4!ihuxk!jdj55611
From: jdj55611@ihuxk.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Native American Origins
Message-ID: <457@ihuxk.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Sep-83 13:11:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihuxk.457
Posted: Mon Sep 12 13:11:42 1983
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Sep-83 05:21:50 EDT
Organization: BTL Naperville, Il.
Lines: 103


In a recent article, Jon White submitted the following `proof' concerning
the Book of Mormon. I quote:

>Another interesting proof that the Book of Mormon is fraudulent is found in
>an extensive claim in Mormon literature -- namely, that the American Indians
>are descendants of the Lamanites (a Semitic race of Jewish origin).  If it can
>be shown that the Indian could not possibly be of Semitic extraction, the
>entire story of Nephi and his trip to America in 600 B.C. would be proven
>false.  And the fact is, according to anthropologists and geneticists, such as
>W.C. Boyd and Bentley Glass, the American Indian is not of Semitic extraction
>but has the phenotypical characteristic of a Mongoloid.

The problem here is that Jon is taking a scientific theory and crowning it
as fact. Let me quote from `Since Cumorah' by Hugh Nibley:

"The normal way of dealing with the Book of Mormon "scientifically" has
been first to attribute to the Book of Mormon something it did not say, then
to refute to claim by scientific statements that have not been proven. A good
example of this is the constant attempt to blast the Book of Mormon by
assuming that it allows only one possible origin for the blood of the
Indians (a perfectly false assumption), and then pointing out that the real
origin is a migration via the Alaskan land-bridge or Bering Straits  - a
still unproven hypothesis.  This is presented as the confrontation of crude
19th century superstition with the latest fruits of modern science. And
that, too, is misleading. For in 1835 Josiah Priest wrote in his `American
Antiquities:' "The manner by which the original inhabitants and animals
reached here, is easily explained, by adopting the supposition, which ,
doubtless is the most correct, that the northwestern and western limits of
America were, at some former period, united to Asia on the west, and to
Europe on the east."(1)

Therewith, for Priest, the question was settled; instead of being a
fruitful and exciting problem, the theory of settlement by the Alaska land
bridge was the final solution. And as such it has been accepted by North
American anthropologists to this day, even though their colleagues in
Europe and South America may shake their heads in wonder at such naive and
single-minded devotion to a one-shot explanation of everything. We may find
it strange that back in 1835, with no evidence to go by but the
configuration of the map, anyone could have settled for such finality - the
problem was real and wonderful, the conclusion premature and untested. But
has the situation changed? Yes, there has been testing, but few people
realize what dismally meager results have rewarded the vast expenditure of
time and cash that has gone into the project. "Thus far," write Carleton
Deals, summing up the situation on 1961, "nothing has been discovered to
indicate haman presence on or near the Bering Straits prior  to five
thousand years ago."(2) It is still a problem, and very much alive, but the
solution rests exactly where it did in Josiah Priests day; on a
common-sense interpretation of the map.

To clinch the Bering Straits argument it is usual to point out that the
Indians are Mongoloid and therefore cannot possibly be of the racial stock
of Lehi. Again an unproven hypothesis is set against a false interpretation
of the Book of Mormon. As to the hypothesis, it is fairly well known by now
that the predominant blood-type among the Mongols is B, a type which is
extrmely rare among the Indians, whose dominant bloodtype is A, that being
found among 91.3% of the pure-blooded North American Indians. "Here is a
mystery," writes Beals commenting on the disturbing phenomenon, "that
requires much pondering and investigation." 

1. Josiah Priest, American Antiquities and discoveries in the West (Albany,
1835), p. 62, noting that "this was partly the opinion of Buffon, and other
great naturalists."

2. Carleton Beals, Nomads and Empire Builders (Philadelphia and New York;
Chilton Co., 1961), p. 76. "

One need not go very far to find additional information on the weakness of
the cited hypothesis. The Encyclopedia Brittanica classifies the blood
typing of human beings as a powerful anthropological tool. As a short
background on the distribution of bloodtypes the following is given:

"In the ABO system a high frequency of group O is found in northwestern
Europe, southwest Africa, parts of Australia, and in the Indians of
south and central America. Proceeding eastward across Europe into Asia the 
frequency of B rises and the maximum is reached in central Asia and northern 
India. The frequency of A is high in Europe, western Asia and among
the aborigines of the southern part of Australia, and is highest of
all in certain American Indian tribes."

As can be seen the Indians of North and South America and the Mongols
do not even share a predominant blood type. The link here, based on
blood type, is established between the peoples of western Asia, Europe,
AND the Indians. The Encyclopedia also agrees that there is more work to
do. In the section on North American Indians I found the following:

"The distribution of blood groups among the American Indians will eventually
aid greatly in solving the problem of their origins. Thus, blood type B
is generally absent in the aboriginal population of the Americas
(though its incidence is high among Asian Mongoloids), and type A
is found mainly in North American Indians."

The point I want to make is that the answer to the origins of the American
Indian are not as cut and dried as Jon White would have us believe. From a
scientific perspective, the answer has not been found. The theory, as
espoused by those who believe in the Book of Mormon, that there were
migrations from the Old World via water seems like a reasonable alternative
to the Bering Strait theory. The true picture may even be a combination of
the two.

			J. D. Jensen
			ihuxk!jdj55611
			BTL Naperville IL