Anyone reading the FairWiki?

[Anonymous]

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Main_Page

The page I was reading today:

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Book_ ... A_evidence

A few quotes:

What Jewish DNA?
Identifying DNA criteria for Manasseh and Ephraim may always be beyond our reach. But, even identifying markers for Jews—a group that has remained relatively cohesive and refrained from intermarriage with others more than most groups—is an extraordinarily difficult undertaking.

What? Jews are a relatively cohesive group? The Jews have been one of the most widespread peoples/religions in history. I cannot even begin to describe how false this statement is. Suffice to say, Jews can (or at least could) be found all around the Mediterrean World and the Ancient Near East, and of course have immigrated to America. Along the way they have been interbreeding. Jews have been mixing with whatever group they've come into contact with since they began dispersing. Do the words Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi mean anything to you?

It should be remembered too that many sectarian critics use DNA science in a sort of "suicide bombing" attack on the Church.[8] The fundamentalist Christian critics are happy to use DNA as a stick to beat the Book of Mormon, but do not tell their readers that there is much stronger DNA evidence for concepts which fundamentalist Christian readers might not accept, such as:

evolutionary change in species
human descent from other primates
And, despite being inconsistent with DNA data, fundamentalist critics do not call on their congregations to abandon such literalistic Biblical concepts as:

the earth being only 6,000 years old
a Biblical Adam and Eve were the parents of all humanity only 4,000 years before Christ
a world-wide, Noachian flood which exterminated all life except that which was in the Ark, occurred approximately 5,000 years ago
The critics are often hypocritical—they claim the Saints should abandon the Book of Mormon on flimsy, dubious science, and yet do not tell their audience that they should (by the same logic) abandon religious beliefs of their own that have much more DNA evidence against them.

Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): ix–lxii. off-site PDF link
David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 109–138. off-site PDF link wiki FAIR link

(my emphasis)

So basically a complete attack on fundamentalist believers on the basis of Bible inaccuracies. Of course an atheist could make the same arguments. I love how the world "suicide bomber" just pops off the page, don't you?

The funny thing about this page is that every refuting source is FARMS or BYU. Can't they find someone at the U. of Chicago or UCLA to back up their scholarship?

[_Mephitus]

i can't....stop.....laughing.....*can't breathe! HAHAHAHA

[_bcspace]

Anyone reading the FairWiki?

Yes. I think it's a great idea. That article on the women sealed to Joseph Smith has helped me in debate. I've been tempted to contribute some scripture chains on how to prove or see this or that.

[_Mister Scratch]

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Main_Page

The page I was reading today:

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Book_ ... A_evidence

A few quotes:

What Jewish DNA?
Identifying DNA criteria for Manasseh and Ephraim may always be beyond our reach. But, even identifying markers for Jews—a group that has remained relatively cohesive and refrained from intermarriage with others more than most groups—is an extraordinarily difficult undertaking.

What? Jews are a relatively cohesive group? The Jews have been one of the most widespread peoples/religions in history. I cannot even begin to describe how false this statement is. Suffice to say, Jews can (or at least could) be found all around the Mediterrean World and the Ancient Near East, and of course have immigrated to America. Along the way they have been interbreeding. Jews have been mixing with whatever group they've come into contact with since they began dispersing. Do the words Ashkenazi, Sephardi, and Mizrahi mean anything to you?

It should be remembered too that many sectarian critics use DNA science in a sort of "suicide bombing" attack on the Church.[8] The fundamentalist Christian critics are happy to use DNA as a stick to beat the Book of Mormon, but do not tell their readers that there is much stronger DNA evidence for concepts which fundamentalist Christian readers might not accept, such as:

evolutionary change in species
human descent from other primates
And, despite being inconsistent with DNA data, fundamentalist critics do not call on their congregations to abandon such literalistic Biblical concepts as:

the earth being only 6,000 years old
a Biblical Adam and Eve were the parents of all humanity only 4,000 years before Christ
a world-wide, Noachian flood which exterminated all life except that which was in the Ark, occurred approximately 5,000 years ago
The critics are often hypocritical—they claim the Saints should abandon the Book of Mormon on flimsy, dubious science, and yet do not tell their audience that they should (by the same logic) abandon religious beliefs of their own that have much more DNA evidence against them.

Daniel C. Peterson, "Editor's Introduction," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): ix–lxii. off-site PDF link
David G. Stewart, Jr., "DNA and the Book of Mormon," FARMS Review 18/1 (2006): 109–138. off-site PDF link wiki FAIR link

(my emphasis)

So basically a complete attack on fundamentalist believers on the basis of Bible inaccuracies. Of course an atheist could make the same arguments. I love how the world "suicide bomber" just pops off the page, don't you?

The funny thing about this page is that every refuting source is FARMS or BYU. Can't they find someone at the U. of Chicago or UCLA to back up their scholarship?

Thanks for posting this, Bond. Really, I am rather appalled at Prof. Peterson's over-the-top, inflammatory language in this article (or was that Stewart, who was using that "suicide bomber" bit?) Very nasty, in my opinion, and more evidence why FARMS Review is not credible as a so-called "academic" journal.

[_why me]

Well, actually the jews have been a rather cohesive group when it comes to marriage. There is no question about that at all. And although the jews have been widely dispersed over the globe, the custom of marrying other jews, does add to the cohesion. And so the FAIRwiki was right on with that information.

And the suicide bombing remark may be just a tad insensitive, but when one looks at it from an LDS perspective, one can see the comparison. DNA has been used to try to discredit the LDS church and one can say that critics do use such 'suicide bombing' techniques to discredit the church in an attempt to cause the same devastation theoretically. Hence, the comparison.

[_Mister Scratch]

Well, actually the jews have been a rather cohesive group when it comes to marriage. There is no question about that at all. And although the jews have been widely dispersed over the globe, the custom of marrying other jews, does add to the cohesion. And so the FAIRwiki was right on with that information.

And the suicide bombing remark may be just a tad insensitive, but when one looks at it from an LDS perspective, one can see the comparison. DNA has been used to try to discredit the LDS church and one can say that critics do use such 'suicide bombing' techniques to discredit the church in an attempt to cause the same devastation theoretically. Hence, the comparison.

With all due respect, why me, I think it is a bit more than "a tad insensitive." What you are describing would be similar to saying that evidence disputing heliocentrism, or a Flat Earth theory, is a "suicide bomber tactic."

[_Bond...James Bond]

Well, actually the jews have been a rather cohesive group when it comes to marriage. There is no question about that at all. And although the jews have been widely dispersed over the globe, the custom of marrying other jews, does add to the cohesion. And so the FAIRwiki was right on with that information.

Uh, not really. If Jews didn't intermarry with the local population they would still all be very Semitic looking (dark hair, olive skinned, etc). How does a population of Jews from the Middle East end up with Blond hair and blue eyes in Europe? By marrying and mixing with the Indo-European population. That's where the diversification came from. Ashkenazi Jews were the lighter skinned Jews of Central Europe while the Sephardi were Jews who were darker skinned in the Iberian Peninsula. There are many other subgroups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_ethnic_divisions

And the suicide bombing remark may be just a tad insensitive, but when one looks at it from an LDS perspective, one can see the comparison. DNA has been used to try to discredit the LDS church and one can say that critics do use such 'suicide bombing' techniques to discredit the church in an attempt to cause the same devastation theoretically. Hence, the comparison.

A tad?? They're comparing a scientific argument to a form of killing which has taken the lives of untold thousands of people the past few years. Using "suicide bomber" is over the top in my opinion.

[_richardMdBorn]

DCP

And, despite being inconsistent with DNA data, fundamentalist critics do not call on their congregations to abandon such literalistic Biblical concepts as:

the earth being only 6,000 years old

Gee, Dan must be using the Inspired version. I don't see in Genesis any reference to 4,000 BC (joke) or the earth being created 6,000 years ago.

[_Bond...James Bond]

DCP

And, despite being inconsistent with DNA data, fundamentalist critics do not call on their congregations to abandon such literalistic Biblical concepts as:

the earth being only 6,000 years old

Gee, Dan must be using the Inspired version. I don't see in Genesis any reference to 4,000 BC (joke) or the earth being created 6,000 years ago.

What's really funny is that some Mormons believe the exact same thing (young earth--6000-7000 years).

[_richardMdBorn]

DCP The critics are often hypocritical—they claim the Saints should abandon the Book of Mormon on flimsy, dubious science, and yet do not tell their audience that they should (by the same logic) abandon religious beliefs of their own that have much more DNA evidence against them.

Richard Can an LDS apologist survive without misusing the word hypocritical?
"Hypocrisy is the act of pretending or claiming to have beliefs, feelings, morals or virtues that one does not truly possess or practice."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy

Thus, it is ACTING inconsistently with one's words. DCP should have used the word inconsistent.

By this standard, the LDS should not argue that the Christian church went apostate (circa 100-400) since the FLDS can argue that the LDS church went apostate.