Basically, the series is about an anthropologist type lady, and a trip she took around the world, to try and determine how and when people left Africa and populated the rest of the globe. She has also been looking at how and why people look the way they do. We've found it fascinating.
Now, the reason we were so excited last night, was that we were both raised in Mormonism.
Mormonism has a couple of core beliefs which impact this.
- The earth was only created 6,000 years ago.
- The ancestors of the Native American tribes were Jews who came across by boat in 600 BC
- The history of the Native Americans, is thus contained in the Book of Mormon, a book which they believe is literally true, and the cornerstone of the religion.
Anyway, aside from our own personal interest, Mormonism's latest global missionary has been sharing this 'history' on the TV recently, but more on that another time.
So... Science and the History of the America's...
Ignoring the Mormon perspective, science has found some interesting stuff in recent years. DNA research has indicated that the native American's are actually descendants of a people originally from Mongolia and regions there about.
In previews for last night's show, an allusion was made to shocking new evidence about the history... And so we were both rather excited to see what it was.
The fact that the Native Americans originated from Asia, seemed to have been an accepted fact. The big question was how and when did they arrive.
The show was very interesting, discussing the idea that the original groups came across an ice bridge to Canada and then down into the America's around 13,000 years ago.
They covered a great deal of interesting things surrounding this time. Archeological evidence of their tools, and also what may have been a comet/meteor which may have caused a continental catastrophe and been responsible for the eradication of the mammoths and mastodons who lived here.
But then, they had discovered remains in South America, which indicated that people may have been here before 13,000 years ago. The problem is that at that time, Canada was likely covered by a sheet of ice, up to 2 miles thick in some areas.
And then came the shocking evidence.
While it seems that most tribes trace history back to a group which came through a gap made in the ice sheet, there is other evidence that a smaller band of people made their way along the coast prior to that immigration.
DNA evidence has shown that about 2% of tribes have a rather rare pattern in their DNA which can be traced back to this, and each of those tribes is located along the western coast, from Alaska, right the way down to the southern tip of South America.
All in all, it was a very informative and fascinating show, and I'd highly recommend it.
Yeah, DNA and archaeological evidence which made the dates of the Garden of Eden impossible and proved that the American Indians weren't from the Middle East were a big part of what did it all in for me too.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of the Garden of Eden though... I saw something a few weeks back, talking about how they believe DNA evidence can trace the origins of mankind back to a single male and female living in the Rift Valley, and they refer to the two specimens as Genetic Adam and Genetic Eve.
ReplyDeleteI just liked the names!
Mormon intellectuals and apologists tend not to believe your number 1 and to restrict number 2 to only a part of Native American ancestry. (Never mind what the masses -- and pretty much every prophet and apostle since Joseph Smith -- believe.)
ReplyDeleteYou're right, unfortunately I'm surrounded by Mormon fundamentalist types who would give their lives for number 1. And the variety of excuses for number 2, generally I'm just left in awe at the complete lack of any rational thinking involved.
ReplyDeleteWhen this is what gets handed out in Institute class, how is your average Mormon supposed to know yer not s'posed to take it literally?
ReplyDeleteI didn't know you don't have to take it literally until about 10 or 12 years ago. Then I was like, "Wait -- I don't have to believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old to be a Mormon?" It was quite a relief at the time.
ReplyDeleteKoda,
ReplyDeleteCoincidentally, I came across this in my Twitter feeds today: "Mammoth-killer impact rejected."
Mormons believe the Earth is 6000 years old?
ReplyDeleteI must've missed that memo. Or never thought about it. I know my daddy believes it.
Sigh.
I never believed it, Molly or not.
My understanding was that the Earth could be very old, but the Fall occurred about 4000 B.C., and no human beings were on our world before then.
ReplyDeleteActually, my initial comment was a little different from the dates I was taught as a kid...
ReplyDeleteI guess the earth would be about 13,000 years old based on that... 7 creative periods (days) each about 1,000 years, and then the 6,000 since the fall - except if Adam and Eve weren't mortal prior to that, it would kind of seem weird that the animals weren't immortal too, and the same with plants.
As to the story of the dinosaurs... They were from a previous world, which I must say, sounds more plausible that... God put them here to test our faith!
@Kuri, interesting article - I'll have to read it some more when I'm not surrounded by screaming kids (It's bedtime in the Koda household right now). The series actually appeared to have been put together in 2008, which may explain why it was still presented as plausible, and the way they presented it was that it was not so much the impact, but more the resulting fire which swept the entire country and wiped out the food source for the larger mammals.
I thought I was required to believe them, but mostly I tried not to think about the things that are absolutely implausible, like the young Earth or a global flood.
ReplyDelete@Koda, when I was a kid, I think the most widely accepted explanation was that simple climate change, the end of the ice age, killed off the mega-mammals. Then about 25 or 30 years ago, people started talking about overhunting by paleo-Indians, and that theory gained pretty wide acceptance (although modern tribes don't seem to like it so much).
I hadn't heard about the impact theory before, but it seems people are still arguing about it, and, if that article is correct, it isn't gaining much ground.
The 1,000 years for each "day" is a very common mistranslation because of the verse in the NT (2 Peter, I believe) that talks about how a day for the Lord is 1,000 years. That's fine and all only that phrase is translated from Greek but the account of the creation is translated from Hebrew.
ReplyDeleteWhile I don't recall the exact word, a better translation would be "period" or "age" because the word itself has a close literal translation of "undisclosed amount of time." Hence each of the "days" could well have taken different amounts of time from the others and ties in very well with the idea that the earth is millions of years old.
Ironically I tell people I'm still a religious man not because of the Mormon heritage, but because I want to see the day where those who've screwed our country over and think they can get away with it in this life come face-to-face with God in the next and just utter, "O SHI-!" I can't wait to see their expressions.
@Kuri... Wait... The global flood is implausible?!?! But how else could the earth receive it's baptism and thus be eligible for celestial glory?
ReplyDelete@Dave P. I have to give the Church kudos in their approach to evolution and such. While I think many of the older prophets believed and taught more rigid teachings, the newer thinking does definitely seem to allow a way for God and Evolution to exist together. Now... If they could just take this kind of approach to issues they are clueless about, like homosexuality, perhaps I might be more inclined to return.
And the looks on faces... That would be sweet. Unfortunately, if it turns out my turning away from the Church is indeed a huge mistake, I'll likely be in hell when that happens, so I'll just get to see their sullen faces as they are ushered in down there... But I'm sure even at that point, seeing their faces would still be satisfying.
Yeah, lots of comments already, but here's my two cents. The church has unofficially switched to an old earth creation. Ever since the Book of Abraham the age of the earth has been open to interpretation in Mormonism, though almost everyone believed in a young earth. It's one of those doctrines that has never been official and has switched slowly from one view to the next as science tells us what is going on. A small evolution on the churches part.
ReplyDelete