Genetics and the Book of Mormon

For many decades the indigenous inhabitants of the Americas were thought by many members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to be the descendants of the peoples mentioned in the Book of Mormon. In particular, the term "Lamanite" was often applied sweepingly to Native Americans in the United States. The introduction to the Book of Mormon stated that the Lamanites...

"...Are the principal ancestors of the American Indians."

We now know from genetic studies that this is false. The indigenous peoples of the Americas are almost entirely the offspring of migrants that came from Asia, as verified by studies on maternal and paternal haplogroups. 

However, the assumption stated in the introduction of the Book of Mormon is a modern contrivance, and the Book of Mormon itself never states that from Alaska to Patagonia the natives of this continent are Book of Mormon peoples. As such genetic studies have proven the modern assumption false, not the Book of Mormon itself. 

Native American Patrilineal Ancestry

To begin with allow me to examine the genetic heritage of the Native American peoples. I will not be defining critical terms on the assumption that readers have a basic knowledge of inheritance and genetics. 

While most of our genetic material may have been inherited from either our mother or father, or their mother or father, in certain places you find DNA which is only passed on from father to son, or mother to daughter. By studying the DNA which is only passed down from father to son we can observe our ancestry along a patrilineal line going back to the origin of our species, and likewise for women along a maternal line back to the origin as well. 

For the patrilineal line the critical DNA is on the Y-Chromosome. Because this chromosome cannot be inherited from the mother it can form a useful link to study paternity amongst men going back for many generations. By studying the presence or absence of specific mutations on the Y-Chromosomes of different men we can estimate how closely related they are. Studies of populations arounds the globe have given us an unprecedented view into the family tree of humanity and our migrations and mixing around this world. 

Groups of people who share a common paternal ancestry are termed a "Haplogroup," and are assigned a letter to distinguish them. Here is a map that is useful in seeing the global distribution of paternal haplogroups before modern migrations occurred (from wikimedia commons):

One may see from this map that Europeans, for example, belong primarily to Haplogroup R (either R1a or R1b). Chinese men, by comparison, largely fall into Haplogroup O. 

In the Americas native men largely belong to Haplogroup Q, with some more recent admixture from Haplogroup C. This is the crux of the problem: Haplogroup C has no relationship with or presence in Southwest Asia, where Lehi and his family came from. This single fact apparently destroys the entire foundational claim of the Book of Mormon, unless you are willing to look more deeply at the data. 

There is, in fact, a small amount of Haplogroup R mixed into Native American peoples, though it is only present in certain North American groups and never at a density of more than 25% percent. Its primary geographic distribution appears to be amongst the Algonquin peoples of the American Midwest and Great Lakes region. We will study this more later. 

Native American Matrilineal Ancestry

On the matrilineal side there is a direct inheritance from woman to woman of a very specific kind of DNA that is not found in the nucleus of the cell, but rather in the mitochondria. Mothers pass near exact copies of the mitochondria in their cells to their offspring through the egg (sperm, which fertilizes the egg, has no mitochondria). Because the daughter will then pass the same near exact copy down to her own daughter and so on this Mitochondrial DNA, or mtDNA, can help us trace matrilineal lines back to our human origins much like the Y-Chromosomal DNA helps us track paternity, and like with the Y-Chromosome we can compare how closely related two women are by looking at key mutations. 

Matrilineal descendance is likewise categorized into haplogroups and assigned letters, though the letters do not correspond with the Y-DNA haplogroups. Here is a map of the distribution of those haplogroups before modern times (from wikimedia commons):

As with the patrilineal haplogroups, studies on mtDNA show that the majority of Native American women come from unique haplogroups not seen in Europe or the Middle East, namely Haplogroups A, B, C, and D - all of which indicate a northeast Asian connection for the Native American peoples. 

Except for a bit of Haplogroup X, which has strong connections to the Middle East, and exists as a minority in the Native American peoples of the American Midwest and Great Lakes region. 

Western Haplogroups in North America

A fair amount of diversity exists in the R haplogroup found in Northeastern North America. Some of it very closely matches European DNA and likely comes from admixture at some point. There are, of course, many points of contact between Europeans and Natives peoples that are both proven or plausible before Columbus. However, the geographic distribution of much of this DNA is inland, far from locations where European contact could have occurred. Furthermore, some of the samples taken show mutations that suggest it is much older than any possible European contact, perhaps even making it a founding population that crossed over the Bering Strait. 

One might wonder how these ancient DNA samples could have appeared in this remote corner of North America, as those samples with unique mutations appear in neither Asia nor Europe. It is as though some ancient precursor to the more modern variants of the R Haplogroup found in Europe was picked up millennia ago and dropped in the midst of a far away continent. 

The scientific community is willing to consider many possibilities for this apparent ancient airlift to the new world, except for a few (source: Austin Whittall): 

"Then there are some religious beliefs involved (Mormons) with lost tribes reaching America, and things can get even worse: Atlantean migrations... you get it, sci-fi junk. These strange theories are frowned upon by mainstream scholars and even a slight formal support to any of these notions is academically unacceptable."

Sadly, this tendency to dismiss the Book of Mormon migrations out of hand or cluster them with absurd theories seems to be common across much of the scientific community. After all, academia is not without its pride and prejudices. In spite of denialism in the secular academic community there are plausible reasons why this could suggest Book of Mormon connections. 

Amongst the non-European R Haplogroup samples there is some diversity, one might expect. After all, the Book of Mormon cites at least four potential sources for these samples

• Lehi, descended from Manasseh (Alma 10:3)
• Ishmael, descended from Ephraim
• Zoram, apparently an Israelite but unknown
• Mulek, descended from Judah (ancestry of his companions is unknown)

Thus it is possible that these men carried slightly different version of the R chromosomal DNA with them to the Americas. This does not take into account the possibility that the Jaredites also left genetic traces in the Americas, although it is not indicated that they did so in the Book of Mormon.

The matrilineal mtDNA Haplogroup X corresponds almost perfectly to the location of Y-Chromosomal Haplogroup R. Also, the specific variety of the mtDNA Haplogroup X that is found in North America is not connected to the small samples taken in eastern Asia and Europe, where cousin branches of the Haplogroup have been found. 

Outside of the North American sampling the place with the highest concentration of mtDNA Haplogroup X is amongst the modern Druze, a minority group found in Israel and the surrounding areas, although it is also found amongst Jewish populations, such as those of Libyan extraction. 

Amongst modern Jews the two most common Y-Chromosomal Haplogroups are R and J, with J being both most closely associated with the Middle East and amongst Jews claiming to be descended from Aaron. R is most likely not, therefore, the original Haplogroup of Israel himself, but given that variety of R is present in Jewish populations outside of Europe and is somewhat distinct from modern European R examples it is likely an ancient admixture. 

I cannot find any scholarly work comparing the specific R varieties find in Jews and that found in the Algonquins of North America, or the a similar comparison for mtDNA Haplogroup X.

To conclude, these two haplogroups, mtDNA X and Y-DNA R, are both sufficiently different from their Eurasian counterparts to suggest that they diverged a considerable time before the present. Furthermore, they likely migrated to the New World together given that they share a geographical expanse in North America, and because they do not share the same geography with other founding Haplogroups it is not reasonable to assume that they came to the Americas in the same migration. 

Rather, it is plausible the they arrived as part of an ancient, limited migration from the Old World with potentially significant ties to the ancient Israelites. 

Roots and Branches of the Family of Lehi

Lehi was ethnically Jewish, although he himself was thought to be a descendant of Joseph. Ancient Israelites, like the modern Jews, may have had a large and ongoing admixture with converts to their religion and culture, who would have been absorbed into a tribe. While Haplogroup R is associated with Indo-Europeans, there is no reason to believe that Lehi was in fact a direct patriarchal descendent of Israel. The same is true for Ishmael and Zoram. 

Furthermore, we do not know if any direct male descendants of these men survived the genocidal wars at the end of the Book of Mormon. For example, what if Lehi's male descendants were wiped out, Zoram was a slave taken as a boy from a non-Jewish tribe, and Ishmael's ancestors were not Jewish? This is just one of many explanations why it is variations of the Indo-European Haplogroup R rather than the Semitic Haplogroup J that appears in the Americas. 

The same goes for mtDNA Haplogroup X. We don't really know the ancestry of Ishmael's wife, or that of the wives of the sons of Ishmael, or Sariah for that matter. Given that Haplogroup X exists amongst the Druze but is less evident amongst modern Jews it is likely that this represents non-Hebrew admixture at some point. 

And of course, we have no idea about the genetic ancestry of Mulek or his companions. 

Suffice it to say, the Book of Mormon offers a plausible explanation for the presence of both of the wayward Haplogroups in North America. 

Diluting Lehi in the Americas

Whatever you choose to believe, the genetic record shows that the descendants of Lehi's migration intermingled a great deal with a people already present in the New World. This of course is never stated in the Book of Mormon, but it is not overruled by it either. 

Mormon makes a curious statement:

"I am Mormon, and a pure descendant of Lehi." - 3 Nephi 5:20

Unless the children of Lehi had mixed with other peoples wouldn't they all have been pure descendants of Lehi? Why does Mormon feel the need to state this, unless it set him apart somehow. It may help explain why Mormon was chosen to lead the people of Nephi at such a young age, if as a pure descendant of Lehi he was afforded a special place in society. 

Why would the Mulekites make Mosiah their king, if he was just a strange refugee who popped into their neighborhood from the woods with a handful of ragtag followers? Could Mosiah have also been viewed as a more natural authority due to his undiluted Hebrew bloodline?

Could Lehi's family been accepted by a native population upon arrival as a sort of theo-aristocracy? As such, could this be why Laman and Lemuel's jealousy finally reached the breaking point? Was Nephi becoming accepted as pseudo-king in this new land where Lehi's family were accepted as rulers by a local population? 

When Nephi left he took nearly half of the Lehite tribe with him, but he makes a curious statement: 

"Wherefore, it came to pass that I, Nephi, did take my family, and also Zoram and his family, and Sam, mine elder brother and his family, and Jacob and Joseph, my younger brethren, and also my sisters, and all those who would go with me. And all those who would go with me were those who believed in the warnings and the revelations of God; wherefore, they did hearken unto my words." - 2 Nephi 5:6

I suspect that Nephi was in the process of converting this people they had come to live amongst, and the unlisted people were those whom he had converted prior to leaving. This is why Nephi's family had the population to build a temple, and defend itself in wars. Nephi was leading a hybrid Israelite-Indigenous population that was faithful to the gospel. 

However, the bulk of the people remained behind and fell prey to the lies of Laman and Lemuel. Neither Laman nor Lemuel were skilled craftsman, or priests, or indeed teachers of any sort. As such their people remained in a more primitive hunter-gatherer state, which the more industrious but less numerous Nephites would describe as "idleness."

Both nations would mingle blood with the local inhabitants to some extent, but the Nephites would remain with a higher concentration of Israelite blood, as such an apparent racial difference emerged within a few generations. In times the two populations would mingle further and those differences would disappear as noted later in the Book of Mormon. Nonetheless, families which could tie their ancestry directly to the family of Lehi remained somewhat more notable, perhaps even aristocratic. 

Believe it, or Not

The Book of Mormon contains many truths about our Savior Jesus Christ which are universally Christian. Even if Joseph Smith made the whole thing up it is still a brilliant work of fiction, which for Christians could strengthen our overall faith, and for non-Christians it includes a story of epic proportions which deserves its place amongst the greatest stories ever written. That is if it not a true historical account revealed by the power of God. 

However, we do not consider it to be a literary epic like Lord of the Rings, or a Christian faith promoting work of fiction like the Narnia series. We, as a church, claim that it is a true account of people that really actually existed. As such, our assertion forces other to dismiss it entirely or embrace it entirely. The academic community and other so-called Christians therefore reject it utterly in spite of its literary and philosophical merits. 

It is possible to believe it. Genetic studies put us no closer to proving the historicity of the Book of Mormon. Nearly every criticism of the Book of Mormon leads the fair minded to draw the same conclusion: There is no slam dunk evidence that proves the Book of Mormon to be a fraud. Likewise, there is no slam dunk evidence to counter those claims and prove it to be true. Apparently, God wishes us to have enough room for doubt to allow us an authentic choice. 

You have grounds to choose to believe in the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, or to choose not to. The evidence leaves you with the choice. 

The Thousand-Year-Day Theory

Many members of the Church of Jesus hold to the belief that a single day to the Lord is equal to a thousand years for mankind, a semi-doctrine which is supported by both passages of scripture and the expressed views of some church leaders. However, I believe that a more complete analysis of the scriptures upon which this doctrinal theory is based reveals that the time ratio is not what it appears.

One may dismiss this discussion as being unnecessary, as it does not relate directly to the Atonement of Jesus Christ or His Gospel. While this is true, this defense is often used as a defense mechanism to halt the discussion when the discussion may require one to modify their views. 

This does in fact pertain to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it pertains to the nature of deity itself. I believe that God does not measure time as we do at all, and that the Thousand-Year-Day is a symbolic expression that may typically be interpreted as a very long time to those of us on this earth. 

The Creationist Timeframe versus Science

Amongst many Christian literalists there is a strongly held view that the days of creation described in Genesis are just that - days. In addition, there is a timeline set forth in the Old Testament which literally suggests that this world is not much older than the oldest Bristlecone Pine trees. This is a cornerstone of so called "Creation Science," which is not related to actual science. 

Scientists estimate this earth at about 4.5 billion years, with life existing in some form for well over half of that span. The geological evidence for an ancient creation is overwhelming to say the least.

I'm not going to review the Biblical timelines or the scientific evidence further. I have another purpose. 

The Reckoning of the Lord's Time

In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints a popular theory exists which adds to creation science somewhat, suggesting that a day to the Lord is a thousand years to mankind. I will refer to this as the Thousand-Year-Day theory. Allow me to review certain scriptural quotes which form the basis for this view: 

"... Kolob was after the manner of the Lord, according to its times and seasons in the revolutions thereof; that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning, it being one thousand years according to the time appointed unto that whereon thou standest. This is the reckoning of the Lord’s time, according to the reckoning of Kolob." - Abraham 3:4

This reference in Abraham is fairly explicit. Two Bible verses similarly support this idea, though somewhat more ambiguously: 

"For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past..." - Psalm 90:4

"... One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." - 2 Peter 3:8 

Further support for this different reckoning of time is had in references to the Garden of Eden. 

"... In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." - Genesis 2:17

Note that the Book of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price has almost identical language. Given that Adam lived to be nearly a thousand years old, as did the first several generations before the Great Flood, this tends to support the prior verses. To the Lord, Adam died in the same day he ate the fruit, even though to Adam he lived 930 years. The Book of Abraham expands slightly on this: 

"... In the time that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die. Now I, Abraham, saw that it was after the Lord’s time, which was after the time of Kolob; for as yet the Gods had not appointed unto Adam his reckoning." - Abraham 5:13

Further verses also support the significance of thousand year intervals in the history of the earth. To sample just a few: 

"... Concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence." - Doctrine & Covenants 77:6

"... The first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh." - Doctrine & Covenants 77:7

Taken collectively, these verses have popularized a belief that somewhat corresponds with the Creationist view, albeit by extending the days of creation to the point where each was a thousand years according to our modern chronology, thus granting a little more space for creation. The days of creation become millennia, and the age of the earth doubles to well over ten thousand years old. 

Looking Deeper into the Scriptures

Beware of telegraphic doctrine, that is to say skimming the surface of the scriptural text to gain deep insights. If we wish to gain a deeper understanding of the Lord's purposes we must engage in a deeper review of the scriptures. Let's start by adding a few scriptures in that directly conflict with this Thousand-Year-Day theory: 

"... All is as one day with God, and time only is measured unto men." - Alma 40:8

There is simply no way to reconcile this with the thousand-year-day theory. This suggests that God does not even see time as linear, as though we were ants working our way along a string stretched out before Him. He sees our past, present, and future as one. Another verse asserts this even more fully:

"...Is not the reckoning of God’s time, angel’s time, prophet’s time, and man’s time, according to the planet on which they reside? I answer, Yes. But there are no angels who minister to this earth but those who do belong or have belonged to it. The angels do not reside on a planet like this earth; But they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire, where all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord." - Doctrine & Covenants 130:4-7

This wonderfully weaves the two threads together: To God there is no time, only to men. Once again, this cannot be reconciled at all with the Thousand-Year-Day theory, as it specifically mentions the "reckoning of God's time". Sure if the deeper truth were that God saw time as a simple ratio of a thousand years to a day he would have mentioned it herein? 

But he did not. Instead, he asserted a very different view of time, one that is much more beautiful. 

Also, one which in no way contradicts the enduring timelines put forth by science.

What Was the Lord Teaching Abraham?

What then should we make of the references to the thousand-year-day? After all, the two Bible references to this theory are sufficiently ambiguous as to be moldable, but the reference in Abraham is specific and unyielding. We will need to delve deeper into Abraham: 

"And I, Abraham, had the Urim and Thummim, which the Lord my God had given unto me, in Ur of the Chaldees; And I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it; And the Lord said unto me: These are the governing ones; and the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me, for I am the Lord thy God: I have set this one to govern all those which belong to the same order as that upon which thou standest." - Abraham 3:1-3

This is the context for the scripture in Abraham that best support the Thousand-Year-Day theory. Yet, this is not talking about time, but astronomy. We are learning about Kolob. Herein we learn the following:

1. Kolob is the greatest star, and is nearest to the 'throne' (residence) of God.
2. Around Kolob are other great stars.
3. Kolob and these other stars govern all other stars, including ours. 
4. Our star is one of an 'order', meaning there are others like it. 

One cannot see a diagram of our galaxy without feeling humbled by the majesty and order of it. What we cannot see is that at the center of our galaxy are a series of super-stars which in turn have enormous gravitational pulls. Scientists have detected that a super-star greater than all the others sits in the midst of these massive suns, perhaps a Black Hole. It is thought that the gravitational pull of these massive stars, collectively, is what holds the entire galaxy in its ordered pattern. 

Could the Lord have been teaching Abraham about our galaxy? 

Let's continue. In verse four, which I quoted previously, it makes it clear that we are discussing "revolutions," and in regards to Kolob "that one revolution was a day unto the Lord, after his manner of reckoning." We know, for example, that the Earth revolves completely once every 23:56 hours, but let's continue: 

"And the Lord said unto me: The planet which is the lesser light, lesser than that which is to rule the day, even the night, is above or greater than that upon which thou standest in point of reckoning, for it moveth in order more slow; this is in order because it standeth above the earth upon which thou standest, therefore the reckoning of its time is not so many as to its number of days, and of months, and of years. And the Lord said unto me: Now, Abraham, these two facts exist, behold thine eyes see it; it is given unto thee to know the times of reckoning, and the set time, yea, the set time of the earth upon which thou standest, and the set time of the greater light which is set to rule the day, and the set time of the lesser light which is set to rule the night. Now the set time of the lesser light is a longer time as to its reckoning than the reckoning of the time of the earth upon which thou standest." - Abraham 3:5-7

So, here Abraham is taught that the reckoning of time on the Sun ("the greater light") and the Moon ("the lesser light") are both longer than the Earth ("that upon which though standest"). One full revolution of the sun takes roughly 24 to 35 days (depending on which part you speak of), and roughly twenty-seven days for the moon. That is to say, their reckoning of time is longer. 

Abraham was being taught astronomy. 

"And where these two facts exist, there shall be another fact above them, that is, there shall be another planet whose reckoning of time shall be longer still; And thus there shall be the reckoning of the time of one planet above another, until thou come nigh unto Kolob, which Kolob is after the reckoning of the Lord’s time; which Kolob is set nigh unto the throne of God, to govern all those planets which belong to the same border as that upon which thou standest. And it is given unto thee to know the set time of all the stars that are set to give light, until thou come near unto the throne of God." - Abraham 3:8-10

Apparently, Kolob revolves so slowly that a day one Kolob last a thousand of Abraham's years. 

What Exactly is Kolob?

Now we piece together Abraham and modern science. We now know that gravity affects the flow of time. That is to say, the greater the gravity the slower the time. Bear in mind that the great stars at the center of our galaxy are so enormous that their gravity holds our galaxy together, much like the sun holds our solar system together. 

A black hole is a star whose gravity is so great, and its mass so great, that not even light can escape it. Black holes literally suck in stars that get too close, peeling them apart and eating them. In the midst of the great stars in the center of our galaxy is a juggernaut that is thought to be a black hole. 

If you get too close to a black hole you pass the Event Horizon, after which point you are pulled into the black hole with no hope of escape. If, somehow, you could stay conscious during this process (as opposed to being crushed into oblivion) time would slow so much that before you landed on the surface you would witness the birth and death of new stars. Time would appear to stop.

So, let's venture a guess as to what Kolob actually is. Kolob is a black hole, so vast and powerful that with its gargantuan neighbors it holds the entire galaxy in its position. It is the greatest of the "governing ones," to quote Abraham. The Lord explained this to Abraham thousands of years before science began to understand it.

One could delve even deeper into astrophysics here and venture a guess as to where God lives. Let's revisit one of our earlier citations: 

"Kolob is set nigh unto the throne of God" - Abraham 3:9

Some mistakenly identify Kolob as God's planet, but it is not. It is nearest to wherever God is. Now let's see where God resides: 

"The angels do not reside on a planet like this earth; But they reside in the presence of God, on a globe like a sea of glass and fire, where all things for their glory are manifest, past, present, and future, and are continually before the Lord." - Doctrine & Covenants 130:6-7

The vividness of this description - a sea of glass and fire - it is an image that is almost impossible to paint in one's mind. As is said both here and in Alma 40:8, there is no 'Time' as we know it in the place God resides. 

There is nothing else in or around Kolob that could be where God dwells. Here we venture into speculation so wild it borders on the irresponsible: Could a black hole like Kolob somehow be a hole punched in the fabric of our universe, which connects this universe to the plane on which God dwells? 

Given that where God dwells is timeless, it makes one wonder, what exactly will change in the end of times when this world will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory? What does it imply in Doctrine & Covenants 84:100 when it is said:

"Satan is bound and time is no longer."

I'll end this line of thought at this point. We are reaching the outer limits of what we can comprehend without the intercession of the Lord, as occurred with those to whom the Lord revealed everything he ever did. 

Suffice it to say, it is naïve of us to impose a sleep-wake cycle on our Savior. 

Revisiting the Thousand-Year-Days Theory

We often take literally what the Lord states symbolically, an effect of our limited brains that are contained in these littles tomes of flesh. Yet, if you can start to accept that the scriptural term "day" does not represent an exact one thousand calendar years, but rather an extremely long period of time we begin to see truth distilling from the confusion. 

At times the Lord may be using the ratio literally, as appears to be the case in stating that Adam would die in Genesis, although in Abraham the word 'day' is replaced with 'time', a word choice that is not without meaning.

However, the days of creation were long spans of time, with no specified length. There is no conflict between science and our particular faith on this point. We can believe in an ancient earth without conflict, because:

"... All is as one day with God, and time only is measured unto men." - Alma 40:8

Conclusion

We are taught that the Atonement is infinite and eternal, and as our testimonies of Jesus Christ grow we may begin to personally feel the breadth of the Atonement in our lives, not only redeeming us from the effect of sin, but also releasing us from the pains of this world that rest in our minds and hearts. Christ is truly marvelous, and His Atonement is truly eternal and infinite. 

The Thousand-Year-Day ratio is not a set ratio but a symbolic one. A deeper reading of the scriptures supports this view, and in the process gives us a tiny glimpse of the eternal nature of Christ Himself and our Heavenly Father. 

The Importance of Belief

We all are creatures of belief, whether we view ourselves as skeptics or believers. On some level we must have some trust in something in order to form opinions, because when you start drilling down into the perceptions we all hold you will find that somewhere, on some level, we chose to accept something at face value.

We may believe in Darwinian Evolution, and of course much of the scientific community would be supportive of that belief. The credentials of those who share that belief become for most of us the security we need to accept this idea at face value. In other words, we find the idea credible because we find the teachers credible. However, those teachers have likewise to some extent accepted the teachings of others that they found credible. Even if they are reporting the results of their own research they must be willing to believe what they see.

As such all of the facts we hold in our minds are ultimately the result of a passive or active decision to believe.

Now I am not preaching a form of academic nihilism. Some may take this truth to an extreme and dismiss large parts of the collective and cumulative human experience on the grounds that nothing is ultimately provable. I am not in this camp. Rather, I choose to view this truth as proof of the power of belief. We structure our entire individual and collective minds on a combination of our own beliefs and trust in the beliefs of others. And we form a complex scaffold of belief.

Of course, there is no view that I can discern which is universally held by all people, or even two people. Our own experiences vary so much that the best we can hope for is some degree of alignment in our beliefs. You can see this when two people have a conversation on a point they agree on. The deeper they dig the more likely they will find some “Yeah, but…” that leads them to identify areas of disagreement.

And of course, being the limited creatures that we are, we usually view these minor differences as a “Right” and “Wrong” issue. In fact, our slightly different inputs have led to slightly different beliefs.

One may again become pessimistic over the apparent chaos this implies. If no two people believe exactly the same, then how can we ever achieve a measure of harmony?

Every rock in my driveway is unique. Yet, when viewed on the whole the pattern of uniqueness becomes a beautiful tapestry in which every distinction becomes a welcome part of the whole. Uniqueness and sameness cease to be antagonists, and become inseparable partners to the whole.

So our diversity of beliefs adds to the rich tapestry of society. We choose to believe, we view others as antagonists to our beliefs at times, but in that uniqueness there is beauty.

Not only is belief at the root of everything we think we know, it is at the root of our uniqueness and sameness. It structures our minds, our personalities, and the societies in which we find ourselves.

Belief is at the root of everything. Belief has infinite value.