Is it safe to conclude that because there is no archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon that it is false?
The most highly prized, primary text in Mormonism (The Book of Mormon) makes the claims that there have been vast amounts of people (Jarom 1:8), involved in great wars in North America (Mormon 6:6-15), with swords, arrows, darts, javelins, etc. made of steel (Ether 7:9; Jarom 1:8), also having farming equipment made of steel (Jarom 1:8), and numerous minted coins of various worth (Alma 11:4-19). This is not even close to being an exhaustive list of archaeological issues found in the Book of Mormon. We could go on discussing chariots, horses, wheat, the use of Early Modern English in the Book of Mormon, and many others…
As far as the exodus is concerned, not only do we have proto-Israelite building foundations in Egypt, the Merneptah Stele, and several other archaeological evidences,[3] but we also have the book of Exodus itself. The Bible is not one book, but several books bound together. The book of Exodus found in the Bible is a book that recalls back to the time of the exodus through the memories of the author. He (Moses) wrote down the events of the exodus from Egypt, and this text is another thing we can add to the list of evidence for the exodus. We are not circularly “proving the Bible with the Bible,” but we can understand that the Bible contains the book of Exodus, which is ancient evidence for the exodus in a cumulative case. Like it or not, the book of Exodus is indeed evidence for the exodus.
Concerning the historical claims of the Book of Mormon, of all the construction projects that have happened in America, we were bound to run into something. We are building and building like never before, breaking new ground every day. This requires site development, and site development requires excavation. In our excavations, never have we found any coins, swords, farm equipment, steel, or anything remotely close to what the Book of Mormon describes. This fact makes time and archaeology, specifically enemies against such claims, since it seems that we have had endless amounts of time "looking" for such things without actually looking specifically, based on innumerable construction sites around the country.
Archaeology is a natural byproduct of the construction world. I was personally a heavy equipment operator for over a decade, and all the archaeologists that I have ever worked with were only concerned with modern burials (coffins) and American Indian remains and artifacts.[4] Why? Because we can know beyond reasonable doubt that nothing else archaeologically speaking is in the ground, or we would know about it. Archaeologists are not concerned with running into Mormon antiquities because there aren’t any. In Israel, by comparison, bulldozers are illegal to use in many places because the ancient antiquities below the surface are so rich in number. It does not even register to such a standard in America, even though, according to the Book of Mormon, it should.
The reason comparing the history of the Book of Mormon to the history of the Bible is a false analogy is because there is no archaeological evidence for any event that takes place in the Book of Mormon, but there is much archaeological evidence for many events that take place in the Bible. They are clearly in completely different categories. The difference is evident. There is no credible archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon.
So, is it an argument from silence to say that there has been no archaeological evidence ever been found for the Book of Mormon? Not an argument from silence, but because the Book of Mormon makes such historical claims, Mormons bear the burden of proof because of such claims. Evidence matters, and the burden of proof is on them. The more they compare the Book of Mormon to the Bible, because the more biblical claims, events, people, and customs that are confirmed through archaeology,[5] and the more construction projects that we have in America without finding anything regarding or confirming Mormon historical claims, this means the heavier the burden of proof becomes on Mormonism. I find this to be a major reason people leave the Mormon faith.
So, is it safe to conclude that because there is no archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon that Mormonism is false? Until they can bear the burden by proving the claims in the Book of Mormon are true, everything is unproven. The question is when does one draw the line…
Written by Nace Howell through the grace of the Lord Jesus
[1] Howell, Nace. Mormonism: Impossible: Refuting a Fundamental Mormon Doctrine and Using Apologetics to Reach the Latter-day Saints. Maitland: Xulon Press, 2023. 120. https://www.amazon.com/Mormonism-Refuting-Fundamental-Apologetics-Latter-Day/dp/1662885377/
[4] I have personally been on job sites that had moved 800,000 yards of dirt, which is not uncommon on American soil.
[5] As well as confirming other ancient texts, such as Herodotus’ Histories, concerning which it is said, “archaeology graphically confirms Herodotus's observations.” (Welsby, Derek. The Kingdom of Kush. London: British Museum Press. 1996. Consider also the extreme archaeological discoveries surrounding Alexander the Great, King Tutankhamen, Constantine, and other historical figures.
Comments
Post a Comment