Replies

That’s a lot to defend there. I will try to address a lot but much of this has been addressed and I may need some help posting links to sources.

Why is there little evidence of civilizations here in the American continent? First, we don’t know how large an area the Book of Mormon people really covered. We know at one point one individual ended up in the New York area but we don’t know where the action took place. Descriptions in the book itself are vague and can be interpreted many ways. Archaeologists are discovering even now buried civilizations in Central and South America. What might come in the future, we don’t know. Beyond the archaeological evidence, though, is a peculiar blessing or curse given to those brought here, according to the Book of Mormon. The promise was those who remained righteous would build a magnificent civilization and legacy. Those who broke their covenants with the Lord would be swept off the land and leave no such legacy. In the words of my electronics engineer husband, to break the covenants was to become a Control-Alt-Delete civilization, leaving not even the memory of magnificence. It doesn’t apply to all peoples who were in the continent, only to those who made the covenant with the Lord. (Now, enlighten me, where is the evidence of the Exodus and the Israelites’ presence in Egypt, of the worldwide flood, of King David and Saul, and countless other incidents in the Bible? As I have mentioned earlier, faith requires faith.)

The Book of Mormon doesn’t say the Indians have the blood of Book of Mormon people although prophets have said some Indians have descended from Book of Mormon people though no one has said it was a direct line. It doesn’t claim the Indians were solely descended from Book of Mormon people. Nor does the Book of Mormon claim their people were the only inhabitants of the continent, nor, as I indicated earlier, does the Book of Mormon even given us an idea of how large an area was affected/settled by Book of Mormon people.

As to DNA evidence, my understanding is that the evidence is inconclusive if you consider the Book of Mormon people left the Middle East 600 years before the birth of Christ and shortly after the Ten Tribes were lost to record. The Book of Mormon people claimed to be of the Lost Tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and other blood, specifically of the inhabitants of Jerusalem of that time (which would have included people probably of every tribe but specifically Judah). Therefore, unless you can pinpoint where the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh ended up after the diaspora, you have a hard time isolating Asians from Middle Easterners.

You mentioned plants and animals that science has shown were not here. I haven’t look at the studies but why should it surprise anyone that flora and fauna change over time. Why are there large ruins of civilizations especially in the Southwest America where there is no evidence of how such civilizations supported themselves? Climate changes. Disease can wipe out people, animals and crops. Again, the Bible suffers from the same kinds of “scientific deficiencies” so why demand the Book of Mormon meet a greater standard than the Bible?

But, without belaboring your objections, I will simply tell you that if one sincerely studies the Book of Mormon and follows the dictates at the end to pray about it, answers come. And they did come to me. In the end, we can only communicate or understand spiritual things by spiritual means. Neither science nor any of its branches like archaeology or DNA studies will ever establish the truth of either the Book of Mormon or the Bible. It will always be a matter of faith. And if I have said I have a personal witness of the truthfulness of the Book of Mormon, it is mine to claim and none can gainsay. Neither Bible-bashing nor Book of Mormon-bashing will ever convince one of the truth nor destroy a testimony gained by spiritual means.

First, we don’t know how large an area the Book of Mormon people really covered. We know at one point one individual ended up in the New York area but we don’t know where the action took place.

The bom lists the peoples being in millions upon millions. And from sea to sea. I was reading Alma the other day when the Lamanites attacked numbering like the sand. The ruins of those cities should be easily identified along with the swords, shield and assorted armor and other weapons they are reported to have. Smith pointed out places he said were bom locations during the camp far west era.

Archaeologists are discovering even now buried civilizations in Central and South America.

Decades of investigation have identified multiple cultures that spann the bom period - and none of them linked to the bom. The Smithsonian Institution and the National Geographic Society both have pointed out that the bom does not portray events here in the americas. Not one piece of Nephite or other bom society has been found.

The promise was those who remained righteous would build a magnificent civilization and legacy.

Weren't the Nephites those people - and they were slaughtered by the Laminites?

(Now, enlighten me, where is the evidence of the Exodus and the Israelites’ presence in Egypt, of the worldwide flood, of King David and Saul, and countless other incidents in the Bible? As I have mentioned earlier, faith requires faith.)

Wow, see you start attacking one of your standard works. Regarding Israel and Moses, 4000+ years ago (vs 1400 for the end of the bom era). That said, the customs and laws Moses wrote about in that period have been paralled in other cultures in the area. Going further back, custom of the Pharaoh releasing a prisoner on his birthday has been confirmed from archaeological finds (Genesis 40). Losers normally don't record their losses, so lack of more specific finds is not surprising. The next 40 years were spent nomadically - no buildings to find. Merneptah Stela puts Israel in the promised land as a nation right after conquest. As well as ruin levels in Jericho, Ai and others.

worldwide flood

As a geologist, flood events are difficult to isolate unless well preserved. Archaeological evidence of world wide flood stories strongly infers an event occurred. Again, you are looking at an extremely old event, in comparison to more recent events such as the bom.

of King David and Saul, and countless other incidents in the Bible? As I have mentioned earlier, faith requires faith

The capital Saul established was at Gibeah, identified as Tell el-Ful, located at the northern outskirts of present-day Jerusalem. The site was excavated by W.F. Albright and was the royal residence of Saul.
All of the locations David fled to from Saul have been located. On July 21, 1993, archaeologists discovered the Tel Dan Stone, the stone mentions Kind David’s dynasty, “the House of David” and dates to the era of David.

Now, these are just a few of the voluminous amounts of archaeological evidences found in Israel. I could also point out the well that David used to enter Jerusalem to conquer it, or Solomon's stables, etc. In fact (not faith), archaeological finds fill museums that are directly related to the bible. Faith has very little to do with it. These artifacts are centuries older than the start of the bom period of Nephi.

Central and south american discoveries pre date and span the bom era in the americas. Again, nothing has been found that can be linked to the bom.

No, lets be very clear. The teaching is that the Laminites, who were descendants of Jews from Israel became the native americans of today.

“And the skins of the Lamanites [Native Americans] were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.” Book of Mormon, Alma, chapter 3, verse 6

To say some is not accurate. President Spencer W. Kimball held the position that all were. The translation by the Prophet Joseph Smith revealed a running history for one thousand years—six hundred years before Christ until four hundred after Christ—a history of these great people who occupied this land for that thousand years. Then for the next fourteen hundred years, they lost much of their high culture. The descendants of this mighty people were called Indians by Columbus in 1492 when he found them here.
The term Lamanite includes all Indians and Indian mixtures, such as the Polynesians, the Guatemalans, the Peruvians, as well as the Sioux, the Apache, the Mohawk, the Navajo, and others. It is a large group of great people ("Of Royal Blood," Ensign, July 1971

Nor does the Book of Mormon claim their people were the only inhabitants of the continent, nor, as I indicated earlier, does the Book of Mormon even given us an idea of how large an area was affected/settled by Book of Mormon people.

Again, argument from silence. However, given the populations mentioned, it extended from sea to sea - which to me indicates a substantial area - and add dozens of major cities, all in contrast to the richness of biblical archeology for even older events.

The Book of Mormon people claimed to be of the Lost Tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh and other blood, specifically of the inhabitants of Jerusalem of that time (which would have included people probably of every tribe but specifically Judah). Therefore, unless you can pinpoint where the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh ended up after the diaspora, you have a hard time isolating Asians from Middle Easterners.

DNA provides adequate means to separate peoples. And please note too, that anthropological, linguistic and archaeological evidence proves that the native americans are not of Israeli (Semitic) peoples. See peoples carry genetic markers. These markers will not change over time and since it was Nephi's group that populated the americas in 600 BC, those markers will still match those of others in the middle east. Tracking a people group over that period of time has been further prooven by the Lemba people, a tribe in southern Africa. They arrived in S. Africa about the same time Nephi's group did in america. Genetics showed 70% match with current jews, 30% to local tribes (a problem that would not be encountered by Nephi's party - they were the only ones).

You mentioned plants and animals that science has shown were not here. I haven’t look at the studies but why should it surprise anyone that flora and fauna change over time.

OK, since you are not familiar with these -
American Indians had no wheat, barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys, camels before 1492 . . . Iron, steel, glass, and silk were not used in the New World before 1492 (Information from the National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 20560 Statement Regarding the Book of Mormon ). On the flip side, there is no mention of foods that WERE present such as corn, squash, etc. No mention of other peoples but those descended from Nephite's group.

Again, the Bible suffers from the same kinds of “scientific deficiencies” so why demand the Book of Mormon meet a greater standard than the Bible?

Sorry, as I pointed out above, but will again here - even skeptics acknowledge archaeological support for the bible. Where are the museums full of bom artifacts. I'm not holding the bom to higher critical standards, just to the same standard as the bible.

Neither science nor any of its branches like archaeology or DNA studies will ever establish the truth of either the Book of Mormon or the Bible. It will always be a matter of faith.

The bom makes the claim to represent the actual history in the americas 600 BC - 400 AD. Brigham Young University anthropology professor, Dr. Raymond T. Matheny at an August 25, 1984 Sunstone conference in Salt Lake City made the following observation - ""I would say in evaluating the Book of Mormon that it has no place in the New World whatsoever.""

While archeology cannot directly prove or disprove the spiritual claims of the bom or the Bible. It can evaluate the historical claims which both books make, and that evaluation shows that while the Bible's claim to be authentic history is supported by objective evidence, the same cannot be said for the bom.

Neither Bible-bashing nor Book of Mormon-bashing will ever convince one of the truth nor destroy a testimony gained by spiritual means.

Bible bashing - didn't you make that claim challenging archeology and the bible? The bom makes the claim that can be verified by scientific methods. Every time, the bom has failed that test. You may have faith in a bridge, but if its foundation is flawed, it will collapse when you cross it.