How come archeologists cannot find a trace of..?

How come archeologists cannot find a trace of one single civilization that the Mormon prophet claimed was given to him on the golden [and self destructing] tablets??

Not a single piece of pottery. Not a single dwelling place, not a single burial, not a trace - not a bit of anything that he claimed ever existed.

Care to explain that anyone?

youtube.com/watch?v=svfxSscxh8o&feature=PlayList&p=FE9C02BEB01C6776&playnext=1&index=3

Listen to the youtube link.
Anyone truly seeking truth must be compelled to listen to find out if they are following truth.

There is no evidence of these cities because they never existed. Such cities as described in the BOM would have left countless artifacts especially since a lot of it was “steel”. Also consider that the plates were only covered by a thin layer of earth with the edges of the stone showing, means that any artifacts would practically be laying on top of the ground. “they did build houses of cement, in the which they did dwell” Hel 3:7 Wouldn’t be hard to find these houses of cement don’t you think? That is if they ever existed, which they did’nt.

Here’s a way to understand where Latter-day Saints are coming from with the Book of Mormon: Why do people still believe in the Bible being the Word of God when most secular archaeologists say there is no evidence for the history of the Bible before King David’s time? All the sources I’ve found say that the archaeologists who believe in the Bible before King David’s time are the religious conservative ones.

The Book of Joshua lists 30 cities that the Israelites conquer. Archaeologists say that if Joshua’s Conquest happened, a bare minimum requirement would be that these cities would actually have existed back then. However, archaeologists can’t find evidence for many of these cities existing (yes, Jericho did, but they can’t find evidence for many of the other ones). Thus, the archaeologists who believe in the Book of Joshua are the religious conservatives.

The Bible talks about Moses and the Exodus. Archaeologists say that the land of Palestine was a province of Egypt until the 1100’s B.C., and that if you wanted to settle the area you needed permission from the Egyptians. However, archaeologists can’t find any records from the Egyptians of the Israelites coming into the area before that time. The Egyptians had many military posts all throughout the Sinai Peninsula, and kept records of those who passed through. They don’t have records of a mass Israelite Exodus. The only way through would have been a southern route through a dangerous desert, and in the last 150 years archaeologists haven’t found evidence that a large group of Israelites passed through that route.

The Bible lists some cities, places, and items that Abraham had experiences with. Archaeologists say that we’re lacking in evidence that some of these cities, places, and items existed 2000 B.C. Obviously the “secular” archaeologists don’t believe in Abraham because of this reason.

Mitochondrial and Y-Chromosome DNA studies support all humans coming out of Africa 60,000 years ago from black African DNA lineage groups, rather than from Noah’s Ark in the Middle East 5,000 years ago. Seeing some of the DNA, anarchism, and archaeological comparisons here?

Just like Christians feel awkward rejecting the Bible because the secular archaeologists don’t agree with the Bible’s history before King David’s time, that’s how Latter-day Saints feel about the Book of Mormon.

Exellent post. It seems that people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

The King James Bible uses “steel” as a generic word for metal in the Bible, although many believe that when it used the word “steel” it was probably often referring to other types of metals. The King James Bible uses “Brass” often when it refers to “Bronze”. The King James Bible also uses “corn” to refer to grains in the Bible, although corn didn’t actually exist in the Old World before Christopher Columbus. After time, the meaning of words change, and can be used to refer to other items.

Cement doesn’t have to mean the type of cement made in the 1900’s, it can also be used to refer to mud mixed with certain strengthening agents.

Let’s also not forget that secular archaeologists say that Abraham from Genesis is chock full of anarchism that archaeologists say there’s no evidence for (Philistines that Abraham met 2000 B.C., nomads on camels, Chaldeans, etc). Look Philistines and Chaldeans up in the encyclopedia to see when historians believe they came into existance, then you’ll know why secular archaeologists don’t believe in Abraham. If you still believe in the Bible being the Word of God after that, you’ll understand why these anarchisms don’t shake Latter-day Saint beliefs about the Book of Mormon.

Hopefully that was helpful.

So you’re saying that the Mormon god could not give Joseph Smith the correct translations of the “reformed Egyptian” words for bronze and clay bricks, not to mention whatever the BOM “horses” were? In the bible, the bricks made from clay and straw are called bricks, not cement. It’s obvious that Sidney Rigdon wanted us to believe that the Nephites worked in cement. The word “steel” in the KJV is a mistake, which Sidney Rigdon imitated when he wrote the BOM, much of which he lifted from the KJV bible. All later translations of the bible use the correct word - bronze (or sometimes brass).

BTW, it’s “anachronism”, not anarchism.

But they have found evidence for some of the cities, and are finding more evidence and more cities with every passing year. The biblical civilizations, kingdoms, cities, monetary systems, languages, wars and so much more have been found and proven and many are still there to be visited.

By contrast, not one shred of evidence has ever been found for the Nephite civilization (ending circa 421 AD), which is 1800 years more recent than Joshua’s time (circa 1380 BC).

421 AD is just this morning in archaeological time. Civilizations leave artifacts. There should be Nephite artifacts all over the place, but there are none. That’s because the Nephite civilization is fictional.

This is absurd. Ever heard of the Mayans, Incas, Aztecs, Olmecs?

Are you just stupid or something? I am not going to participate-- this is pure ignorance and participation is a waste of time. All those cultures are the cities and cultures mentioned in the BOM. And in regard to DNA- we are talking about the DNA of a dozen or so people in the midst of thousands and thousands of people.

1- The BOM says NOWHERE that all native americans are descendents of the family of Lehi. Probably almost none are, since genealogical lines die out. We are talking about a dozen people here.
2- The BOM says no where that the family of Lehi were the ONLY people on two continents. This is absurd. It says that the land was saved as an inheritance for that family.

Expecting Native Americans to have all been descendents of Lehi is precisely the same as expecting all Jews to be literal descendents of the person Judah in the bible and to have that show in the DNA.

This is my first last and only post on this stupid thread. Question asked, question answered.

Archaeologists claim that carbon dating says Jericho was destroyed 1500 B.C., the city of Ai abandoned 2200 B.C., and Hazor by fire 1250 B.C. Check out NOVA’s movie on that from PBS pbs.org/wgbh/nova/bible/program.html Click on chapter 4, running time 8:50 minutes.

“Secular” archaeologists say that if it’s true that a person named Joshua conquered these three cities in a lifetime, it doesn’t explain or fit the evidence “found to date” very well. Using the Scientific Method, you can’t prove, but “secular” archaeologists do make the claim that if Joshua’s Conquest is mythical it would then be using less assumptions to explain more evidence.

Likewise, Science and Archaeology changes over time with new evidence that comes in. The same could happen with the Book of Mormon. If God is all powerful, why wouldn’t he be able to have some people in the Americas, while having the Book of Genesis in the Old World going undetected? And typically Latter-day Saints don’t believe that the Book of Mormon people were the only ones in the Americas, and that many of them probably mixed and that’s why there are many mongloid features in most modern Native Americans.

Although the Minimalists believe in the Bible after 600 B.C. and Maximalists after David, the secular archaeologists don’t believe before David’s time, and believe that there’s evidence that should reasonably exist, which doesn’t.

To understand how Latter-day Saints see King James wording in the Book of Mormon, the original New Testament wasn’t written in Hebrew. Although Jesus spoke Aramaic, it was written in Greek. In the 1900’s the New Testament was translated into Hebrew for those who like that language. It was often translated into Old Biblical Hebrew rather than modern Hebrew, because many who speak Hebrew preferred that language. Just like many see that move as smart because many Hebrew speakers preferred the old Hebrew, Latter-day Saints see it as smart that God had Joseph Smith translate the BoM into King James language, since many like the King James type of wording of scriptures.

There are accusations of Sidney Rigdon writing it, or copying from the View of the Hebrews, or whatever else that may pop up. Likewise, many secular scholars say that Jesus was probably plagiarized from many pagan myths. There are many parallels between Jesus Christ and the Greek god Dionysus, Persian Mithras, and Egyptian Horus, with these myths existing before Jesus’ time and in the Roman Kingdom of Judah. Many secular scholars also say that the oldest dated scrolls of the Bible do not date before the Babylonian Conquest, and there are many parallels between the Book of Genesis and what the ancient Babylonians believed, and so they accuse the Bible of Babylonian plagiarism! :eek:

Thanks

This is argument from tautology, a kind of circular reasoning.

The Book of Joshua lists 30 cities that the Israelites conquer. Archaeologists say that if Joshua’s Conquest happened, a bare minimum requirement would be that these cities would actually have existed back then. However, archaeologists can’t find evidence for many of these cities existing (yes, Jericho did, but they can’t find evidence for many of the other ones). Thus, the archaeologists who believe in the Book of Joshua are the religious conservatives.

We have evidence for some, and the parallels between the findings and the Biblical record are striking – even secular archaeologists readily concede this. Not only that, but other cities and civilizations before David, besides the ones listed in Joshua, have been found and documented thoroughly.

The Bible talks about Moses and the Exodus. Archaeologists say that the land of Palestine was a province of Egypt until the 1100’s B.C., and that if you wanted to settle the area you needed permission from the Egyptians. However, archaeologists can’t find any records from the Egyptians of the Israelites coming into the area before that time. The Egyptians had many military posts all throughout the Sinai Peninsula, and kept records of those who passed through. They don’t have records of a mass Israelite Exodus. The only way through would have been a southern route through a dangerous desert, and in the last 150 years archaeologists haven’t found evidence that a large group of Israelites passed through that route.

“A large group”, maybe not, but there is evidence of Israelite culture in Egypt in a period near that of Egyptian jewelry and religious artifacts in Israel, and of numerous independent civilizations in the area at the time. Egyptian records speak of strife between the Hebrew people and the Egyptian people. The Egyptian military posts clustered along the seaboard, and the only route out of Egypt would be – get ready for it – the exact route the Scripture says the Israelites took.

The Bible lists some cities, places, and items that Abraham had experiences with. Archaeologists say that we’re lacking in evidence that some of these cities, places, and items existed 2000 B.C. Obviously the “secular” archaeologists don’t believe in Abraham because of this reason.

Perhaps inexperienced archaeologists might be skeptical because not every single event is documented, but it’s much more likely that someone who went through archaeology school would know evidence that corroborates an account need not be 100% complete to be corroborating. The difference is that there is no evidence at all for any of the civilizations mentioned in the Americas by the BOM.

Mitochondrial and Y-Chromosome DNA studies support all humans coming out of Africa 60,000 years ago from black African DNA lineage groups, rather than from Noah’s Ark in the Middle East 5,000 years ago. Seeing some of the DNA, anarchism, and archaeological comparisons here?

Actually, no, because there is no comparison. So people came from Africa. That doesn’t conflict with the Flood because Noah and his wife and sons were one bloodline; his sons’ wives were three others. Originally, they came from Iraq or North Africa. So did the current Sub-Saharan Africans. So did everyone else. If the Bible had said that the current Africans were descended from the Inuit and the rest of humanity wasn’t, there would be a conflict with DNA and archaeological evidence. As it is there’s a non sequitur.

Just like Christians feel awkward rejecting the Bible because the secular archaeologists don’t agree with the Bible’s history before King David’s time, that’s how Latter-day Saints feel about the Book of Mormon.

I don’t “feel awkward rejecting the Bible because” of secular archaeologists’ conclusions. I feel and see nothing to cause me to reject the Bible. Secular archaeologists are the archaeologists who have held onto their secularism despite the evidence, not because of it, as I see it, and many many archaeologists have become Christian because of their work. Many who were strongly atheistic have become agnostic during their work.
I don’t know of any archaeologist who ahs ever become Mormon or open to LDS theology as a result of digging in the New World. This is because there has never been any evidence to support the BOM. The difference between not-totally-comprehensive evidence and no evidence is vast and makes a large difference. It’s not close to being comparable.

The Evangelical Protestant argument that the Book of Mormon isn’t true because Native Americans came from the Siberia 20,000 years ago would work the same way. 20,000 years ago is calibrated on the 60,000 years out of Africa and 5 million years ago splitting from chimpanzees, so if those starting assumptions don’t work, neither does the 20,000 years ago for Native Americans work, since it’s calibrated on that. If a Noah was black African DNA lineage group, then why can’t the Siberians be from a lineage group of ancient Middle Easterners, just like Lehites? There’s also more than that, secular biologists say that viruses can’t reproduce on their own and so they have to inject their RNA material into living cells. Secular biologists say that chimpanzees share the most retrovirus DNA with humans compared to any other animal on the face of the planet, and at the same retrovirus DNA sites, thus they believe evolution by common descent rather than Genesis. Biologists also say that humans are way to genetically diverse for us to come from Noah’s Ark (bottleneck) 5,000 years ago.

Likewise the same could be applied to archaeologists who are against the Book of Mormon. If the secular and liberal Christian/Jewish archaeologists don’t believe in the Bible’s history before King David’s time, and only the religious conservative Christian/Jewish archaeologists believe, and that’s a “circular reasoning”, then why isn’t it circular to say it’s the Mormon archaeologists who believe in the Book of Mormon? If there were just as many Mormon archaeologists as religious conservative Christian/Jewish archaeologists, then there would be just as much debate about the time before David’s time.

They use Karl Popper’s falisfication to say that if the Book of Joshua is real, then they would predict the cities would actually exist as a minimum requirement. When there are failed predictions, the secular archaeologists don’t still believe. They say that if some cities existed but others did not, that’s not at all evidence that it happened. The secular archaeologists who concede are the Bible Minimalists for after 600 B.C. and the Maximalists after King David’s time.

Non-religious conservative archaeologists have said they’ve been searching for evidence that the Israelites went along that route for the last 150 years and have found nothing, and only the religious conservatives believe. Part of Archaeology is testability, or falsification. What is a study that if it went bad would disprove the Exodus, since it’s not logical to prove but to only disprove? That’s why the non-religious conservatives don’t believe.

Why do people still believe in the Bible being the Word of God when most secular archaeologists say there is no evidence for the history of the Bible before King David’s time?

I’ve heard of SOME archaeologists saying this–not most.

Survive, secular and liberal Christian/Jewish archaeologists do not believe in the history of the Bible before King David’s time:

(Differences between secular and liberal Christian/Jewish archaeologists vs. religious conservative archaeologists with the Bible)
religioustolerance.org/chr_arhs.htm (with references)

“The Bible, as History, Flunks New Archaeological Tests” (New York Times)
nytimes.com/library/arts/072900david-bible.html

National Geographic on their website says that to this day, little evidence has been found for the Kingdoms of David and Solomon, which were supposed to be obvious kingdoms. news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/10/081028-king-solomon-copper-mine-missions_2.html (under the “Historical Extremes” section)

“The Bible Unearthed” (by a famous Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein - he says there is no convincing evidence for the United Monarchy or anything before it)
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed
and found on the History Channel youtube.com/watch?v=v2HqrIwz0Pw&NR=1 (Survive, watch Part 2, 8:52 minutes, then you’ll understand why Latter-day Saints believe the Book of Mormon if you still believe the Bible being the Word of God)

Survive, you haven’t explained about the “Chaldeans”, “Philistines”, and “nomads on camels” for 2000 B.C.? Saying that the Philistines Abraham met could have been people living in the general area rather than the historical ones from David’s time just makes non-religious conservatives say it’s now unfalisfiable, and that a fundamental aspect of Archaeology is “testability”. The same can be done for every single part of the Book of Mormon that appears as a anachronism to non-Mormons; Mormon apologists say that you just have to see things from a different perspective. The Book of Mormon mentions “silk”. Although there wasn’t Old World silk in the Americas, the Spanish said that the Native Americans had a Native American type clothing silk which was made from moth larvae. Do you now see where Latter-day Saints are coming from, even if you don’t agree with them?

Cluny, can you name some secular archaeologists who believe in the history of the Bible before King David’s time? And I mean actual archaeologists, not secular people? Those who try to discredit the plagues of Egypt as miracles who are atheists are considered pseudoscientists/pseudoarchaeologists by the secular archaeologists, because the secular archaeologists don’t even believe they were slaves in Egypt (only small groups now and then of Canaanites, but never the Hebrew slaves), and because these atheists don’t say how they can falsify their Plagues of Egypt theories, nor are they practicing archaeologists but rather scholars.

Secular archaeologists don’t believe in Adam & Even, Noah’s Global Flood and Ark, secular linguists don’t believe in the Tower of Babel and languages, etc, before King David’s time.

Religious Quest - where are you going with this?

There are burials of the Pharoah who the Bible mentions, and all his sons after the time of Moses…and there is one burial of a young son during the time of the Exodus of the slaves. Which coincides with the death of his first born son dying thru the Angel of Death at Passover. I will get into that further…

Archeologists have proof, even if the internet might not.

I hope you dont base the products of truth on the internet.
It is a wonderful place to learn, but it doesn’t contain every archeological dig ever made. Go to a library and read them. I have. I also saw history shows with the FINDS produced via the time of Moses.

Did you know they found a wheel from a chariot IN the Red Sea dated to the time of Moses, prooving that the chariots rode into the parted sea after Moses??

- Page 1""Chariot Wheels Found****Red Sea

recovered the metal of a wheel with the remains of eight spokes and gave this significant find to Nassif Mohammed Hassan, Director of Antiquities in Cairo. Mr. Hassan immediately identified the artifact as a chariot wheel dating 3500 years ago during the 18th Dynasty, the only time the ancient Egyptians used an eight spoked wheel.

[size=3][/size]

Secular evidence.

The Papyrus Ipuwer from Egypt. This is an Egyptian poem that state the 10 plagues of Eqypt (from the book of Exodus) really happened.

The Pharoah who ruled during Moses time was Amenhotep II. According to succession rights, his first-born should have become the next pharaoh, but this child died.

This child died during the 10th plague on Egypt.** This plague killed the first born son of throughout Egypt. This is documented on an inscription on the Stela between the legs of the Sphinx, which tells the story of how the second-born son became pharaoh in the place of the first-born**.

As for Noah, there have been dozens of alleged sightings of Noah’s ark in eastern Turkey. Numerous programs on secular TV stations (History Channel, etc) have documented this.

There is the Merenptah’s Victory Stele mentioning the Jews.
Additionally a papyrus was found in Egypt in the nineteenth century which describes in detail many of the plagues and the Exodus itself. This papyrus, which currently resides in a Dutch museum, is known as the Ipuwer Papyrus, which was written by an Egyptian who was an eye-witness to these events. The museum of Leiden in the Netherlands acquired the papyrus in 1828. It was translated and published in
English for the first time in 1909 by Professor Alan H. Gardiner. “It is no merely local disturbance that is here described, but a great and overwhelming national disaster.”

In The Antiquity of the Jews (1830, 166; Book 8.3.1) Josephus says the exodus occurred 592 years before the Temple of Solomon was built which is about 960 BC. So the exodus, according to Josephus, was about 1552 BC or 1,020 years from Abraham’s entry into Canaan.

Manetho was an Egyptian priest who wrote a history of Egypt in Greek in the third century BC His writings are mainly preserved by quotations in the writings of Josephus, Africanus, and Eusebius. As noted earlier Josephus quotes Manetho to show the antiquity of the Jews. Manetho equated the Hyksos with the Jews. The Hyksos were foreign rulers of Lower Egypt from about 1663 BC to 1555 BC They were expelled from Egypt by Ahmose who founded the 18th Dynasty

Tacitus states: Most authors agree that once during a plague in Egypt which caused bodily disfigurement, King Bocchoris approached the oracle of Ammon and asked for a remedy, whereupon he was told to purge his kingdom and to transport this race (the Jews) into other lands, since it was hateful to the gods.

Diodorus writes: Now that we are about to record the war against the Jews, we consider it appropriate to give first a summary count of the establishment of the nation, from its origins, and of the practices observed among them. When in ancient times a pestilence arose in Egypt, the common people ascribed their troubles to the workings of a divine agency; for indeed with many strangers of all sorts dwelling in their midst and practicing different rites of religion and sacrifice, their own traditional observances in honour of the gods had fallen into disuse. Hence the natives of the land surmised that unless they removed the foreigners, their troubles would never be resolved.

Herodotus is known as the father of history. He was a Greek writer born in Asia Minor about 484 BC He traveled extensively in Asia Minor, Babylon, Egypt, and Greece. Herodotus wrote Histories which was later divided into nine books. Book Two deals with the history and culture of Egypt. Herodotus describes the Hyksos period by saying: Thus they reckon that for a hundred and six years Egypt was in great misery and the temples so long shut were never opened. So much do the people hate the memory of these two kings that they do not greatly wish to name them, and call the pyramids after the shepherd Philitis, who then pastured his flocks in this place (Book ii, 128; 1920, 431).

Eusebius in his book The Preparation for the Gospel tries to show the antiquity of the Jews by referring to what Herodotus had said indirectly. Eusebius says: Herodotus also has made mention of this revolt and of Amosis in his second Book; and, in a certain way, of the Jews themselves, enumerating them among those who practice circumcision, and calling them the Assyrians in Palestine, perhaps on account of Abraham (1981, 525-26; Herodotus 1920, 319; Book ii, 36).

Source(s):

http://www.houseofptolemy.org/housejew.h…
http://www.askmoses.com/article.html?h=2…
http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/08slav…

”“Biblical Archaeology
In Regard to the Authorship of the Mosaic Writings: Does Archaeological Discoveries sculptures, implements of war, written documents on stone, clay tablets,

Nonetheless, the many references that have been called into question by critics have with the continual findings of Archaeology been verified with pinpoint accuracy.

[size=3][/size]

Pertaining especially to the Mosaic Writings, two examples will suffice to illustrate this precision. First, it was once argued by Naturalistic critics that neither Moses nor any of the people before him could have written the Pentateuch because they were illiterate. However, discoveries have been made in a variety of fields such as government, business, religion, warfare, tools, transportation, coinage, medical, prisons, stables and graves and as a result of these discoveries scholars and scientist have been brought into contact with a range of subjects running from anthropology to zoology. Included in these finds are writings dating from these time periods. These writings engraved in stone, have been perfectly preserved and now serve as witnesses to the literary capabilities of humanity during the time periods in question. For example, a book engraved in stone from Abraham’s day known as The Code of Hammurabi was discovered at Babylon in 1901. Digging up this stone was one of the most significant discoveries in the field of archaeology. The reason that this finding is so notable is because “here is a book, written on stone, not a copy, but the original autograph book itself, made in Abraham’s day, still in existence, bearing testimony to a well developed system of jurisprudence but also to the fact that as early as Abraham’s time literary skill had reached a remarkably advanced stage.” 9 So, these “new discoveries in all parts of the world are…revealing that early man was a highly skilled technologist in many fields at dates far earlier than imagined by evolutionist only a few years ago.” 10

[size=3][/size]

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.