Archaeological facts to support Book of Mormon

[Maya]

Just in case no one put this up yet one of my favorite sites: Mormon Sites - rising from the dust...

[Maya]

If Joseph's education was so limited, how do we not know that he thought horses were always on the American continent. It was in the 1830's that scholars and historians thought otherwise. I'm sure Joseph was not privy or had access to that kind of information. Yet it's been since proven otherwise that horses had been on the American continent prior to Columbus. It just hasn't been proven they were here during Book of Mormon times.

Yet that lack of proof makes no difference to me at all. Does not in anyway change my thoughts or my belief that what is written in the Book of Mormon is true.

And what are the curly haired horses... where did they come from?? Spaniards did not have them with!

[Snow]

Nice to see that you're being yourself Snow and that you've chosen this thread to do so. You know very well that the archaeological research for both the Bible and Book of Mormon will have significant religious bias in it. I would venture to say that there's a decent amount of "mainstream" archaeology that takes great delight in whenever they're not finding things to support a story from scripture. For instance, archaeology comes up empty when looking for David, more often than not. Some academics think that's loads of fun to prove that religious people are idiots. I don't know if there is such a thing as an untainted or unbiased scientific opinion when it comes to archaeological studies of ancient America.

The Book of Mormon offers us almost nothing with which to place events. It would be amazing if anything specific ever turns up. What we have are generalities. They are interesting, but all you have is a lot of guess work. So what?

The poster claimed parallels between ancient history and BoM accounts but upon questioning cannot name any. If starting a thread by making a claim, it would be nice to have something to offer on the subject.

Edited May 13, 2009 by Snow

[dnc76v22]

Does not prove anything, but it's evidence just the same.

“Traditional Dakota/Lakota people firmly believe that the aboriginal North American horse did not become extinct after the last Ice Age, and that it was part of their pre-contact culture.”-Aboriginal North American Horse.pdf

Edited May 13, 2009 by dnc76v22

[Hemidakota]

Many archaeologist devote their lives to proving events in the bible actualyl happened.

Facts have emereged, proving the exodus, jesus' travels, and biblical cities.

Faith should be your ultimate decision making tool when believing in the scriptures.

However, I find archaeological proof of scriptural events very exciting!

Until recent times, we did not have an archaeological record of ancient times in the americas. Now we have the Maya civilizations records and dates available since we have cracked the graphical writing system.

Closer examinations of the historical changes in cultural and social events in the lives of the mayan people coincide with events in the Book of Mormon. Changes like the decline and increase of war, city abandonment, and power changes.

I challenge those of academic prowless in this area to investigate further. It is impossible for Joseph smith to know anything about the mayans, quite remarkable.

Even our own academia suffers from faith promoting truths. Excellent post...

[Ammoclip]

When do you believe horses came to the Americas? I have a reason for asking but want your thoughts ammoclip.

Well, as discussed in a later posting, Joseph Smith would have thought horses had always been here but science states that they were not here between 10,000BC and 1400AD.

But if I were an ancient person first seeing the new world, I might call Alpacas and Llamas - horses and jack-asses. Specially since the maya domesticated and used them in some of the same fashions as horses and asses.

I posted the two timelines so that readers could draw their own conclusions. As for offering 'FACTS', I think comparing the two timelimes of records both being of the same area you might find some pararels.

And comparing the two timelines it is clear that a social change happened about the time

the nephites arrived. This was the mayan's reinensance, they began writing about spiritual matters in their records at this point. There is far more detailed accounts of the ancient mayans all over the place if your looking for more specific information than what I am providing.

[Ammoclip]

Huh?

Are you claiming that the Maya highlands fall under the domination of Teotihuacán represents the destruction of the Nephites?

What's your evidence?

Well we have a society of 100,000-500,000 people that are extinguished at the same time the BoM states the nephite society was destroyed.

I don't know how many societies are being destroyed in the americas at this time but I would certainly point out that this is a dramatic world event. When moses lead his people out of egypt they were able to find egyptian writings and biblical writings of the same event to substantiate it. I believe we've just done the same thing with the BoM and the Mayan records.

[Jim108]

Following is an official response by the Smithsonian and the National Geographic Society regarding the book of mormon. This is not to say the book of mormon is not true, but rather to say that the supporting science does not exist to support it. Maybe in the future science will be able to support the book.

Responses to the Book of Mormon

For years we have heard from the missionaries that the Smithsonian Institute and National Geographic have both corroborated the historicity of the Book of Mormon. I’ve been told by countless missionaries that all I had to do was contact them for the information so that is what I did via e-mail. The following are their responses to my inquiry.

9/10/2004

Dear Sir or Madam;

I am looking for information from the Smithsonian Institute that will help me verify that you do/do not have anthropological evidence that there was a large civilization that supposedly existed in the Americas that the Book of Mormon claims. I've been told by countless people that your organization holds maps, etc of said finds. I've also been shown letters from you to other people that there is no such evidence of the Mormon Church. Any help you could provide me with would be greatly appreciated!

Sincerely,

Michelle Grim

Life After Ministries

10/27/2004

Dear Michelle Grim:

Thank you for contacting the National Geographic Society.

The National Geographic Society has not examined the historical claims of the Book of Mormon. We know of no archaeological evidence that corroborates the ancient history of the Western Hemisphere as presented in the Book of Mormon, nor are we aware of empirical verification of the places named in the Book of Mormon.

The Book of Mormon is clearly a work of great spiritual power; millions have read and revered its words, first published by Joseph Smith in 1830.

Yet Smith’s narration is not generally taken as a scientific source for the history of the Americas. Archaeologists and other scholars have long probed the hemisphere’s past, and the Society does not know of anything found so far that has substantiated the Book of Mormon.

In fact, students of prehistoric America by and large conclude that the New World’s earliest inhabitants arrived from Asia via the Bering land bridge.

(Lower sea levels during ice ages exposed the continental shelf beneath Bering Strait, allowing generations of ancient Siberians to migrate east.) National Geographic carried the article “Hunt for the First Americans” and the map supplement “The Dawn of Humans: Peopling of the Americas” in the December 2000 issue, perhaps on your library’s shelf.

You might want to write the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History and ask for their latest statement on this topic. You can write the museum in care of P.O. Box 37012, Washington, D.C. 20013-7012.

I hope this information proves helpful.

Sincerely,

Lisa

Research Correspondence

Dear Sir or Madam;

I am looking for information from the Smithsonian Institue that will help me verify that you do/do not have anthropological evidence that there was a large civilization that supposedly existed in the Americas that the Book of Mormon claims. I've been told by countless people that your organization holds maps, etc of said finds. I've also been shown letters from you to other people that there is no such evidence of the Mormon Church. Any help you could provide me with would be greatly appreciated!

Sincerely,

Michelle Grim

Life After Ministries

This letter from the Smithsonian’s Department of Anthropology is in response to your inquiry regarding the Book of Mormon.

The Smithsonian considers the Book of Mormon a religious document and not a scientific guide. The Smithsonian Institution has never used it in archaeological research and has found no archaeological evidence to support its claims.

You might wish to consult the following publications:

Coe, Michael D. and Rex Koontz. Mexico. 5th rev. and expanded ed. Thames & Hudson, 2002. (A well-written, authoritative summary of Mexican archeology.)

Coe, Michael D. The Maya. 6th fully rev. ed. Thames & Hudson, 1999. (A general summary of the archeology of the Maya.)

Coe, Michael D. and Richard A. Diehl. In the Land of the Olmecs. 2 vols. Univ. of Texas Press, 1980.

Fagan, Brian. Ancient North America: The Archaeology of a Continent. 3nd ed. Thames & Hudson, 2000.

Kingdoms of Gold, Kingdoms of Jade: The Americas Before Columbus. Thames & Hudson, 1991.

Freidel, David, Linda Schele, and Joy Parker. Maya Cosmos: Three Thousand years on the Shaman’s Path. 1st Quill ed. William Morrow & Co., 1995.

Hammond, Norman. Ancient Maya Civilization. Rutgers Univ. Press, 1982.

Hunter, Milton R. and Thomas S. Ferguson. Ancient America and the Book of Mormon. Kolob Book Co., 1950. (The Mormon point of view is presented.)

Jennings, Jesse D. Prehistory of North America. 2nd ed. McGraw Hill, 1989.

Jennings, Jesse, editor. Vol. 1. Ancient North Americans. Vol. 2. Ancient South Americans. W. H. Freeman, 1983.

Lamberg-Karlovsky, C. C. and Jeremy A. Sabloff. Ancient Civilizations; The Near East and Mesoamerica. 2nd ed. Waveland Press, 1995. (Chapter 4 discusses the first Mesoamerican civilization and its origin. Very readable.)

Larson, Stan. Quest for the Gold Plates: Thomas Stuart Ferguson’s Archaeological Search for The Book of Mormon. Freethinker Press, 1996.

Marcus, Joyce. Mesoamerican Writing Systems: Propaganda, Myth, and History in Four Ancient Civilizations. Princeton University Press, 1992.

Papers of the New World Archaeological Foundation. Brigham Young University, 1952-. (Published results of archeological investigations in Mesoamerica by the Foundation, supported by the Mormon Church.)

Riley, Carroll L. et al., editors. Man Across the Sea: Problems of Pre-Columbian Contacts. Univ. of Texas Press, 197l. (A collection of articles, mostly by well-qualified specialists, concerning transoceanic contacts.)

Sabloff, Jeremy A. The New Archaeology and the Ancient Maya. Scientific American Library, 1994.

Sabloff, Jeremy A. Cities of Ancient Mexico: Reconstructing a Lost World. Thames & Hudson, 1990.

Schele, Linda, and David Freidel. A Forest of Kings: The Untold Story of the Ancient Maya. William Morrow & Co., 1992.

Schele, Linda. The Inscription on Stela 5 and Its Altar. Copán Mosaics Project, 1987.

Wauchope, Robert. Lost Tribes and Sunken Continents. Univ. of Chicago Press, 1974. (Chapter 4 covers Mormon theories, setting them in the context of other nonscientific schemes. Author is a well-qualified specialist on Mexican archeology.)

Williams, Stephen. Fantastic Archaeology: The Wild Side of North American Prehistory. Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1991. (See the chapter "Archaeology and Religion: Where Angels Fear to Tread.")

Thank you for your interest in the Smithsonian Institution.

Department of Anthropology

Smithsonian Institution

2004

[Ammoclip]

It seems science has dismissed the possibility that the book of mormon is true. In the egyptian record of the exodus it refers to the people of mosses by a different name than the bible. I wonder if researchers consider this when easily dismissing the BoM.

[Jim108]

The exodus has hundreds of scientific evidence to support that it is indeed true history. Maybe in years to come the book of mormon will also be supported in such a manner.

[Snow]

I don't know how many societies are being destroyed in the americas at this time but I would certainly point out that this is a dramatic world event. When moses lead his people out of egypt they were able to find egyptian writings and biblical writings of the same event to substantiate it. I believe we've just done the same thing with the BoM and the Mayan records.

You'd be the first ever to discover that - historical writings re the exodus. Where did you dig up the records?

[Snow]

The exodus has hundreds of scientific evidence to support that it is indeed true history. Maybe in years to come the book of mormon will also be supported in such a manner.

Change that "hundreds" to zero and then you'd be about right.

[Snow]

It seems science has dismissed the possibility that the book of mormon is true.

"Science" hasn't dismissed anything nor is science even an entity with the power to "dismiss."

Scholars from scientific disciplines have not proved nor disproved the historicity of the BoM.

[Islander]

The exodus has hundreds of scientific evidence to support that it is indeed true history. Maybe in years to come the book of mormon will also be supported in such a manner.

Check your sources. There is cero, none, nada evidence of the exodus.

[deseretgov]

It just doesn't seem that to me the Book of Mormon offers enough information to determine specifics. It talks only about certain groups of people. Perhap there were other groups of people not mentioned in the Book of Mormon and it is their remains we are digging up right now.

[Ammoclip]

You'd be the first ever to discover that - historical writings re the exodus. Where did you dig up the records?

Umm, I saw it on the history channel. And I think an internet research on your part would reveal the commonality of this knowledge.

[Ammoclip]

Check your sources. There is cero, none, nada evidence of the exodus.

Hmm I think alot of the "no proof' posts I have seen are talking about that there is no evidence of how the Exodus occured,i.e.parting the red sea ect.

But there is Biblical record and egyptian written records of a mass amount of ppl leaving egypt around the same time as the biblical event. Here is a link that will explain how I Learned of this find.

The Exodus Decoded /\ Pictures of the show

Upon searching, I discovered hundreds of websites dedicated to this subject. Here's another good one ->Amazing Discoveries

It IS FACT that an exodus occured in egypt.

Edited May 14, 2009 by Ammoclip

[Islander]

I saw the show. Although interesting, very informative and highly entertaining, it offer possible but hypothetical explanations for the physical phenomena described in the biblical accounts (plagues, blood in the river, partig of the Red Sea, etc) but no archaeological evidence of any kind.

To this date there is NO physical/archaeoogical evidence of the exodus whatsoever.

[Ammoclip]

They have found evidence of a mass exodus of eqypt. They even found where the people lived before the exodus. And eqyptian writings record this event.

The stones of archaeology were silent witnesses to the dramas of the past, and it was only after 1799, when the Rosetta Stone was discovered, that the ancient records could be deciphered. It took Jean-François Champollion 20 years to decipher the ancient hieroglyphics from the Rosetta Stone. The Stone was unique in that three languages were inscribed upon it, each telling the same story. The science of archaeology is thus a fledgling science, and most of its treasures have only been subject to scrutiny in the last century.

I think the eqyptians record the people leaving eqypt as the Hyksos. I am no egyptologist for sure! hehe But I know they have found a city abandoned around the time of the exodus and they have found writings that record this event. That is fact.

Edited May 14, 2009 by Ammoclip

[Islander]

They have found evidence of a mass exodus of eqypt. They even found where the people lived before the exodus. And eqyptian writings record this event.

Friend, you bring somebody's private, be it well intended, but non-scientific website as a reference. Approximate chronology about the Egyptian kingdom is not actual evidence for the exodus. There is NO Egyptian record or otherwise that describes the exodus extant from the bible. You should take a class on history of the Old Testament, or engage in some serious research if you are really interested.

We have received thru revelation that the bible is true. We hold fast to that testimony of the Spirit of God as we do of the Savior. We have received these things by revelation and not thru archaeology and we know them to be true. But since we are talking about physical tangible archaeological evidence; there is none.

[Ammoclip]

Friend, you bring somebody's private, be it well intended, but non-scientific website as a reference. Approximate chronology about the Egyptian kingdom is not actual evidence for the exodus. There is NO Egyptian record or otherwise that describes the exodus extant from the bible. You should take a class on history of the Old Testament, or engage in some serious research if you are really interested.

We have received thru revelation that the bible is true. We hold fast to that testimony of the Spirit of God as we do of the Savior. We have received these things by revelation and not thru archaeology and we know them to be true. But since we are talking about physical tangible archaeological evidence; there is none.

I had earlier acknowledged that the plagues, red sea, ect weren't proven. All I am saying is that there is proof a bunch of ppl left egypt around the time of the biblical exodus. I just did a google search on it and linked some websites to show the amount of information out there on this subject. I don't need any classes to know that there is egyptian records that tell of a mass amount of ppl leaving egypt. Are you disputing that there is written egyptian record of a population leaving egypt at the time of the exodus? Cause if your not, that was the only referrence I intended. Now this has gotten so picked at, we are totally off subject. If you disagree that there is evidence of this, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Faded]

The archaeology of the Bible and Book of Mormon have this much in common: Both could fit within the known history of the region where they were purportedly written. Neither can really be proven archaeologically or scientifically. There are scientists and archaeologists who are convinced that the Bible was mostly made up and written many centuries later than it was purported to have been written. One of the biggest blows to their theory was the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls. That pushed the "oldest existing manuscripts" from about 1200 AD to 100ish BC. That still 300 years off from the life of the last prophet who's writings we have (Malachi.) Every writer prior to Malachi is obviously much, much farther back. So it helps make the case stronger, but it's not absolute proof.

Traditional Christianity had ought to be cautious how far they go with the assumption that the Bible has been proven to be 100% valid, historical and accurate, while the Book of Mormon has not. The Bible hasn't been proven at all. Some things have been demonstrated to be factual or plausible, but very little has been truly "proven."

This is where the thoughts and desires of the LDS Church diverges from Traditional Christianity as well as Judaism.

-- Jews look on with satifaction and pride anytime some archaeological discovery comes out that seems to support the validity of the Old Testament. They do not get excited about anything the helps support the Christians and their belief in the New Testament.

-- Traditional Christianity gets excited whenever a discovery comes out that supports either the Old Testament or the New Testament, but they do not get get all happy when something comes out that supports the Book of Mormon.

-- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is perfectly happy and enthusiastic about any new evidence supporting all three.

The best that can be said about all three ancient scriptures: There is room within the historical record (as we currently have it) for them to have occurred. That isn't proof. Like it or not, we're all in the same boat together. We all have to take it largely on faith. I think that's exactly as God intended it.

[Ammoclip]

The archaeology of the Bible and Book of Mormon have this much in common: Both could fit within the known history of the region where they were purportedly written. Neither can really be proven archaeologically or scientifically.

This was a very smart an well thought out response, thank you.

[Jim108]

The bible has thousands of thousands of real science to back it up. Known places, names, geography that can fill volumes. The book of mormon does not. YET and I repeat Yet. Lets keep looking. Lets be real and true to ourselves.

[Dravin]

The bible has thousands of thousands of real science to back it up.

As a mythology/history of a real people, not that it's the Word of God. Which is what I think a lot of people think when you (generic) talk about there being scientific evidence that the Bible is true because proof that Jews and Jerusalem really existed and they really believed these things isn't really any more compelling than Greeks really believed in Athena and Athens really existed as far as it comes to believing its anything but a mythology/history.

So to sum up. If you are stating there is evidence that the Bible wasn't the invention of somebody in the 19th century I'll agree, if you are trying to say there is evidence of the spiritual events depicted in the Bible I'm gonna have to ask for a cite.