Why hasn't archaeology uncovered evidence of Book of Mormon cities and culture? Ep. 103

Why haven’t archaeologists found anything in the New World that categorically proves that the Book of Mormon is true? It’s a question as old as the Book of Mormon itself, and it’s the subject Dave addressed in this episode.

Notes:

-In the 2nd or 3rd century BC, we read in the book of Omni that the language of the Mulekites “had become corrupted… and Mosiah, nor the people of Mosiah could understand them.” So, Mosiah “caused that they should be taught in his language.” But then not long after at the beginning of the Book of Mosiah we read that King Benjamin “caused that [his three sons] should be taught in all the language of his fathers…” Why would they have to be taught in the language of their fathers if it’s already the language that everyone spoke? It could very well be that by this time the Old World Nephite language was only used by the upper class or for potential record-keepers. And by the end of the Book of Mormon we get some additional support for that theory, when Mormon writes that the Book of Mormon has been written in reformed Egyptian characters, “being handed down and altered by us, according to our manner of speech.” He continues, “the Hebrew hath been altered by us also… [and] none other people knoweth our language; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore [God] hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof.” Food for thought.

SUBSCRIBE:

Follow Us:

Follow David:

[SaintsUnscripted]

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: You are not in a Matrix simulation. THIS EPISODE IS A RE-UPLOAD.

It was originally posted back in December 2020, but we later discovered some historical inaccuracies that we felt strongly about correcting. We have done so, and present it to you once more to enjoy with greater accuracy. :)

Thank you for your patience, and may the Force be with you.

[lordcycle]

Your missing on big thing. The mayan had a written language and in the mayan hieroglyphs theres no mention of anything from the book of mormon

[jonathanwilliams]

Maybe make a video about the View of the Hebrews? Strange how a book came out just a few years before the Book of Mormon which had many of the same ideas: Native Americans were descended from the Ten Lost Tribes, they arrived after a long sea journey, two groups engaged in long wars with the eventual destruction of the "good" group by the "evil", and that the gospel of Jesus was preached in ancient America. Coincidence? The kicker is that Joseph Smith's scribe Oliver Cowdery lived for 5 years in the same small Vermont town where the author of 'View of the Hebrews' lived.

I grew up in the LDS church and I was never told that many, many writers before Joseph Smith were speculating that Native Americans were actually descendants of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.

[millenialhymns]

The reference point was given to Joseph Smith. Zarahemla across from Nauvoo as stated in D&C. Why is this not taken into consideration?

[estebancarbajal]

How about Hill Cumorah in up state NY? Former presidents of the church referred to that hill as the one mentioned in the BoM. There's nothing there.

[brettallen]

As an active member of the church this is a question that gives me a healthy skepticism. I really enjoyed the video, this provides some great perspective.

[curtiscarwile]

So, the evidence is that you "just haven't found anything yet"?

[jisharresendiz]

Was this re-uploaded?, I feel like I've seen this one allready

[sterlingturner]

If the BOM were true, I just find it hard to believe that God with allow so many things from the Bible to be found but none for the Book of Mormon.

[ManInThePandaMask]

4:25 why is nobody talking about how the fish saying hello translates to "epstein didn't kill himself"? LOL

[bcfamilyvideos]

This video is presented as if using a scientific/factual approach. But its clearly hoping the viewer will assume the BOM is true and wait until the evidence for it is discovered at some later time. Science typically lets the evidence lead to the conclusion, not the other way around. So this isn't so much a scientific/factual argument as an apologetic argument in favor of a particular religious view. Probably meant for believers who struggle to reconcile faith with science.

[majesticliberatoroftheoppr]

Perturbed heartlander here. 😂. I’d love to see you do a video on Wayne May / Meldrum/ Bruce porter heartlander stuff. It’s amazing! Mesoamerica has its story, including I believe a visitation of Jesus Christ. But from my research, the heartland model makes way more sense. And the evidence is very impressive.

[thehastyterrainmaker]

Even with limited sites discovered and being dug, what HAS been uncovered does NOT support BoM claims though. Any archeological site even in its infancy digging produces items to date it, pottery, tools, weapons, waste pits/heaps... all Mesoamerican sites to date FAIL to produce one shard of BOM item claims. That is an issue itself

[moistpoptart]

Heartland model matches up much better with the nephite timeline than mesoamerica. Not saying mesoamerica couldnt end up being correct its just there is absolutely more evidence at this point for the heartland than mesoamerica

[xnihilo]

It's like saying unicorns exist. All I have to do is find one.

[TheJonnyzeus]

Surely the correct question is, “is there any evidence to support the history set out in the Book of Mormon?”. The answer to that is, “no.”.

[russellricksbooks]

I still agree with the Heartland theory more. Joseph Smith spoke of traveling through the land of the Nephites, picking up the bones, etc? The Central American mayan temples don't correlate with Israelite temples. You need to talk to Wayne May, even interview him. Please get Wayne on your program!

[GodManyprayers]

Mormons defense to this. We don’t know anything and can’t prove anything but “here is how I felt” 😂😂😂😂

[wtxohnthao]

The evidence for the Israelites being slaves in Egypt has been found. Many historians can't accept it because it will prove the God of Israel exist. That's why they refuse to accept the fact that Ramesses II(The Great) was not the ruler when Moses led the Israelites out of Egypt in the book of Exodus. Because they have pure evidence of a stone tablet for Ramesses II great sucess which has the people he had conquered. And one of those nations states Israel, Sons from the House of David. So that would mean King David lived before Ramesses II and he had conquered the land of Israel. So yes, they have evidence. But no one is willing to move the timeline to be corrected.

[karendinkel]

So crazy how few meso American sites have been discovered /explored