Mormons....why?

Question

is there no evidence of any place, or people in the Book of mormon?

Answer 1

the bible had many prrofs but there is not one documented linage , people, bloodline, race, town, hill etc in the BOM

Answer 2

Bong!! Wrong!

Oh dear. Homework time dude...

Jesussaves: Look at my link. There have been many things, places and names that were scoffed during the early years of the Church but are now being confirmed* as time goes on.

*Read as "possible candidates are now being unearthed"

Dont want to incur the wrath of any creature with the head of Chuck Norris

Answer 3

There isn't "evidence" per se, but there is coincidence. When you put enough of a spin on coincidence, people begin to see it as proof.

The LDS Church (and the BoM) has no more or less "proof" than Islam does with the Koran. The same is true with the Watchtower Society and its claims. The same can be true for Mrs. White, the prophetess of the 7th Day Adventists. "Mother Anne" Lee even had a pretty good case as the founder of the shakers.

Coincidence doesn't mean anything. Indian legends prove nothing, since similar legends are told in Africa and Aboriginal Australia. Carved drawings of trees prove nothing since the same thing exists in other parts of the world. A random name in the BoM that happens to sound a bit Hebrew means nothing, because words and names in different languages may sound alike despite being completely different. For example: Eve (English) and Yves (French) are pronounced nearly identically. yet a monkey with an index finger and a working eye could identify the complete lack of common roots between the too. Besides, even if the name really is Hebrew, Joseph Smith was fascinated by the Hebrews and studied them long before 1829, which is when he presented the BoM for publishing.

Captain Moroni: You have to be careful about throwing around the word "confirmed." You haven't said who has confirmed them, or exactly what was confirmed. No non-mormon scholars have ever supported the claims of the Maxwell Institute (FARMS) for the provided link. No non-mormon historians/scholars have ever converted based on this evidence. However, there have been many LDS scholars (most notably, many of the scholars who discovered your evidence) who have subsequently left the church, calling it a hoax. These are the people that know the most about the nature of this evidence. They are fighting a neverending battle trying to archaeologically support a book with no archaeological support. The problem is that no non-LDS firm is willing to provide funding for LDS studies. The only firms willing to pay for that are Church entities (BYU, CES, etc) or apologist groups (FAIR, etc). Why would a disinterested 3rd-party institution (Smithsonian, for example) pay hundreds of thousands (and sometimes millions) to send a team of researchers to prove something false that less than 1/8 of 1% of the world's population believes in to begin with?

All evidence against the BoM has been discovered haphazardly by people with different goals for obtaining and using the information. The information that they have gathered isn't in any way designed to explore the Book of Mormon issue, yet we still know enough about the issue to discover that the people aren't related to Hebrews, and that horses and elephants on the American continent died off at least 10,000 years before the Brother of Jared supposedly landed there (during the last ice age, which the Bro of Jared wouldn't have survived) and weren't reintroduced until post-columbian times. We also know that iron and other metalworks (other than soft metals, like gold) didn't exist until at least 1500, and that there were likely no mass wars between different populations where tens of thousands were slain.