Conclusion

I started this project several years ago, working on it in my spare time. I had many more topics relevant to Book of Mormon historicity that I wanted to write about, but I no longer have the interest or urgency to continue for now. I recently posted what I hoped to be the final post in my general Mormon-themed blog. I thought it would be fitting to include one final concluding post on this blog as well, summarizing the points I have made so far and listing the additional areas I had hoped to cover. I am open to revisiting these topics in the future, but for now I am interested in writing about topics other than Mormonism on my blog, Stuff I Think About.

In previous posts I have examined the question of Book of Mormon historicity from the point of view of external evidence and the consistency and plausibility of the text itself.  I think it is safe to say that there is absolutely no convincing external evidence that the Book of Mormon is an actual record of ancient Native Americans living from 600 BC to 420 AD as claimed by Joseph Smith and the modern Utah-based church. Furthermore, there are problematic aspects of the text itself, independent of external evidence, that make it very difficult to harmonize its contents with the claim that it is of ancient origin. The hypothesis that the Book of Mormon is a creation of the 19th century explains the problematic aspects of the text quite well. The largest splinter group, the Community of Christ, which split off from the main church after the death of Joseph Smith, no longer requires belief in Book of Mormon historicity, showing that the evidence is sufficient to convince an entire organization sharing the same foundational tradition as the mainstream church.

Apologists do not defend their belief in Book of Mormon historicity by providing evidence. None exists for them to provide. Rather they refute each of the critics' points one at a time without taking care that their explanation for one point does not contradict their explanation for another point. They attempt to demonstrate plausibility despite the evidence against a specific point, which does not address the accumulated weight of the totality of the data. Apologists also point out the most obscure parallels of the type that could be found by comparing any random text with any random ancient civilization without providing a rigorous analysis of the statistical significance of the parallelism. Of course, there is probably not any other way they could operate given that they are beginning with a non-negotiable conclusion in mind rather than open-mindedly following the evidence where it leads. Their role is to prop up the faithful, not to convince a skeptic or even a neutral observer.

External evidence I have discussed in these posts includes DNA, metallurgy, plants, and animals. All the available evidence supports the scientific consensus that Native Americas originated in Central Asia and migrated to the Americas across the Bering land bridge at the end of the last ice age between 12,000 and 15,000  years ago. External evidence fails to support the existence of a single plant or animal mentioned in the text of the Book of Mormon during the appropriate time period. It is striking that there is a 100 percent disconnect on this point. Joseph Smith did not even guess right on a single plant or animal. There is no mention of corn, potatoes, tomatoes, squash, beans, chilis, chocolate, llamas, or Muscovy ducks in the text and every single plant and animal that is mentioned in the text has not been found to exist in the Americas during the Book of Mormon time period. Neither have any metal artifacts been found that correlate with those mentioned in the text. Not a single Nephite coin has ever been found, even though millions must have existed at the height of Nephite civilization.

Internal textual evidence I have discussed includes biblical quotations that the Nephites could not have had because they had not been written by the time Lehi left Jerusalem. Statements in the Book of Mormon about the ancient Egyptian language represent 19th-century misconceptions rather than a true knowledge of Egyptian hieroglyphics. The characters in the Book of Mormon are flat caricatures who are not believable as real people. The Book of Mormon presents a mature Christology, not one that fits within the historical context of its time. Doctrinally, the Book of Mormon represents exactly where Joseph Smith was at the time of its publication and contains none of his later doctrinal innovations.

There are a number of points I wanted to explore in future posts if I had sufficient interest to continue this project. Below are a brief discussion of each of these.

Linguistics: No known Native American language bears any resemblance to Hebrew. Furthermore, they all contain common elements that reveal that they evolved from a single language that bears no relationship to any Semitic languages spoken in the Middle East.

King James Bible: It makes absolutely no sense at all for the Book of Mormon translation to contain biblical passages translated into the identical King James English of the bible. It especially makes no sense for the text of the Book of Mormon to contain the exact errors and mistranslations of the King James Bible, unless it is a 19th-century creation.

Final Battle: I had planned on writing a least 2 posts on the final battle. The story in the Book of Mormon reveals a complete misunderstanding of military tactics and logistics, and how real soldiers would behave in such a battle. Furthermore, there is absolutely no archeological evidence that such a battle took place in the Americas.

Building an Transoceanic Vessel: There is an excellent podcast episode on this subject, Mormon Expression Podcast, Episode 276. The story of Nephi building a ship that could cross the ocean given the size of Lehi's band and their isolation from civilization is totally implausible.

Early American Ideas: The Book of Mormon is full of ideas that were in the cultural milieu of early 19th-century America. Many of these ideas should have no place in a genuine ancient text.

Prophesies: The prophesies in the Book of Mormon are extremely specific when they are about events that were known to Joseph Smith. Once they go beyond his day they become vague and inaccurate.

Each of these subjects deserve to be treated in greater depth, and some have already been treated in some detail elsewhere. Perhaps I will one day revisit this blog and address some of these additional points, but for now I will let what I have already written be my final word on the subject.

It is not so much that want to criticize Mormons for believing as they do. They have a right to believe whatever they want. My biggest problem with the church is that when members, who otherwise want to participate, discover the true state of the evidence against Book of Mormon historicity they are marginalized, and even demonized, within Mormon culture. There is no option to accept the evidence at face value, interpret the Book of Mormon as an inspired allegory, and remain a Mormon in good standing. The stakes are high. Families are broken up and otherwise faithful members are forbidden from attending their own children's weddings merely because they are convinced by the overwhelming evidence that the Book of Mormon is not historical.

There has been a recent rash of excommunications such as has not been seen since the early days of the church, not for failing to live up to the church's moral code, but merely for asking questions and making reasonable conclusions based on overwhelming evidence. The crisis is past for me and I have moved on, but many are in the midst of the crisis, and many more will follow. The church is slow to learn and slow to adjust because of their aging, conservative leadership. Eventually, the church will have to adjust, just as more mature religions already have, but it will be too little and too late for many people, and perhaps even for the church itself.