Many critics of the Book of Mormon claim there is no archaeological evidence. The Bible is assumed to be completely true. MSNBC has a link about a PBS show about archeaology of Bible that recently appeared on Nova.
William Dever, from the University of Arizona, is one of my favorite scholars. Let me quote from the PBS Article:
The way Dever sees it, “The Bible’s Buried Secrets” plays it straight down the middle, and that may raise unsettling questions for literalists as well as those who see the Bible as a collection of fairy tales.
“The film’s going to get it from both sides,” Dever said.
The further you go back in the Bible, the harder it is to find archaeology that supports the Bible. The show will bother many Bible Believers with assertions such as
The Land of Canaan was not taken over by conquest – rather, the Israelites actually might have been Canaanites who migrated into the highlands and created a new identity for themselves. “Joshua really didn’t fight the Battle of Jericho,” Dever said.
Other assertions will bother people who don’t believe in the Bible. Up until recently, there hasn’t been much evidence before about 600-700 BC. Many Bible critics claim that characters such as David, Solomon, Moses, Abraham, etc. are mythical figures. However, 2 recent discoveries dispute this assertion.
“The Bible’s Buried Secrets” includes a segment highlighting the work of the Pittsburgh Theological Seminary’s Ron Tappy, who is part of a team studying an inscription at Israel’s Tel Zayit archaeological site. The inscription hints that a well-organized state was functioning in the 10th century B.C., with Jerusalem as its seat.
Yet another inscription at Tel Dan, from the ninth century B.C., appears to refer to the “House of David” – although that interpretation is disputed. Such evidence suggests that King David and King Solomon were historical figures who matched up with the biblical accounts.
There is an online link so you can view the show. I believe in the Bible, as well as the Book of Mormon. My point is this: people who are concerned about the Book of Mormon, should look more closely at the Biblical similarities. If one believes that Abraham and Moses were historical figures, despite the complete lack of archaeological evidence, then one should consider the historical possibility of Lehi and Nephi, despite the lack of archeaological evidence.
So, what do you make of it?