By Jerald and Sandra Tanner
In 1969 we published our book Archaeology and the Book of Mormon. On January 10, 1970, we received a letter from the Mormon Egyptologist, Dee Jay Nelson in which the following statements appeared:
The booklets, The Mormon Kingdom and Archaeology and the Book of Mormon arrived in the mail today. Thank you for sending them . . . I already had a copy of Archaeology and the Book of Mormon but sat myself down this evening and read it again from beginning to end. I must say without qualification that I indorse your views completely as put down in this work (and you may quote me as having said so).
We are very happy with this endorsement of our work. Dee Jay Nelson is probably the most qualified Egyptologist in the Mormon Church, and he has spent years trying to prove that the Book of Mormon is true.
Since printing Archaeology and the Book of Mormon, a number of important things relating to the Book of Mormon and archaeology have come to light. Therefore, we have added an Appendix of 22 pages to this book. This new material brings the book right up to date and increases its value. Those who have already obtained the book will be happy to know that they can obtain a copy of the new material without purchasing the entire book (price of the new Appendix alone is $1.00).
In the new Appendix we deal with Dr. Cyrus Gordon’s claim that a stone found at Bat Creek in Tennessee proves that if the Mormon Church were to accept Gordon’s claim it could actually weaken their case for the Nephites.
In this Appendix we show that there is a growing division between Mormon archaeologists. From 1948 to 1961 the Department of Archaeology at Brigham Young University sent “five archaeological expeditions to Middle America,” but since no evidence for the Nephites has been found interest has declined. The Mormon archaeologist Ross. T. Christensen states:
(2) The archaeology of the Scriptures, which once occupied the center of the picture, indeed was the very purpose for which the Department was created in the first place, now seems to be only a peripheral field. This great study, for which Elder Widtsoe and President McDonald had such high hopes . . . has now been relegated to the position of simply a private research interest on the part of two of the Department’s five faculty members . . . it cannot be said that BYU now officially supports through its archaeology department any kind of research program in the archaeology of the Scriptures. In other words, even though the Department’s original assignment in this field has never been explicitly annulled, still no genuine official support is now forthcoming. (Newsletter and Proceedings of the Society for Early Historic Archaeology, Brigham Young University, June 1970, page 8)
If the Book of Mormon were a true history, we would expect to find hundreds, if not thousands, of inscriptions written in Hebrew or reformed Egyptian in the New World. In 1958 Thomas Stuart Ferguson, a Mormon scholar who founded the New World Archaeological Foundation, stated that digging should continue at an “accelerated pace” and that “Eventually we should find decipherable inscriptions in modified (reformed) Egyptian, in a modified or pure Hebrew or in cuneiform, referring to some unique person, place or event in the Book of Mormon” (One Fold and One Shepherd, page 263). On December 2, 1970, we had the opportunity to ask Mr. Ferguson if any such inscription had been found. He indicated that nothing had been found. Although he believed that Bat Creek inscription was written in Hebrew, he felt that it had nothing to do with the people mentioned in the Book of Mormon. It would appear, then, that there is still no proof that the Nephites ever existed. The situation remains the same as it was when Dr. Hugh Nibley wrote these words:
Of course, almost any object could conceivably have some connection with the Book of Mormon, but nothing short of an inscription which could be read and roughly dated could bridge the gap between what might be called a pre-actualistic archaeology and contact with the realities of Nephites civilization . . . All that we have to go on to date is a written history. That does not mean that our Nephites are necessarily mythical, . . . Nephite civilization . . . could just as easily and completely vanish from sight as did the worlds of Ugarit, Ur, or Cnossos; and until some physical remnant of it, no matter how trivial, has been identified beyond question, what can any student of physical remains possibly have to say about it? Everything written so far by anthropologists or archaeologists—even real archaeologists—about the Book of Mormon must be discounted, for the same reason that we must discount studies of the lost Atlantis: not because it did not exist, but because it has not yet been found. (Since Cumorah, 1967, pages 243-244)
While Dr. Nibley would be willing to accept any archaeological evidence for the Book of Mormon, he seems to have closed his mind to any evidence against it. He states:
For one thing the Book of Mormon is immune to attack from the West. No matter how much archaeological evidence may pile up one way or the other, the fact remains that the Book of Mormon never claims to be telling the story of all the people who ever lived in the western hemisphere. . . . Thus, where research in America may conceivably bring forth a wealth of evidence to support the Book of Mormon, no findings can be taken as unequivocal evidence against it. Improvement Era, November 1970, page 115)
Joseph Fielding Smith, who recently became President of the Mormon Church, has stated:
It is the personal opinion of the writer that the Lord does not intend that the Book of Mormon, at least at the present time, shall be proved true by any archaeological findings. (Answers to Gospel Questions, vol. 2, page 196)
In our book Archaeology and the Book of Mormon we devote a great deal of space to the problems one encounters when he tries to reconcile the Book of Mormon with archaeological discoveries.
Originally appeared in:
See also:
- Testing the Book of Mormon (tract)
- Who Are the Lamanites? (Salt Lake City Messenger no. 103, Nov. 2004)
- Book of Mormon Challenge (Salt Lake City Messenger no. 107, Oct. 2006)