Book of Mormon Central recently posted Five Compelling Archeological Evidences For the Book of Mormon. Without going into much depth on every point, I offer up a few counter arguments or resources that might be helpful for putting each evidence in proper context.

In most cases the sum of each evidence in context suggests that these are not clear-cut victories for the historical authenticity of the Book of Mormon. And even if we include them in our tabulation of evidences, these kinds of evidences seem necessary but not sufficient to convince a reasonable person of the historical authenticity of the book

The reader may also want to consult the case for a modern Book of Mormon.


  1. Metal plates - A short critique of discovered metal tablets as evidence for the authenticity of the Book of Mormon
  2. An Arabian altar at a crossroad called Nahom - NHM (Nahom) as evidence for the ancientness of the Book of Mormon
  3. Cement - cement is not exactly a “hit”
  4. The seal of Mulek - critique of the seal of Mulek
  5. Barley in the Americas - some thoughts pulled from this thread:
    • 1 Nephi 18:24 discusses how the Lehites “brought [seeds] from the land of Jerusalem”. There definitely wasn’t old world barley in the new world. Maybe they forgot to bring barley?
    • Domestication appears to have been supplanted by maize domestication, so brief, possible periods of domestication may not be a great match with the BoM?

Originally from a comment here