Quantcast
Michael R. Ash

Connect with Michael R. Ash

Subscribe

When examining the Book of Mormon, we must begin by assuming that it was really written by ancient authors. While the critics will immediately cry that such an examination is "bias," it is equal bias to reject ...
While the interpretation of historical and archaeological data will forever be the topic of debates among academics, it's little wonder that we are asked to seek spiritual confirmation the sure word of the Lor...
Some critics like to compare the lack of archaeological support for the Book of Mormon with the supposedly voluminous archaeological support for the Bible. But there is a drastic difference.
For the time period in which the Nephites lived, scholars are aware of only a very limited number of inscriptions from the entire ancient New World that can be read with some degree of certainty.
The task of finding the evidence of a real ancient community of New World Christians becomes difficult once we understand the complexity and nature of what might be found.
Occasionally, I read some critic who claims that archaeological evidence contradicts the Book of Mormon or has proven it to be fiction. This is both silly and a classic example of the logical fallacy known as "...
Occasionally, I read some critic who claims that archaeological evidence contradicts the Book of Mormon or has proven it to be fiction. This is both silly and a classic example of the logical fallacy known as ...
While critics seem to want secular "proof" for the Book of Mormon, thats not how science works.
Contrary to the claims of many critics, the Book of Mormon is not only supported by direct evidence, but the parallel evidences that support the Book of Mormon function in the same fashion as any other evidence...
In addition to a spiritual witness, I believe there are many secular evidences that support of the Book of Mormon.