Originally Posted by
Phoenix
i don't think it is faulty.
they probably believe that a person named Jesus existed in the 1st century, who used magic tricks and words to convince some gullible people that he was the son of deity. Some anti-lds people use the "con man" argument to accuse Joseph Smith, similar to how atheists can use it against Jesus' claims.
I hope not, because most or all of the new converts who joined the church based on that evidence, wouldn't be strong, faithful members. They would be trend-following members, their faith would be archaeology-based, and that's not the right foundation for a Christian's faith to have. If a newer discovery seemed to refute the former one, what will happen to the faith of those members? It will rise and fall with each announcement from some archaeologist, and be like an anchorless ship on the ocean, ****n left and right as the wind changes direction. Strong, lasting faith comes from a spiritual conviction, not from the Smithsonian. Having the Holy Spirit witness to your spirit that something (the Bible's claims, the BOM's claims, the reality of Jesus' love for you, etc.) is true, is the kind of conviction that can last when trials of your faith hit you--when others are mocking your beliefs, when sickness, unemployment, family strife, etc. make the going tough.
I will take a spiritual witness over 10 archaeological discoveries.
An accusation that is so ill-considered that it can be used against one's own beliefs, is likely to backfire.