For context for those just joining, the thing that OP originally stepped in here was, he claimed that the Mormon cultural connection to stolen Native American land in the would-be nation of Deseret was equivalent to the Jewish cultural connection to historically Jewish cultural sites in Levant – and that as an Ex-Mormon who understood that Joseph Smith’s fake archeology was fake, he had unique and valuable insights into how all of the real archeology performed by real archaeologists in Levant was probably also fake, or at least didn’t matter. Part of his rhetorical argument was, I shit you not, “we both even call it Zion!”
OP then was surprised and offended that a whole bunch of non-Mormons – not all of whom were even Jews, btw! – took exception to the notion that there was literally no difference whatsoever between a) claiming that there was a solid archeological record of there being Jewish communities living in Levant continuously dating all the way back to at least the Edict of Cyrus, and b) claiming that a magic rock that you put in your hat told you that the Native Americans are all the distant descendants of the Israelites, that their skin color is the result of a fall from a higher civilization, and that their land is yours by divine right and their genocide is a moral obligation.
Like brother, I don’t know how to fucking tell you this, but however ex-Mo you think you are, you very clearly need to deconstruct a little further. Maybe like. Idk. Read the CES Letter, and then compare it to the entire field of Near Eastern and Judaic Studies, and see if you can’t spot a difference or five.
Joseph Smith may have made obvious, ridiculous, fraudulent claims about ancient Israelites, but that doesn’t mean that the history of Levant prior to the Arab Conquest of Syria is unknowable.
It is the height of arrogance to think that merely knowing that “the historical account in the Book of Nephi is a bunch of racist lies” – a thing that almost everyone except for Mormons already understands – qualifies you to speak on literally anything at all, but especially on something as nuanced and complex as eg. the relationship between modern day Middle Eastern politics and the millennia long path of bloody history in the region that lies between the Iron Age and today.