[Archaea]

Grant:

Thank you for your response. However, I disagree that the BoM should be considered a history.

It should be considered a theological document laden upon either some historical events as perceived by certain individuals, or inspired fiction. It's one or the either.

It is not written as a traditional, ancient or modern history, so I fully disagree with the concept it's a history, even if it says so. It's compilation of religious events strung together in a quasi-chronological sequence. That's not a history.