Archaeological and Historical Evidence

 As Kowallis points out, “Large explosive volcanic eruptions are often accompanied by violent winds and whirlwinds.” He further says: “Whirlwinds, or tornados, appear to be a fairly common feature of many explosive volcanic eruptions. The hot ash erupted into the air is a concentrated source of heat that causes severe updrafts, providing ideal conditions for the formation of whirlwinds. Only a few accounts, however, actually report whirlwinds, perhaps because they often cannot be seen due to the incredible darkness that usually accompanies eruptions.”  

 Kowallis also says that “Central American volcanoes are so explosive that liquid lava is rarely erupted. Instead, almost all (99 percent) of the magma erupted out of Central American volcanoes is in the form of ash and pumice. This would perhaps explain why there is no mention in the 3 Nephi account of anything that sounds like lava flows.” It also perhaps explains why the 3 Nephi account makes no mention of rain in connection with the whirlwinds and why Joseph Smith used the word whirlwind rather than tornado to describe the destructive forces associated with the massive volcanic eruptions in AD 34. 

 People living in upstate New York in the nineteenth century probably would have heard about tornadoes. Some of them may even have experienced tornadoes. Once again, however, without an eyewitness account and unique information to guide them, they would not have distinguished between tornadoes and whirlwinds and then correctly associated the concept of whirlwinds with massive volcanic eruptions."

Summary:
Since its initial publication, millions of readers of the Book of Mormon have stood forth boldly in support of the historicity of the Book of Mormon. That means they believe Joseph Smith translated an ancient record by the gift and power of God. Their belief in the historicity of the Book of Mormon has many facets, including those contained in this article.
The fundamental approach that many, many Book of Mormon readers have followed in connection with Book of Mormon issues has been the following: Questions—yes; doubts—no! In the process, they have taken the stance that questions about the Book of Mormon are legitimate and are always answerable—if not immediately, then at some time in the future.
Such has indeed been the case beginning in 1829 with questions about the darkness in 3 Nephi 8, as reflected in the Book of Mormon literature of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The major historicity premise about darkness in the Book of Mormon is the primary point of this article—that 3 Nephi 8 was written as an eyewitness account of the events that occur in connection with massive volcanic eruptions. 

Simply put, Joseph Smith was in no position to write this account as an outcome of his personal experiences; and all evidence points to the fact that he did not have access to someone else’s eyewitness account as a basis for the content of 3 Nephi 8. Therefore, Joseph translated Mormon’s account of these catastrophic events; and Mormon wrote his account based on the eyewitness report of Nephi and his associates who lived in Mesoamerica at the time of Christ’s crucifixion.

Logic and reasoning provide ample credible evidence for Book of Mormon readers to accept the historicity of the Book of Mormon based on the evidence that 3 Nephi 8 is based on an eyewitness account of massive volcanic eruptions and that nobody in upstate New York in 1829, including Joseph Smith, had access to a suitable eyewitness account of such catastrophes as a basis for 3 Nephi 8. Obviously, support for such logic and reasoning must come from the exercise of appropriate faith.
Readers are invited to examine critically all the details of 3 Nephi 8 as a reflection of an eyewitness account of massive volcanic eruptions and then ask the following question: Where could Joseph Smith have acquired the necessary experiential knowledge to write a detailed account of massive volcanic eruptions that is geologically and geographically accurate?
The word darkness in 3 Nephi 8 can function as an initial impetus for readers to search for further understanding about New World catastrophic events at the time of Christ’s crucifixion. An understanding of the nature and cause of that darkness will lead readers to conclude that the events in 3 Nephi 8 had to be based on eyewitness accounts of massive volcanic eruptions. Without personal experiences associated with volcanic eruptions or eyewitness accounts to rely on, typical readers of the Book of Mormon are undeniably incapable of writing such descriptive, creative content as found in 3 Nephi 8.
Therefore, in understanding the level of Joseph Smith’s education and experiences, readers will recognize the impossibility of Joseph’s authoring, on his own, the 3 Nephi 8 content of the Book of Mormon. Such reasoning by logic will provide one instance of overwhelming evidence that the Book of Mormon is historical—that it was translated by Joseph Smith. Obviously, the “system” is such that the testimony of the Spirit will confirm logical reasoning and give even more substantive evidence that the Book of Mormon is historical rather than ahistorical—it is a real account about real people."