Christians likewise are so sure that Christ was born,ministered and died in Jerusalem that they believe so strongly that there is just a missing document that would prove their Savior actually existed in Jerusalem. So strong is their belief that when other theories arise that contain primary documentation of Christ's existence, just elsewhere, they refuse to accept the evidence because it merely disproves or weakens their theory.
Do you see the predicament that Mormon Apologists are in? They trust Joseph Smith in such a way, a literalist interpretive way, that they come up with a Missing Papyrus theory for the Book of Abraham and a missing document theory for the Book of Mormon, and claim that one day we will discover a complete Sensen Papyrus that will show that added to it will be a Book of Abraham text exactly the way Joseph Smith translated with or without the anachronistic elements or unearth records that will say on them Nephite or Lamanite, the missing proof of course coming from the specific believed location of their particular believed Book of Mormon geographical scene of events, . So that when other theories emerge that provide evidence that Joseph is not a fraud, but still knew Egyptian just not their theory, Mormon Apologists will not only refuse to accept and even read such a theory, but have a history of suppressing and censoring such theories in an attempt to keep them from the ears of the membership making their theory the dominant one that the Church publishes on the lds.org site and in Church manuals, or that the Church makes the claim that they will not take a position and discourage members from pure scientific research to confirm Joseph Smith's work, just not in their theory.
The Jews, Christians, and Mormon Apologists need to allow the truth from the evidence no matter where it leads. They are correct, just not in the way they had supposed from their traditions that they established. When one plants a seed of faith and it doesn't sprout or sprouts a weed, or even sprouts a vegetation of a seed of a different fruit than they were expecting, they must disregard their original belief. They need to be confident in the fact that the evidence is what leads us to the truth, not that our beliefs will lead us to the evidence. Such a fallacious argument has led archaeologists to plant fake evidence in an effort to legitimize theirs and the traditionalist missing document theory. It is the truth that will set us free, not our beliefs.