John Dehlin claims that the Nahom argument lacks support from mainstream, non-LDS archaeological and anthropological scientific communities.

“I am going to bet I would be willing to bet all my life savings that whatever Ask Kent Brown is asserting here is not agreed to by the broader uh you know Middle Eastern uh archaeologic and and anthropologic communities.”

Kolby Reddish contends that the archaeological evidence presented by apologists for Nahom is flawed and does not align with the Book of Mormon's textual account.

“what I put this slide together for is because I know there's this is a lot of information um and people might want to digest it a little bit. So, here's my reminder of all the problems you would have to overlook to view Nahome as significant evidence for a historical Book of Mormon.”