(clipped excerpt)

"Archeology has made some important contributions," he began, speaking in a drawl he picked up as a child in southeastern Oklahoma, "but it certainly can't prove whether the New Testament is the Word of God. If we dig in Israel and find ancient sites that are consistent with where the Bible said we'd find them, that shows that its history and geography are accurate. However, it doesn't confirm that what Jesus Christ said is right. Spiritual truths cannot be proved or disproved by archeological discoveries."

In trying to determine if a witness is being truthful, journalists and lawyers will test all the elements of his or her testimony that can be tested. If this investigation reveals that the person was wrong in those details, this casts considerable doubt on the veracity of his or her entire story. However, if the minutiae check out, this is some indication-- not conclusive proof but some evidence-- that maybe the witness is being reliable in his or her overall account.

Archeology's repeated affirmation of the New Testament's accuracy provides important corroberation for its reliability. This is in stark contrast with how archeology has proved to be devastating for Mormonism. Although Joseph Smith, the founder of the Morman church, claimed that his Book of Mormon is "the most correct of any book upon the earth,"¹ archeology has repeatedly failed to substanciate its claims about events that supposedly occured long ago in the Americas.

I remember writing to the Smithsonian Institute to inquire whether there was any evidence supporting the claims of Mormonism, only to be told in unequivocal terms that its archeologists see "no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book."

As authors John Ankerberg and John Weldon concluded in a book on the topic, "In other words, no Book of Mormon Cities have ever been located, no Book of Mormon person, place, nation, or name has ever been found, no Book of Mormon artifacts, no Book of Mormon scriptures, no Book of Mormon inscriptions...nothing that demonstrates the Book of Mormon is anything other than myth or invention has ever been found."²

However, the story is totally different for the New Testament. McRay's conclusions have been echoed by many scientists, including prominent Australian archeologist, Clifford Wilson, who wrote, "Those who know the facts now recognize that the New Testament must be accepted as a remarkably accurate source book."³

Bibliography

1. Joseph Smith, History of the Church, 8 vols.(Salt Lake City: Deseret, 1978), 4:461, cited in Donald S. Tingle, Mormonism (Downers Grove, Ill.:InterVarsity Pres, 1981), 17.

2. John Ankerberg and John Weldon, The Facts on the Mormon Church (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1991), 30, emphasis in original.

3. Clifford Wilson. Rocks, Relics and Biblical Reliability (Grand Rapids: Zondervan; Richardson, Tex.: Probe, 1977), 120, cited in Ankerberg and Weldon, Ready with an Answer, 272.