Americas. I remember writing to the Smithsonian Institute to inquire about whether there wasany evidence supporting the claims of Mormonism, only to be told in unequivocal terms that itsarchaeologists see 'no direct connection between the archaeology of the New World and thesubject matter of the book.'" Archaeologists have never located cities, persons, names, or placesmentioned in theBook of Mormon.3Many of the ancient locations mentioned by Luke, in the Book of Acts in the New Testament,have been identified through archaeology. "In all, Luke names thirty-two countries, fifty-fourcities and nine islands without an error."4Archaeology has also refuted many ill-founded theories about the Bible. For example, a theorystill taught in some colleges today asserts that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch (thefirst five books of the Bible), because writing had not been invented in his day. Thenarchaeologists discovered the Black Stele. "It had wedge-shaped characters on it and containedthe detailed laws of Hammurabi. Was it post-Moses? No! It was pre-Mosaic; not only that, but itwas pre-Abraham (2,000 B.C.). It preceded Moses' writings by at least three centuries."5Archaeology consistently confirms the historical accuracy of the Bible.The Bible today is the same as what was originally written.Some people have the idea that the Bible has been translated "so many times" that it has becomecorrupted through stages of translating. That would probably be true if the translations werebeing made from other translations. But translations are actually made directly from originalGreek, Hebrew and Aramaic source texts based on thousands of ancient manuscripts.The accuracy of today’s Old Testament was confirmed in 1947 when archaeologists found “TheDead Sea Scrolls” along today's West Bank in Israel. "The Dead Sea Scrolls" contained OldTestament scripture dating 1,000 years older than any manuscripts we had. When comparing themanuscripts at hand with these, from 1,000 years earlier, we find agreement 99.5% of the time.
