Chapter Four - Archaeology
¡@
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter is divided into two major sections, they are:
we will note the functions of archaeology, and also underscore some areas where archaeology will not help us; and
we will examine some of the ways in which archaeology has substantiated Old Testament narratives, while recognizing that this tool cannot make people believe the Bible.
¡@
2. FUNCTIONS OF ARCHAEOLOGY
2.1 Development of the Biblical Archaeology
In the early years of the 19th century, a new door of information opened to the earliest roots of the human race in the Near East. Increased travel and exploration provided the hinges to the door, and modern archaeologists walked through in a spurt of enthusiasm. They began to dig below the earth's surface for the material remains of humankind's past found in ancient palaces, buried temples and animal stables. Civilizations came alive that existed long before the known world of Greece. Babylon (called "great") where Daniel lived revealed double walls with nine ornamented gates. Egypt showed marvels of painted tombs, bandaged mummies, mirrors, perfume jars and mascara pots.
At first the buried cultures themselves were the objects of study. Then there appeared places and names from the Old Testament on palace walls. Names of Assyrian tyrants that warred with Israel, along with their armies and hapless captives, were found. Persian governors spoke through their letters. The Pharaohs of Egypt, some lying in solid gold coffins, could now be identified.
In the wake of these discoveries, biblical scholars found rich background for the biblical history of Israel and her neighbors. The historical and geographic reliability of the Bible was affirmed in a number of important areas. This was in marked contrast to the centuries before when there was little evidence to corroborate the Bible's historical statements. Critics would dismiss the narratives by casting them as implausible stories set in fictional backgrounds rather than genuine historical events. But by the middle of this century it began to be recognized that archaeological discoveries were substantiating the biblical record. The statements of well-known authorities who were not evangelicals are indicative of this. Dr W.F. Albright, late professor emeritus of Johns Hopkins University, could declare, "There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition."
Millar Burrows of Yale stated, "On the whole, however, archaeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the Scriptural record. More than one archaeologist has found his respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine. Archaeology has in many cases refuted the views of modern critics. It has shown, in a number of instances, that these views rest on false assumptions and unreal, artificial schemes of historical development. This is a real contribution and not to be minimized."
2.2 Scope of Archaeology
The help from archaeology falls roughly into two categories:
it has verified some specific biblical events that were doubted and even ridiculed; and
in filling in overall background to the culture and practices of the biblical times. Such things as economic problems and literary development describe the world to which the Old Testament prophets spoke.
Archaeology confirms the historicity of the biblical record, and provides us with the culture and life-style of people within a particular historical period. Through written materials, we gain insight into people's hopes, religion and future aspirations. It is evident that certain points of apparent conflict between the biblical record and the information previously available have been cleared up as more information has been obtained. It would seem, then, that when apparent conflicts still exist, rather than conclude that the Bible must be wrong, it would seem much more reasonable to admit the problem exists and to hold it open pending further discoveries.
Can archaeology, however, test doctrinal truth? For example, in examining the excavations at Jericho, archaeologists are willing to say something happened to the city walls, at a given date, but can they also prove that an omnipotent God was vindicated before Israel's enemies? This is an area which cannot be tested by the scientific method. It is important to point out that we cannot prove the Bible by archaeology, nor do we believe the Bible on the basis of archaeological proof.
H. Darrell Lance stated, "Although archaeology can sometimes provide independent evidence for the evidence of certain places, persons or events mentioned in the Bible, it can say nothing at all about whether God had anything to do with any of it. That, for the modern believer as well as for the ancient Israelite, is a matter of faith."
Added to faith, it is the Holy Spirit who ultimately confirms the truth of the Scripture to us. Spiritual truth can never be confirmed by archaeology. But we can be thankful for the historical details which have been confirmed by archaeology even though we recognize the apparent conflicts that still exist. We need to be very careful about what can be substantiated, and what archaeology is unable to do.
2.3 Sources of the Archaeologist
More than 25,000 sites showing some connection with the Old Testament period have been located in Bible lands. Yet there is still a wealth of material that awaits discovery. Throughout the Near East mounds of earth and debris (called "tells") mark the places where towns or cities once flourished. Most of the major cities of the Bible can be identified, A.R. Millard states, either by "general geographical considerations or by tradition (though that may not be very reliable) or by current use of the ancient name." A major example of this latter situation is the city of Damascus. It has existed under that name 3,500 years or more.
The largest body of evidence for comparison with Scriptures is found in the ancient Eastern inscriptions. Few contemporary documents from Old Testament times have been found in Palestine. Illustrations must be drawn from the writings of neighboring countries.
Another major source of information for comparison with biblical narratives has been the archaeological excavation of biblical sites.
2.4 How Can These Finds Be Dated?
The ancient cities were built and rebuilt in the same place, so that a whole succession of levels is usually found, the lowest of course, being the oldest. The question arises, how can these finds be dated? Fashions in pottery changed, and if at one excavated site a particular fashion can be dated, the similar pottery found elsewhere will obviously be of the same period. Kings often inscribed their names on the hinge-sockets of temple doors, and the name of their god would be given. Inscribed stones were often laid under palace or temple walls in memory of the founder. Royal sepulchers can usually be identified in the same way.
Archaeologists have uncovered copies of lists dating back almost 2000 BC. They were drawn up by Sumerian scribes cataloging the kings according to their successive dynasties with notes as to the lengths of their reigns. A few miles from Ur an inscribed foundation stone was found, laid by a king of unknown name, of the First Dynasty of Ur, which the scribes speak of as the 3rd dynasty after the Flood. This king apparently reigned 3,100 years before Christ and more than a thousand years before Abraham.
A.R. Millard observed, "Archaeologists usually concentrate on the more rewarding parts, where temples or palaces stood, or lay out their trenches to probe each period of existence in the life of the place. To do this a trench may slice right through the mound, producing a small amount of information at all levels. Any area of especial interest can be marked and explored with a larger trench. Each building or time of occupation will have left its mark on the mound in the form of floor surfaces, stumps of walls, and heaps of rubbish. These will be sandwiched between earlier remains below and later remains above."
2.5 Archaeology and Biblical Criticism
2.5.1 Theory of Higher Criticism
All during the 1800s, higher criticism sought to fracture the Old Testament. This created many smaller biblical documents, authorized by individuals or groups of people of whom we have no knowledge. In the Documentary Theory, documents were proposed which were characterized by the names of God. For example, using E for various developments of documents were the use of Elohim predominates, J for Jehovah, and the D code for the discovery of a lost copy of the Law, possibly Deuteronomy, in 621 BC (2 Chronicles 34:14).
In addition, other critics have dated documents according to the development theory, so that the Pentateuch could not have been completed before 400 BC. Therefore, the J document only appeared about 850 BC, the E document around 750 BC, the JE work of the redactor, or editor, who put together the two documents by 700-650 BC. Next is the D code, dated in 621 BC and then follows the JED combination by a redactor about 600-550 BC. A P code follows, representing the work of priests who were responsible for those portions of the Pentateuch which pertained to their duties, dated about 500-450 BC. The final redactor put the finishing touches on the Pentateuch by 400 BC (See E.J. Young, An Introduction to the Old Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949, pp. 144-145).
Those responsible for the Development theory also proposed that the prophets, in succession, did not complete their work until 200 BC, and that the rest of the Old Testament was not finished until the 1st century.
2.5.2 The presupposition of the theory
The presupposition for this theory is that:
The religion of Israel went through an evolutionary process. It was not thought possible to have such complex ideas of worship developed as early as Moses in 1400 BC, Abraham in 2000 BC; or even earlier. In one factor alone, reflecting this attitude.
It was thought impossible that writing could be an accomplished art in 2000 BC; rather, writing was considered to be a very late accomplishment.
If the higher critics asked why they proposed the theories they did, their only reply is that it seemed logical to assume that that was what happened. But the higher critics' assertions do not rest on scientific methodology at all.
2.5.3 Archaeology has proven the theory of higher criticism was wrong
Archaeology of this century alone has proven critics wrong due to the following reasons:
The earliest writings we have of the Sumerians of 3500 BC reflect a complex system of worship, and a high ethical standard in their wisdom writings.
The early writings of the Egyptians can now be traced back to 2800-2700 BC. In fact, Egyptian history is dated without any doubt to 300 BC.
Writing was an accomplised art, and highly complex.
The ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics consisted of some 24 consonants of carefully drawn figures. Later, it was simplified in the hieratic written form by 1300 BC, and further popularized in the demotic writing by 400-100 BC. The Akkadian of 2000 BC consisted of a syllabic writing, using some 300 characters to form the language. These are just a sampling of the many examples which show how men were able to express complex ideas, define their historical background, their culture and life-style, and their religious systems.
¡@
3. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE OLD TESTAMENT
At the end of chapter 3, we recognized that people raise questions about the validity of the Old Testament text, because we are unable to trace the Hebrew Masoretic text much further than the Qumran literature of 200-100 BC. What evidence do we have for an older text? Archaeology becomes a tool which can indicate something about the Old Testament text. We cannot begin to cover all of the information available to us today, but we can note a few of the details which are at our disposal. These will help us to substantiate narratives and historical materials of various periods of Old Testament history.
The field of information and correlation with biblical data is so vast that we can spotlight only a few of the major contributions.
3.1 Mari Tablets
A good example of the help archaeology can be to us comes from the life and times of Abraham. The critics claimed the culture pictured in the Genesis story did not correlate with their knowledge of Near Eastern life up to that time. However, a change came when in 1933 a party of Arabs were digging a grave by the River Euphrates. They unearthed a stone statue and reported their find. Soon a team of archaeologists dug out other statues and eventually unearthed an elaborate palace bearing the name of the city of Mari.
The royal palace covered more than six acres and had over 260 rooms, courtyards and passages. The Temple of Ishtar was also uncovered in the Mesopotamian valley. Mari was one of the main cities of this area about the time of Abraham, and when Abraham and his father Terah left Ur, they must have passed through Mari on their way to Haran.
Millard describes the palace as containing rooms with walls 15 feet high, some empty and some filled with jars that stood ready for oil, wine or grain. There were spacious living quarters for the king, his wives and his family; and more cramped ones for officials and servants. One can imagine craftsmen in workshops, cooks in the kitchens, secretaries, servants and singing troupes for the king's entertainment. One of the many statues found was of a bearded man dating from the 18th century BC and inscribed with the name Ishtupilumk King of Mari.
Some 20,000 cuneiform (wedge-shaped writing) tablets from royal archives were found at the royal palace. Accountants had used some of the tablets to record grain, vegetables and other provisions brought into the palace. Letters to the king, musical instruments and gold for decorations are all mentioned. There are even letters with messages from prophets to gods. A jar of buried treasure and inscriptions date the city around 2500 BC, and since Abraham is variously thought to be in the same general era between the 19th and 20th centuries BC, this is certainly the kind of culture in which he lived.
Some of the tablets reveal a correspondence between the last king of Mari with Hammurabi, king of Babylon, at about 1728-1626 BC. The name of the latter king was also affixed to a code of laws, the Hammurabi Code, similar to the Ten Commandments of Moses. Abraham's migration from Ur took place about 400 years earlier than the correspondence of the kings. The tablets indicate that the people of Mari controlled a significant region in the Mesopotamian valley, including the city of Nahor (Genesis 24:10) which is mentioned quite often in the Mari tablets. These tablets also include:
3.1.1 Hebrew name "Ivri"
The Hebrew name "Ivri," which was also the designation of Abraham (Genesis 14:13).
3.1.2 Reference to Benjaminites
A reference to Banu Yamina, or Benjaminites, "sons of the right," or "sons of the south." We cannot connect this name to the biblical Benjamin, but it is interesting to note the similarities of names in this period of history.
3.1.3 Description of sacrifices
A description of how sacrifices were made when a treaty was ratified between individuals or leaders. In the tablets there is the recurring phrase, "to kill a donkey," which indicated that no covenant or treaty was made without the shedding of blood. We find similar practices in Canaan. The people of Shechem were called Bene Hamor or, "sons of the donkey" (Joshua 24:32), and their tribal god was Baal Berith, or "Master of the Covenant" (Judges 9:4). This suggests that they were sons of a covenant, made effective through the killing of a donkey. Abraham followed roughly the same procedure when God made a covenant with him. In preparation for the occasion, Abraham cut up the pieces of the sacrifices and divided them. God then moved between the sacrifices as He ratified His covenant with the patriarch (Genesis 15:1-18).
3.1.4 References to Abraham and Jacob
The names "Abraham" and "Jacob." While we cannot say that there are tablets actually referring to the biblical Abraham, there is enough evidence to indicate that the name Abraham was a common name in use at the time. In addition, Jacob, or Ya'que'-el, "may El protect," appears on tablets from the 18th century BC onward in Northern Mesopotamia.
3.2 Nuzu Tablets
The tablets of another city, Nuzi, situated east of the city of Mari near the Tigris River, southeast of Nineveh, not far from the modern Kirkuk, details some of the social customs of the city in the 14th and 15th centuries BC. They were discovered between 1925 and 1941 at Nuzu. These tablets give us much background information on the narratives of the patriarchs.
The impact of the cities of Mari and Nuzi lies in the information they provide of ancient civilizations, giving clues of what went on in Syria and Mesopotamia historically and politically. In addition we get a new view into the urban lifestyles and its sharp contrast with the pastoral life known from the Patriarchal narratives.
These records cover a broad spectrum from business, politics, government and the arts. They reflect customs and social relationships that parallel the situations that the biblical patriarchs faced. When we see Abraham in the settings similar to those known from the cities of Mari and Nuzi, the biblical accounts become highly credible and believable. The life and history, the political movements, the cultural and business activities of these two cities all paint a wonderfully illuminated background of the world of the father of the Hebrew nation.
3.2.1 Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar
Read Genesis 16:1-16; 17:18-20; 21:1-21.
The Nuzi tablets recall a similar incident to Genesis 16:1-2 where Sarah presents her handmaid Hagar to Abraham to bear a child. Families are described in situations similar to the dilemma Abraham faced in Genesis 17:18-20 when he took Ishmael as his own son. Yamauchi tells us of a "tablet of adoption" which stipulates that a barren wife must provide a slave girl to her husband to beget a son. This particular tablet and the Hammurabi Marriage Law Code require that:
It was permissible for a barren wife to give her handmaid or slave girl to her husband as a substitute to beget a son;
The slave girl's child was considered a part of the family, must be kept, and also able to share the inheritance; and
If later the couple had a natural child, the adopted son would have to yield some of his rights to the second son.
Therefore, Sarah was only following the accepted custom when she gave her maidservant Hagar to Abraham so that he could have a child (Genesis 16:1-2). According to this custom, however, once this was alone, the child was considered a part of the family and able to share the inheritance. When Sarah later gave birth to Isaac, and insisted that Hagar and Ishmael be expelled and disinherited (Genesis 21:8-10), Abraham was very reluctant to comply (Genesis 21:11). We can understand why, because of the prevailing culture of the day.
3.2.2 Jacob and Rachel
Read Genesis 31:19-35. The Nuzu tablets indicate that whoever possessed the "teraphim," or household gods, had the position of leadership in the family, and the inheritance rights. When Rachel took the family teraphim from her father Laban, he ran after Jacob with a vengeance. Because of the tablets, we can better understand why he was so upset. He searched everywhere, trying to find the teraphim title deeds to his family property. Rachel, because of her physical condition, was sitting on the idols, and her father did not force her to get up! She now had the upper hand, controlling her father's inheritance, and he could do nothing about it.
3.3 Writing in the Patriarchal Times
Did you ever wonder about the literary abilities of the Patriarchs? The bustling city of Ebla provides the largest ever archive thus far unearthed from the New East. It dated back to the 3000 BC. Although its existence had been known, its location and highly developed culture was unsuspected. The city was divided into two sectors, an acropolis and a lower city. The upper division contained four building complexes, including the palace of the king, temple to the goddess Ishtar and numerous stables. The lower section was divided into four quarters boasting four gates.
In a room adjacent to the temple, archaeologists found an astonishing collection of more than 20,000 tablets on the floor. The small room had been burned. In the heat of the flames the brickwork was baked, and the tablets as well. As a result both room and tablets withstood the ravages of the centuries until they were uncovered in 1975. History has been preserved for 5,000 years!
Years of research will yet be required to interpret these vast records. But one of the valuable contributions of these tablets lies in the evidence they provide that cuneiform writing had spread to north Syria before 2300 BC. It also shows the habit of recording every sort of activity, business and cultural. Dictionaries confirm the presence of west Semitic people of other language in that era. Biblical history, we now know, took place in a world where writing was well-established.
3.4 The Biblical Kings
Archaeology has given us colorful background information for the study of the biblical kings. Solomon's grandeur has been the target of special skepticism. His lavish wealth is described in 1 Kings 9-10 as consisting of a royal navy built on the shore of the Red Sea even though there is no suitable harbor on the coastline of Palestine. His army had use of 1,400 chariots and 1,200 horses. His building projects were extensive, including fortification of the cities of Jerusalem, Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer (9:15). Recent excavation at these last three cities have at least documented Solomon's building skills.
In 1960 the famed Israeli scholar Yigael Yadin, while excavating the city of Megiddo, had identified the layer of Solomon's time by comparing pottery types. Knowing that 1 Kings 9:15 grouped together the three cities of Megiddo, Hazor and Gezer as being built by Solomon, he had a sudden inspiration. He recalled the Megiddo Gate from Solomon's time had three chambers on each side. Could the other two cities be the same?
Yigael Yadin tells this exciting story of the dig at Hazor, "Before proceeding further with the excavation of Hazor, we made tentative markings on the ground following our estimate of the plan of the gate on the basis of the Megiddo Gate. And then we told the laborers to go ahead and continue removing the debris. When they had finished, they looked at us with astonishment, as if we were magicians or fortunetellers. For there, before us, was the gate whose outline we had marked a replica of the Megiddo Gate. This proved not only that both gates had been built by Solomon but that both had followed a single master plan.
3.5 Solomon's Gold
1 Kings 10:21 adds the information that Solomon possessed large stores of precious metals. The temple he built for the Lord, like the golden shrine of King Tutankhaman of Egypt, was a glory of gold as described in the latter half of 1 Kings 6. "Solomon covered the inside of the temple with pure gold, and he extended gold chains across the front of the inner sanctuary, which was overlaid with gold. So he overlaid the whole interior with gold" (1 Kings 6:21-22). The whole concept is breathtaking.
Although the exact site of Solomon's Temple has not been found, othe discoveries showed that kings of surrounding nations of his time possessed technology and workmanship similar to the biblical account.
Millard elaborates, "Extravagant as this may seem, a display of gold was a matter of pride for any powerful ruler (note: valuable plates are displayed at royal banquets today). National currency reserves were held in gold, not stored idly in bank vaults to be publicized merely as figures, but shown to the populace. When a stronger army attacked, the gold was stripped and handed over (cf. 2 Kings 18:16). Assyrian, Babylonian and Egyptian monarchs boast of the gold they donated to beautify temples in their own cities. Their inscriptions speak of walls "covered with gold like plaster," of doors and doorways carved in relief and plated with gold, of furniture and decorations sheathed in precious metal. One Assyrian king seized six decorative golden shields from a temple in Armenia, each weighing 12 times as much as each of the shields Solomon hung in his palace (1 Kings 10:16-17; cf. 14:26-27). Claims of pompous emperors may be treated as grossly inflated, but with these uses of gold that is not so. Small fragments of thin gold sheets have been found in Assyria and Babylonia, and in Egypt nail holes ... for attaching the metal are visible in ... stonework."
At least one of the sources of Solomon's gold came from Ophir. 1 Kings 9:11, as well as other passages, describes Hiram, king of Tyre, as supplying Solomon "with all the cedar and pine and gold he wanted." And verse 28 tells of Hiram's men who "sailed to Ophir and brought back 420 talents of gold, which they delivered to King Solomon." Although this city's exact location still remains a mystery (with conjectures ranging from the Samali coast of Africa to India), its existence and assets have been independently attested. A potsherd from the mid-eighth century BC has been unearthed at a port north of Tel Aviv. It carried the clear notation of the contents marked by a local clerk saying, "Ophir gold for Beth-Horon: 30 shekels" (about 340g., 12oz).
One conclusion can be safely made: Solomon's golden temple was no mere invention of exaggerating scribes. It falls into the known patterns of ancient practices of his times.
3.6 A Battle Between Moab and Israel Described
Some of the objects unearthed by archaeologists give very specific details of biblical events. One example of this is a stone memorial telling of a battle between Moab and Israel. The Bible notes that after Ahab died, Mesha, the king of Moab, and his people rebelled against Israel's rule over them and refused to pay tribute (2 Kings 3:1-8). A battle raged between Moab and the kings of Israel, Judah and Edom (2 Kings 3:9). The pressure of battle was so great that in desperation Mesha offered his eldest son the wall as a burnt offering to the god of the Moabites, Chemosh (2 Kings 3:27). What happened then is not clear, but the implication is that the three kings had to abandon their siege against Moab (2 Kings 3:27).
In and 1868 excavation a German named Klein found an inscribed stone at Dibon, the land of Moab. Since the stone was owned by Arabs living at Dibon, he returned home to raise money for its purchase. The Arabs, thinking they could get a higher price for it, roasted the stone and then threw cold water over it to break it in pieces. Fortunately, Klein had taken an impression of the intact stone, so it was possible to restore the fragments and translate them after its purchase. It is now at the Louvre in Paris. In an early form of the Phoenician alphabet, the inscription describes how Mesha, king of Moab, with the help of his god Chemosh, had thrown off the rule of Israel. King Omri of Israel, Ahab's father (1 Kings 16:21-22; 29), is referred to by name in the inscription and a number of biblical place-names mentioned. Significantly, it mentions the God of Israel, called Yahweh.
3.7 Daniel and Belshazzar
From a host of other discoveries, Daniel's account of the irreverent King Belshazzar stands out. Daniel names Belshazzar as the last king of Babylon (Daniel 5:1, 9, 11, 24-26, 30). Yet all known Babylonian records listed Nabonidus as the last king. An obvious discrepancy, the critics cried! Then it was discovered in a Babylonian chronicle that Nabonidus inexplicably removed himself for a ten-year stint in Arabia, leaving the kingdom in the hands of his son Belshazzar. The confusion came because Nabonidus did not abdicate the kingship. He was still called king. Although Belshazzar was not the sole king, Daniel and the Hebrew young men with him considered him as the de facto king. Prior to the study of the Babylonian chronicles, Belshazzar was mentioned only in the biblical record.
The archaeologist R.F. Dougherty concludes after his study of these findings, "Of all non-Babylonian records dealing with the situation at the close of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, the description of events in, ... Daniel ranks next to cuneiform literature in accuracy."
3.8 Observations on the Old Testament Text
The customs reflected in the Nuzu and Mari tablets have been placed by the archaeologists in the 2000-1500 BC period. What is described in the Scriptures concerning the customs, culture, and life-style of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is also similar to that described in these tablets, and therefore the patriarchs can only be placed into the time slot of 2000-1500 BC.
To date the biblical texts describing the patriarchs at any other time would be an anacronism, or an out-of-date sequence. In this way, we can demonstrate that what is described in Genesis is substantiated by archaeological materials. While we do not have biblical manuscripts dating back to this period, the events and culture of Scripture can only be placed within this period.
In the same way, we can substantiate events from the Egyptian period by means of information from the Amarna letters. They were found in Egypt and dated somewhere in the late 1400s and early 1300s BC. In these materials are references to royal correspondence between rulers of the city-states in the land of Israel and the Egyptian Pharaoh. Being dependent upon Egypt, they were desperately calling for help because of the invasion of Habiru, or Israeli invaders. No help came from the Egyptians. What is significant is that the Amarna letters are dated at about the time when Canaan was being invaded. We therefore have some corroboration concerning the invasion of the land of Israel by the Israelis under Joshua.
Of course, this touches off a storm of debate as to whether the Exodus should be placed at the time of the Amarna letters, about 1400 BC, or during the early 1200s BC. A good case can be made for the earlier dating, because of the biblical chronology (1 Kings 6:1) which corresponds to the dating of the Amarna records.
We will not continue to discuss the contributions of archaeology, which can corroborate events of the periods of the judges, the kings, the Babylonian exile of Judah, etc. The student is referred to the bibliography for further study regarding the verification of history, culture and life-style of the Old Testament. It is in this way that we can substantiate at least the historical materials which the Old Testament text claims. Again, although we do not have the original manuscripts, archaeology helps with the biblical historicity, and therefore lends credence as to when a portion of the Old Testament text can be dated.
3.9 The Later Critics
Can we say that more recent biblical scholarship now has no problems with what the Bible claims for itself? Hardly! While liberal scholarship is now ready to accept the finds of archaeology for dating, and that ancient people could think in terms of complex culture, it still does not mean that these critics accept the faith which the Old Testament proclaims. Today, many of these scholars declare that the Hebrews borrowed much of their culture from their neighbors, but because of their "monotheistic and moral persuasions," they cleansed the materials of their paganism. According to the newer liberals, the Hebrews were very much a part of the Middle Eastern world in which they lived, but it is their genius which produced the Old Testament!
3.10 Conclusion
We have to be careful about what archaeology can prove. In itself, it is a useful tool, but it can never make people believe in the God of the Bible.
¡@
4. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE NEW TESTAMENT
Archaeological research and discovery for the New Testament has been of a different nature than for the Old. It is not so much a matter of digging for buried buildings or inscribed tablets; rather, New Testament archaeology is primarily a matter of written documents.
F.F. Bruce comments, "These documents may be public or private inscriptions on stone or some equally durable material: they may be papyri recovered from the sand of Egypt recording literary texts or housewives' shopping lists; they may be private notes scratched on fragments of unglazed pottery; they may be legends on coins preserving information about some otherwise forgotten ruler or getting some point of official propaganda across to the people who used them. They may present a Christian church's collection of sacred Scriptures, like the Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri; they may be all that is left of the library of an ancient religious community, like the scrolls from Qumran or the Gnostic texts from Nag Hammadi. But whatever their character, they can be as important and relevant for the study of the New Testament as any cuneiform tablets are for the study of the Old."
4.1 Papyrus
Papyrus documents have yielded a wealth of information. The common people wrote letters on papyrus and kept the ordinary commercial accounts of life on it. An even cheaper writing material was broken pieces of pottery, called ostraca. These were used for odd notes. One of the great significances of these materials, discovered in ancient rubbish heaps, has been to show the connection between the everyday language of the common people and the Greek in which most of the New Testament is written. It has long been recognized that there are great differences between the Greek of classic literature and that of the New Testament. Some scholars went so far as to suggest that New Testament Greek was a heavenly language which came into being for the purpose of recording Christian revelation. But through the discoveries of the papyri it became evident that the New Testament Greek was very similar to the language of the common people.
In 1931 the discovery of a collection of papyrus texts of the Greek Scriptures was made public. They have come to be known as the "Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri." F.F. Bruce says that this collection evidently formed the Bible of some outlying church in Egypt; it comprises eleven fragmentary codices. These papyri bear most important testimony to the early textual history of the New Testament. In addition, there is the oldest known fragment of any part of the New Testament from a codex of St. John's Gospel dated around AD 130 (please read chapter 3 for more information).
4.2 Stone Inscriptions
Inscriptions on stone have been another source of valuable information. An example of this is an edict of Claudius inscribed on limestone at Delphi in central Greece.
F.F. Bruce says, "This edict is to be dated during the first seven months of AD 52, and mentions Gallio as being proconsul of Achaia (Acts 18:12). We know from other sources that Gallio's proconsulship lasted only for a year, and since proconsuls entered on their term of office on 1 July, the inference is that Gallio entered on his proconsulship on that date in AD 51. But Gallio's proconsulship of Achaia overlapped Paul's year and a half of ministry in Corinth (Acts 18:11-12) so that Claudius' inscription provides us with a fixed point for reconstructing the chronology of Paul's career."
Luke makes so many specific references to people and places that his writings are more easily illustrated by this kind of material than other parts of the New Testament. His accuracy of detail has been thoroughly established. Where he has been questioned, new evidence has vindicated him a number of times.
F.F. Bruce points out, "For example, his reference in Luke 3:1 to 'Lysanias, the tetrarch of Abilene,' at the time when John the Baptist began his ministry AD 27 has been regarded as a mistake because the only ruler of that name in those parts known from ancient historians was King Lysanias, whom Antony executed at Cleopatra's instigation in 36 BC. But a Greek inscription from Abila (18 miles west-northwest of Damascus), from which the territory of Abilene is named, records a dedication to one Nymphaeus "freeman of Lysanias, the tetrarch" between AD 14-29, around the very time indicated by Luke." It clearly indicates that the Bible record is more reliable than human history record which may contain mistakes and it is subject to revision and correction by archaelogy and other scientific methods.
4.3 Coins
Coins have provided some background information for parts of New Testament history. One of the crucial questions in establishing the chronology of Paul's career is the date of Felix's replacement by Festus as procurator of Judea (Acts 24:27). A new Judean coinage began in Nero's fifth year, before October of AD 59. This may point to the beginning of the new procuratorship.
Some sacred sites have been definitely identified and general locations have also been uncovered. General locations have been more easily established than exact spots where some of the great New Testament events transpired.
Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70 and a new pagan city was founded on the site in AD 135. This has complicated the identification of places in Jerusalem mentioned in the Gospels and Acts. Some, however, like the temple area and the Pool of Siloam, to which our Lord sent the blind man to wash (John 9:11), have been clearly identified.
4.4 Conclusion
Archaeology is a real help in understanding the Bible. It yields fascinating information which illuminates what might otherwise be obscured and in some instances confirms what some might otherwise regard as doubtful.
We can agree with Keith N. Schoville who says, "It is important to realize that archaeological excavations have produced ample evidence to prove unequivocally that the Bible is not a pious forgery. Thus far, no historical statement in the Bible has been proven false on the basis of evidence retrieved through archaeologic research."
¡@
5. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY
¡@
¡@
¡@