Archaeological Proof for the Bible - Some Issues

 There is great danger in using archaeology for apologetics. It is a two-edged sword. Jericho provides an excellent example. On the basis of John Garstang’s excavations of 1930–1936 evangelicals have argued that archaeological evidence indicates that the walls did indeed fall outward. Yet some today seem still unaware that Kathleen Kenyon’s work of 1952–1958 demonstrated that Garstang’s fortifications actually stemmed from an earlier period, namely, an early Bronze Age city destroyed by an earthquake and fire about 2300 b.c. (rather than the 1400 b.c.date of Garstang). To date, there is an absence of evidence for the biblical story regarding the walls of Jericho. This does not disprove the biblical data (see Dumbrell 1985:130–39) but does exemplify the serious problems in an apologetic use of archaeology. We dare not reach too hasty conclusions as to the relevance of archaeological discoveries. Often the problems outweigh the solutions, and it is dishonest to use a tool only when it supports us and to neglect it when it does not.

Edwin Yamauchi discusses the “fragmentary nature” of archaeological evidence (1972:146–58). In a series of descending spirals, he studies the extent of the evidence that is available to us.

1.     Only a very small fraction of what was made or written has survived, due to the erosion of the material by natural forces (wind, rain, soil) and the destructive nature of humans. In addition, site after site has been denuded when inhabitants have stolen priceless artifacts.

2.     Only a fraction of available sites have been surveyed. Mound on mound lies unnoticed in Greece or Syria. For instance, in Palestine alone the number of sites rose from 300 in 1944 to 5,000 in 1963 to 7,000 by 1970.

3.     Of those surveyed only a fraction have been excavated. Of the 5,000 in Palestine in 1963 only 150 had been excavated in part and only 26 had become major sites.

4.     Only a fraction of an excavated site is ever examined, due to the unbelievable costs involved and the amount of time required. Yigael Yadin estimated it would take eight hundred years to clear Hazor, a site of 175 acres. Some cities are small (Jericho comprises seven acres and Megiddo thirteen) but many others are quite large. Babylon, with 2,500 acres, would take eight thousand years to excavate entirely! This can lead to skewed results. For instance, from 1894 to 1963 there was no evidence for a Bronze Age existence at Ephesus. Then in 1963 Turkish engineers building a parking lot found a Mycenaean burial ground. Few archaeologists are willing to make categorical judgments on the basis of an absence of data.

5.     Only a fraction of the discovered material has been published. Important finds may languish in the basement of a museum for fifty to seventy-five years. For instance, 25,000 cuneiforms have been unearthed at Mari but to date only 3,500 to 4,000 have been published. Too many scholars have rushed new discoveries into print only to be embarrassed when later studies have proved them wrong. Caution is the watchword!

Osborne, Grant R.: The Hermeneutical Spiral : A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Rev. and expanded, 2nd ed. Downers Grove, Ill. : InterVarsity Press, 2006, S. 159

Comments

[Chaussure Jordan]

All for one, one for all.*

[Air Jordan Shoes]

At any rate, the separation ratio is accurate.

[Air Jordan Q4]

The general said British schoolchildren than continental Europe's most general schoolchildren clever.

[Coach Outlet Online]

Thanks for all the help with just write, every bit helps.