sea star

Today I overheard a middle school history teacher, who is also the wife of a pastor, tell her students that the Bible is not just a religious book, but a history book. She said that there was archeological evidence of some things in the bible.

She asked if anyone knew who wrote the bible, and then told them that King James did. :huh: :banghead:

Now, I am not interested in a CSS discussion. I don't know why she felt compelled to expound on the Bible. I told the principal what I heard, in case any parents called the school.

What I would like to know is if there really is any evidence of any biblical incidents. I am not at all familiar with the bible, but I enjoy reading what the knowledgeable people here write.

I don't know if I will speak to the teacher, but if I do I want to be able to refute what she says regarding archeological evidence.

Thanks in advance!

cajela

I'm an ignoramus on this, too, but yes, there is some evidence. IIRC, the first that can be attested is that there probably was a King David - though no doubt most of the stories are myths, like King Arthur. Later on, Nebuchadnezzer and Cyrus were certainly real. Earlier, nothing from Genesis or Exodus is supported - unless you want to count things at the level of "Egypt is a real place".

neilgodfrey

The modern challenge to the widespread belief that the archaeological evidence supported the biblical stories began in 1992 with Philip Davies publication of "In Search of Ancient Israel". There is an introductory discussion of that book and a link to a summary of Davies' argument and archaeological evidence (incomplete sorry) here.

Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

Malachi151

Here are my suggestions:


The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts (or via: amazon.co.uk)

The Invention of Ancient Israel (or via: amazon.co.uk)

The Mythic Past: Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel (or via: amazon.co.uk)

In short, NO, archeology does not support the Bible in any meaningful way.

Are some of the places mentioned in the Bible "real"? Yes, no surprise there, especially the ones mentioned in the later books, but so much if false.

For example, Jericho is revealed to have been destroyed long, LONG before the story of the Jewish destruction go Jericho takes place. That story was just completely made up.

Indeed, the latest view is that pretty much all of the the story about the Israelites early exploits is all made up.

The Evil One

Of the four rivers mentioned in Genesis 2 as flowing out of Eden, two can be identified as the tigris and euphrates, real rivers with real geographical locations. Would this justify a claim that "the modern study of geography supports the bible account"? If you adopt the same standard as those who make the parallel claim for archaeology, then yes.

spin

As has already been indicated, there isn't a lot of verifiable material in the Hebrew bible. We know these things at least:

1. There was an ethnic group with a name very similar to Israel in the Samaria area at the time of Merneptah of Egypt, late 13th c. BCE, for an inscription of his mentions the group and his having destroyed its seed.
2. There was a state called Samaria or Israel from the middle of the 9th c. BCE till it was destroyed by the Assyrians at the end of the 8th c. There was a king called Ahab mentioned in the Assyrian accounts, along with a reference to the House of Omri; whether that be a real person or just an eponymous head of family, there is no way to tell.
3. There was a state of Judah before the time of Hezekiah, end of 8th c., because he is also mentioned in Assyrian records along with Jerusalem and a siege, before Hezekiah because an artefact was found with the name of a predecessor.
4. Jerusalem was later taken by Nebuchadnezzar, start of 6th c., which is found in Babylonian data and the city has yielded lots of evidence for the destruction.
5. There was an exile because many Jews found themselves in Mesopotamia, where a lot of them stayed.

These are off the top of my head, so there may be more. Please add, if you can think of more.

As to King James (I), the British monarch was the head of the Anglican church, so when the first state sanctioned translation was made, by the best scholars of the time, he sanctioned the work, which because of this became known as the King James Version or the authorized version (AV). (There had been earlier attempts, Tyndale and Coverdale, from memory.)


spin

post tenebras lux

Isn't the only archeological evidence for King David an inscription that reads: 'House of David'? Except that David just means Praise, so the inscription might just be saying: House of Praise?

Or am I not remembering it corrrectly?

neilgodfrey

Wow spin, compared with the Copenhagen School you sound like a die-hard Albrightian.


Philip Davies et al note that we have no way of knowing what, exactly, that term 'Israel' in the Merneptah stele means - whether a geographic area, or an ethnic group, or a label for a people not living in cities. Sure it belongs to the area of a kingdom of Israel that appeared some centuries later, but given what we know of the histories of the names of people and place-names (the Dutch, for example, are not the Deutsch; Scotland takes its name from the Scots who settled in Ireland; and Briton from the names of peoples limited to Wales and Cornwall) the Merneptah inscription tells us nix about the kingdom of Israel that appeared centuries later.

From what I recall there is no record of Nebuchadnezzar conquering Jersulem in 586 but there are records for his conquest of "the city of Judah" in the 7th year of his reign (=597?). Interestingly Nebuchadnezzar portrays himself as the liberator of the land and as the one who is "leading back ... and reinstalling" the inhabitants to their original homelands. "Deportation" was such an ugly word. By contrast "Restoration" had such a positive ring to it. (Thompson, Early History, pp.347-8)

I will have to look up again studies that have linked population growths in various regions at the same time as the depopulation of Judah -- an indication of where the people where deported. Many at least do not appear to have been taken as far as Mesopotamia, but I am working from faded memory on this point.

But given what we know of the purposes and effects of mass deportations (Oded, "Mass Deportation" 1979) the notion that deported Jews somehow retained and even revived their religious and cultural identity in Babylonia is pure fantasy. The whole point of any deportation was to smash cultural identities and replant peoples with new ones. It is far more plausible and perhaps even consistent with the available evidence to postulate the myth of exile being cultivated in Babylon at the time of Persian rule when it became expedient to plan new mass deportations to stabilize economies and defences (especially against Egypt) in the area of Palestine. (The whole notion a "Jewish" religious identity and its origins may have roots no earlier than the Persian period.)

Archaeological evidence also tells us that the area of Judah and Jerusalem began to emerge as economically interesting after the collapse of Samaria -- it may well have been the Assyrians who established this area as a client state to cultivate the olive crops. The archaeological evidence simply does not allow for the existence of an extensive kingdom let alone empire before that period. Hence a united David-Solomon led empire is simply out of the question.

Check out also the excellent Niels Peter Lemche's The Israelites in History and Tradition.


For more details I have summarized the archaeological evidence for much of this period at "In Search of Ancient Israel" (still to be completed). Also a brief summary of the book's significance ("In Search of Ancient Israel" by Philip Davies) at my just-beginning archive for "OT archaeology"


Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

neilgodfrey

Yep, that's according to George Athas, Niels Peter Lemche, Thomas Thompson and Keith Whitelam.

• Bethelehem = House of Bread;
• Bethel = House of God;
• Bethdavid = House of Praise.

(What's Bethsaida?)

That's also referenced in brief in the links in my previous post.

sea star

Wow! Thanks, all. This is lots of info/resources. It's more in depth than I expected, and probably way more than the teacher would be able to argue.

As no one posted, "yes, archeologists have confirmed that... blah blah etc", I'm thinking she doesn't know what she's talking about.

Last night I was wondering if maybe she is a pawn of the DI, subtly inserting their agenda into the classroom. But I'm suspicious by nature. :devil1:

Thanks again.