An Introduction to Biblical Archaeology
The word archaeology is derived from the Greek archaio
(ancient, old) and logos (word, study): thus signifying the
orderly arrangement of ancient things. It can be defined broadly to
include all study of antiquity, and but this would then merge into
physical anthropology or human palaeontology.
In the narrower sense, archaeology deals with the material remains of
human life in antiquity. It seeks to gain more information from what
remains of past civilisations, whether it be pottery, tools, household
utensils, furnishings, ornaments, buildings, fortifications, coins,
sculpture, paintings, mosaics, weapons, inscriptions, stonework and
artwork, and other buried material that was once made or fashioned by
man.
Biblical archaeology is a specialised branch of archaeology that is
devoted to the gathering and classification of archaeological data that
come from or relate to the areas included in the biblical world and the
times pertinent to the biblical story.
There is no special technique in biblical archaeology; indeed, some
scholars would deny that there is such a discipline as “biblical
archaeology,’ any more than there are such disciplines as “biblical
geology” or “biblical mathematics.” The difference, however, lies
not in methods or results but in the definition of purpose.
The task of the archaeologist may be divided into three main areas:
recovery of the data, reporting the discovery, and interpreting the
significance of the finds.
By what criteria should all archaeological finds by interpreted, and
why?
Interpretation is a necessary part of the archaeologist’s work, and
here the work may be done by ‘armchair’ archaeologists. The best
interpretation of the finds at one site will be made against the
background of discoveries at other sites. The archaeological term used
here is typology, which is the classification of the various
types of objects that have been found in an excavation, and the study of
their relationship to earlier and later finds of the same types at that
location as well as to the same or similar types that have been
discovered at other locations.
Integration of information from one site to information to another
site is necessary, if sound interpretation is to be formulated. The
armchair archaeologist, therefore, is not working from ignorance;
rather, he should be fully cognisant of all the significant discoveries
in all of the periods and locations that comprise his area of study.
The obvious method of procedure, and in some ways the simplest, is
surface exploration. Usually, however, we think of excavation when we
speak of archaeology. The Arabic word tell, commonly meaning “hill,”
has been taken over by archaeologists to designate a hill that has been
formed by successive occupation of the location. There are thousands of
tells of this nature in the Near East.
Archaeology has added a tremendous amount to our knowledge and
understanding of the Bible. The value of various discoveries for
biblical study is often a matter of personal axiology. For the person
who wants “archaeological proof” of the Bible, the inscription
mentioning the proconsulship of Gallio in Corinth is far more
significant than the Wisdom of Amenemope, and reports of the discovery
of “Noah’s Ark” on Mount Ararat are of greater import than the
Dead Sea Scrolls.
Some want proof to bolster faith, others want knowledge to make faith
more certain, and still others want knowledge to replace faith.
Archaeology serves each in his own way.
The expression “archaeology proves the Bible,” so often used, is
quite imprecise and employed even by Christians to their own hurt. It is
the opinion of scholars today, including many who are not personally
committed to faith in the Bible as the Word of God, that the evidential
value of archaeology is not properly understood if it is taken to man
that archaeology proves the Bible. It can prove that Canaanite cities
were destroyed in the thirteenth century before Christ (corresponding to
the occupation under Joshua) but it can never prove that it was God who
fought Israel’s battles. Archaeology has nothing to say on this point.
This was a matter of Israelite faith, and it remains a point of faith
for all who accept the Bible by faith.
Nevertheless, there is evidential value in the study of biblical
archaeology. It is a unique doctrine of the Christian faith, that God
revealed Himself to His people in historical situations in time and
space. He call Abram out of Ur to go to the land of Canaan; and so many
other events may be mentioned. From beginning to end, the Bible is
filled with the names of peoples and places, of kings and commoners. No
other religion has its faith so thoroughly intermingled with historical
and geographical details. It therefore becomes necessary to include the
study of peoples and places with our study of the Bible. Archaeology
brings to life these peoples and places.
Faith that requires proof is no faith, but faith that says, “Help
my unbelief!” is quite common among human beings. Archaeology supplies
means for understanding many of the biblical situations, it adds the
dimensions of reality to pictures that otherwise would be strange and
somewhat unreal, and therefore it provides an element of credibility.
While the person of faith does not ask for proof, he does want to
feel that his faith is reasonable and not mere fantasy. Archaeology, by
supplying him with material remains from biblical times and places, and
by interpreting these data, provides a context of reality for the
biblical story and the reasonability for biblical faith.
But at the end of the day, archaeology (and any other discipline, for
that matter) must be the handmaid of faith. The Christian’s primary
presupposition is, “The Bible is the Word of God, and therefore true.”
Everything else falls under that criterion.
If we use archaeology, or reason, or geology, to prove the Bible
wrong, we would effectively be placing our frail and incomplete human
knowledge in judgement over God’s mind. It is no wonder that no
archaeological find has so far contradicted the Bible’s record; and we
may rest assured that no find ever will. The Bible, by itself, remains
supreme and sufficient for our faith. Everything else is judge by it;
the Bible itself, being God’s voice, can never be criticised or
accused of error.
Archaeology, therefore, enhances our confidence in the broad outlines
of the biblical report. Archaeological finds have supported many, many
specific statements in the text. Archaeology has often been useful in
refuting the attacks of sceptics. But much of the Bible has to do with
relatively private, personal matters which archaeology cannot verify.
And the farther back we go into history, the less evidence we have.
The truth of the Bible is not a matter of facts, but of their
interpretation. Even if we could demonstrate the factuality of the
entire Bible, that would not prove its redemptive significance. Because
the Christian faith is based on historical events, Christians welcome
any evidence that archaeology can provide, but they do not anchor their
faith to it. No lack of evidence nor critical scepticism can disprove
God’s Word.
It is therefore better to emphasise how archaeology helps us understand
the Bible than to insist that it proves the Bible true. In fact, it
cannot do so much, nor is there any need that it should.
How do archaeological finds confirm the great ages that ancient
people lived?
The ancestors of the human race who lived prior to the flood
consisted of ten men, from Adam to Noah, plus Noah’s three sons. Most
of their data is concentrated in the genealogies of Genesis 4:17-5:32.
Confirmatory parallels to the Sethite patriarchs arise from the
history of Berosus, a Babylonian priest of 300 B.C., who tells of ten
kings who reigned thousands of years over Chaldea before the flood.
The third kings is Amelu, “man,” compare with Enosh; the fourth
is Ummanu, “artificer,” matching the fourth patriarch Kenan, meaning
“fabricator.” The seventh is Enmeduranki, reputed to be acquainted
with the secrets of heaven and earth, while Enoch the seventh patriarch
walked with God; and the tenth king, like the tenth patriarch, was the
hero of the flood.
According to the biblical account, most of the antediluvian
patriarchs lived over nine hundred years, a phenomenon which infidelity
mocks to no end.
Yet even pagan Sumerian legend preserved the memory of extended life
spans prior to the flood - although eight kings are reputed to have
reigned a total of 241,200 years!
Such discrepancies are to be expected, for though ancient man knew
the truth as passed on to him by previous generations, because of his
innate depravity he is always prone to exaggerate and distort the truth.
But the evidence is there, twisted as it might be!
What documented evidence supports the biblical record of the
universal flood?
Flood stories have been discovered among nearly all nations and
tribes. Though most common on the Asian mainland and the islands
immediately south of it and on the North American continent, they have
been found on all the continents. Totals of the number of stories known
run as high as about 270.
Although these traditions have been modified through the ages and
some have taken on fantastic elements, most of them have certain basic
elements in common.
1. 88% of them single out a favoured individual or family.
2. 70% point to survival due to a boat.
3. 66% see the Flood coming as a result of human wickedness.
4. 67% speak of animals saved along with human beings.
5. 57 % record that the survivors end up on a mountain.
6. 66% indicate that the hero receives warning of the coming
catastrophe.
The assertion that many of these flood stories came from contacts
with missionaries will not stand up because most of them were gathered
by anthropologists not interested in vindicating the Bible. Moreover,
they are filled with fanciful and pagan elements, evidently the result
of transmission for extended periods of time in a pagan society. A third
factor is that the ancient accounts were written by people very much in
opposition to the Hebrew-Christian tradition.
Most important of all the flood stories is the Babylonian account.
Interest in it rises because it comes from the same Semitic context and
the same geographical area as the Genesis narrative and because it is
similar to the Genesis account in so many ways.
The Babylonian flood story was part of the library of King
Ashurbanipal of Assyria (668 - 627 B.C.) found during the British
excavations at Nineveh in 1853 and 1873. The story was the eleventh
tablet of a twelve-tablet piece entitled the Gilgamesh Epic, an
account of Gilgamesh’s search for immortality. Gilgamesh (king of Uruk,
biblical Erech) interviewed Utnapishtim, the “Babylonian Noah,” and
learned from him the story of the flood and his securing of immortality.
Subsequently an early Akkadian story of the flood, written in
Mesopotamia about 1600 B.C. and known as the Atra-hasis Epic, and a
Sumerian version of the Babylonian flood story (dating circa 1700 B.C.)
have come to light. The story in all these texts is similar and the
flood hero is known variously as Ziusudra in Sumeria and Atra-hasis or
Utnapishtim in Akkadian.
Child sacrifice is forbidden in Scripture. Is there any evidence to
support the idea that such sacrifices were made?
Many passages in Scripture prohibit child or human sacrifice, whether
it be to the Ammonite deity Molech, to demons, or even to Jehovah (cf.
Judges 11:29-40). The Law of Moses proscribed this pagan practice and
the prophets denounced it as a heinous sin.
Evidently child sacrifice was practised in various ancient cultures
and even in more recent cultures. Archaeologists, among them Stager and
Wolff, have convincingly demonstrated that child sacrifice was practised
in Phoenician Carthage. At the sanctuary called Tophet, children were
sacrificed to the goddess Tanit and her consort Baal Hammon. A pillar,
half a metre high, with upraised hands and a disk and crescent has been
discovered at Hazor in northern Israel. These symbols seem to indicate
the same deities found in Carthage. Their presence in Hazor suggests the
possibility that children were sacrificed there also, although the Hazor
site predates the Tophet in Carthage by a thousand years.
Furthermore several ancient writers reported incidences of child or
adult sacrifice, among them Diodorus and Porphyry.
A. Green summarised his exhaustive study of human sacrifice in the
ancient Near East with the general statement that “human sacrifice can
be traced throughout this region,” that is, throughout Mesopotamia,
the Indus Valley, Egypt, and Syro-Palestine.
Have any archaeological artefacts been found that contradict the
Bible?
There have been cases where at first sight the artefacts discovered
were thought to negate the biblical record. But upon further
investigation and research all discoveries haven been found to harmonise
with Scripture.
This does not mean that difficulties and enigmas may be solved
easily. The biblical world is far removed from our own, and the remains
are relatively few and scattered. The “jig-saw puzzle,” so to speak,
can never be complete, and archaeologists have to make do with bits and
pieces, some of them indeed brilliant, but never forming one whole. So
what is fragmentary and incomplete can never justly be compared with
what is complete (the biblical canon), and far less to attempt to use it
in order to water down the Bible’s authority and infallibility.
Archaeology is an ongoing discipline. What is obscure needs to be
subjected to further study, always keeping in mind that we are just
touching the iceberg’s tip.
To conclude: never has an artefact been successfully pitted against
the Bible, so as to prove that the Bible is erroneous in any way.
Why is the “Taylor Prism” so important?
Taylor’s Prism, also known as the Sennacherib Prism, discovered
about 1850, records Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah, and mentions king
Hezekiah (2 Kings 18:13-16; Isaiah 36:1).
Sennacherib was king of Assyria and Babylonia from 705 to 681 B.C.,
the son of Sargon II and father of Esarhaddon. He besieged Jerusalem in
the days of Hezekiah. Sennacherib left copious records of his reign, the
final edition of his annals being known as the Taylor Prism, and a
better copy known as the Oriental Institute Prism.
These remains tell us a lot about his military campaigns, his
buildings projects, his literary ability, his invasion of Judah and his
death.
The account of the siege of Jerusalem has so often been quoted that
only a brief portion will bear quoting: “As for Hezekiah the Judean
who did not submit to my yoke, 46 of his strong, walled cities, as well
as the small cities in their neighbourhood, which were without number,
by escalade and by bringing up siege engines, by attacking and storming
on foot, by mines, tunnels, and breaches, I besieged and took...Himself
like a caged bird I shut up in Jerusalem, his royal city.”
Evidently the Taylor Prism is important because it parallels so
closely the biblical record of this king’s conquests and life. If
corroboration is needed to the biblical record, we do have
three-dimensional evidence from the pagan king himself.
|