Friday, February 16. 2007
An Examination of Archaeology Pertaining to the Bible
The claim is often made that the Bible has been independently confirmed to be a historically accurate reference text. I've always been curious to what extent this is actually true. How much has actually been verified? How was it verified? Which parts have been verified?
In general, people who make the claim do so in extremely vague terms--usually referring to unspecified archaeological findings ("archaeology proved that this was right!"), unnamed archaeologists, or saying things like "no archaeological evidence that contradicts the bible has ever been found." If you actually dig a little deeper than the surface, however, it becomes quite apparent just how empty these particular claims are. Instead of going over all of the examples of archaeology "proving" the Bible in detail, I will simply provide brief summaries of some of the specific claims in the form of simple conversations in order to provide an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the claims. (Well, okay, just the weaknesses... but only because there are no strengths.) The Hittites Archaeologist: Wow! I found a whole new civilization! Let's call them the Hittites. Bricks Without Straw Archaeologists: Oh, look. Some bricks without straw in them. The Walls of Jericho Archaeologists: We found the city of Jericho. It's really old so most of it has crumbled and collapsed. The City of Ur Archaeologists: We found the city of Ur. Cities of Ancient Israel Archaeologists: We found a bunch of ancient cities. Noah's Ark Christians: Look! There's a big kinda-boat-shaped lump on the side of that mountain! The Great Flood Archaeologists: The Pyramids and Sphinx in Egypt were built before the Biblical flood was supposed to have occurred--the fact that they are still here today proves that the flood couldn't have happened as described in the Bible. We have also found other evidence all around the world that shows millions of people were alive all over the Earth just shortly after the flood should have occurred. This can't really be accounted for by the Bible. You get the idea. Not only is the archaeological evidence for the accuracy of the Bible extremely weak (it can only prove that places, people, or events in the bible may have actually existed--it cannot say anything one way or the other about the nature of the actual narratives being told), but Christians must also pick and choose only specific archaeological findings that support the Bible, and ignore ones that contradict them. The bottom line is, archaeology does not prove anything of religious consequence in the Bible. Any sources that claim otherwise, or that claim that the archaeological findings that support information in the Bible in some way gives credibility to everything else in the Bible, are simply being intellectually dishonest. Again, I will close on a quote by someone who's definitely much more qualified to comment on the subject than me. Christopher O'Brien, archaeologist and professor of anthropology at California State University, wrote in his blog: ...archaeological data are cherry-picked, archaeological concepts and methods misconstrued, and archaeologists' statements taken out of context by creationists to provide "confirmation" of the particular version of biblical history that best serves them. References http://www.beyondthisplanet.org/bible/No_mistakes/accurate_history1.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hittites#Biblical_Hittites http://www.keyway.ca/htm2000/20000926.htm http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a011.html http://www.dawnbible.com/booklets/archeology.htm http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/bible-archaeology.htm http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/may04.html http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11747932/ Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
|
Calendar
QuicksearchAbout the AuthorRudis is an amateur skeptic with an interest in science, and you absolutely should not believe anything he says. Do the research for yourself, apply some critical thinking skills, and come to your own conclusions. But you should definitely read his comic.
ArchivesCategoriesRecent EntriesWhat's up with the Psience Blog?
Friday, August 17 2007 An Approach to Arguing with True-believers Monday, April 9 2007 April Fools Prank Roundup Sunday, April 1 2007 Extraterrestrial Code in our DNA? Thursday, March 22 2007 What if "The Secret" were true? Tuesday, March 13 2007 Non-fossil Evidence Supporting Evolution Thursday, March 8 2007 Conspiracy: A Believer's Last Refuge Sunday, March 4 2007 A Closer Examination of Sheldrake's Trial Sequences Thursday, February 22 2007 LinksSyndicate This BlogPowered by
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
