The Bible’s Track Record
The most powerful proof of the archaeological historicity of the Bible can be summed up in a single statement: Never, in the history of the field of archeology, have artifacts or evidence been discovered that would disprove the Bible. Instead, characters and events, which were once thought to be myths, are being authenticated with each new discovery. Archeological confirmations of the Biblical record have been almost innumerable in the last century. Dr. Nelson Glueck, one of the foremost authorities on Jewish archeology, has said,
“It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions has often led to amazing discoveries.” 1
There are so many examples that I hardly know where to begin. One of my favorites, however, is the example of the Hittites. For many years critics maintained that the Hittite civilization did not exist because the only historic record of the people was in the Bible. As the result of archaeological discoveries, there are now hundreds of artifacts documenting the Hittite civilization, spanning more than 1,000 years.
This sort of skepticism continues to exist where evidence has yet to be discovered. There is an axiom, however, that applies here with regard to archaeology. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There have been hundreds of examples like the Hittites where skeptics had no evidence and assumed biblical inaccuracy. Then, at some later date, evidence was discovered. Conversely, as stated above by Dr. Glueck, evidence has never been discovered that contradicts the biblical record. At what point do we give the document the benefit of the doubt based on thousands of trials and a perfect track record?
A Letter to Time
In December 1995 Time Magazine published a cover story entitled Is the Bible Fact or Fiction?2 It seems like stories similar to this one run at least annually either around Christmas or Easter. Each time a major publication releases a story like this the facts are similarly distorted. Perhaps in an effort to please the entire readership, or perhaps because of a radically liberal bent, evidence is either ignored or deformed beyond recognition. This article was no exception. In an effort to set the record straight I sent a letter to the editor which was never printed. I have printed it here simply because it gives clues regarding the nature of these distortions and assertions.
Dear Editors:
Your recent article “Are the Bible Stories True?” was disappointing to say the least. In an effort to be equitable and unbiased Mr. Lemonick ignored many facts about biblical historicity. Yes, I am a Christian, but this does not mean that I practice a blind faith. My faith is based on a sound understanding of both biblical and historical truths.
To his credit, Mr. Lemonick did point out the crucial archaeological maxim, “absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence,” but he seemed to stop there. Argument after argument against biblical accuracy was presented without evidence. Any evidence relating to biblical history was in favor of its accuracy. Overall he cited nine archaeological discoveries made between 1979 and 1995. Each and every one of them points towards the precision of the scriptures.
The only case of evidence presented against the scriptures relates to the investigation of Jericho by Kathleen Kenyon. Mr. Lemonick ignores the amazing discoveries made by John Garstang in 1936, that the walls of Jericho fell outwards as the Bible indicates in Joshua 6:20. Moreover, he leaves out the fact that Kenyon, believing the historicity of the Bible, concluded that there were two walls built at different times; and that the occupation layers from Joshua’s time had eroded away or the ruins used by later occupants. Further, John Bimson’s theory indicating the fall of Jericho during the Middle Bronze period is missing completely.
The account of New Testament accuracy, by John Elson, is equally distorted. In it he states that the existence of Jesus is not proven. If it is not, then what shall we say about the existence of Aristotle, Homer, or Plato? There are over 24,000 New Testament manuscripts and manuscript fragments dating back to the first and second centuries, versus less than 1,000 for the above three authors combined! Additionally, there are many other non-biblical references to Jesus, such as Cornelius Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, and Thallus. These historical documents, and numerous archaeological findings, will stand up to any test they are put to. This letter is not the forum, but volumes can be (and have been) written to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, the accuracy of the New Testament.
Finally, I should add that there are many (thousands) of other twentieth-century archaeological discoveries corroborating the scriptures that go unmentioned; yet there are none that successfully refute it. This fact combined with hundreds of fulfilled prophecies (which also can be historically supported) and the ability of the Bible to stand up to legitimate internal evidence, external evidence, and bibliographic tests make it one of a kind. It is, without question, the holy and inspired word of God.
Sincerely…
It is frustrating to see this continual denial of solid evidence. As mentioned in this letter, nine archaeological discoveries were cited, each confirmed biblical accuracy. Beyond that, assertions were made that the existence of Abraham and Moses were questionable because evidence was lacking. I’ll ask again, at what point do we give the document the benefit of the doubt based on thousands of trials and a perfect track record?
Recent Confirmations
Up until 1993, this same sort of skepticism existed towards David. In that year, however, evidence confirming the Bible’s historical accuracy regarding David and his rule over Israel was discovered. The Time article explains,
“In what may be the most important of these discoveries, a team of archaeologists uncovered a 9th century B.C. inscription at an ancient mound called Tel Dan, in the north of Israel, in 1993. Words carved into a chunk of basalt refer to the ‘House of David‘ and the ‘King of Israel.’ It is the first time the Jewish monarch’s name has been found outside the Bible, and appears to prove he was more than a legend.” 3
Perhaps the most significant discovery of this generation has been the Dead Sea Scrolls found in the caves of Qumran. These scrolls, discovered in 1947, provided some of the best archaeological and bibliographic evidence of the modern era. Charles Pellegrino, confirmed agnostic, archaeologist, and historian had this to say,
“The Qumran texts are at most a thousand years older than the Aleppo Codex, which was written in Israel about AD 900 and was, until AD 1947, the oldest-known Hebrew manuscript containing the full text of the Bible. What has surprised most scholars is that in spite of the millennium of hand copying that separates them, the Aleppo Codex and the books of the Old Testament unearthed at Qumran are virtually identical. One of the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating to about 200 BC, is the Book of Isaiah. Only thirteen minor variations from the Aleppo text (and from its modern descendants) have been identified. During the approximately three and a half centuries separating the Qumran Book of Isaiah from the version originally compiled in Babylon, one might be tempted to posit even fewer changes than during the eleven centuries separating Qumran and Aleppo. If this assumption is correct, then the modern Hebrew Bible is, in most essentials, the same Bible one would have found in Babylon about 550 BC.” 4
This evidence supporting the accuracy of Isaiah is noteworthy. As we can see in studying prophecy, Isaiah contains some curiously detailed and accurate prophecies about Jesus; so detailed, in fact, that modern skeptics have insisted that they must have been written after the life of Christ. Until the Qumran discovery the evidence of their dating was largely circumstantial. With the Qumran manuscripts predating Christ by 200 years, the power of God to foretell the future with accuracy and detail is confirmed. Pellegrino continues,
“Evidence supporting this assumption can be found in Jerusalem’s silver scroll-which is, next to the writing on the 750 BC wall of Deir Alla, the earliest fragment of biblical text presently known. The scroll of beaten and inscribed silver was contained in a one-inch-diameter prayer amulet. Construction workers found it in AD 1981, when they accidentally broke into a gravesite under New Jerusalem’s cinema district. The verses on the scroll are literally microscopic, and are indistinguishable from the priestly benediction in Numbers 6:24-26. The biblical fragment, dating between 700 and 500 BC, is almost an exact contemporary with the Babylonian compilations and reads: ‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and give thee peace.’ The modern biblical version reads: ‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee: The Lord make his face shine upon thee: The Lord lift up his countenance to thee, and give thee peace.’ More than twenty-five hundred years… yet we witness no mutation of the text. The DNA of moths living on the Hawaiian Islands has undergone vastly greater change in that same time frame. It is a testimony to the amazing fidelity of transmission, through dozens of generations of pious scribes, once the old song stories and oral histories were committed to writing.” 5
The Dead Sea Scrolls not only testify that many messianic prophecies pre-date Christ, but they clearly demonstrate the quality of our ancient manuscript copies. With copies spanning well over 1,000 years with no meaningful change, we can be confident that the scribes respected the word of God. This discovery is but a grain of sand in a vast ocean of scrolls, papyrus fragments, tablets, and thousands of other artifacts confirming the historicity of God’s word.
To conclude this section on archeology and the Bible I quote the great archaeologist William F. Albright,
“The excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, certain phases of which still appear periodically, has been progressively discredited. Discovery after discovery has established the accuracy of innumerable details, and has brought increased recognition to the value of the Bible as a source of history.” 6
- McDowell, Josh, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, San Bernadino, CA: Here’s Life Publishers, 1979. p.65 ↩︎
- Lemonick, Michael D. “Is the Bible Fact or Fiction?” Time, vol. 146, no. 25, 18 Dec. 1995, pp. 62–70 ↩︎
- Ibid. ↩︎
- Charles Pellegrino, The Return to Sodom and Gomorrah, New York: Random House, 94. 324-325. ↩︎
- Ibid. ↩︎
- McDowell, Josh, Evidence That Demands a Verdict, San Bernadino, CA: Here’s Life Publishers, 1979. p.65 ↩︎