Good News for All

Is what the Bible says historically accurate ?

Not all of the Bible is history, though much of it is. A good deal that is not history still has historical or cultural connections that can be subject to historical verification. The evidence we have regarding the historical accuracy of the Bible comes from other ancient writings and from archaeological discoveries. This evidence naturally does not cover all of the Bible, and not all of it is relevant to the Bible.

What do other ancient writings say ?

Our ancient sources for comparison with the Bible include Egyptian inscriptions, the Amarna letters, Assyrian records, Babylonian inscriptions and records, Roman history, and Josephus.

Although we have so far not found definitive material connected with the Exodus in Egyptian records, there have been some possible parallels suggestive of the biblical account, making allowance for differing viewpoints. The stele of Pharaoh Merneptah from the late 13^th century BCE is the earliest written record of Israel where, in a list of conquered nations, it rather ironically declares that 'Israel is laid waste and his seed is no more.'

The slightly earlier Amarna letters offer insight on conditions, public administration and military matters in pre-Israelite Canaan, all broadly consistent with the Biblical narrative. Assyrian material also broadly confirms the biblical account as regards the invasions and destruction of the northern kingdom of Israel and the captivity which followed. Babylonian material broadly confirms the biblical account as regards the successive invasions and eventual destruction of the southern kingdom of Judah and its captivity. It confirms the names of some leading figures. Later records are consistent with events described in Nehemiah, Ezra and Esther.

Proper recording of history only really began with Herodotus in the 5th century BCE, about the time the Old Testament (excepting some of the Apocrypha) ends. The New Testament fits in well with recorded history from this point. Some Roman history relates to the Bible, including the names of people and places, and certain events of public note. A few Roman authors mention Christianity and its influence, though mostly well after the events of the New Testament. Josephus was a Jewish writer contemporaneous with the birth of the church and he is consistent with the New Testament, making passing mention of Jesus and the early church in a credible manner, though the genuineness of the reference has been challenged.

What does archaeology tell us about Bible history ?

Excavations in the area in and around Israel and Jordan tend to confirm biblical accounts. This is so much the case that some field archaeologists have used the Bible to find places of interest for digs, and in some cases the biblical record was helpful in exploring the dig site.

The fire layer at Tel Hazor corresponds very well with the conquest under Joshua. Plaques I have seen at the site are located to help visitors identify and understand the archaeological evidence. Jericho is a very ancient site, one of the longest occupied. Excavations there have resulted in considerable controversy over dating owing to the early and less expert investigations and the many layers. Ongoing activities continue to cause damage, but it remains evident that the walls were destroyed, apparently falling outwards, and possibly about the time described in the Bible. The site of Gath offers insights into Philistine society that is in general accord with the Bible.

The Temple Mount is a trove of information which is unfortunately closed to proper investigation and is subject to ongoing an purposeful damage by the Waqf. Even so, debris from excavations done there has been gathered and sifted by archaeologists. Many informative and interesting artifacts have been found. The City of David excavations south of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem are full of artifacts from the first and second temple eras. Inscriptions confirm names and events. Findings in place document the two destructions of the city by the Babylonians and the Romans. Wall segments mentioned in Nehemiah can be identified, and the aqueduct from the time of Hezekiah and the water channel used by David to conquer the original Jebusite city have both been found.

Excavations of the ancient town of Shiloh have uncovered the probable site of the Biblical tabernacle, along with numerous other items of Israelite origin, and reveal the plan and construction of an important town in Israel from the time of the Judges and early Kings. The Samaritan sites at Gerizim and Ebal, though subjected to damage by the Arabs, nevertheless have yielded many items of Israelite origin and tend to confirm some details of the Israelite conquest in the book of Joshua. The city of Samaria, though under Arab control and subject to their usual efforts to obfuscate any record of Jewish presence from antiquity, is nevertheless a source of some confirmatory evidence for the Bible account.

The dig at Tel Hebron is on the Jewish side of the line. It has revealed a number of distinctly Jewish-Israelite artifacts, some possibly going back to the time David. A tomb attributed to the Judges period of Ruth and Boaz is located there. The ancient site of Beersheba has a well attributed to Abraham and offers insight into the structure and defenses of a garrison from the period of the Judges and Kings.

There are numerous other locations from the biblical era yielding cultural information, inscriptions, artifacts, and items of interest regarding the political and economic conditions of the past. These have helped answer questions of those who have doubted and challenged the Biblical narrative. For example, the Gospel narrative was challenged because there was no mention of Pilate in Roman historical records. A stone inscription from the proper Roman era bearing his name was found in 1961 at Caesarea, which settled that question.

What about the creation in Genesis ?

The opening chapters of Genesis which explain the origin of the earth, humanity and the universe in general are clearly at odds with modern science. This, along with the account of a worldwide flood at the time of Noah, and the origin of the numerous spoken languages of humanity at Babel, are the three biblical accounts facing the most serious challenges. A literal understanding of the BIble account would place the age of the earth and our universe at less than 10,000 years. Students of physics and astronomy, based on the speed of light and observations using modern telescopes (optical, radio, infrared and others), date origin of the universe at approximately 14.5 billion years ago. Geological dating by radiological and other methods places the Earth's origin at 4.5 billion years ago. There is a discrepancy on the order of a factor of a million between science and scripture that needs explaining. Attempts have been made.

One such explanation involves a gap between creation in Genesis 1:1 and a supposed restoration described by the remainder of the account. This allows an undefined period of time to pass between the creation of the heavens and the earth, and a time when it was formless and empty, presumably due to some destructive influence. The creation account thus becomes a restoration account that begins human history at some point about 6,000 years ago in accord with the biblical narrative.

Scorning to resort to such tactics, literalists would deny the need for any gap. Efforts to discredit the science behind scientific dating, or explain anthropological and archaeological remains antedating a literal creation have so far failed. However, insisting that the universe was given an apparent age at the time of its creation is a workable explanation. For example, when the stars were made, the light on its way to the earth also had to be made for them to appear in the sky. This idea is extendable to include an apparent age for geological strata and the remains of prehistoric plants and animals.

Terms used in Hebrew to describe the creation are of some interest. There is a distinction between 'create' (barah) and to 'make', 'do' or 'cause to appear' (a'sah). Creation implies producing something new, distinct in some notable way from anything seen before. Making, like manufacturing, relies in some way on a prior pattern and procedure. The heavens, earth, whales and men were created. Everything else was made. In that context it might be that light could appear before the sun. Perhaps the sun, moon and stars were not created but only made to appear, for example by removing some obstruction. Furthermore, 'earth' (aretz) can refer to the entire planet, but may also be quite localised, for example referring only to the land (aretz) of Israel, even without 'Israel' as a qualifier. In that case we may be looking at only the making of a localised paradise garden on an already existing planet with the addition of a few novelties, Adam being one of them.

At the other extreme it would not be unreasonable to permit God to provide his people with credible origin myths to explain their present state of affairs. The creation account by the standard of its day is a model of restraint and good sense with a strong monotheistic and anti-pagan theme (note that the sun and moon are not named but just termed 'lights' and each is assigned a specific and limited function). It designates all living things as subordinate first to God as creator, and then to mankind by delegation, and therefore unsuited to worship. The seven day week with a day of rest, a unique characteristic of Israelite heritage, is also explained and ratified as fundamental. By contrast any attempt to provide a proper scientific explanation of origins would be unduly long, overly complex, and quite literally incredible to the ancient world in the sense that no one would believe it. Parables and stories to illustrate, explain and make a point are quite common in scripture.

There are a variety of potential explanations for the discrepancy between the creation account and modern science. Such explanations can be satisfying for biblical interpretation but their speculative nature renders scientifically irrelevant for the present. Irrespective of how you prefer to understand the opening chapeters of Genesis, the main purpose of the account is to explain the presence of sin in the world, the need for judgement, and to present the promise of redemption. As explained elsewhere on this site, Genesis does a very good job in this regard.

What about Noah's Ark ?

Harking back to the explanations of the Genesis account of creation, the most literal Bible interpreters would use the flood to explain the presence of coal, oil, gas, dinosaurs, the many layers of sedimentary deposits, the continental shelves, landforms attributed to glaciation, and deep river gorges. There are a few problems with that, not least of which are the inadequacy of a single pair for species survival, and the physical survival of delicate archaeological and anthropological remains that antedate Noah's flood.

The flood is said to cover the entire earth (tevel, the inhabited world). Its description is consistent with the flooding of a large but limited inhabited area below sea level, such as the Mediterranean or Black Sea basins. There have been some efforts to account for it on that basis, but not without problems. It does not explain the widespread massive flood myth traditions of almost every human subgroup on the planet. A localised flood would require that population God intended to destroy to be restricted to a very small area of the globe, which is not consistent with our anthropological knowledge of human distribution. The survivors would have to spread widely and rapidly, or interbreed with populations unaffected by the flood. Given the isolated nature of some of these populations this would seem highly improbable.

Of course, if you allow the creation account to be a credible origin myth, there is no reason to exclude Noah and the Ark from the same category. As a divinely inspired moral parable it constitutes a dire warning against sin, legitimises meat consumption, and offers comfort to those who feel threatened by violent storms. It references judgement of sin by water and provides a basis elsewhere in scripture to refer to eventual judgement by fire. It is also used prophetically in other contexts.

The Tower of Babel

One of the great mysterys of the ancient world were the many races and languages that existed beyone one's immediate locale. The story of the Ark goes some way toward explaining the races as distinct families of Noah's progeny. Babel accounts for the languages. Modern science can trace liguistic families, and it is clear that a number of these ancient civilisations antedate the Sumerian, and therefore the presumed time of the construction of Babel.

As an origin story to explain languages, Babel serves that purpose well, laying the groundwork for the existence of the diverse but related cultures Abram was about to encounter. The history of the Jewish people which begins after this point stands in clear contrast with the initial 11 chapters of Genesis for both its intricate detail and its very human and generally simple and ordinary course.

Conclusions

The Bible is a literary collection that includes the most valued of ancient Jewish works. The genuineness and reliability of its historical aspects is amply confirmed by archaeology, including ancient written materials recovered from excavations and inscriptions. A few of the very earliest accounts appear to incorporate simplified mythological origin accounts that lay the groundwork of the later history. Some more or less satisfactory ongoing efforts attempt to reconcile these with modern science, but their speculative nature and lack of supporting evidence has not so far impressed the scientific community.