• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does Archaeology Support the Bible?

74x12

Well-Known Member
FOR Bible students, archaeology is useful, since its findings often supplement their knowledge of life, conditions, customs, and languages in Bible times. Archaeology also provides helpful information on the fulfillment of Bible prophecies, such as those predicting the demise of ancient Babylon, Nineveh, and Tyre. (Jeremiah 51:37; Ezekiel 26:4, 12;Zephaniah 2:13-15) The science has its limits, however. Artifacts must be interpreted, and interpretations are subject to human error and modification.

Christian faith depends, not on broken vases, moldering bricks, or crumbling walls, but on the entire, harmonious body of spiritual truth found in the Bible. (2 Corinthians 5:7; Hebrews 11:1) To be sure, the Bible’s internal harmony, candor, fulfilled prophecies, and many other features provide convincing evidence that “all Scripture is inspired of God.” (2 Timothy 3:16) That said, consider a number of interesting archaeological discoveries that corroborate Biblical accounts.

A team of archaeologists digging in Jerusalem in 1970 came upon a charred ruin. “The picture was clear to any trained eye,” wrote Nahman Avigad, the team leader. “The building had been destroyed by fire, and the walls and ceiling had collapsed.” In one room were the bones [1] of an arm, its fingers spread, grasping at a step.

Strewn on the floor were coins [2], the latest of which dated to the fourth year of the Jewish revolt against Rome—69 C.E. Objects had been scattered before the building collapsed. “Seeing this,” said Avigad, “we recalled Josephus’s description of the Roman soldiers looting the houses after the city had been conquered.” Historians date the Roman sack of Jerusalem to 70 C.E.

Analysis determined that the bones belonged to a woman in her 20’s. “Caught in the fire when the Romans attacked,” says Biblical Archaeology Review, “a young woman who was in the kitchen of the Burnt House sank to the floor and was reaching for a step near the doorway when she died. The fire had spread so fast . . . that she could not escape and was buried by falling debris.”

This scene reminds us of Jesus’ prophecy concerning Jerusalem, uttered nearly 40 years earlier: “Your enemies . . . will dash you and your children within you to the ground, and they will not leave a stone upon a stone in you.”—Luke 19:43, 44.

Archaeological finds corroborating Biblical statements also include the names of individuals mentioned in the Scriptures. Some of these finds quashed earlier claims by critics that the Bible writers fabricated certain characters or exaggerated their fame.

Inscriptions of Biblical Names

At one time, prominent scholars held that Assyrian King Sargon II, whose name appears in the Bible at Isaiah 20:1, never existed. In 1843, however, near present-day Khorsabad, Iraq, on a tributary of the Tigris River, Sargon’s palace [3] was discovered. It covers some 25 acres [10 ha]. Raised from secular obscurity, Sargon II is now one of the best-known kings of Assyria. In one of his annals [4], he claims to have captured the Israelite city of Samaria. According to Biblical reckoning, Samaria fell to the Assyrians in 740 B.C.E. Sargon also records the capture of Ashdod, further corroborating Isaiah 20:1.

While excavating the ruins of the ancient city of Babylon, in present-day Iraq, archaeologists uncovered some 300 cuneiform tablets near the Ishtar Gate. Relating to the period of the reign of Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar, the inscriptions include a list of names, among which is “Yaukin, king of the land of Yahud.” This refers to King Jehoiachin of the land of Judah, who was taken captive to Babylon at the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s first conquest of Jerusalem, in 617 B.C.E. (2 Kings 24:11-15) Five of Jehoiachin’s sons are also mentioned on the tablets.—1 Chronicles 3:17, 18.

In the year 2005, while digging at a site where they hoped to find the palace of King David, archaeologists came upon an extensive stone structure that they believe was destroyed when the Babylonians razed Jerusalem just over 2,600 years ago, during the time of God’s prophet Jeremiah. Whether the structure is the remains of David’s palace is uncertain. However, archaeologist Eilat Mazar did identify one particularly interesting object—a 0.4-inch-wide [1 cm] clay seal impression [5] that reads: “Belonging to Yehuchal son of Shelemiyahu son of Shovi.” This impression was evidently made with the seal of Yehuchal (also Jehucal or Jucal), a Jewish official mentioned in the Bible as having opposed Jeremiah.—Jeremiah 37:3;38:1-6.

Jehucal, says Mazar, is only the “second royal minister,” after Gemariah, the son of Shaphan, whose name appears on a seal impression found in the City of David. The Bible identifies Jehucal, the son of Shelemiah (Shelemiyahu), as a prince of Judah. Prior to the discovery of the seal, he was unknown outside the Scriptures.

Could They Read and Write?

The Bible indicates that the ancient Israelites were a literate people. (Numbers 5:23; Joshua 24:26; Isaiah 10:19) But critics disagreed, arguing that Bible history was largely transmitted by unreliable oral tradition. In 2005 this theory suffered a blow when archaeologists working at Tel Zayit, midway between Jerusalem and the Mediterranean, found an archaic alphabet, perhaps the oldest Hebrew alphabet [6] ever discovered, incised on a piece of limestone.

Dated to the tenth century B.C.E., the find, say some scholars, suggests “formal scribal training,” a “sophisticated level of culture,” and “a rapidly developing Israelite bureaucracy in Jerusalem.” So, contrary to the critics’ claims, it appears that at least as early as the tenth century B.C.E., the Israelites were literate and would have been able to record their history.

Assyrian Records Lend Further Support

Once a mighty empire, Assyria often appears in the Bible record, and many archaeological finds there attest to the accuracy of the Scriptures. For instance, an excavation at the site of ancient Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, revealed a sculptured slab [7] in the palace of King Sennacherib, which depicts Assyrian soldiers leading Jewish captives into exile after the fall of Lachish in 732 B.C.E. You can read the Bible’s account at 2 Kings 18:13-15.

The annals of Sennacherib [8], found at Nineveh, describe his military campaign during the reign of Judean King Hezekiah, whom the annals mention by name. Cuneiform records of various other rulers refer to Judean Kings Ahaz and Manasseh, as well as Israelite Kings Omri, Jehu, Jehoash, Menahem, and Hoshea.

In his accounts Sennacherib boasts of his military successes but, significantly, omits any mention of taking Jerusalem. This striking omission adds credence to the Biblical record, which states that the king never laid siege to Jerusalem but suffered defeat at God’s hands. Thereafter, a humiliated Sennacherib returned to Nineveh, where, the Bible says, he was assassinated by his sons. (Isaiah 37:33-38) Interestingly, two Assyrian inscriptions attest to the assassination.

Because of the wickedness of the people of Nineveh, Jehovah’s prophets Nahum and Zephaniah foretold the city’s complete destruction. (Nahum 1:1; 2:8–3:19; Zephaniah 2:13-15) Their prophecies were fulfilled when the combined forces of Nabopolassar, the king of Babylon, and of Cyaxares the Mede besieged and captured Nineveh in the year 632 B.C.E. The discovery and excavation of its ruins once again corroborated Bible accounts.

Nuzi, an ancient city to the east of the Tigris River and southeast of Nineveh, excavated between 1925 and 1931, yielded many artifacts, including some 20,000 clay tablets. Written in the Babylonian language, they contain a wealth of detail involving legal customs similar to those of the patriarchal era described in Genesis. Texts show, for example, that family gods, often small clay figurines, were a form of title deed, giving their owner a claim to the inheritance. This custom may explain why the patriarch Jacob’s wife Rachel took the family gods, or “teraphim,” belonging to her father, Laban, when Jacob’s family moved away. Understandably, Laban tried to recover the teraphim.—Genesis 31:14-16, 19,25-35.

Isaiah’s Prophecy and the Cyrus Cylinder

The cuneiform inscription on the ancient clay cylinder illustrated here corroborates another Bible account. Known as the Cyrus Cylinder [9], this document was recovered at the site of ancient Sippar on the Euphrates, about 20 miles [32 km] from Baghdad. It speaks of the conquest of Babylon at the hands of Cyrus the Great, founder of the Persian Empire. Amazingly, some 200 years earlier, Jehovah, by means of his prophet Isaiah, said of a Medo-Persian ruler who would be named Cyrus: “‘He is my shepherd, and all that I delight in he will completely carry out’; even in my saying of Jerusalem, ‘She will be rebuilt.’”—Isaiah 13:1, 17-19;44:26–45:3.

Significantly, the cylinder mentions Cyrus’ policy—in sharp contrast with that of other ancient conquerors—of returning to their homeland captives held by the previous power. Biblical and secular history testify that Cyrus did release the Jews, who then rebuilt Jerusalem.—2 Chronicles 36:23; Ezra 1:1-4.

A relatively new science, Biblical archaeology has become a major field of study that has yielded some valuable information. And as we have seen, many finds attest to the Bible’s authenticity and accuracy, sometimes down to the smallest detail.
Good post. This is only a smattering of archaeological support for the Bible.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Good post. This is only a smattering of archaeological support for the Bible.
No it doesn't. There's nothing in archaeology that supports Bible narratives as to the validity of any events that it contains.

Since nobody knows who wrote or when it was ever made, provides reasonably strong evidence that it's pretty much a redacted work where everything is made to fit together to make it appear like some prophecy was fulfilled. There is no chronological record or artifacts of each book being progressively older respectively . Archaeology has none of that.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
There was a pretty decent assertion that crossing the "Red" sea was really the "Reed" sea a while ago because the wind patterns can push back the water exposing dry land. But that, of course, illustrates that taking the Bible as literal history is a mistake in at least almost all cases.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
No it doesn't. There's nothing in archaeology that supports Bible narratives as to the validity of any events that it contains.

Since nobody knows who wrote or when it was ever made, provides reasonably strong evidence that it's pretty much a redacted work where everything is made to fit together to make it appear like some prophecy was fulfilled. There is no chronological record or artifacts of each book being progressively older respectively . Archaeology has none of that.
There is a lot of archaeological findings that do support the Bible narratives, both of real people and events, and dates.
More Evidence

While we have evidence written on both soft and hard materials...
Many critics continue to oppose this evidence - making claims that they cannot prove, and therefore has no validity.,

Most ancient Hebrew biblical inscription deciphered
Professor Gershon Galil of the department of biblical studies at the University of Haifa has deciphered an inscription dating from the 10th century BCE (the period of King David's reign), and has shown that this is a Hebrew inscription. The discovery makes this the earliest known Hebrew writing. The significance of this breakthrough relates to the fact that at least some of the biblical scriptures were composed hundreds of years before the dates presented today in research.

Prof. Gershon Galil of the University of Haifa who deciphered the inscription: "It indicates that the Kingdom of Israel already existed in the 10th century BCE and that at least some of the biblical texts were written hundreds of years before the dates presented in current research."


Ancient Hebrew writings - Wikipedia
The oldest manuscripts discovered yet, including those of the Dead Sea Scrolls, date to about the 2nd century BCE. The common traditional dating of the Pentateuch suggests it was written between the 16th century and the 12th century BCE. Some secular scholars, who tend to suggest latter dates, believe that there was a final redaction between 900-450 BCE. The traditional view is that all five books were written in immediate succession, but some scholars believe that Deuteronomy was written later than the other four books. Religious and secular scholars generally agree that the other books of the Bible were written at a latter date than the Pentateuch.

A significant number of apocryphal works was written in the Second Temple Period (530 BCE — 70 CE); see also Second Temple Judaism.

It seems apparent that these critics are the ones doing the editing - reading the texts, and then dating them after the events.

What these critics would have you believe is that events took place, at a period of history between conquering nations nations - Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Moab, Ammon, etc. etc. Persia... and others, and a people came along and recorded all these events accurately to the T.
So that later, in our time, when archaeologist dig in these places, they find these precise details etched in stone. :dizzy:

Who ever here of such genius?
Whoever wrote these text should have a monument erected with the inscription - "The Only Super Cons In History".

It is evident that these critics will go down fighting to the very end, despite the extent of the evidence. If the evidence does not include every single piece of narrative... there is no evidence, that will do it for some. :(
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
No it doesn't. There's nothing in archaeology that supports Bible narratives as to the validity of any events that it contains.

Since nobody knows who wrote or when it was ever made, provides reasonably strong evidence that it's pretty much a redacted work where everything is made to fit together to make it appear like some prophecy was fulfilled. There is no chronological record or artifacts of each book being progressively older respectively . Archaeology has none of that.
Ha ha ha. Clearly you are not a student of music.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
The various books use History in their themes, and they are written long before modern archeology begins to unravel the lost knowledge of the past, but History shows that several Bible stories are written as antagonists of the stories and myths of the Egyptians and Babylonians. Gilgamesh, a story lost for a long time and now known again, informs that the story of Noah with peace as its theme is a converted version of another story glorifying battle prowess. The Egyptian Pharaohs spread the belief that a strong people ought to oppress surrounding peoples. The Babylonians worshiped Marduk, who was the monotheistic god of might is right. In many books the Bible makes no mention of Babylon's actual gods but alludes to them as it does to Babylon's kings. Babylon is famed as a great city, and historically it is. The Bible's prophets protest against it as a terrible place, but without history its terror is obscure. What was the problem with Babylon? Now we know; but the Bible's stylistic allusions were never enough to inform us. There was once a great sucking void caused by a lack of historical reference. All we knew were the stories in the Bible. We knew the stories, and so we accepted them as trite History, but they were not. They were moral stories making use of historical themes.
 

David T

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Does science support music? What an odd question.

Here i have 5 species of guitars and i would say science and religion both have played roles in their evolution! The vest guess we have are these creatures date baxk 1 milion years when some ancestor took a srick and beat it on a log in ryrhmm to their heart beat

Now science is new and a very young phenomenolgy talking about a much much older phenomenolgy. So can a young phenomenolgy actually be objective from an old phenomonolgy seems to be the question? No.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The main intent of the Bible, namely teaching that God created all and that he sets for us morals to follow cannot be objectively ascertained. However, one can ascertain it for themselves through faith, which by definition is not always reliant on objectivity.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Yes there are places mentioned in the bible that archeology confirms existed. And there are people in the bible that history confirms lived.

There are places mentioned in harry potter that exist.

Throwing in a little reality helps to make a story more believable
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
There is a lot of archaeological findings that do support the Bible narratives, both of real people and events, and dates.
More Evidence

While we have evidence written on both soft and hard materials...
Many critics continue to oppose this evidence - making claims that they cannot prove, and therefore has no validity.,

Most ancient Hebrew biblical inscription deciphered
Professor Gershon Galil of the department of biblical studies at the University of Haifa has deciphered an inscription dating from the 10th century BCE (the period of King David's reign), and has shown that this is a Hebrew inscription. The discovery makes this the earliest known Hebrew writing. The significance of this breakthrough relates to the fact that at least some of the biblical scriptures were composed hundreds of years before the dates presented today in research.

Prof. Gershon Galil of the University of Haifa who deciphered the inscription: "It indicates that the Kingdom of Israel already existed in the 10th century BCE and that at least some of the biblical texts were written hundreds of years before the dates presented in current research."


Ancient Hebrew writings - Wikipedia
The oldest manuscripts discovered yet, including those of the Dead Sea Scrolls, date to about the 2nd century BCE. The common traditional dating of the Pentateuch suggests it was written between the 16th century and the 12th century BCE. Some secular scholars, who tend to suggest latter dates, believe that there was a final redaction between 900-450 BCE. The traditional view is that all five books were written in immediate succession, but some scholars believe that Deuteronomy was written later than the other four books. Religious and secular scholars generally agree that the other books of the Bible were written at a latter date than the Pentateuch.

A significant number of apocryphal works was written in the Second Temple Period (530 BCE — 70 CE); see also Second Temple Judaism.

It seems apparent that these critics are the ones doing the editing - reading the texts, and then dating them after the events.

What these critics would have you believe is that events took place, at a period of history between conquering nations nations - Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Moab, Ammon, etc. etc. Persia... and others, and a people came along and recorded all these events accurately to the T.
So that later, in our time, when archaeologist dig in these places, they find these precise details etched in stone. :dizzy:

Who ever here of such genius?
Whoever wrote these text should have a monument erected with the inscription - "The Only Super Cons In History".

It is evident that these critics will go down fighting to the very end, despite the extent of the evidence. If the evidence does not include every single piece of narrative... there is no evidence, that will do it for some. :(
Well archeology does support references concerning a number of dates, places, and times. However nothing concerning actual events as it applies to biblical characters in the context they are potrayed. Dates are off such as Herod supposedly killing off all the newborn and Pontius Pilates position in government during the time Christ was allegedly alive.

There no doubt the archaeological value of the Bible as an ancient mythological work of literature.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Well archeology does support references concerning a number of dates, places, and times. However nothing concerning actual events as it applies to biblical characters in the context they are potrayed. Dates are off such as Herod supposedly killing off all the newborn and Pontius Pilates position in government during the time Christ was allegedly alive.

There no doubt the archaeological value of the Bible as an ancient mythological work of literature.
If you check the reference I posted you should see that actuals events with regard to Biblical characters are verified.

Dates may be off where secular history cannot be verified to be accurate. I don't find your information correct however.
Perhaps you have a source with that information?
See Herod - Wikipedia
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
No it doesn't. There's nothing in archaeology that supports Bible narratives as to the validity of any events that it contains.
It seems to me you've been listening to the wrong "experts" and let them do the thinking for you. An "expert" is presenting more than just facts. He is presenting opinion. This opinion can be based on the facts but also can be based on his/her own bias and assumptions.

Therefore when saying that archaeology doesn't support the Bible you should be looking at the actual facts and not just the interpretation of the facts by so called "experts" who wouldn't give any credence to the Bible even if they thought they could because they're afraid of ridicule.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
If you check the reference I posted you should see that actuals events with regard to Biblical characters are verified.

Dates may be off where secular history cannot be verified to be accurate. I don't find your information correct however.
Perhaps you have a source with that information?
See Herod - Wikipedia
All Wikipedia does is reference the Bible by which Herod Antipas is best known for.

The Bible is not a valid source for archaeological information aside from the mythology surrounding Herod.

I don't think there is too much information on Herod himself and the algorithms of Google makes it a very difficult find without the mythology from the Bible that is attached to him....

BBC - Religions - Christianity: King Herod


Same goes for Pontius Pilate....


Historical Notes: Pontius Pilate: a name set in stone
 

74x12

Well-Known Member
All Wikipedia does is reference the Bible by which Herod Antipas is best known for.

The Bible is not a valid source for archaeological information aside from the mythology surrounding Herod.

I don't think there is too much information on Herod himself and the algorithms of Google makes it a very difficult find without the mythology from the Bible that is attached to him.

BBC - Religions - Christianity: King Herod


Historical Notes: Pontius Pilate: a name set in stone
You've clearly never read Josephus who talks about Herod extensively and in a good way. He actually praises Herod a lot. But also shows many of his failings and faults.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
You've clearly never read Josephus who talks about Herod extensively and in a good way. He actually praises Herod a lot. But also shows many of his failings and faults.
Are you sure you're talking about Herod Antipas, and not his father Herod the Great?
 
Top