The Gospels and Acts as History
Do the Gospels and Acts present accurate history? In this talk, originally presented for Reasonable Faith Belfast, Dr. Timothy McGrew explores five tests for historical credibility for the Gospels and book of Acts. This is one hour and ten minutes of content-packed analysis followed by thirty minutes of Q&A.
Views: 212
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on -
Does Archaeology Confirm the Existence of Specific People Mentioned in the Bible?
The following biblical people existence has been attested by archaeology or other preserved ancient records.
On virtually every page of the Bible you will find the name of a person or place.
Since the Bible claims to be real history, its credibility rests on its historical accuracy. If the people, places and events mentioned in the Bible are part of factual accounts, we should expect to find evidence to support those accounts. So what does the evidence show? Do archaeology and history confirm the Bible or disprove it?
As archaeologists have excavated the ancient lands of the Bible, they have uncovered inscriptions and other evidence that prove the existence of dozens of persons mentioned in the Bible. Historians poring over ancient records have found still more.
Among biblical figures whose existence has been attested by archaeology or other preserved ancient records are the following:
Old Testament
Ahab, king of Israel
Ahaz (Jehoahaz), king of Judah
Artaxerxes, king of Persia
Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria
Azaliah, scribe
Azariah, grandfather of Ezra
Baruch, scribe of the prophet Jeremiah
Balaam, Moabite prophet
Belshazzar, coregent of Babylon
Benhadad, king of Aram
Cyrus II, king of Persia
Darius I, king of Persia
David, king of Israel
Esarhaddon, king of Assyria
Evil-merodach, king of Babylon
Gedaliah, governor of Judah
Gemariah, scribe
Geshem, Nabatean dignitary
Hazael, king of Aram
Hezekiah, king of Judah
Hilkiah, high priest
Hophra (Apries), pharaoh of Egypt
Hoshea, king of Israel
Jehoiachin, king of Judah
Jehu, king of Israel
Jehucal (Jucal), court official
Jerahmeel, prince of Judah
Jezebel, wife of king Ahab of Israel
Johanan, grandson of the high priest Eliashib
Josiah, king of Judah
Jotham, king of Judah
Manasseh, king of Judah
Menahem, king of Israel
Merodach-baladan, king of Babylon
Mesha, king of Moab
Meshullam, father of Azaliah the scribe
Nebo-Sarsekim, Babylonian official
Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon
Necho II, pharaoh of Egypt
Nergal-sharezer, king of Babylon
Neriah, father of Baruch the scribe
Omri, king of Israel
Pekah, king of Israel
Rezin, king of Aram
Sanballat, governor of Samaria
Sargon II, king of Assyria
Sennacherib, king of Assyria
Seraiah, court official of Zedekiah
Shalmaneser III, king of Assyria
Shalmaneser V, king of Assyria
Shaphan, father of Gemariah the scribe
Sharezer, son of Sennacherib
Shebna, royal steward of Hezekiah
Shelemiah, father of Jehucal (Jucal)
Shishak, pharaoh of Egypt
Tiglath-Pileser III, king of Assyria
Uzziah, king of Judah
Taharqa (Tirhakah), pharaoh of Egypt
Xerxes I, king of Persia
Zedekiah, king of Judah
New Testament
Annas, high priest Aretas IV, king of Nabateans
Augustus Caesar, emperor of Rome
Caiaphas, high priest
Claudius Caesar, emperor of Rome
Erastus, public official in Corinth
Gallio, proconsul of Achaia
Herod the Great
Herod Antipas
Herod Agrippa I
Herod Agrippa II
James, half-brother of Jesus
Jesus Christ
John the Baptist
Nero Caesar, emperor of Rome
Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea
Quirinius, governor of Syria
Sergius Paulus, proconsul of Cyprus
Tiberius Caesar, emperor of Rome
The list of confirmed biblical figures is detailed and extensive. A major difficulty that has long faced the Bible's critics is its many mentions of seemingly insignificant names. At times entire lists that aren't functional to the narrative are inserted here and there.
Some critics have argued that the biblical books were written much later and that such names were added to make the accounts merely appear authentic. Others have suggested that people important to stories of later times were surreptitiously inserted into earlier accounts or that the inserted names serve a poetic function.
How, then, can they explain biblical figures whose existence has been proven by archaeological finds placing them in the exact times and locations in which they are described in the Bible? And, as seen from this list, this has happened dozens and dozens of times with persons ranging from kings to court officials to commoners!
There are limits, of course, to what archaeology can confirm about the Bible. But archaeology has verified not just the existence of dozens of people mentioned in Scripture, but hundreds of details such as cities, towns and even specific structures mentioned in the Bible such as palaces, pools and city gates. Again and again as archaeologists have excavated the lands of the Bible, the evidence they've uncovered has verified that the Bible is a truly authentic and accurate ancient record.
As the great archaeologist William F. Albright wrote, "There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition" ( Archaeology and the Religions of Israel, 1969, p. 169).
He also stated: "The excessive skepticism shown toward the Bible by important historical schools of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries 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" ( The Archaeology of Palestine, 1960, pp. 127-128).
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
In the Bible Persia interacts a great deal with the nation of Israel. But how do the recorded historical accounts of the Persians match up with those of Israel recorded in the Bible. Dr Mark Woolmer investigates.
-
Permalink Reply by James Robertson on -
There is Historical, non-Biblical Proof of an Actual Jesus Christ of Nazareth
Author - Kelly OConnell - April 8, 2012 - CanadaFreePressWhat is the greatest question in Western history? It is probably safe to assert it’s the debate over whether the historical Jesus existed; and, if so—what was the nature of his person? Easter is a splendid time to revisit this topic. What does current scholarship say about the historical Jesus? Do historians still believe a man named Jesus of Nazareth lived approximately 2,000 years ago?
For Christians, Easter is a time to meditate upon the sufferings of Christ, His payment for sins upon the cross, and revel in His resurrection—the future hope of all Believers. And yet, if there were no actual Jesus, Christians would have little hope except that of symbolism. So did Christ actually exist, beyond stories and legends? What evidence is there outside of the New Testament? The volume Jesus Outside the New Testament, (2000 Eerdmans) by Robert E. Van Voorst, addresses this topic splendidly. (All quotes in this essay are Voorst’s, unless otherwise noted.)
I. Birth of Radical Biblical Skepticism
A. Early Modern Christian SkepticismModern biblical skepticism was deeply influenced by the writings of philosopher George Hegel and acolytes. According to Voorst, Bruno Bauer was Hegel’s “left wing” student who developed a highly astringent interpretation of the Bible. Bauer unsurprisingly had a huge impact upon Karl Marx. Writes Voorst,
Bauer laid down the typical threefold argument that almost all subsequent deniers of the existence of Jesus follow. First, he denied the value of the New Testament in establishing the existence of Jesus. Second, he argued that the lack of mention of Jesus in non-Christian writings of the first century shows that Jesus did not exist; as does the few mentions of Jesus by Roman writers in the early second century. Third, he promoted the view that Christianity was syncretistic and mythical at its beginnings.
B. Post-Modern Skepticism
The most influential modern skeptic of the “historical Jesus” is George Wells. Gary Habermas’ sums up Wells’ argument by saying Wells claims the legend of Jesus was not written until ¬†after all those who knew him died. Habermas explains why virtually all scholars have abandoned Wells’ ideas:
Why do scholars reject Wells’ thesis? One does not impress scholars by maintaining a thesis at all costs, consistently resorting to extraordinary means to overlook any bit of data that would disprove one’s view. But at several points, this is clearly what Wells does. He often admits that a natural textual reading devastates his theories. Then he dismisses every historical reference linking Jesus to the first century, making some bizarre moves in the process. But it all seriously undermines his system, as well as eroding his credibility. Wells appears to declare virtually anything rather than admitting Jesus’ historicity. Yet, one by one, his house of cards collapses. This is precisely why the vast majority of scholars reject Well’s claims: he fails to deal adequately with the historical data.
II. Non-Biblical Evidence
Here are the following statements about Christ found in non-biblical writers.
A. Classical Authors: Greek & Roman Sources1. Thallos
Thallos, an author from antiquity gives the earliest possible reference for Jesus, from approximately 55 AD. He’s quoted in his lost three-part history of the Mediterranean, mentioning an eclipse around the date of the crucifixion which some claim could be the darkness that supposedly fell the day Jesus died (Matthew 27:45):When Julius Africanus writes about the darkness at the death of Jesus, he added: “In the third (book) of his histories, Thallos calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun, which seems to me to be wrong (Toῦτo τò σκóτoς ἔκλειΨιν τoῦ ἡλiou Θαλλoς ἀπoκoλεῖ ἐν τρiτητῶν ῶτoρῶν, ὡς ἐμoῖ δokεῖ ἀλoγώς).”
2. Pliny the Younger
Pliny the Younger (61-112 AD) was a powerful Roman lawyer, senator and intellectual famed for his letters which were turned into ten popular books. In his tenth book is a letter written, #96, to Emperor Trajan asking for help with trials of accused Christians. Three times he mentions the Christians of Christ. This letter is not suspected of being a forgery by most historians. Pliny writes, in part,They had met regularly before dawn on a determined day, and sung antiphonally a hymn to Christ as if to a god (carmenque Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem). They also took an oath not for any crime, but to keep from theft, robbery and adultery, not to break any promise, and not to withhold a deposit when reclaimed.
3. Suetonius
Roman writer Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus was another Roman lawyer and friend of Pliny the Younger. His famous Lives of the Caesars included the section on the Deified Claudius, mentioning what most scholars concede is an allusion to Christ, or Chrestus. He stated:He [Claudius] expelled the Jews from Rome, since they were always making disturbances because of the instigator Chrestus (Judaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantis Roma expulit).
4. Tacitus
Tacitus is generally accepted as greatest Roman historian. In his Annals, he mentions Christ in a passage which most scholars accept as authentic regarding the Emperor Nero:But neither human effort nor the emperor’s generosity nor the placating of the gods ended the scandalous belief that the fire had been ordered. Therefore, to put down the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits and punished in the most unusual ways those hated for their shameful acts [flagitia], whom the crowd called “Chrestians.” The founder of this name, Christ, had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate [Auctor nominis eius Christus Tiberio imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat]. Suppressed for a time, the deadly superstition erupted again not only in Judea, the origin of this evil, but also in the city [Rome], where all things horrible and shameful from everywhere come together and become popular. Therefore, first those who admitted to it were arrested, then on their information a very large multitude was convicted, not so much for the crime of arson as for hatred of the human race [odium humani generis].
5. Mara Bar Serapion: The Wise Jewish King
An ancient letter was discovered from early first millennium, written by Mara Bar Serapion to his son. This was a Jewish family, dealing with the fury of Rome after the Jerusalem rebellion was put down. The letter is dated anywhere from 70 AD to the second century. It appears to mention Roman occupiers and Christ as “Wise King.” Here is the excerpt:What else can we say, when the wise are forcibly dragged off by tyrants, their wisdom is captured by insults, and their minds are oppressed and without defense? What advantage did the Athenians gain by murdering Socrates, for which they were repaid with famine and pestilence? Or the people of Samos by burning of Pythagoras, because their country was completely covered in sand in just one hour? Or the Jews [by killing]130 their wise king, because their kingdom was taken away at that very time? God justly repaid the wisdom of these three men: the Athenians died of famine; the Samians were completely overwhelmed by the sea; and the Jews, desolate and driven from their own kingdom, are scattered through every nation. Socrates is not dead, because of Plato; neither is Pythagoras, because of the statue of Juno; nor is the wise king, because of the new laws he laid down.
6. Lucian of Samosata
Lucian of Samosata (115—200 AD) was a celebrated Greek satirist and traveling speaker. His book, The Death of Peregrinus (Περì τς Περεγρíνoυ Tελεύτης), (165 AD), is about a famed pagan who converted to Christianity. Lucian wrote,This period [Peregrinus] associated himself with the priests and scribes of the Christians in Palestine, and learned their astonishing wisdom. Of course, in a short time he made them look like children; he was their prophet, leader, head of the synagogue, and everything, all by himself. He explained and commented on some of their sacred writings, and even wrote some himself. They looked up to him as a god, made him their lawgiver, and chose him as the official patron of their group, or at least the vice-patron. He was second only to that one whom they still worship today, the man in Palestine who was crucified because he brought this new form of initiation into the world [έκενoν ὅν ἔτ σέβoυσ, τòv ἄνθρωπoν τòν έν τ Παλαστíν άνασκoλoπσθέντα, ὅτ κανὴν ταύτην τελετὴν ές τòν βíoν].
7. Celsus: Christ the Magician
Famed NeoPlatonist writer Celsus composed an attack on Christianity titled True Doctrine (Aληθῆς Λόγoς). Early Church Father Origen discussed Celsus’ claims:Celsus portrays the Jew having a conversation with Jesus himself, refuting him on many charges. First, he fabricated the story of his birth from a virgin; and he reproaches him because he came from a Jewish village and from a poor country woman who made her living by spinning. He says that she was driven out by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, when she was convicted of adultery. Then he says that after she had been driven out by her husband and while she was wandering disgracefully, she secretly bore Jesus. He says that because (Jesus) was poor he hired himself out as a laborer in Egypt, and there learned certain magical powers which the Egyptians are proud to have. He returned full of pride in these powers, and gave himself the title of God.
III. Jewish Sources: Josephus & Mishnah
A. JosephusJewish historian Flavius Josephus (37—100 AD), aka Joseph ben Mattathias, is one of the most important writers of antiquity. He survived Rome crushing the Jewish revolt in 66 AD. His book Jewish Antiquities has a passage most scholars accept as authentic,
He assembled the sanhedrin of the judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus called Christ [‘I??o? ?o? ???o???o? X????o?], whose name was James, and some others. When he had accused them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.
Another very famous passage in Josephus is offered in modified form, because most scholars agree the original was tampered with. Voorst attempts to reformulate the original passage using all known copies:
Around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, [but] those who had first loved him did not cease [doing so]. To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared.
B. Rabbinic Literature: Mishnah
After the fall of Jerusalem, the Jews produced the Mishnah, a massive work of scholarship, purported to present the oral half of Moses’ Code from Sinai. A famed example is here:
It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days [proclaiming], “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover.
IV. Other Proofs of an Ancient Christ: World’s Oldest Church?
Consider two ancient proofs of an early, living Jesus. In Jordan, an archaeologist says he discovered the world’s oldest church in 2008 in a cave, dating from AD 30-70. (Others dismiss the claim as ‘ridiculous.’) Another proposal of the world’s oldest church was unearthed in 2009 under Israel’s Megiddo Prison, where archaeologists say…“inscriptions, including a reference to Jesus, was found, along with the foundation of a building from the 3rd or 4th century C.E.”
ConclusionBelievers in Christ of the New Testament have every right to worship Him with the full knowledge even the most atheist of scholars generally accept Jesus of Nazareth actually existed. Happy Easter!
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
Video: Did Jesus Really Rise From The Dead? (NT Wright) March 2007, Roanoke College
Dr. N. T. Wright speaks on the historical reliability of Jesus' resurrection.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
Justin Taylor|9:54 pm CT
An Interview with Daniel B. Wallace on the New Testament Manuscripts
As Craig Blomberg has written, “Dan Wallace has clearly become evangelical Christianity’s premier active textual critic today.” In addition to teaching New Testament at Dallas Theological Seminary, he serves as executive director of the cutting-edge Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts (CSNTM). He recently made quite a stir when he announced that next year an academic publication will reveal the discovery of a first-century fragment from the Gospel of Mark. (See, for example, this interview with Hugh Hewitt.)
He was kind enough to answer some questions about the discipline of textual criticism, the number of manuscripts, the earliest manuscripts (including the soon-to-be famous fragment), why the process of copying is nothing like the “telephone game,” and other questions.
[...]
What’s the earliest manuscript we have?
Up through the end of 2011, the following would be the answer: A papyrus fragment that had been sitting in unprocessed ancient documents at the
John Rylands Library of Manchester University, England, is most likely the earliest NT document known today. Known as P52 or Papyrus 52, this scrap of papyrus has John 18:31-33 on one side and John 18:37-38on the other.It was discovered in 1934 by C. H. Roberts. He sent photographs of it to the three leading papyrologists in Europe and got their assessment of the date—each said that it was no later than AD 150 and as early as AD 100. A fourth papyrologist thought it could be from the 90s. Since the discovery of this manuscript, as many as eleven NT papyri from the second century have been discovered.
On February 1, 2012, I made the announcement in a debate with Dr. Bart Ehrman at UNC Chapel Hill, that as many as six more second-century papyri had recently been discovered. All of them are fragmentary, having only one leaf or part of a leaf. One of them rivals the date of P52, a fragment from Luke’s Gospel. But the most significant find was a fragment from Mark’s Gospel, which a leading paleographer has dated to the first century!
What makes this so astounding is that no manuscripts of Mark even from the second century has surfaced. But here we may have a document written while some of the first-generation Christians were still alive and before the NT was even completed. All seven of these manuscripts will be published by E. J. Brill sometime in 2013 in a multi-author book. Until then, we should all be patient and have a “wait and see” attitude. When the book comes out it will be fully vetted by textual scholars.
[...]
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
Khirbet Qeiyafa as the biblical city of Shaaraim mentioned in 1 Samuel 17 "the Shaaraim road to Gath and Ekron" is being excavated and is the source of several interesting finds. Included here is a skeptical news video and some reports by the archaeological team involved in the excavation.
Khirbet Qeiyafa at the Time of David
YOSEF GARFINKEL AND SAAR GANOR, KHIRBET QEIYAFA: SHA’ARAYIM
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
In this lecture, entitled The Resurrection of Jesus, Dr. Timothy McGrew present a case for the resurrection of Jesus based upon five facts found in the Gospels. He evaluated other competing hypotheses, showing that the resurrection alone accounts for all the historical data. This is about 45 minutes of content followed by fifteen minutes of Q&A.
PowerPoints and handouts can be found at www.apologetics315.com.
This is PART 6 of a series of lectures:01: Who Wrote the Gospels?
02: External Evidence for the Truth of the Gospels and Acts
03: Internal Evidence for the Truth of the Gospels
04: Alleged Historical Errors in the Gospels
05: Alleged Contradictions in the Gospels
06: The Resurrection of Jesus
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
I’m sick and tired of the way that extremist conservative claims about history – such that Abraham Lincoln actually existed – are taken seriously, but serious, well-thought-out, well evidenced and reasonable claims – like the claim that Richard Carrier does not exist – are demonised. This is manifestly unfair. As Tim McGrew has recently shown, pure Bayesian probability gives us excellent reasons to doubt this strong claim:
The initial odds that Richard Carrier exists are – let’s be generous – a hundred to one in favor of the proposition.
Part of the definition of Richard Carrier is that he is supposed to be a scholar with a Ph. D. in History. He is also supposed to be relatively young, which makes him one of, say, 3,000 or so History Ph. D.s to have been minted in the past five years. These factors will become important as we proceed.
Now we throw some of the other factors into the mix. Richard Carrier (if he exists) is a Jesus mythicist, someone who disbelieves in the existence of Jesus of Nazareth as a real person in space and time. Of the 3,000 or so History Ph. D.s minted in the last five years, and bracketing Carrier for the moment so as not to beg any questions, how many are mythicists? It’s a pretty safe bet that the number is close to zero. Let’s be generous, however, and suppose that there are 30, all of them devout mythicists (though in secret, for fear of damaging their careers). But – and this is the point we must dwell on – if the internet atheist community wanted to create a superhero who could defeat the Christians by his superior credentials, would we not expect them to invest him with a doctorate in History and, at the same time, have him endorse, nay, vindicate, the mythicist position? Surely this is not very improbable, say, even odds (for the mythicist position is very well represented online). And that the internet atheists should invent such a character, though it might seem a bit far-fetched, is not really that unlikely, since all of history amply documents the human response to the felt need for superheroes. (Vide not only Egyptian and Greek mythology but also the Edda and The Avengers, due to be released in a couple of weeks.) Upon the whole, it seems safe to say that the probability of the invention of such a character is at least .1. At a conservative estimate, the likelihood ratio
P(Historian-myther-hero|Richard Carrier is not a real person)/P(Historian-myther-hero|Richard Carrier is a real person)
is therefore .1/(30/3,000), or 10 to 1.
But Richard Carrier is also supposed to be a “world renowned philosopher and historian” (according to the blurb on Why I am not a Christian). Problems now begin to crowd more thickly around the definition. How many History Ph. D.s are philosophers at all? Surely not very many. How many are world renowned philosophers, even though they have just obtained the Ph. D.? The percentages are vanishing; they probability cannot sensibly be estimated at greater than 0.0001. But this would be a very useful accomplishment to add to the credentials of a historian-myther-hero, if he were an invented character. Let us suppose the probability to be merely 0.1 (though it should probably be higher), and we get the likelihood ratio:
P(World-renowned philosopher|Richard Carrier is not a real person & Historian-myther-hero)/P(World-renowned philosopher|Richard Carrier is a real person & Historian-myther-hero)
= 0.1/0.0001, or 1000 to 1.
We can go further. This world-renowned philosopher-historian-myther-hero is also a mathematician. Given historians’ well-known disdain for mathematical methods, the probability of this if Carrier is a real person is low, though perhaps not so drastically low as it would be if our hero were not also a philosopher, since perhaps as many as ten percent of all philosophers can and do use mathematical methods from time to time. Call the conditional probability of this detail, given the reality of Carrier and all of the other factors considered thus far, 0.05. But the mythic Carrier would only be enhanced by adding mathematical abilities to his other powers; it is at least even money that, if he is entirely mythical, this additional qualification would be tacked onto his resume. However, so as not to overestimate the probability, let us reduce the estimate to:
P(Mathematician||Richard Carrier is not a real person & Historian-myther-hero & World-renowned philosopher)/P(Mathematician|Richard Carrier is a real person & Historian-myther-hero & World-renowned philosopher)
= 0.2/0.05, or 4 to 1.
Putting these factors together, we have to weigh odds of 100 to 1 for Carrier’s reality against the combination of other factors, which tip the scales at 40,000 to 1 against. These considerations alone leave us with odds of 400 to 1 against, or a probability just a bit in excess of .9975 that Richard Carrier is not a real person.
We might go on in this vein for quite some time, noting further incongruities in the Carrier myth. How many trained historians would misread Plutarch’s “On Isis and Osiris” 19.358b as declaring Osiris’s physical resurrection from the dead here on earth? How many mathematicians would bungle basic probability calculations? How many philosophers, world-renowned or otherwise, would endorse the position that the laws of logic “obviously” derive from the laws of physics? Yet such blunders are what we might well expect to crop up as the community feigning Carrier’s existence attempted to demonstrate his expertise in one field after another.
So the calculation given above seriously underestimates the probabilities in the case. Almost certainly, by strict Bayesian reasoning, Richard Carrier does not exist.
And yet, I venture to predict that the vast majority of Carrier-believers will pay no attention whatsoever to Bayesian reasoning when it is applied rigorously to conclusions that they hold sacred.
[...]
-
Permalink Reply by James Robertson on
-
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Gosse on
-
Qeiyafa Ostracon Relates the Birth of the Kingdom of Israel
Gerard Leval Investigates the Inscription from Khirbet Qeiyafa
Biblical Archaeology Society Staff • 05/07/2012
Recent excavations at Khirbet Qeiyafa* have had an enormous impact on our understanding of the formation of the Kingdom of Israel. The only known Judahite fortified city dating to the time of Saul and David, Khirbet Qeiyafa has reshaped debates on urbanism during the early Israelite monarchy. The 2008 discovery of the Qeiyafa Ostracon has captivated the attention of epigraphers and archaeologists alike, and the diversity of translations and interpretations have simultaneously kept the sherd from Khirbet Qeiyafa in the spotlight and shrouded in mystery. The highly regarded French epigrapher Émile Puech provides one of the most groundbreaking interpretations, presenting the Qeiyafa Ostracon as the earliest text on the formation of the Kingdom of Israel and the only artifact referencing King Saul.
In the May/June 2012 BAR, Gerard Leval adds to the discussion on the heavily debated Qeiyafa Ostracon by reviewing Émile Puech’s translation and analysis for the first time in English. (In the same issue of BAR, Christopher Rollston discusses the non-Hebrew script on the Qeiyafa Ostracon in a search for the oldest purely Hebrew inscription.)** Puech translates the incomplete text on the Qeiyafa Ostracon as:
Do not oppress, and serve God…despoiled him/her The judge and the widow wept; he had the power Over the resident alien and the child, he eliminated them together The men and chiefs/officers have established a king He marked 60 [?] servants among the communities/habitations/generation.
According to Puech, this translation of the Qeiyafa Ostracon “contained all of the essential” components of the Biblical tale on the transition from Judges to the selection of Saul as the leader of a new Kingdom of Israel.
[...]
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- …
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
© 2012 Created by Norm Fisher.
Powered by
