A New Archaeological Discovery Appears to Support the Old Testament
From "Archaeologist unearths biblical controversy: Artifacts from Iron Age fortress confirm Old Testament dates of Edomite kingdom" by Michael Valpy:
As an advocate of the high view of Scripture, i.e., that the Bible is true in all of its particulars and can be relied upon, stories such as this make me smile. After all, this is one of those "archaeological proofs" sometimes relied upon by skeptics to argue that the Bible is not good history.
The article continues:
Again, I want to urge everyone to not jump on the bandwagon and announce this as now established proof of the validity of the Bible. But it certainly does appear that it will bolster the case for Biblical inerrancy.
From "Archaeologist unearths biblical controversy: Artifacts from Iron Age fortress confirm Old Testament dates of Edomite kingdom" by Michael Valpy:
Canadian archeologist Russell Adams's interest is in Bronze Age and Iron Age copper production. He never intended to walk into archeology's vicious debate over the historical accuracy of the Old Testament -- a conflict likened by one historian to a pack of feral canines at each other's throats.
Yet by coincidence, Prof. Adams of Hamilton's McMaster University says, he and an international team of colleagues fit into place a significant piece of the puzzle of human history in the Middle East -- unearthing information that points to the existence of the Bible's vilified Kingdom of Edom at precisely the time the Bible says it existed, and contradicting widespread academic belief that it did not come into being until 200 years later.
Their findings mean that those scholars convinced that the Hebrew Old Testament is at best a compendium of revisionist, fragmented history, mixed with folklore and theology, and at worst a piece of outright propaganda, likely will have to apply the brakes to their thinking.
Because, if the little bit of the Old Testament's narrative that Prof. Adams and his colleagues have looked at is true, other bits could be true as well.
As an advocate of the high view of Scripture, i.e., that the Bible is true in all of its particulars and can be relied upon, stories such as this make me smile. After all, this is one of those "archaeological proofs" sometimes relied upon by skeptics to argue that the Bible is not good history.
The article continues:
What is particularly exciting about their find is that it implies the existence of an Edomite state at the time the Bible says King David and his son Solomon ruled over a powerful united kingdom of Israel and Judah.
It is the historical accuracy -- the very existence of this united kingdom and the might and splendour of David and Solomon, as well as the existence of surrounding kingdoms -- that lies at the heart of the archeological dispute.
Again, I want to urge everyone to not jump on the bandwagon and announce this as now established proof of the validity of the Bible. But it certainly does appear that it will bolster the case for Biblical inerrancy.
Comments