[Âà¿ý]ûig5?B?UmU6IMP2qfO4dLhnqrqlab5hqco

[咸蛋超人 封機中]

※ [本文轉錄自 lamwm 信箱]

作者: lamw...@cbs.ntu.edu.tw
標題: =?big5?B?UmU6IMP2qfO4dLhnqrqlab5hqco=?=
時間: Fri Dec 19 03:54:54 1997

發信人: "John Fok" <john...@hkstar.com>, 信區: religion
標 題: =?big5?B?UmU6IMP2qfO4dLhnqrqlab5hqco=?=
發信站: Netvigator (Fri Dec 19 00:22:18 1997)
轉信站: Lion!ccnews.nsysu!news.civil.ncku!news.csie.nctu!aidebbs!spring!news-pe
來 源: hhtun005173.netvigator.com

Hello,

The reliability of the Bible can be found at:
http://home.hkstar.com/~johnfok1/Apologetics/3.htm
http://home.hkstar.com/~johnfok1/Apologetics/4.htm

Chapter Three - Reliability of the Bible
　
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter is designed to help the fellow Christian workers face
attacks by non-believers, who raise serious claims whether the Bible
of today could be the same as it was in the 1st century, or even
previous to that date. This chapter is divided into three major
divisions, they are:
we will demonstrate that we do have New Testament materials, many of
them dated almost as far back as the 1st century;
we will deal with Old Testament materials which help us to verify the
Hebrew Bible; and
we will discuss how do we know the books in our Bible, and no others,
are the ones that should be there, this is called the question of the
canon.
The integrity of the Bible has been attacked by a number of sources:
the validity of the text (this chapter);
the historicity and geography claimed by the Scriptures (chapter 4);
and
the authority of the Bible (chapter 11).
1.1 The Validity of the Text
Since we do not have the original manuscripts, one argument against
the validity of text is apparent. The non-Christian will express doubt
that the Bible we have today is the same as when it first appeared.
The critic will also question how it is possible for the Bible to be
the same after so many translations. What guarantee do we have that
deletions and embellishments have not totally obscured the original
message of the Bible? What difference does the historical accuracy of
the Bible make?
Christianity is rooted in history. Jesus Christ was counted in a Roman
census (Luke 2:1-5). If the Bible's historical references are not
true, grave questions may be raised about the reliability of other
parts of the message based on historical events. However, manuscripts
finds in the last 100-150 years have done much to blunt these attacks
upon the integrity of the Scriptures.
The job of establishing the text accurately is an extremely important
one. This task is called textual criticism. It has to do with the
reliability of the text, i.e. how our current text compares with the
originals and how accurately the ancient manuscripts were copied.
Manuscript evidence is based on a concern for its historical
trustworthiness, authorship, and integrity. Much effort has been
expended examining the manuscripts we have today to prove their
integrity. The technique in this chapter will be to work our way
backward through history, and see how close we are to the original
sources.
　
2. NEW TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS
2.1 The Discovered New Testament Manuscripts
The New Testament was written in Greek. More than 6,000 manuscripts of
the New Testament, or parts of it, have survived to our time. These
are on different materials. There are two major types of materials,
they are:
Parchment; and
Papyrus.
Parchment was one of the materials of which Greek manuscripts were
made. This was the skin of sheep or goats, polished with pumice. It
was used until the late Middle Ages, when paper began to replace it.
Papyrus was the common materials used for writing purposes at the
beginning of the Christian era. It was made from reeds and was highly
durable. In the last 500 years many remains of documents written on
papyrus have been discovered, including fragments of manuscripts of
the New Testament.
2.1.1 Parchment of the New Testament
The most important manuscripts for our purposes are the Greek capital
letters, the uncials, written on velum and parchment, from the 4th to
the 9th centuries. Only a few of the older manuscripts will be
mentioned.
2.1.1.1 Codex Aleph
Sometimes this manuscript is also called Codex Sinaiticus because it
was found at the Monastery of St. Catherine, at the base of the
traditional site of Mount Sinai. The German Count Tischendorf visited
there in 1844 and discovered baskets containing 43 leaves of velum
manuscripts, which the monks used to light their fires! Subsequently,
he made two additional visits, and on the third one, he was able to
acquire a treasure of manuscripts and other books and bring them to
Russia. In 1933, the British government purchased this codex, and it
is now in the British museum. Most of the New Testament is intact,
with the exception of Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11. It is dated to
the early 4th century.
2.1.1.2 Codex Beta
This is probably the oldest uncial manuscript on parchment. It dates
from the early 4th century, possibly about AD 325-350. The only part
of the New Testament that is missing is from Hebrews 9:14 to the end.
Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11 are not in the original uncials, but
were added in smaller uncials at a later date. The manuscript is in
the Vatican library in Rome, and is also called Codex Vaticanus for
that reason.
2.1.1.3 Codex A
This manuscript, Codex Alexandrius, ranks next in importance to the
preceding two, and is dated to either the late 4th century of mid-5th
century. The only parts that are missing are Matthew 1:1-25:6; John
6:50-8:52l and 2 Corinthians 4:13-12:6. The text is in large square
uncial letters.
2.1.2 Papyrus of the New Testament
The great bulk of papyrus fragments were found in Egypt. The first
notable find was in 1778, but it was not until 1890 when the first
systematic exploration began. Drs. Grenfell and Hunt of Oxford,
England, began their work in 1896-1897 at Oxyrhynchus in Egypt where
they found tons of papyri texts, ranging from the 1st century BC to
the 10th century AD. For our purposes, we are interested in papyri New
Testament materials dated in the 2nd and 3rd centuries.
The discovered papyrus fragments may be classified into two major
categories:
Literary and non-literary. Literary papyri contain texts of Homer,
Plato, and other Greek authors. The non-literary papyri consists of
contracts, wills, receipts, complaints, and petitions, which are
valuable for clues about the culture, customs, and life-style. They
also indicate the language of the New Testament, which was not
classical Greek, but the common Greek that was the international
language of the world of that time. These non-literary papyri give us
much information concerning the vocabulary of the New Testament. It
shows how words were used, which can throw light on the meaning of New
Testament words.
Biblical and doctrinal. There are also present some 76 papyri
manuscripts of the New Testament, from the very beginning of the 2nd
century. These materials are valuable, helping us trace the New
Testament back to almost the 1st century.
The most important papyrus fragments of the New Testament were as
follows:
2.1.2.1 The John Rylands fragment
It is designated P52, and possibly dated at about AD 120-140, is the
earliest fragment of the New Testament. It was written on both sides,
with portions of John 18:31-33, 37-38.
2.1.2.2 The Chester Beatty papyri
It is marked as P45, 46 and 47, dated to about AD 250 and contained
most of the New Testament.
2.1.2.3 The Bodmer papyri
It is designated P66, 72 and 75, dated approx. to AD 175-225, is
possibly the most important find since the Chester Beatty Papyri. P66
has portions from the gospel of John; and P72 has the earliest known
materials for Jude, 1 and 2 Peter. Several apocryphal portions are
also present.
2.1.2.4 Other papyri
They have the Gospels, Acts, most of Paul's epistles and parts of
Romans.
Some of the papyri finds on John date to within 50 years of the
apostle John's writings, which appeared at about AD 80-90. Most of the
papyri finds can provide for nearly all of the New Testament, dated to
within 100-200 years of the originals, a remarkable feature.
2.2 The Testimony of the New Testament Text by the Early Church
Fathers
The church Fathers most helpful for our purposes are the apostolic
Fathers (AD 70-150), and the ante-Nicene Fathers (AD 150-300). By the
time of the Council of Nicea in AD 325, nearly every verse of the New
Testament had been cited by the apostolic and ante-Nicene Fathers over
36,000 times. Not every New Testament book is quoted by every Father,
but every book of the New Testament is quoted as canonical by at least
one of them.
These men either quoted directly, referred to a variant reading,
provided a paraphrase, or perhaps even made an allusion. In spite of
how the New Testament passage was handled, their testimony is the best
evidence for the New Testament. The apostolic Fathers bring us so
close to the New Testament writers that we are almost breathing down
their necks!
From the chart in Geisler and Nix, How We Got Our Bible - From God to
Us, Chicago: Moody Press, 1974, p. 109, we note that:
By the end of the 1st century, 14 books of the New Testament were
cited by pseudo-Barnabas (around AD 70-130) and Clement of Rome (about
AD 95-97);
By AD 110, some 19 books were cited by Ignatius (about AD 110), and
Polycarp, a disciple of the apostle John (about AD 110-150);
By AD 150, some 24 New Testament books were used, Hermas (about AD
115-140), Didache (about AD 120-150), Papias (about AD 130-140),
Iraneus (about AD 130-202), and the rest were Diognetus, Justin
Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian;
By AD 200, 26 books of the New Testament had been cited; and
Origen, shortly afterwards, mentioned the existence of 3 John.
These demonstrate a living history and testimony of the New Testament
text.
2.3 Other Witnesses to the New Testament Text
The authenticity of the New Testament comes from other sources. These
are the references and quotations of the New Testament books by both
friends and enemies of Christianity.
2.3.1 Gnostic school of Valentinus
It seems apparent, from recent discoveries, that the Gnostic school of
Valentinus was also familiar with most of the New Testament.
2.3.2 Broken pieces of pottery, ostraca
In one instance, twenty broken pieces of pottery, called ostraca,
provided a copy of the gospels.
2.3.3 Translation versions
There are two other sources of data for establishing the authenticity
of the New Testament books. The first source is the versions. Versions
are those manuscripts which were translated from the Greek into other
languages. Three groups of these are of the most significance:
the Syriac (Aramaic) versions appeared around AD 150-200;
the Egyptian or Coptic versions by about AD 150; and
the Latin versions.
By careful study of the versions, important clues have been uncovered
as to the original Greek manuscripts from which they were translated.
2.3.4 Lectionaries
Finally, there is the evidence of the lectionaries containing
selective readings, or reading cycles, the reading lessions used in
public church services. By the middle of the 20th century more than
1,800 of these reading lessons had been classified. The church
services used most of the gospels, portions of Acts, and sometimes the
epistles. Though they did not appear before the 6th century, the text
from which they quote may itself be early and of high quality.
2.4 Dates of the New Testament Documents
The dates of the New Testament documents indicate that they were
written the lifetime of contemporaries of Christ. People were still
alive who could remember the things he said and did. Many of the
Pauline letters are even earlier than some of the Gospels.
2.5 Accuracy of the New Testament Text
We have over 5,000 New Testament manuscripts today. As they are
compared, there are some 200,000 known variants. This is not as
serious as it may sound; if one word is misspelled in 1,000 different
manuscripts, it is counted as 1,000 variants. Actually, we find that
when lower textual criticism is finished with its task, making
allowance for misspelling of words, recopying of lines, and omission
of lines, the actual number of variants are very few. When we defend
the integrity of the New Testament text, we have an abundance of
evidence for it, far more than other writings from the ancient world.
Though there have been many changes in the many copyings of the New
Testament writings, most of them are minor. The science of textual
criticism, which is very exacting, has enabled us to be sure of the
true text of the New Testament.
2.6 Conclusion - the New Testament Text is Reliable
We can rest with the conclusion of the late Sir Frederic Kenyon, a
world-renowned scholar of the ancient manuscripts. He said: "The
interval, then, between the dates of original composition and the
earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible,
and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come
down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed.
Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the
New Testament may be regarded as finally established.
　
3. OLD TESTAMENT DOCUMENTS
3.1 Who Copy the Old Testament Text?
It was a task undertaken by a devout Jew with the highest devotion.
Since he believed he was dealing with the Word of God, he was acutely
aware of the need for extreme care and accuracy.
3.2 Three Families of the Old Testament Texts
There are three families of the Old Testament texts:
the Masoretic;
the Septuagint; and
the Samaritans.
The above mentioned three main types of text existed in 200 BC. The
question for us is, What is the original version of the Old Testament,
in the light of these three "families" of texts to choose from?
3.2.1 The Masoretic
There are no complete copies of the Hebrew Old Testament earlier than
around AD 900, but it seems evident that the text was preserved very
carefully and faithfully since at least AD 100 or 200. A check is
provided by comparing some translations from the Hebrew into Latin and
Greek at about this time. This comparison reveals the careful copying
of the Hebrew text during this period. The text dating from around AD
900 is called the "Masoretic Text" because it was the product of
Jewish scribes known as the "Masoretes." All of the present copies of
the Hebrew text which come from this period are in remarkable
agreement, attesting to the skill of the scribes in proof-reading.
But how could we know about the accuracy and authenticity of the text
in pre-Masoretic times?
3.2.2 The Septuagint
Other ancient witnesses attest the accuracy of the copyists who
ultimately gave us the Masoretic text. One of these is the Greek
translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint. It is often
referred to as the LXX because it was reputedly done by seventy Jewish
scholars in Alexandria. The best estimate of its date seems to be
about the 3rd century BC. In the New Testament times, Israel was under
the sovereignty of the Roman Empire, Greek was the official language
at that time. As a result, it was common for the Jewish people to use
the Septuagint for general reading and worshipping of God.
Until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls there was a question, when
the LXX was different from the Masoretic text, why the variations
existed. It is now apparent that the Masoretic text has not changed
significantly since around 200 BC. Other scrolls among those
discovered show a type of Hebrew that is very similar to that from
which the LXX was translated. The Samuel scroll especially resembles
the reading of the LXX. The LXX appears to be a literal translation,
and our manuscripts are pretty good copies of the original
translation.
3.2.3 The Samaritans
Another ancient witness is the evidence for a third type of text
similar to that which was preserved by the Samaritans. Copies of the
old scrolls of the Pentateuch are extant today in Nablus (Shechem),
Palestine.
3.3 The Discovered Old Testament Manuscripts
3.3.1 Prior to 1890
Before the discovery of the treasure house in the Cairo Geniza, a
special room in the synagogue where used and worn out manuscripts were
placed, only 731 Hebrew manuscripts were in existence. Some of the
major manuscripts are:
3.3.1.1 Codex Cairensis
It is containing both former and latter prophets, is dated approx. AD
900, and is the oldest known manuscript.
3.3.1.2 Codex Leningrad of the Prophets, or Codex Petersburg
It is dated at about AD 916, has only the major and minor prophets.
3.3.1.3 Codex Aleppo
It is dated around AD 930 is sometimes called the Ben Asher because he
further edited the text.
3.3.1.4 Codex Oriental 4445
It is dating from about AD 950, is an incomplete manuscript of the
Pentateuch, from Genesis 39:20 to Deuteronomy 1:33.
3.3.1.5 The Leningrad Codex
It is dated AD 1008, is a complete manuscript of the Old Testament.
There are reasons for the scarcity and limit of those Old Testament
manuscripts which remained in circulation. At the council of Yavne (AD
70-90), the Jewish religious leaders standardized the Masoretic, or
official, text and removed variant readings from it. During the
Masoretic Period (AD 500-900), the Jewish authorities completely and
systematically reworked the Hebrew text, and standardized its
pronounciation. The accuracy of the texts is due to the careful way in
which manuscripts were copied, with very few variants permitted in the
texts, as contrasted with the New Testament. Although we have
manuscripts which date only until the 10th century, the integrity of
the text is well established.
3.3.2 The Cairo Genizah
People began to take manuscripts from this room as early as 1864,
which were then sent to various libraries in Europe. In 1896, Solomon
Schechter from Cambridge University was granted permission to enter
the Genizah, and remove from it what he wished. He selected the older
uncial manuscripts, which meant much to the scholarly world. Among the
treasures were "fragments of the books of Ecclesiastes and Hebrews ...
Aquila's version of the Old Testament, biblical fragments in an early
Hebrew script presenting in some instances the supra-linear
punctuation (the vowel pointings above the line), liturgical fragments
and portions of the Talmud and of commentaries ..." (For further
information, see Paul Kahle, The Cairo Genizah, New York: Praeger,
1959.) Here are manuscripts already predating the Old Testament
manuscripts described above. What is established is a line of evidence
from the days of the Masoretic scholars (AD 500-800), which testifies
to the integrity of the Hebrew Masoretic or traditional text of the
Bible.
Even with this find, liberal Bible scholars pronounced the Septuagint
(a Greek translation of a particular Hebrew manuscript family) the
more authoritative text, and the Masoretic Hebrew text was relegated
to second place. The Greek Old Testament manuscripts predated the
Hebrew ones, but all of this was to change during Israel's war of
independence in 1948.
3.3.3 The Dead Sea Scrolls - The Qumran Literature
In 1947 the world learned about what has been called the greatest
archeologic discovery of the century. In caves in the valley of the
Dead Sea, ancient jars were discovered containing the now-famous Dead
Sea Scrolls. From these scrolls, it is evident that a group of Jews
lived at a place called Qumran from about 150 BC to AD 70.
Just west of the Dead Sea, near its northern end, was a community at
the site of Khirbet Qumran. It was occupied either by people called
Essenes, or a particular group like the Essenes. Theirs was a communal
society, operated very much like a monastery. In addition to tilling
the fields, they spent their time studying and copying the Scriptures.
When the impending fall of Jerusalem became certain (AD 70), they
realized that the Romans would soon be at their site. They hid a
number of the manuscripts in the caves of the western hills
surrounding Qumran, and then fled to safety.
In the providence of God the scrolls survived undisturbed until
discovered accidentally by a wandering Bedouin goat herdsman in
February or March of 1947. The accidental discovery was followed by
careful exploration, and then several other caves containing scrolls
were found. The find included the earliest manuscript copy yet known
of the complete Book of Isaiah, and fragments of almost every book in
the Old Testament. The story of the discovery of the first manuscript
can be found at the book (Geisler and Nix, From God to Us, op. cit.,
pp. 142-43). In the period between 1947-1956, eleven caves yielded
manuscripts wrapped in leather scrolls and hidden in jars.
From the first cave came seven scrolls, some complete and others less
so. Included in this find is the earliest known complete book of
Isaiah. There was also a commentary on Habakkuk, another incomplete
text of Isaiah, the War Scroll and the Manual of Discipline for the
community, and some 30 thanksgiving hymns. In the fourth cave,
thousands of fragments were discovered, including a fragment of
Samuel, which is possibly the oldest known piece of biblical Hebrew of
the 4th century BC. Cave eleven was also productive, providing a
preserved copy of some of the Psalms, including Psalm 151, which
appears only in the Septuagint. In addition, there was a scroll of a
portion of Leviticus, as well as a Targum, or paraphrase of Job.
Altogether, some 600 manuscripts were collected from the eleven caves.
The greatest contribution of the Qumran literature is the dating of
the copies, about 200 BC to AD 100. Most scholars will settle for a
date of about 100 BC, although some of the manuscripts are dated
earlier.
The tremendous contribution of the scrolls of Qumran establishes the
integrity of the Masoretic text of the Hebrew Bible. By comparing the
Dead Sea Scrolls with the Masoretic text, we would get a clear
indication of the accuracy, or lack of it, of transmission over the
period of nearly a millennium. At least two-thirds of the scrolls
reflect the Masoretic text, thereby establishing it as the more
authoritative text. What is more, it compares favorably with the
Hebrew biblical text already existing from the 10th century AD. The
evidence for the Old Testament is now pushed back 1,000 years to
establish its integrity, and the Septuagint is no longer regarded as
the more acceptable text.
3.4 Accuracy of the Old Testament Testament Text
In comparing the Qumran manuscript of Isaiah 38-66 with the one we
had, scholars found that the text is extremely close to our Masoretic
text. A comparison of Isaiah 53 shows that only seventeen letters
differ from the Masoretic text. Ten of these are mere differences of
spelling, like our "honor" or "honour" and produce no change in the
meaning at all. Four more are very minor differences, such as the
presence of the conjunction, which is often a matter of style. The
other three letters are the Hebrew word for "light" which is added
after "they shall see" in verse 11. Out of 166 words in this chapter,
only this one word is really in question, and it does not at all
change the sense of the passage. This is typical of the whole
manuscript.
However, some critics are still not satisfied. They believe that a
text from 100 BC is very much removed from the original manuscripts of
Isaiah, about 700 BC, David, about 1,000 BC, and others even prior to
these dates.
Do we have the means to discover what the original texts were? We
obviously do not have the original manuscripts, but we do have
evidence today that can substantiate from archaeology the historicity,
culture, life-style, and geography to which the Old Testament refers.
Chapter 4 will provide us with these materials, and further establish
the integrity of the Old Testament.
3.5 Conclusion - the Old Testament Text is Reliable
We can conclude with R. Laird Harris:
"We can now be sure that copyists worked with great care and accuracy
on the Old Testament, even back to 225 BC. At that time there were two
or three types of text available for copying. These types differed
among themselves so little, however, that we can infer that still
earlier copyists had also faithfully and carefully transmitted the Old
Testament text. We can conclude that we have our Old Testament in a
form very close to that used by Ezra when he taught the Law to those
who had returned from the Babylonian captivity."
　
4. THE QUESTION OF THE CANON
4.1 What is Canon?
A question closely allied to that of the reliability of the texts we
have is, How do we know the books in our Bible, and no others, are the
ones that should be there? This is called the question of the canon.
The word "canon" comes from the Greek word meaning "rule" or
"standard." When it is applied to the books of the Bible, it means
that they have met a certain standard which has segregated them from
all other writings. This does not mean that the Bible was not God's
Word before the individual books became part of the canon; the process
of canonization was simply an official recognition by man of what has
always been God's Word.
There are distinct questions involved for Old and New Testaments.
4.2 The Old Testament Books
The Protestant church accepts identically the same Old Testament books
as the Jews had, and as Jesus and the apostles accepted. The Roman
Catholic Church, since the Council of Trent in 1546, includes the
books of the Apocrypha. The order in the English Bible follows that of
the Septuagint. This is different from the Hebrew Bible, in which the
books are divided into three groups:
the Law (Genesis to Deuteronomy), known also as the Torah or the
Pentateuch;
the Prophets, including the Former Prophets (Joshua, Judges, Samuel,
Kings) and the Latter Prophets (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and the Book
of the Twelve - Hosea to Malachi); and
the Writings, the remaining books of our Old Testament canon.
As E.J. Young says:
"When the Word of God was written, it became Scripture, and inasmuch
as it had been spoken by God, it possessed absolute authority. Since
it was the Word of God, it was canonical. That which determines the
canonicity of a book, therefore, is the fact that the book is inspired
of God. Hence, a distinction is properly made between the authority
which the Old Testament books possess as divinely inspired and the
recognition of that authority on the part of Israel."
We can see this development in the work of Moses. The laws issued by
him and by the later prophets were intended to be respected as the
decrees of God Himself. They were so regarded then and also by later
generations. The authority of the Law was recognized by Israel's
spiritual leaders. It was the recognition of this authority that shook
the King Josiah when he realized how long the Law had been neglected
(2 Kings 22:11).
When we examine the writings of the prophets, it is obvious that they
believed they spoke with authority. "This is what the Lord says" and
"the word of the Lord came to me" are common preambles to their
messages.
By the beginning of the Christian era the term Scripture had come to
mean a fixed body of divinely inspired writings that were fully
recognized as authoritative. Our Lord used the term in this sense and
was fully understood by his hearers when he said, "The Scripture
cannot be broken" (John 10:35). It is interesting that there was no
controversy between our Lord Jesus Christ and the Pharisees on the
authority of the Old Testament. Contention arose because they gave
tradition the same authority as Scripture.
4.3 The Apocryphal Books
The apocryphal books, it is important to note, were never received
into the Jewish canon and were not considered as part of the inspired
Scriptures by Jews or Christians in the early centuries of the
Christian era. This is evident from a study of the writings of
Josephus, the Jewish historian, and of Augustine, the great North
African Bishop of Hippo.
It is interesting that the New Testament writers rarely quote the
Apocrypha.
The apocryphal books do not claim to be the Word of God or the work of
prophets. They vary greatly in content and value. Some, like 1
Maccabees, were probably written around 100 BC and are valuable as
historical background. Others are more characterized by legend and are
of little value. Though not included at first, these books were later
added to the LXX. In this way they came to be included by Jerome in
the Latin Vulgate. Even Jerome, however, accepted only the books in
the Hebrew Canon. He viewed the others as having ecclesiastical value
only. He was in conflict with the later action of the Council of
Trent, in Reformation times, which elevated the Apocrypha to canonical
status.
For the Old Testament we have, ultimately, the witness of our Lord to
the canonicity of the 39 books we now have.
4.4 The New Testament Books
Here, as for the Old Testament, the books possessed canonicity by
virtue of their inspiration, not by virtue of their being voted into
canonicity by any group. The history of the recognition of the New
Testament's canonicity, however, is interesting. Much of the material
of the New Testament claimed apostolic authority. Paul and Peter
clearly wrote with this authority in mind. Peter specifically refers
to Paul's letters as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16).
Jude (v. 18) says that 2 Peter 3:3 is a word from the apostles. Such
early church fathers as Polycarp, Ignatius and Clement mention a
number of the New Testament books as authoritative.
The onslaught of heresy in the middle of the 2nd century caused the
concept of a canon to be revived in the thinking of Christians.
Irenaeus and later Eusebius, in the 3rd century, give us more light in
their writings. The final fixation of the canon as we know it came in
the 4th century. In the East, a letter of Athanasius in AD 367 clearly
distinguishes between works in the canon which are described as the
sole sources of religious instruction and others which believers were
permitted to read. In the West, the canon was fixed by decision of a
church council held at Carthage in AD 397.
Three criteria were generally used throughout this period of time to
establish that particular written documents were the true record of
the voice and message of apostolic witness, they were:
Could authorship be attributed to an apostle? The Gospels of Mark and
Luke do not meet this criterion specifically, but were accepted as the
works of close associates of the apostles. Note: Mark and Luke were
the companions of the apostle Paul.
There was the matter of ecclesiastical usage - that is, recognition of
a book by a leading church or majority of churches.
There was conformity to standards of sound doctrine.
4.5 Conclusion - the Bible is the Word of God
These data are helpful and interesting, but in the final analysis, as
with the question of the inspiration of the Scripture, canonicity is a
question of the witness of the Spirit in the hearts of God's people.
In days of uncertainty, what a rock the Scripture is on which to
stand! "Heaven and earth will pass away," says our Lord, "but my Words
will never pass away" (Luke 21:33).
　
5. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY
Apologetics, Lesson 7, Moody Bible Institute, 1990, by Louis Goldberg.
Know Why You Believe, Chapter 6, InterVarsity Press, 1988, by Paul E.
Little & Marie Little.
Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament in Revelation and the
Bible, Grand Rapids, Baker House, 1958, by F.F. Bruce.
　
Chapter Four - Archaeology
　
1. INTRODUCTION
This chapter is divided into two major sections, they are:
we will note the functions of archaeology, and also underscore some
areas where archaeology will not help us; and
we will examine some of the ways in which archaeology has
substantiated Old Testament narratives, while recognizing that this
tool cannot make people believe the Bible.
　
2. FUNCTIONS OF ARCHAEOLOGY
2.1 Development of the Biblical Archaeology
In the early years of the 19th century, a new door of information
opened to the earliest roots of the human race in the Near East.
Increased travel and exploration provided the hinges to the door, and
modern archaeologists walked through in a spurt of enthusiasm. They
began to dig below the earth's surface for the material remains of
humankind's past found in ancient palaces, buried temples and animal
stables. Civilizations came alive that existed long before the known
world of Greece. Babylon (called "great") where Daniel lived revealed
double walls with nine ornamented gates. Egypt showed marvels of
painted tombs, bandaged mummies, mirrors, perfume jars and mascara
pots.
At first the buried cultures themselves were the objects of study.
Then there appeared places and names from the Old Testament on palace
walls. Names of Assyrian tyrants that warred with Israel, along with
their armies and hapless captives, were found. Persian governors spoke
through their letters. The Pharaohs of Egypt, some lying in solid gold
coffins, could now be identified.
In the wake of these discoveries, biblical scholars found rich
background for the biblical history of Israel and her neighbors. The
historical and geographic reliability of the Bible was affirmed in a
number of important areas. This was in marked contrast to the
centuries before when there was little evidence to corroborate the
Bible's historical statements. Critics would dismiss the narratives by
casting them as implausible stories set in fictional backgrounds
rather than genuine historical events. But by the middle of this
century it began to be recognized that archaeological discoveries were
substantiating the biblical record. The statements of well-known
authorities who were not evangelicals are indicative of this. Dr W.F.
Albright, late professor emeritus of Johns Hopkins University, could
declare, "There can be no doubt that archaeology has confirmed the
substantial historicity of Old Testament tradition."
Millar Burrows of Yale stated, "On the whole, however, archaeological
work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of
the Scriptural record. More than one archaeologist has found his
respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in
Palestine. Archaeology has in many cases refuted the views of modern
critics. It has shown, in a number of instances, that these views rest
on false assumptions and unreal, artificial schemes of historical
development. This is a real contribution and not to be minimized."
2.2 Scope of Archaeology
The help from archaeology falls roughly into two categories:
it has verified some specific biblical events that were doubted and
even ridiculed; and
in filling in overall background to the culture and practices of the
biblical times. Such things as economic problems and literary
development describe the world to which the Old Testament prophets
spoke.
Archaeology confirms the historicity of the biblical record, and
provides us with the culture and life-style of people within a
particular historical period. Through written materials, we gain
insight into people's hopes, religion and future aspirations. It is
evident that certain points of apparent conflict between the biblical
record and the information previously available have been cleared up
as more information has been obtained. It would seem, then, that when
apparent conflicts still exist, rather than conclude that the Bible
must be wrong, it would seem much more reasonable to admit the problem
exists and to hold it open pending further discoveries.
Can archaeology, however, test doctrinal truth? For example, in
examining the excavations at Jericho, archaeologists are willing to
say something happened to the city walls, at a given date, but can
they also prove that an omnipotent God was vindicated before Israel's
enemies? This is an area which cannot be tested by the scientific
method. It is important to point out that we cannot prove the Bible by
archaeology, nor do we believe the Bible on the basis of
archaeological proof.
H. Darrell Lance stated, "Although archaeology can sometimes provide
independent evidence for the evidence of certain places, persons or
events mentioned in the Bible, it can say nothing at all about whether
God had anything to do with any of it. That, for the modern believer
as well as for the ancient Israelite, is a matter of faith."
Added to faith, it is the Holy Spirit who ultimately confirms the
truth of the Scripture to us. Spiritual truth can never be confirmed
by archaeology. But we can be thankful for the historical details
which have been confirmed by archaeology even though we recognize the
apparent conflicts that still exist. We need to be very careful about
what can be substantiated, and what archaeology is unable to do.
2.3 Sources of the Archaeologist
More than 25,000 sites showing some connection with the Old Testament
period have been located in Bible lands. Yet there is still a wealth
of material that awaits discovery. Throughout the Near East mounds of
earth and debris (called "tells") mark the places where towns or
cities once flourished. Most of the major cities of the Bible can be
identified, A.R. Millard states, either by "general geographical
considerations or by tradition (though that may not be very reliable)
or by current use of the ancient name." A major example of this latter
situation is the city of Damascus. It has existed under that name
3,500 years or more.
The largest body of evidence for comparison with Scriptures is found
in the ancient Eastern inscriptions. Few contemporary documents from
Old Testament times have been found in Palestine. Illustrations must
be drawn from the writings of neighboring countries.
Another major source of information for comparison with biblical
narratives has been the archaeological excavation of biblical sites.
2.4 How Can These Finds Be Dated?
The ancient cities were built and rebuilt in the same place, so that a
whole succession of levels is usually found, the lowest of course,
being the oldest. The question arises, how can these finds be dated?
Fashions in pottery changed, and if at one excavated site a particular
fashion can be dated, the similar pottery found elsewhere will
obviously be of the same period. Kings often inscribed their names on
the hinge-sockets of temple doors, and the name of their god would be
given. Inscribed stones were often laid under palace or temple walls
in memory of the founder. Royal sepulchers can usually be identified
in the same way.
Archaeologists have uncovered copies of lists dating back almost 2000
BC. They were drawn up by Sumerian scribes cataloging the kings
according to their successive dynasties with notes as to the lengths
of their reigns. A few miles from Ur an inscribed foundation stone was
found, laid by a king of unknown name, of the First Dynasty of Ur,
which the scribes speak of as the 3rd dynasty after the Flood. This
king apparently reigned 3,100 years before Christ and more than a
thousand years before Abraham.
A.R. Millard observed, "Archaeologists usually concentrate on the more
rewarding parts, where temples or palaces stood, or lay out their
trenches to probe each period of existence in the life of the place.
To do this a trench may slice right through the mound, producing a
small amount of information at all levels. Any area of especial
interest can be marked and explored with a larger trench. Each
building or time of occupation will have left its mark on the mound in
the form of floor surfaces, stumps of walls, and heaps of rubbish.
These will be sandwiched between earlier remains below and later
remains above."
2.5 Archaeology and Biblical Criticism
2.5.1 Theory of Higher Criticism
All during the 1800s, higher criticism sought to fracture the Old
Testament. This created many smaller biblical documents, authorized by
individuals or groups of people of whom we have no knowledge. In the
Documentary Theory, documents were proposed which were characterized
by the names of God. For example, using E for various developments of
documents were the use of Elohim predominates, J for Jehovah, and the
D code for the discovery of a lost copy of the Law, possibly
Deuteronomy, in 621 BC (2 Chronicles 34:14).
In addition, other critics have dated documents according to the
development theory, so that the Pentateuch could not have been
completed before 400 BC. Therefore, the J document only appeared about
850 BC, the E document around 750 BC, the JE work of the redactor, or
editor, who put together the two documents by 700-650 BC. Next is the
D code, dated in 621 BC and then follows the JED combination by a
redactor about 600-550 BC. A P code follows, representing the work of
priests who were responsible for those portions of the Pentateuch
which pertained to their duties, dated about 500-450 BC. The final
redactor put the finishing touches on the Pentateuch by 400 BC (See
E.J. Young, An Introduction to the Old Testament, Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans, 1949, pp. 144-145).
Those responsible for the Development theory also proposed that the
prophets, in succession, did not complete their work until 200 BC, and
that the rest of the Old Testament was not finished until the 1st
century.
2.5.2 The presupposition of the theory
The presupposition for this theory is that:
The religion of Israel went through an evolutionary process. It was
not thought possible to have such complex ideas of worship developed
as early as Moses in 1400 BC, Abraham in 2000 BC; or even earlier. In
one factor alone, reflecting this attitude.
It was thought impossible that writing could be an accomplished art in
2000 BC; rather, writing was considered to be a very late
accomplishment.
If the higher critics asked why they proposed the theories they did,
their only reply is that it seemed logical to assume that that was
what happened. But the higher critics' assertions do not rest on
scientific methodology at all.
2.5.3 Archaeology has proven the theory of higher criticism was wrong
Archaeology of this century alone has proven critics wrong due to the
following reasons:
The earliest writings we have of the Sumerians of 3500 BC reflect a
complex system of worship, and a high ethical standard in their wisdom
writings.
The early writings of the Egyptians can now be traced back to
2800-2700 BC. In fact, Egyptian history is dated without any doubt to
300 BC.
Writing was an accomplised art, and highly complex.
The ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics consisted of some 24 consonants of
carefully drawn figures. Later, it was simplified in the hieratic
written form by 1300 BC, and further popularized in the demotic
writing by 400-100 BC. The Akkadian of 2000 BC consisted of a syllabic
writing, using some 300 characters to form the language. These are
just a sampling of the many examples which show how men were able to
express complex ideas, define their historical background, their
culture and life-style, and their religious systems.
　
3. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE OLD TESTAMENT
At the end of chapter 3, we recognized that people raise questions
about the validity of the Old Testament text, because we are unable to
trace the Hebrew Masoretic text much further than the Qumran
literature of 200-100 BC. What evidence do we have for an older text?
Archaeology becomes a tool which can indicate something about the Old
Testament text. We cannot begin to cover all of the information
available to us today, but we can note a few of the details which are
at our disposal. These will help us to substantiate narratives and
historical materials of various periods of Old Testament history.
The field of information and correlation with biblical data is so vast
that we can spotlight only a few of the major contributions.
3.1 Mari Tablets
A good example of the help archaeology can be to us comes from the
life and times of Abraham. The critics claimed the culture pictured in
the Genesis story did not correlate with their knowledge of Near
Eastern life up to that time. However, a change came when in 1933 a
party of Arabs were digging a grave by the River Euphrates. They
unearthed a stone statue and reported their find. Soon a team of
archaeologists dug out other statues and eventually unearthed an
elaborate palace bearing the name of the city of Mari.
The royal palace covered more than six acres and had over 260 rooms,
courtyards and passages. The Temple of Ishtar was also uncovered in
the Mesopotamian valley. Mari was one of the main cities of this area
about the time of Abraham, and when Abraham and his father Terah left
Ur, they must have passed through Mari on their way to Haran.
Millard describes the palace as containing rooms with walls 15 feet
high, some empty and some filled with jars that stood ready for oil,
wine or grain. There were spacious living quarters for the king, his
wives and his family; and more cramped ones for officials and
servants. One can imagine craftsmen in workshops, cooks in the
kitchens, secretaries, servants and singing troupes for the king's
entertainment. One of the many statues found was of a bearded man
dating from the 18th century BC and inscribed with the name
Ishtupilumk King of Mari.
Some 20,000 cuneiform (wedge-shaped writing) tablets from royal
archives were found at the royal palace. Accountants had used some of
the tablets to record grain, vegetables and other provisions brought
into the palace. Letters to the king, musical instruments and gold for
decorations are all mentioned. There are even letters with messages
from prophets to gods. A jar of buried treasure and inscriptions date
the city around 2500 BC, and since Abraham is variously thought to be
in the same general era between the 19th and 20th centuries BC, this
is certainly the kind of culture in which he lived.
Some of the tablets reveal a correspondence between the last king of
Mari with Hammurabi, king of Babylon, at about 1728-1626 BC. The name
of the latter king was also affixed to a code of laws, the Hammurabi
Code, similar to the Ten Commandments of Moses. Abraham's migration
from Ur took place about 400 years earlier than the correspondence of
the kings. The tablets indicate that the people of Mari controlled a
significant region in the Mesopotamian valley, including the city of
Nahor (Genesis 24:10) which is mentioned quite often in the Mari
tablets. These tablets also include:
3.1.1 Hebrew name "Ivri"
The Hebrew name "Ivri," which was also the designation of Abraham
(Genesis 14:13).
3.1.2 Reference to Benjaminites
A reference to Banu Yamina, or Benjaminites, "sons of the right," or
"sons of the south." We cannot connect this name to the biblical
Benjamin, but it is interesting to note the similarities of names in
this period of history.
3.1.3 Description of sacrifices
A description of how sacrifices were made when a treaty was ratified
between individuals or leaders. In the tablets there is the recurring
phrase, "to kill a donkey," which indicated that no covenant or treaty
was made without the shedding of blood. We find similar practices in
Canaan. The people of Shechem were called Bene Hamor or, "sons of the
donkey" (Joshua 24:32), and their tribal god was Baal Berith, or
"Master of the Covenant" (Judges 9:4). This suggests that they were
sons of a covenant, made effective through the killing of a donkey.
Abraham followed roughly the same procedure when God made a covenant
with him. In preparation for the occasion, Abraham cut up the pieces
of the sacrifices and divided them. God then moved between the
sacrifices as He ratified His covenant with the patriarch (Genesis
15:1-18).
3.1.4 References to Abraham and Jacob
The names "Abraham" and "Jacob." While we cannot say that there are
tablets actually referring to the biblical Abraham, there is enough
evidence to indicate that the name Abraham was a common name in use at
the time. In addition, Jacob, or Ya'que'-el, "may El protect," appears
on tablets from the 18th century BC onward in Northern Mesopotamia.
3.2 Nuzu Tablets
The tablets of another city, Nuzi, situated east of the city of Mari
near the Tigris River, southeast of Nineveh, not far from the modern
Kirkuk, details some of the social customs of the city in the 14th and
15th centuries BC. They were discovered between 1925 and 1941 at Nuzu.
These tablets give us much background information on the narratives of
the patriarchs.
The impact of the cities of Mari and Nuzi lies in the information they
provide of ancient civilizations, giving clues of what went on in
Syria and Mesopotamia historically and politically. In addition we get
a new view into the urban lifestyles and its sharp contrast with the
pastoral life known from the Patriarchal narratives.
These records cover a broad spectrum from business, politics,
government and the arts. They reflect customs and social relationships
that parallel the situations that the biblical patriarchs faced. When
we see Abraham in the settings similar to those known from the cities
of Mari and Nuzi, the biblical accounts become highly credible and
believable. The life and history, the political movements, the
cultural and business activities of these two cities all paint a
wonderfully illuminated background of the world of the father of the
Hebrew nation.
3.2.1 Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar
Read Genesis 16:1-16; 17:18-20; 21:1-21.
The Nuzi tablets recall a similar incident to Genesis 16:1-2 where
Sarah presents her handmaid Hagar to Abraham to bear a child. Families
are described in situations similar to the dilemma Abraham faced in
Genesis 17:18-20 when he took Ishmael as his own son. Yamauchi tells
us of a "tablet of adoption" which stipulates that a barren wife must
provide a slave girl to her husband to beget a son. This particular
tablet and the Hammurabi Marriage Law Code require that:
It was permissible for a barren wife to give her handmaid or slave
girl to her husband as a substitute to beget a son;
The slave girl's child was considered a part of the family, must be
kept, and also able to share the inheritance; and
If later the couple had a natural child, the adopted son would have to
yield some of his rights to the second son.
Therefore, Sarah was only following the accepted custom when she gave
her maidservant Hagar to Abraham so that he could have a child
(Genesis 16:1-2). According to this custom, however, once this was
alone, the child was considered a part of the family and able to share
the inheritance. When Sarah later gave birth to Isaac, and insisted
that Hagar and Ishmael be expelled and disinherited (Genesis 21:8-10),
Abraham was very reluctant to comply (Genesis 21:11). We can
understand why, because of the prevailing culture of the day.
3.2.2 Jacob and Rachel
Read Genesis 31:19-35. The Nuzu tablets indicate that whoever
possessed the "teraphim," or household gods, had the position of
leadership in the family, and the inheritance rights. When Rachel took
the family teraphim from her father Laban, he ran after Jacob with a
vengeance. Because of the tablets, we can better understand why he was
so upset. He searched everywhere, trying to find the teraphim title
deeds to his family property. Rachel, because of her physical
condition, was sitting on the idols, and her father did not force her
to get up! She now had the upper hand, controlling her father's
inheritance, and he could do nothing about it.
3.3 Writing in the Patriarchal Times
Did you ever wonder about the literary abilities of the Patriarchs?
The bustling city of Ebla provides the largest ever archive thus far
unearthed from the New East. It dated back to the 3000 BC. Although
its existence had been known, its location and highly developed
culture was unsuspected. The city was divided into two sectors, an
acropolis and a lower city. The upper division contained four building
complexes, including the palace of the king, temple to the goddess
Ishtar and numerous stables. The lower section was divided into four
quarters boasting four gates.
In a room adjacent to the temple, archaeologists found an astonishing
collection of more than 20,000 tablets on the floor. The small room
had been burned. In the heat of the flames the brickwork was baked,
and the tablets as well. As a result both room and tablets withstood
the ravages of the centuries until they were uncovered in 1975.
History has been preserved for 5,000 years!
Years of research will yet be required to interpret these vast
records. But one of the valuable contributions of these tablets lies
in the evidence they provide that cuneiform writing had spread to
north Syria before 2300 BC. It also shows the habit of recording every
sort of activity, business and cultural. Dictionaries confirm the
presence of west Semitic people of other language in that era.
Biblical history, we now know, took place in a world where writing was
well-established.
3.4 The Biblical Kings
Archaeology has given us colorful background information for the study
of the biblical kings. Solomon's grandeur has been the target of
special skepticism. His lavish wealth is described in 1 Kings 9-10 as
consisting of a royal navy built on the shore of the Red Sea even
though there is no suitable harbor on the coastline of Palestine. His
army had use of 1,400 chariots and 1,200 horses. His building projects
were extensive, including fortification of the cities of Jerusalem,
Hazor, Megiddo and Gezer (9:15). Recent excavation at these last three
cities have at least documented Solomon's building skills.
In 1960 the famed Israeli scholar Yigael Yadin, while excavating the
city of Megiddo, had identified the layer of Solomon's time by
comparing pottery types. Knowing that 1 Kings 9:15 grouped together
the three cities of Megiddo, Hazor and Gezer as being built by
Solomon, he had a sudden inspiration. He recalled the Megiddo Gate
from Solomon's time had three chambers on each side. Could the other
two cities be the same?
Yigael Yadin tells this exciting story of the dig at Hazor, "Before
proceeding further with the excavation of Hazor, we made tentative
markings on the ground following our estimate of the plan of the gate
on the basis of the Megiddo Gate. And then we told the laborers to go
ahead and continue removing the debris. When they had finished, they
looked at us with astonishment, as if we were magicians or
fortunetellers. For there, before us, was the gate whose outline we
had marked a replica of the Megiddo Gate. This proved not only that
both gates had been built by Solomon but that both had followed a
single master plan.
3.5 Solomon's Gold
1 Kings 10:21 adds the information that Solomon possessed large stores
of precious metals. The temple he built for the Lord, like the golden
shrine of King Tutankhaman of Egypt, was a glory of gold as described
in the latter half of 1 Kings 6. "Solomon covered the inside of the
temple with pure gold, and he extended gold chains across the front of
the inner sanctuary, which was overlaid with gold. So he overlaid the
whole interior with gold" (1 Kings 6:21-22). The whole concept is
breathtaking.
Although the exact site of Solomon's Temple has not been found, othe
discoveries showed that kings of surrounding nations of his time
possessed technology and workmanship similar to the biblical account.
Millard elaborates, "Extravagant as this may seem, a display of gold
was a matter of pride for any powerful ruler (note: valuable plates
are displayed at royal banquets today). National currency reserves
were held in gold, not stored idly in bank vaults to be publicized
merely as figures, but shown to the populace. When a stronger army
attacked, the gold was stripped and handed over (cf. 2 Kings 18:16).
Assyrian, Babylonian and Egyptian monarchs boast of the gold they
donated to beautify temples in their own cities. Their inscriptions
speak of walls "covered with gold like plaster," of doors and doorways
carved in relief and plated with gold, of furniture and decorations
sheathed in precious metal. One Assyrian king seized six decorative
golden shields from a temple in Armenia, each weighing 12 times as
much as each of the shields Solomon hung in his palace (1 Kings
10:16-17; cf. 14:26-27). Claims of pompous emperors may be treated as
grossly inflated, but with these uses of gold that is not so. Small
fragments of thin gold sheets have been found in Assyria and
Babylonia, and in Egypt nail holes ... for attaching the metal are
visible in ... stonework."
At least one of the sources of Solomon's gold came from Ophir. 1 Kings
9:11, as well as other passages, describes Hiram, king of Tyre, as
supplying Solomon "with all the cedar and pine and gold he wanted."
And verse 28 tells of Hiram's men who "sailed to Ophir and brought
back 420 talents of gold, which they delivered to King Solomon."
Although this city's exact location still remains a mystery (with
conjectures ranging from the Samali coast of Africa to India), its
existence and assets have been independently attested. A potsherd from
the mid-eighth century BC has been unearthed at a port north of Tel
Aviv. It carried the clear notation of the contents marked by a local
clerk saying, "Ophir gold for Beth-Horon: 30 shekels" (about 340g.,
12oz).
One conclusion can be safely made: Solomon's golden temple was no mere
invention of exaggerating scribes. It falls into the known patterns of
ancient practices of his times.
3.6 A Battle Between Moab and Israel Described
Some of the objects unearthed by archaeologists give very specific
details of biblical events. One example of this is a stone memorial
telling of a battle between Moab and Israel. The Bible notes that
after Ahab died, Mesha, the king of Moab, and his people rebelled
against Israel's rule over them and refused to pay tribute (2 Kings
3:1-8). A battle raged between Moab and the kings of Israel, Judah and
Edom (2 Kings 3:9). The pressure of battle was so great that in
desperation Mesha offered his eldest son the wall as a burnt offering
to the god of the Moabites, Chemosh (2 Kings 3:27). What happened then
is not clear, but the implication is that the three kings had to
abandon their siege against Moab (2 Kings 3:27).
In and 1868 excavation a German named Klein found an inscribed stone
at Dibon, the land of Moab. Since the stone was owned by Arabs living
at Dibon, he returned home to raise money for its purchase. The Arabs,
thinking they could get a higher price for it, roasted the stone and
then threw cold water over it to break it in pieces. Fortunately,
Klein had taken an impression of the intact stone, so it was possible
to restore the fragments and translate them after its purchase. It is
now at the Louvre in Paris. In an early form of the Phoenician
alphabet, the inscription describes how Mesha, king of Moab, with the
help of his god Chemosh, had thrown off the rule of Israel. King Omri
of Israel, Ahab's father (1 Kings 16:21-22; 29), is referred to by
name in the inscription and a number of biblical place-names
mentioned. Significantly, it mentions the God of Israel, called
Yahweh.
3.7 Daniel and Belshazzar
From a host of other discoveries, Daniel's account of the irreverent
King Belshazzar stands out. Daniel names Belshazzar as the last king
of Babylon (Daniel 5:1, 9, 11, 24-26, 30). Yet all known Babylonian
records listed Nabonidus as the last king. An obvious discrepancy, the
critics cried! Then it was discovered in a Babylonian chronicle that
Nabonidus inexplicably removed himself for a ten-year stint in Arabia,
leaving the kingdom in the hands of his son Belshazzar. The confusion
came because Nabonidus did not abdicate the kingship. He was still
called king. Although Belshazzar was not the sole king, Daniel and the
Hebrew young men with him considered him as the de facto king. Prior
to the study of the Babylonian chronicles, Belshazzar was mentioned
only in the biblical record.
The archaeologist R.F. Dougherty concludes after his study of these
findings, "Of all non-Babylonian records dealing with the situation at
the close of the Neo-Babylonian Empire, the description of events in,
.. Daniel ranks next to cuneiform literature in accuracy."
3.8 Observations on the Old Testament Text
The customs reflected in the Nuzu and Mari tablets have been placed by
the archaeologists in the 2000-1500 BC period. What is described in
the Scriptures concerning the customs, culture, and life-style of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is also similar to that described in these
tablets, and therefore the patriarchs can only be placed into the time
slot of 2000-1500 BC.
To date the biblical texts describing the patriarchs at any other time
would be an anacronism, or an out-of-date sequence. In this way, we
can demonstrate that what is described in Genesis is substantiated by
archaeological materials. While we do not have biblical manuscripts
dating back to this period, the events and culture of Scripture can
only be placed within this period.
In the same way, we can substantiate events from the Egyptian period
by means of information from the Amarna letters. They were found in
Egypt and dated somewhere in the late 1400s and early 1300s BC. In
these materials are references to royal correspondence between rulers
of the city-states in the land of Israel and the Egyptian Pharaoh.
Being dependent upon Egypt, they were desperately calling for help
because of the invasion of Habiru, or Israeli invaders. No help came
from the Egyptians. What is significant is that the Amarna letters are
dated at about the time when Canaan was being invaded. We therefore
have some corroboration concerning the invasion of the land of Israel
by the Israelis under Joshua.
Of course, this touches off a storm of debate as to whether the Exodus
should be placed at the time of the Amarna letters, about 1400 BC, or
during the early 1200s BC. A good case can be made for the earlier
dating, because of the biblical chronology (1 Kings 6:1) which
corresponds to the dating of the Amarna records.
We will not continue to discuss the contributions of archaeology,
which can corroborate events of the periods of the judges, the kings,
the Babylonian exile of Judah, etc. The student is referred to the
bibliography for further study regarding the verification of history,
culture and life-style of the Old Testament. It is in this way that we
can substantiate at least the historical materials which the Old
Testament text claims. Again, although we do not have the original
manuscripts, archaeology helps with the biblical historicity, and
therefore lends credence as to when a portion of the Old Testament
text can be dated.
3.9 The Later Critics
Can we say that more recent biblical scholarship now has no problems
with what the Bible claims for itself? Hardly! While liberal
scholarship is now ready to accept the finds of archaeology for
dating, and that ancient people could think in terms of complex
culture, it still does not mean that these critics accept the faith
which the Old Testament proclaims. Today, many of these scholars
declare that the Hebrews borrowed much of their culture from their
neighbors, but because of their "monotheistic and moral persuasions,"
they cleansed the materials of their paganism. According to the newer
liberals, the Hebrews were very much a part of the Middle Eastern
world in which they lived, but it is their genius which produced the
Old Testament!
3.10 Conclusion
We have to be careful about what archaeology can prove. In itself, it
is a useful tool, but it can never make people believe in the God of
the Bible.
　
4. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE NEW TESTAMENT
Archaeological research and discovery for the New Testament has been
of a different nature than for the Old. It is not so much a matter of
digging for buried buildings or inscribed tablets; rather, New
Testament archaeology is primarily a matter of written documents.
F.F. Bruce comments, "These documents may be public or private
inscriptions on stone or some equally durable material: they may be
papyri recovered from the sand of Egypt recording literary texts or
housewives' shopping lists; they may be private notes scratched on
fragments of unglazed pottery; they may be legends on coins preserving
information about some otherwise forgotten ruler or getting some point
of official propaganda across to the people who used them. They may
present a Christian church's collection of sacred Scriptures, like the
Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri; they may be all that is left of the
library of an ancient religious community, like the scrolls from
Qumran or the Gnostic texts from Nag Hammadi. But whatever their
character, they can be as important and relevant for the study of the
New Testament as any cuneiform tablets are for the study of the Old."
4.1 Papyrus
Papyrus documents have yielded a wealth of information. The common
people wrote letters on papyrus and kept the ordinary commercial
accounts of life on it. An even cheaper writing material was broken
pieces of pottery, called ostraca. These were used for odd notes. One
of the great significances of these materials, discovered in ancient
rubbish heaps, has been to show the connection between the everyday
language of the common people and the Greek in which most of the New
Testament is written. It has long been recognized that there are great
differences between the Greek of classic literature and that of the
New Testament. Some scholars went so far as to suggest that New
Testament Greek was a heavenly language which came into being for the
purpose of recording Christian revelation. But through the discoveries
of the papyri it became evident that the New Testament Greek was very
similar to the language of the common people.
In 1931 the discovery of a collection of papyrus texts of the Greek
Scriptures was made public. They have come to be known as the "Chester
Beatty Biblical Papyri." F.F. Bruce says that this collection
evidently formed the Bible of some outlying church in Egypt; it
comprises eleven fragmentary codices. These papyri bear most important
testimony to the early textual history of the New Testament. In
addition, there is the oldest known fragment of any part of the New
Testament from a codex of St. John's Gospel dated around AD 130
(please read chapter 3 for more information).
4.2 Stone Inscriptions
Inscriptions on stone have been another source of valuable
information. An example of this is an edict of Claudius inscribed on
limestone at Delphi in central Greece.
F.F. Bruce says, "This edict is to be dated during the first seven
months of AD 52, and mentions Gallio as being proconsul of Achaia
(Acts 18:12). We know from other sources that Gallio's proconsulship
lasted only for a year, and since proconsuls entered on their term of
office on 1 July, the inference is that Gallio entered on his
proconsulship on that date in AD 51. But Gallio's proconsulship of
Achaia overlapped Paul's year and a half of ministry in Corinth (Acts
18:11-12) so that Claudius' inscription provides us with a fixed point
for reconstructing the chronology of Paul's career."
Luke makes so many specific references to people and places that his
writings are more easily illustrated by this kind of material than
other parts of the New Testament. His accuracy of detail has been
thoroughly established. Where he has been questioned, new evidence has
vindicated him a number of times.
F.F. Bruce points out, "For example, his reference in Luke 3:1 to
'Lysanias, the tetrarch of Abilene,' at the time when John the Baptist
began his ministry AD 27 has been regarded as a mistake because the
only ruler of that name in those parts known from ancient historians
was King Lysanias, whom Antony executed at Cleopatra's instigation in
36 BC. But a Greek inscription from Abila (18 miles west-northwest of
Damascus), from which the territory of Abilene is named, records a
dedication to one Nymphaeus "freeman of Lysanias, the tetrarch"
between AD 14-29, around the very time indicated by Luke." It clearly
indicates that the Bible record is more reliable than human history
record which may contain mistakes and it is subject to revision and
correction by archaelogy and other scientific methods.
4.3 Coins
Coins have provided some background information for parts of New
Testament history. One of the crucial questions in establishing the
chronology of Paul's career is the date of Felix's replacement by
Festus as procurator of Judea (Acts 24:27). A new Judean coinage began
in Nero's fifth year, before October of AD 59. This may point to the
beginning of the new procuratorship.
Some sacred sites have been definitely identified and general
locations have also been uncovered. General locations have been more
easily established than exact spots where some of the great New
Testament events transpired.
Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70 and a new pagan city was founded on
the site in AD 135. This has complicated the identification of places
in Jerusalem mentioned in the Gospels and Acts. Some, however, like
the temple area and the Pool of Siloam, to which our Lord sent the
blind man to wash (John 9:11), have been clearly identified.
4.4 Conclusion
Archaeology is a real help in understanding the Bible. It yields
fascinating information which illuminates what might otherwise be
obscured and in some instances confirms what some might otherwise
regard as doubtful.
We can agree with Keith N. Schoville who says, "It is important to
realize that archaeological excavations have produced ample evidence
to prove unequivocally that the Bible is not a pious forgery. Thus
far, no historical statement in the Bible has been proven false on the
basis of evidence retrieved through archaeologic research."
　
5. REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FURTHER STUDY
Apologetics, Lesson 8, Moody Bible Institute, 1990, by Louis Goldberg.
Know Why You Believe, Chapter 7, InterVarsity Press, 1988, by Paul E.
Little & Marie Little.
Archaeological Confirmation of the New Testament in Revelation and the
Bible, Grand Rapids, Baker House, 1958, by F.F. Bruce.
　
Please tell your friends to visit the following Bible study
web sites regularly:
網上聖經課程 Bible Studies On the Internet
http://home.hkstar.com/~johnfok1/
香港以馬忤斯聖經函授學校 http://home.hkstar.com/~emmaushk
Week End Web Page
http://www.patriot.net/users/premil/weekend.html
God bless you!
Yours in Christ,
John K.C. Fok
Hong Kong
18 Dec 1997