Does archaeology support the Bible?

Question

Does archaeology support the Bible?

Answer 1

Quite the opposite. It started out to provide evidence of Bible stories but has done the opposite.



IE: B/c of archaeology, it is known now how old the earth is, there are fossils that are used to demonstrate evolution, there are dinosaur fossils and no geologic layer to show there was ever a world-wide flood. And other religions and cultures appeared that predate any Christian theology that are in no way mentioned in the Bible and they say nothing of an individual creator deity that was masculine.

Answer 2

No, it doesn't. There are archaeological finds that prove certain people or places mentioned in the Bible did exist, but as with other myths, the Biblical story merely used those people and places as backdrops for it's narrative. The actual events of the stories aren't supported by archaeological evidence, and in many cases the evidence runs contrary to the Biblical version of events.



For example, the Bible describes the invasion of Canaan by the ancient Hebrew people. It discusses how one city after another fell.



The Canaanites really did 'disappear', and the cities mentioned really did exist, however the archaeological evidence shows that some of the cities were destroyed hundreds of years apart, not in some single generation blitz. Other locations showed no sign of ever having been destroyed like the Bible said, while others were destroyed by other nations - not the ancient Hebrew.



Another example is the exodus from Egypt.



There are no indications that the Hebrew people were ever enslaved in Egypt as the Bible claims, or that the events of exodus ever happened at all. Instead, there were two groups known as the 'Habiru' and the 'Hyksos' who had invaded the region around the Nile. They took over the exact same region as the Bible claims Jacob and his descendants settled in Egypt. They remained there for several centuries, holding the land, until one of the Pharaohs organized an army to chase them out. He chased them all the way back to Canaan, where they had originally come from. The historian Flavius Josephus had been of the opinion that the Hyksos exodus was the Hebrew exodus.



That's without even going into events of the New Testament, and the distinct lack of archaeological evidence for it's claims.

Answer 3

Some of it is pretty ambiguous.There are those who tend to see what They want to see.This does not apply only to the Archeologists who are interested in religious artifacts but also to others who wanted to see something in what They discovered and therefore when They found something it instantly became what They had come to find.That,s why when a Archaeologist finds something and tells the World about it there,s often a long time before many other Archeologists will believe it.Persons who call Themselves Biblical Scholars or Archeologists have a long history of finding artifacts that support Their causes and beliefs.this practise keeps Them popular and keeps the money rolling in.Also helps Them sell Their books and fills the Auditorium for Their presentations.My opinion is that if the find has been around for 50 years or longer and no-one has questioned it then I tend to take it as fact.But if it,s less than that amount of time I would reserve My opinions until other informed experts have published Their opinions.

Answer 4

Archaeology does support aspects of the bible. When I say aspects I am referring to some, not all, historical citations in the bible. However, archaeology does not support the supernatural aspects of the bible and that is purely speculative from the Christian side.

Answer 5

A lot of the gross historical incidents in the bible (kings and kingdoms and such) are supported. NONE of the miraculous events are directly supported, and many are directly at odds with history. Anyone who tells you otherwise does not know archaeology, or the bible (or I suspect EITHER) For example, there is no record in ancient Egyptian texts of any 'israelite' slaves at any time in Egypt. There are several mentions of the name Israel or something similar, but always as a trading partner, not as a conquered land.



Nor any mention of any group of slaves leaving bondage, nor of any plagues as described.



To state that Noah's ark has been found is simple nonsense.



Pointius Pilate was the Roman governor of Judea, and we hve extensive records from his time, and yet there is not one word to support any of the supposed miracles, nor of any man named Jesus, nor of any 'King of the Jews' being executed. For a civilization which held record keeping as being crucial, you'd think a resurrection would have been noticed and noted?

Answer 6

Absolutely

http://creation.com/archaeology-questions-and-answers



Time and again secularists claim the Bible is wrong only for archaeology to vindicate the Biblical account.

Answer 7

many of the sites mentioned in the bible have been shown to exist, this fact alone does not give any form of veracity to the tales woven around said sites. Merely their existence, Jericho did exist for instance and it was sacked, many times. Sadly it was totally uninhabited at the time line of the bible story and had been for several hundred years. Exodus has by the complete lack of evidence discovered during extensive excavations by Israel after the six day war. Not a single trace at any of the campsites mentioned, none at all.

Answer 8

It shows that the stories are about real places and involve at least some real people. In some cases archaeology shows that the stories couldn't possibly have happened as written.

Answer 9

Yep.



It is possible for people to dig for things in the wrong location. It is possible that two locations have the same name. It is possible for the name of a location to have different spellings, especially when they have been occupied by different nations.



But when someone is in the right location and begins digging, the things that they find will support Scripture.]



Suggested readings: "Great Stones" and "Exodus", both by G. M. Matheny

Answer 10

there is a great deal of archaeological evidence supporting the bible. here are just a few examples.



1. a tomb schematic showing semetic (jewish) slaves making mud bricks for egyptian building projects have been found in thebes on the nile. there are inscriptures on the rephmire tomb.



2. the leiden papyrus page 348 refers to "apiru" (which is the egyptian word for hebrews) being liberated from the bondage of slavery which agrees with the timing of the release of the hebrews under moses.



3. the ruins of jericho show the total destruction of the walls of the city, which were extremely well fortified. archaeologists believe they may have been knocked down by a massive earthquake, which would agree with the description in joshua of God knocking the walls down without the hebrews having to do anything. there is also evidence the city was burned, which agrees with the biblical account in joshua.



4. the ruins of the city of ai have also been discovered.



5. the merneptah stele hieroglyphics states that "israel is wasted, bare of seed" which coincides with the biblical accounts of the hebrew people being in possession of the land and it being called israel as of 1230 BC and refers to the biblically documented conquest of the area by the egyptian military.



6. the dan stele, discovered in 1933 records the victory of king ben-hadad of damascus over the house of david, which validates the ruler ship of king david over israel.



7. the moabite stones discovered in august of 1868 which are currently housed in the louvre museum in paris france speak of misha defeating the house of david. they also mention omri, who was king of israel and is referred to in the book of 1 kings 16:30)



8. there is also the pilate stone found at the ruins of caesarea which place pontius pilate as curate and ruler over israel during the time ascribed to him in the gospel accounts.



9. the pool of siloam mentioned in john 9:6, in 2 kings chapter 30 and isaiah chapter 37 has been found.



10. the pool of bethesda mentioned in john 5:3-4 has also been discovered.



11. sennacherib's prism from the ruins of the city of nineveh reinforce both the bible accounts of this king and the city of nineveh found in 2 kings and the book of jonah.



12. shalamanesar's black oblisk shows king jehu from 2 kings 2:36-37 bowing down to him.

Answer 11

No more than it supports Homer or the existence of Africa supports Tarzan. Magical stories set in a fictionalized version of the real world.

Answer 12

Archaeology is not religion.

Answer 13

According to Vyatcheslav Krasheninnikov: Humans were created about 7500 years ago. Birds participate in time creation. It's a sin to kill birds. Dinosaurs live under our level. They will get out through sinkholes and lakes. To kill them, go for their nerves.



According to common sense:

SCIENTISTS ARE LYING about the Bible not being true.

Sionists paid them to lie.

Answer 14

Only geographically.

Answer 15

That's a vast question! Just limiting it to biblical claims in the book of Genesis about Abraham's descendants and the nation of Egypt...



An archaeologist called David Rohl has written extensively on the evidence in Egyptian artifacts that prove the Habiru (Hebrews) were indeed forced into hard labour in Egypt after a series of weak 13th dynasty pharaohs followed Amenemhat III (who was the pharaoh living at the time of Joseph.)



Rohl has discovered Josephs palace at Avaris in the part of the Nile delta known in the OT as Goshen. Joseph was entombed in a small pyramid in the grounds of his palace, with a chapel containing his colossal cult statue. This depicts an Asiatically pale fellow with reddish hair adorned with the multicoloured coat of a middle Bronze Age chieftain.



Then the Hebrews became despised and pressed into hard labour. Bronze Age documents have yielded up pharaonic slave lists with Hebrew names, and the tinpot grave goods of an underclass were found at Avaris. Independent dating of Rohls bold chronology vindicate his dating of Josephs pharaoh, Amenemhat III at 1678 BC give or take 4 years. The result was 37 out of 39 lunar month-length matches, whereas orthodox chronology scored no better than 21 matches.



The astronomer Dr David Lappin, of Glasgow university, concluded, “Most of the astronomical data... simply do not fit with the orthodox chronology, while the support it gives to David Rohls new chronology is nothing less than startling.” Rohl also found water heights chipped into cliff faces just south of the Niles second cataract that account for four massive Nile floods that would have made seed-sowing impossible for several years, and famine inevitable. Josephs God told him of this coming famine, giving him the interpretation to pharaohs dream, and Joseph was put in charge of preparing for, and surviving the famine, which also lead to Josephs family moving down to Egypt – the start of the Habiru population in Egypt.



So although the Egyptian records do not relate the historic event of the 10 plagues and the exodus of the despised Habiru, Egyptian records do, indeed, point to the truth of the biblical account. The proud Egyptians would never concede, in writing, that their gods were humiliated by each of the 10 plagues, and their forced labour work-force left with great wealth! Rohl places the Moses account during Ramesses II rule, with Moses then having to deal with a new pharaoh at the time of the Exodus. There IS evidence, for those with eyes open to see it and the will to re-arrange chronology according to known facts!



Granted, no record of the Habiru exodus has yet been found; it might never have been recorded, especially as that pharaohs army was drowned at Gods hand, but it also might have been recorded and is awaiting discovery. It is always a mistake to argue from silence against a historic event.



Finally – plagues, the Flood and so on. Rohl has another hefty book where he deals with all of that. There have been Egyptian plague pits found, full of bodies, but the ten plagues were not akin to The Black Death or anything like that. Rohl deals with them all, and for the tenth plague he proposes that things like earthquakes and tidal waves could have preceded the killing of the firstborn. Let me just quote this bit, if space permits: “The Egyptians had resorted to truly barbaric practices in a vain attempt to save themselves from the anger of a god they did not know or understand. Lying in the streets were the bodies of the first-born males – their throats cut. For centuries it had been the custom amongst many in the Asiatic world to deliver the sacrifice of first-born sons, at a time of crisis, in order to placate angry gods. The Egyptians of earlier times had NOT been party to this practice but, during the 13th Dynasty, much of the native population in the Nile Valley had interbred with the incoming Asiatics and had inevitably adopted many of their traditions. This influx of Canaanite and Mesopotamian ideas had penetrated into the highest echelons of society – even into the royal household itself. As we have seen, many of the pharaohs of this period bore Asiatic names and were therefore of second-generation Canaanite stock. Dudimose was no exception. Filled with terror and superstition, Pharaoh had taken the lead in the barbarism and sacrificed his own first-born in the temple of Seth (Canaanite Baal)... His eldest was a fully grown man in his late twenties, the heir to the throne of Egypt.”



Then Rohl quotes from a papyrus known as The Admonitions of an Egyptian Sage, recording distress at disasters; storms, blood and death everywhere. “The river is blood.. Children of the nobility are dashed against walls” then details the poor of the land having great wealth of gold and jewellery. You really need to read the whole book to see the mass of evidence for the biblical record. And Rohl is not a Christian!

Answer 16

yes

Answer 17

Not in all cases.

Answer 18

Yes 100%.

Answer 19

YES. There are many finds that fulfill Bible Prophecy.



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

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

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



A excavation at the site of ancient Nineveh, Assyria’s capital, revealed a sculptured slab in the palace of King Sennacherib, which depicts Assyrian soldiers leading Jewish captives into exile after the fall of Lachish in 732 B.C.E. You can read the Bible’s account at 2 Kings 18:13-15.

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

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

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

Answer 20

nope, not a bit.

Answer 21

No.

Answer 22

No, it does not.