|By: ATRI Staff; ©2006|
|There are a number of striking cases where the Bible has been directly confirmed by archaeology. In this article the authors list 25 examples as they conclude their look at “biblical” archaeology.|
As Dr. Edwin Yamauchi points out for Scripture generally, “There are a number of striking cases where specific passages have been doubted (it is a rare passage that has not be questioned by some critic) and have been directly confirmed. There are many more items and areas which have afforded a general illumination of biblical backgrounds, making the narratives more credible and understandable.” He proceeds to quote the noted scholar D.J. Wiseman, now retired, formerly Professor of Assyriology at the University of London who writes:
In the chart below, we consider just a few examples of hundreds that could be cited. In all the following examples, and many more, critics doubted what the Bible declared. Allegedly, these places, people, and things were anachronistic, errors, or myths. The “scholarly” conclusion was that the Bible was merely a human document and not very trustworthy. But thanks to archaeology, it was the authority of the critics that was silenced, not the authority of the Bible. In contrast to critical views, archaeology has proven the historicity and biblical time frame of many biblical events like these.
1.Abraham and the patriarchs and the city of Ur (Genesis 11:28-31)
These examples again prove that “archaeological discoveries have shown that these critical charges and countless others are wrong and that the Bible is trustworthy in the very statements that critics have set aside as untrustworthy.
We only wish space were available to continue our discussion of showing how archaeology continually confirms Scripture. Indeed by 1958 “over 25,000 sites from the biblical world have been confirmed by some archaeological discoveries to date.” Forty years later, the list is longer. But let us refer the interested reader to the 17-volume survey, Archaeology—the Bible and Christ by Dr. Clifford Wilson, which brings together over 5,000 facts relating archaeology to the Bible. Dr. Wilson begins volume 17 by stating,
He closes by stating,
In essence, from the perspective of the hope of biblical critics—if that hope was to be proved correct—archaeological research has provided vast opportunities to establish their view of the Bible. Their belief was that it merely constituted the error-filled writings of men and was of no particular or lasting spiritual import. Their hopes have consistently been smashed: the Bible has stood up to the investigation of a type that has not been hurled at any other reputable book of history.
We cannot stress this strongly enough: given the thousands of minute details recorded in the Bible, if the Bible were only the writings of men, surely archaeology would have proven it by now. Modern archaeology has thoroughly disproven the Book of Mormon, as we indicated in our Behind the Mask of Mormonism and as Mormon experts Jerald and Sandra Tanner have detailed in Archeology and the Book of Mormon. Modern archaeology has also corrected the writings of many other ancient and new texts. But modern archaeology has never corrected the Bible beyond legitimate adjustments because of new knowledge, such as translation errors relative to Bible backgrounds and the correct use of titles of Israel’s neighbors. How do we account for what must be viewed as a startling fact, apart from the claims of the Bible itself, that indeed, we have in our possession the literal Word of God?
In conclusion, we cannot but end our discussion by reminding ourselves of the spiritual implications of biblical archaeology: