What is Biblical Archaeology?

Serapha

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2003
5,133
28
✟6,704.00
Faith
Non-Denom






What Is Bible Archeology.












Well, the most important point concerning Biblical Archaeology is archaeological findings from archaeological excavations and the studies concerning those artifacts and/or relics.





“Biblical Archaeology may best be described as the scientific recovery and investigation of the material remains of past cultures that can illuminate the historical Biblical period. Such investigation takes various forms and includes the study of architecture, language, literature, art, pottery, implements, and numerous other examples of material culture that have survived. For more than a century, archaeologists working in the Near East have painstakingly uncovered the past; shedding dramatic new light on the texts of the Bible and making its pages come alive as never before in history. Some of the more exciting finds of recent years made world headlines and captured the attention of both scholars and the public. Examples of significant finds include the House of David inscription, the crucified man, a Galilean fishing boat, the Qumran Ostracon, and The Dead Sea scrolls—just to name a few.” 1



In the scholarly circles, the terminology of “biblical archaeology” receives criticism as any archaeologist associated with a Biblical stance is usually marked as one who is looking for biblical supports rather than one who is searching solely for the truth that is revealed from an excavation.... theological bias is automatically assumed concerning the purpose and work of the Biblical archaeologist.



Vos and Free identify that there are two main functions of Bible archaeology, the illumination and the confirmation of the Bible 2 There are hundreds of internet sites that are dedicated to biblical archaeology from excavation opportunity to published results.3



"What archaeology cannot do, however, even at its best, is to “prove” the Bible in any sense—either by demonstrating that the events claimed by the biblical writers as central to the “salvation history” actually happened, much less by validating the theological inferences that are drawn from these events, whether ancient or modern. The notion that historical proofs can confirm, or even enhance, religious faith is a contradiction in terms."4

For those that are interested in biblical archaeology,



... before entering into the realm of studies and discussions of finds, it is best to leave your denomination or religion at home. Whether one enters the “square” to dig or whether one leads the excavation, those working side-by-side will always set aside their religion and denomination for the best interest of the excavation. Jews dig next to Christians, Muslims dig next to Jews, Catholics dig next to Methodists, Baptists dig next to Mormons. Even the noted biblical archaeologists do not infer that their religion or denomination has any place in the discussion concerning biblical archaeology or on the field.







1 http://www.tfba.org/

2 Archaeology and Bible History, Vos and Free, page 13.

3 http://www.preciousheart.net/Main_A...blical_Arch.htm

4 William G. Dever in The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Freedman, David Noel, ed., (New York: Doubleday) 1997, 1992 CD Rom Version.
 

DailyBlessings

O Christianos Cryptos; Amor Vincit Omnia!
Oct 21, 2004
17,775
981
38
Berkeley, CA
Visit site
✟30,234.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I appreciate the thought, Serapha, but doubt it will make much of an impression. If the board survives at all, it will still be dominated by those who make up most of the forums visitorship- extremely fundamentalist Christians.
 
Upvote 0

StAnselm

Theologue
Aug 17, 2004
1,222
48
46
Melbourne
Visit site
✟16,804.00
Faith
Protestant
Serapha said:
Theological bias has no place in archaeology discussion... I would hope that everyone posting would be mature and considerate enough to leave their religion/denomination at home.



But why? This seems to be your starting assumption, but you haven't really demonstrated why it's valid. Or even possible: doesn't faith affect every area of our lives? Doesn't the Bible speak address all facets of human existence?



One could argue that by saying you shouldn't bring your theological bias to the dig, you are showing your own theological bias.



Besides, this is a theological forum, anyway.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,822
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
StAnselm said:
... One could argue that by saying you shouldn't bring your theological bias to the dig, you are showing your own theological bias...
Oh, I disagree. The dig produces facts, possibly inconvenient ones. Now bringing theology to bear on the interpretation may makes sense, but not to the facts.

StAnselm said:
Besides, this is a theological forum, anyway.
Well, that's a sore point. BA was put here for lack of another suitable spot, and does not (yet) have any forums-specific rules.

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0

StAnselm

Theologue
Aug 17, 2004
1,222
48
46
Melbourne
Visit site
✟16,804.00
Faith
Protestant
Radagast said:
Now bringing theology to bear on the interpretation may makes sense, but not to the facts.

Well, I don't see how we can have facts standing by themselves, without bringing one's interpretation to bear on the situation.

Can you give me an example of an archaeological fact?

Bevlina said:
Modern digs make history no longer a mystery.

What makes you say that, Bevlina? Surely it doesn't mean that there are no remaining unanswered questions! And surely it doesn't mean that before modern archaeology people didn't know much about the past!
 
Upvote 0
B

Bevlina

Guest
What makes you say that, Bevlina? Surely it doesn't mean that there are no remaining unanswered questions! And surely it doesn't mean that before modern archaeology people didn't know much about the past!

The digs make for wonderful and amazing finds. That's why I say that. Biblical Archeology has always been something dear to my heart, but, I have never had anyone to discuss it with. I WAS hoping I could discuss it in this Forum when it was created.
No, each year, Archeologists come up with new tecniques to enable digs. Finds in the seas come into this category.
Does Bible Archeology disturb you StAnselm?
 
Upvote 0

StAnselm

Theologue
Aug 17, 2004
1,222
48
46
Melbourne
Visit site
✟16,804.00
Faith
Protestant
Bevlina said:
Does Bible Archeology disturb you StAnselm?

No, not at all - like you, I've always been interested in it. Some of the point in the OP distubed me though - I think objectivity can be a bit illusory.

I guess I'm approaching this from a philosophy of science perspective - like any branch of science, it is important in Biblical Archaeology to identify one's presuppositions. Which Serapha has done.

Though of course, when you're doing science, you don't state all your presuppositions in every lab report...
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,822
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
To follow up on some of the philosophical issues StAnselm raised:
StAnselm said:
Can you give me an example of an archaeological fact?

The fragment below was found at a specified place at a specified time (in the ground, I think--anyone know?).

That's a fact.

johnpap.jpg


Someone dated it to about 140AD. That's a fact too.

It's an inference that the fragment really dates to 140AD, and another inference that the Gospel of John must have been written before 120AD or so.

It's with inferences that I would see theology coming in. What do you reckon?

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0

StAnselm

Theologue
Aug 17, 2004
1,222
48
46
Melbourne
Visit site
✟16,804.00
Faith
Protestant
Yep, that's a good point, Radagast. The thing is, in archaeology - as in every other branch of scirence - we have to go beyond sheer facts to produce anything that is either useful or interesting.

It would be really boring if in this forum we restricted ourselves to just producing facts. No, we interpret the evidence, and draw inferences from them. I guess my point is that all our beliefs and assumptions come into play as soon as we start doing this.
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,822
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
StAnselm said:
Yep, that's a good point, Radagast. The thing is, in archaeology - as in every other branch of science - we have to go beyond sheer facts to produce anything that is either useful or interesting.

It would be really boring if in this forum we restricted ourselves to just producing facts. No, we interpret the evidence, and draw inferences from them...

Oh, I agree, and I think Serapha would too, since she is an archaeologist.

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0

Radagast

comes and goes
Site Supporter
Dec 10, 2003
23,822
9,817
✟312,047.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Bevlina said:
Lots of people on the web can say that Rad. I can say I'm John Howard.
:confused: Your photo doesn't look like John Howard! :)

Bevlina said:
Bible Archeology has fascinated me since I was very young.
Me too, ever since I saw some actual burnt grain from Jericho.

And it all came back when I visited the British Museum, who run Bible-related tours through their exhibits.

-- Radagast
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Serapha

Well-Known Member
Jun 29, 2003
5,133
28
✟6,704.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Bevlina said:
Struth! "What is Biblical Archeology"! And I'm no remnant from a dig! My interest started ... struth I've forgotten now.....


HI there!

:wave:

Perhaps this will clarify the difference between archaeology and historical reference...

quoting from Joni Magness, The Archaeology of Qumran and the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2002, Eerdmans publishing, page 4...

"The Oxford Companion to Archaeology defines archaeology as "the study of the past as is evident in the material remains available to us." In contrast, history is the study of the past based on information provided by written documents. In other words, although both archaeologists and historians study the past... (50 words)

The entire quote is available in the book via a search of the book at amazon.com..... page 4, continuing onto page 5

~serapha~
 
Upvote 0