Historical evidence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eucharisted
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

Eucharisted

Guest
Is there historical evidence for every event in the Bible, or only for some events? I’m talking about the events that took place in history, not, like, the creation story, which is symbolic (though I’m not saying God didn’t create the world).
 
I once read in Fr. Lukefarh’s Book, A Catholic Guide to the Bible, that there are contradicting numbers and dates in the OT for two reasons: a) exaggeration of numbers (as in hoe many were lost in battle) and b) inaccuracies of oral tradition. As soon as I can get to the book, I will come back and quote it here.

So, your question, “Is there historical evidence for every event in the Bible or just some?” I would say that there is evidence that may as yet be undiscovered or not understood yet for each event. However, most of the records we have may be inaccurate due to literary license such as hyperbole and generalisms, or revisionism, such as the part of participants in battle.
 
This is historical evidence (or lack thereof) of persons in the Bible that I was just reading about

“Historically, we have not a shred of archeological or textual evidence contemporaneous with David showing that either he or his son Solomon ever even existed, let alone what kind of men they were. Neither David, nor Solomon, nor the kingdom of Israel over which they ruled, appear in any of the records recovered from the time of their reigns—not in Canaan or from the many nations and peoples with whom they interacted or over whom they allegedly ruled.”

ggreenberg.tripod.com/David/w-kd-ch1.htm

weird. I mean I still believe that David and Solomon existed but I’d have thought there would be plenty of historical evidence.
 
The Bible itself is a source of historical evidence. So what you ask then is there corroborating evidence from other historical sources for every event in the Bible? Probably not, but certainly for the major events. Also, the Bible, while capturing historical events is not a history book and it’s also important to note that the Middle Eastern way of recording history is different than the Western way. While we in the West are focused on linear progression, in the Middle East they’re more concerned with that the event happened and the contextual implications of that event.
 
By historical evidence, I meant things like archeological or geographical or documented evidence. There have been some evidence which has been found (the relics of Jesus and the Tower of Babel, for example); I’m just wondering if there’s evidence for every event, or just some of them.
 
John7 said:
This is historical evidence (or lack thereof) of persons in the Bible that I was just reading about

“Historically, we have not a shred of archeological or textual evidence contemporaneous with David showing that either he or his son Solomon ever even existed, let alone what kind of men they were. Neither David, nor Solomon, nor the kingdom of Israel over which they ruled, appear in any of the records recovered from the time of their reigns—not in Canaan or from the many nations and peoples with whom they interacted or over whom they allegedly ruled.”

ggreenberg.tripod.com/David/w-kd-ch1.htm

weird. I mean I still believe that David and Solomon existed but I’d have thought there would be plenty of historical evidence.
Click to expand...
This dude has an agenda-selling books- but they have come up with evidence just recently on David- try Biblical archaeology magazine- they have articles on the controversy
 
Eucharisted said:
By historical evidence, I meant things like archeological or geographical or documented evidence. There have been some evidence which has been found (the relics of Jesus and the Tower of Babel, for example); I’m just wondering if there’s evidence for every event, or just some of them.
Click to expand...
There’s a good bit. Archeology (like any other discipline) is not perfect, but can provide interesting clues – and corroboration of events.

For example, we know quite a bit about first the Assyrian and then the Babylonian incursions against Israel and Judah because of records those nations kept as well as the material recorded in Kings.

There is a Moabite (I believe) inscription which mentions Omri, who was the father of Ahab.

Certainly there are many many archeological evidences from at least the period of the Divided Monarchy.
 
Eucharisted said:
By historical evidence, I meant things like archeological or geographical or documented evidence. There have been some evidence which has been found (the relics of Jesus and the Tower of Babel, for example); I’m just wondering if there’s evidence for every event, or just some of them.
Click to expand...
Going to a Biblical archaeology source is really your best bet.I wouldn’t trust to many other sources.
The problem now is you have too many people who have agendas in archaeological world. You have the literalists early on like Albright who tried to prove every word in the Bible was true ;then the minimalists who try to disprove everything-(usually these are the guys with the biggest mouths,the most press ,the best publicity)then you have the majority which are the moderates-hard working -truth seekers who let the evidence speak for itself.

Until recently archaeologists were baffled why Canaan was called the land of “milk and honey”. They never found evidence of human-assisted bee honey production.So they assumed that the Bible was talking about date or fruit ‘honey’ a sweet syrup from the plants.
Until recently. They found evidence lately of apiaries for production of a large amounts of honey that could be exported.So indeed the Land of Milk and Honey was not only symbolic but literal. You can never know what you will find under the sand!
 
If anyone is out there who is interested in the archaeological and historical evidence for the bible I would suggest the following books:The Ancient Near East-An Anthology of Texts and Pictures Vols 1&2 by James B. Pritchard
Documents From Old Testament Times edited by D. Winton Thomas
Ancient Israel -Its Life and Institutions by De Vaux
Archaeology And the Old Testament by James Pritchard
The books by Pritchard (especially the ANET) and the book by Devaux are pretty much essentials and standards in biblical scholarship
 
The David example is worth repeating - when I was in school, it was true that there was no extra-Biblical evidence of the existence of David. Then a few years back some stele or something was found that referenced him - and the picture changed - now there is an archaelogical record.

Reality is that there is very little archaelogical evidence of most of ancient history - and what is discovered and what was lost is just accidental.
 
juliamajor said:
If anyone is out there who is interested in the archaeological and historical evidence for the bible I would suggest the following books:The Ancient Near East-An Anthology of Texts and Pictures Vols 1&2 by James B. Pritchard
Documents From Old Testament Times edited by D. Winton Thomas
Ancient Israel -Its Life and Institutions by De Vaux
Archaeology And the Old Testament by James Pritchard
The books by Pritchard (especially the ANET) and the book by Devaux are pretty much essentials and standards in biblical scholarship
Click to expand...
Your post is Providential. I am interested in Old Testament History, and am looking for good resources. Are you familiar with any of these books and authors:

Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000-586 BCE by Amihai Mazar

On the Reliability of the Old Testament by K.A. Kitchen

Archaeology and Bible History by Joseph P. Free, Revised and Expanded by Howard F. Vos

Bible History: Old Testament by Alfred Edersheim

The Bible Is History by Ian Wilson

Thanks!
 
Eucharisted said:
Is there historical evidence for every event in the Bible, or only for some events? I’m talking about the events that took place in history, not, like, the creation story, which is symbolic (though I’m not saying God didn’t create the world).
Click to expand...
Yes, there is plenty of evidence to support bible narratives. The New Encyclopædia Britannica notes: “Archaeological criticism has tended to substantiate the reliability of the typical historical details of even the oldest periods [of Bible history] ”

*** The Davidic United Kingdom = the Elah Valley ecscavations
** The Assyrian Conquest = Sargon’s Palace (Khorsabad);
** Shishaks invasion = Moabite Stone
** King Jehus submission = The Shalmanesers Obelisk
**sennacherbis Assacination = The Escar-haddon Monument
** Belshazzar’s Feast = The Nabonidus Cylinders
** Hezikiahs’ tunnel = Excavated in Jerusalem
** … and many many more.

*** Davidic dynasty: Professor s Biran & Naveh of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem discovery of a ninth century B.C.E. inscription that refers both to the ‘House of David’ and to the ‘King of Israel.’ (see: Biblical Archaeology Review magazine, March/April 1994) clearly indicating that the early hebrew kings were historical figures.

** The Israelite conquest: The Merneptah’s stela which reads “The Canaan is plundered with every hardship. Ashkelon is taken, Gezer captured, [and] Yano‘am reduced to nothing. Israel is laid waste, his seed is no more.”

Obviously since the Israelites eventually ended up occupying the terrotiry, logic dictates that (unless it was virgin territory, which secular history clearly indicates it was not) the Israelites either a) they made an alience and absorbed the populace or b) they conquered the national groups.

**Authenticity of the Exodus Account. An objection against the Exodus account has been that the Pharaohs of Egypt did not make any record of the Exodus. However, archaeology has shown that it was the custom for a new Egyptian dynasty to erase anything uncomplimentary in previous records. They never recorded humiliating defeats.

The Hebrews were (prior to their conquest of Canaan) a nomadic people and as egyptian slave there is little they would have left behind at the exodus.

There is no archelogical evidence that disproves any of the biblical events
 
DeannaMarie said:
Your post is Providential. I am interested in Old Testament History, and am looking for good resources. Are you familiar with any of these books and authors:

Archaeology of the Land of the Bible 10,000-586 BCE by Amihai Mazar

On the Reliability of the Old Testament by K.A. Kitchen

Archaeology and Bible History by Joseph P. Free, Revised and Expanded by Howard F. Vos

Bible History: Old Testament by Alfred Edersheim

The Bible Is History by Ian Wilson

Thanks!
Click to expand...
yep -I am familiar - I have the Wilson and Vos book.Edersheim and kitchen are old school- the earliest along with Albright-set the foundations of Biblical archaeology
 
Cashue said:
Yes, there is plenty of evidence to support bible narratives. The New Encyclopædia Britannica notes: “Archaeological criticism has tended to substantiate the reliability of the typical historical details of even the oldest periods [of Bible history] ”

*** The Davidic United Kingdom = the Elah Valley ecscavations
** The Assyrian Conquest = Sargon’s Palace (Khorsabad);
** Shishaks invasion = Moabite Stone
** King Jehus submission = The Shalmanesers Obelisk
**sennacherbis Assacination = The Escar-haddon Monument
** Belshazzar’s Feast = The Nabonidus Cylinders
** Hezikiahs’ tunnel = Excavated in Jerusalem
** … and many many more.

*** Davidic dynasty: Professor s Biran & Naveh of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem discovery of a ninth century B.C.E. inscription that refers both to the ‘House of David’ and to the ‘King of Israel.’ (see: Biblical Archaeology Review magazine, March/April 1994) clearly indicating that the early hebrew kings were historical figures.

** The Israelite conquest: The Merneptah’s stela which reads “The Canaan is plundered with every hardship. Ashkelon is taken, Gezer captured, [and] Yano‘am reduced to nothing. Israel is laid waste, his seed is no more.”

Obviously since the Israelites eventually ended up occupying the terrotiry, logic dictates that (unless it was virgin territory, which secular history clearly indicates it was not) the Israelites either a) they made an alience and absorbed the populace or b) they conquered the national groups.

**Authenticity of the Exodus Account. An objection against the Exodus account has been that the Pharaohs of Egypt did not make any record of the Exodus. However, archaeology has shown that it was the custom for a new Egyptian dynasty to erase anything uncomplimentary in previous records. They never recorded humiliating defeats.

The Hebrews were (prior to their conquest of Canaan) a nomadic people and as egyptian slave there is little they would have left behind at the exodus.

There is no archelogical evidence that disproves any of the biblical events
Click to expand...
Pritchard’s ANET Vol. 1 & 2 contain most if not all of these inscriptions/writings.It’s really a must have and is used by biblical scholars on a consistent basis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top