NOVA (TV)
Pertinent
Artifacts
The Bible’s Buried Secrets is supposed to be
an accurate scientific synthesis of archaeology and the Bible. Here is one collection of a list of pertinent
or relevant artifacts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_in_biblical_archaeology
The most casual perusal of this list gives an idea of how
much information was avoided by The Bible’s Buried Secrets in its
discussion. While we don’t expect a
two-hour-long video to explore all of these, the omission of some is absurd,
while the neglect of others is devious.
We are especially wary of the start of discussion with the Merneptah
Stele, which is not a creation, temptation, or flood account. A list of things that should not have been
omitted, considering the scope of the subject matter might include:
·
The 2000 BC: artifacts
especially those related to creation, temptation, flood, and law; execration
texts.
·
The 1500 BC: Tombs, Amarna
letters, Ipuwer Papyrus, Papyrus
Harris I.
·
10th century BC: Gezer
calendar was discovered in 1908; emphasis on Tel Zayit, discovered in 2005, suggests that this is
somehow or other shocking news; Isbeth Sartah; Pim
weight, which gives credence to 1 Samuel; Tell es-Safi, which gives credence to
Goliath; Ophel inscription.
·
9th century BC: Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III, which is
pictured in the video, but not discussed.
The supposed evidence of The Bible’s Buried Secrets rests on
only a dozen or so of this mountain of artifacts. The rest are unnoted and unheeded.
Our purpose here, is not to demand that every artifact be
discussed; but rather to insist that good science never eliminates
evidence. The preference of Tel Zayit over the Gezer calendar,
appears to be motivated by the highly biased, and bigoted attempt to establish
the Documentary Hypotheses as new, when they in fact originated in the
nineteenth century, over one-hundred years ago.
The deliberate distortion of evidence to make a point is out of bounds.
If biblical accounts of creation, temptation, and the flood
are discussed, we expect The Bible’s Buried Secrets to at least
begin by mentioning the existence of Mesopotamian creation, temptation, and
flood epics.
If biblical accounts of Law are discussed, we expect some
discussion of the fact that there is significant evidence of such legal
codification dating as far back as 1754
BC.[1] Hammurabi is just the tip of the proverbial
iceberg. There is enough surviving legal
literature to establish Law as a genre.
Subject matter experts in the field can even classify types of laws or
covenants.”[2] This sort of literature shows that legal or
covenant documents of this type exist as unquestionably whole documents, not as
pasted up source documents: evidence which is fatal to any of the variant
Documentary Hypotheses. The real
question concerning Torah is not if it came from source documents, but how and
why does it differ from other legal codes of the era.
Other
Missing Evidence
Why would and did
the Shəkinah Glory appear first in a Burning Bush, then in a Pillar
of Cloud and Fire, crossing the Red (or Reed Sea), settling on Sinai, leading
through the desert, conquering great nations, crossing the Jordan, and
destroying Jericho without a fight?[3]
Why would and did
the Shəkinah Glory bother to give a new law, if all He wished to
establish was another civil moral code, like that of Hammurabi?
Why would and did
the Shəkinah Glory allow Himself to be paraded about on a sedan
chair (the Ark of the Covenant and Mercy Seat) like any other temporal earthly
potentate?
Or why would The
Bible’s Buried Secrets allow
opinions about the paucity of weapons artifacts within cities to stand when the
standard practice was to do the bulk of fighting outside of cities, not within
them.
Or why does The
Bible’s Buried Secrets
develop a whole construct of the twelfth and eleventh centuries without once
even mentioning the material of Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel.
Or why is the
massive settlement of the Philistines[4] in five major cities along
the Mediterranean Sea unmentioned? Why
do the maps always refer to Philistia as an occupation in the central
highlands?
Or why is the
discussion of Joshua’s invasion devoid of any reference to Edomites[5], Amorites[6], Ammonites[7], Bashanites[8], Moabites[9], or
Amalekites[10]?
The Bible’s Buried Secrets has also avoided
even mentioning that “Dr. Bryant
Wood has proposed that Ai should instead be located at the site of Kirbet
el-Maqatir” Since, The
Bible’s Buried Secrets
managed to harp on problems with Ai’s dating associated with Et-Tell, we might
have at least expected some balancing information.
Conclusion
We have just
begun to scratch the surface. All in
all, there is a massive amount of unevaluated material. We do not insist that it is necessary to
study all of this material in a single two-hour video. We do insist that it is necessary to study
all of this material, before one ventures to propose such a wild and unfounded
hypothesis as that put forward in The Bible’s Buried Secrets. The
use of evidence in The Bible’s Buried Secrets suggests that they cherry-picked only
those pieces of evidence that would suit their theory. This is not science; this is theatrics, this
is drama and posturing. The evidence is
buried in a matrix of spectacular music and photography; a barrage of quickly
changing authorities, and pseudo-authorities; and then cloaked in the name of
science and the Bible. “That’s not how
this works. That’s not how any of this
works.”[11]
[2] Meredith
G. Kline (1922-2007), for example, who has in the neighborhood of a dozen or
more publications in the field. The Structure of Biblical Authority (1997), and Treaty of the Great
King: The Covenant Structure of Deuteronomy: Studies and Commentary
(1963) are essential reading
[3]
All of this evidence was also suppressed.
[11] This
is a line from a popular TV commercial that refers to posting on the wall.
[12] If
you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations, please repost,
share, or use any of them as you wish.
No rights are reserved. They are
designed and intended for your free participation. They were freely received, and are freely
given. No other permission is required
for their use.
No comments:
Post a Comment