25 February, 2010

Archaeological dig uncovers support for biblical account of Solomon's 1st temple

Archaeologists have unearthed a series of structures in Old Jerusalem which seems to validate the biblical account of the first temple, built in the 10th century BCE by King Solomon. Once again we seem to be presented with the reality that although the Bible is not a history book, it is a book whose writings are rooted in the history of a people.

This has particular resonance for me as I am currently reading N.T. Wright's history of the resurrection in which he continually argues the same point. It's always nice when these lessons of faith serve to be supported through secular academic research!

Click on the title to this post to read the article yourself!

4 comments:

  1. "...although the Bible is not a history book, it is a book whose writings are rooted in the history of a people."

    Sure, and why not? The Illiad and Aeneid are other examples of fiction written with enough genuine references that Schliemann was able to use them to pinpoint the location of ancient Troy.

    And sometime in the future, somebody will dig up the ruins of today's "civilization," possibly based on geographical references they found in yet another book of fiction.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Northern Exposure26 February, 2010

    Academic history as we know it is barely 200 years old. What is not historical writing is any number of things: fiction, argumentation, poetry, odes, elegies, lyrics of songs, aphorisms, chronicles, even lists. All of these are found in the Bible, which could more accurately be called a library than a book.

    While we are on the topic of books, I have just finished reading Karen Armstrong’s A Case for God. Armstrong does not put forth arguments for the existence of God. Instead, she makes a case for a refinement of what we mean by “God”. Well worth reading, whether or not one agrees with what she says.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Northern Exposure27 February, 2010

    Oops!...The title of the book is, The Case for God, not A Case for God. Sorry about that.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A skeptic is a skeptic, and no amount of evidence is going to change their mind. With relativism running rampant, any argument can be put forth and believed. We are fast becoming an anti-scientific society. Facts can be manipulated to ones fantasy.

    Are we past the stage of reasonable dialogue? One would hope not, but some commentators lead us to believe otherwise.

    Cliff

    ReplyDelete

Followers of this blog:

Blog Archive

Google Analytics