Bible History and Archaeology

This article investigates: 1) the identification of the 'real' Hezekiah's tunnel, as described in 2 Chr. 32:30 (see also 2 Kgs 20:20); and 2) the identification of 'the springs and the stream that flowed through the land' in 2 Chr. 32:3–4. The possibility of Channel II instead of Tunnel VIII as the actual conduit that Hezekiah built in response to the approaching Assyrian threat has gained increasing attention among both archaeologists and biblical literary scholars, and new discoveries in the past fifteen years have both answered questions and raised new ones. This article is a rigorous interdisciplinary evaluation of the evidence from both fields, and it may be seen that when the issue of identifying Hezekiah's tunnel is taken in consideration with an understanding of the biblical text in its ancient Near Eastern literary milieu along with the most reliably expert findings in archaeology, several recent questions may be resolved.

"In the fifth year of King Rehoboam, King Shishak of Egypt marched against Jerusalem."  (1 Kings 14:25)

Nearly all Egyptologists identify Shishak with Shoshenq I of the 22nd dynasty (943 BC -716 BC) and this is still the majority position. However, it is a position which is based on old-school chronology that stems way back to 1828 when Jean-François Champollion (1790-1832) identified the person called Shishak in the Bible as the pharaoh known to history as Shoshenq I. As the two names sounded similar, 'Shishak' was identified by Champollion as Pharaoh Shoshenq I.

Shoshenq's identification was also based on Champollion's interpretation of reliefs he viewed on a wall of the Bubastite Portal at Karnak in that year. If you recall, it was Champollion, who only six years before, succeeded in deciphering the hieroglyphs on the Rossetta Stone in 1822.

When Champollion travelled to Egypt, the only time he did so, he visited the temple complex at Karnak which consists of a vast mix of decayed temples, chapels, pylons, and other buildings near Luxor, in Egypt. However, it was the scenes inscribed on the walls of the Bubastite Portal in hieroglyphs which captured Champollion's attention.

Among the 150 hieroglyphic name-rings on the Bubastite Portal, each represented as a bound and tethered Asiatic captive and representing the names of the towns conquered by Sheshonq during his northern campaign, one of them caught Champollion's eye. This was name ring 29. To him it appeared to say, "Ioudahamalek", which Champollion interpreted to mean "Judah the Kingdom". As far as Champollion was concerned, what other proof was needed. Here it was in black and white, so to speak, that Shoshenq I had fought against Judah and therefore must have captured Jerusalem. The identity that Shoshenq and Shishak of the Bible had therefore been confirmed in the most satisfactory manner."

From henceforth, anybody who was anybody in Egyptology agreed with Champollion, that is until William Max-Muller (1862-1919) who was one of the last students of the famous Egyptologist Georg Ebers (1837-1898), took a closer look. In 1888 Max-Muller pointed out that ring 29 should be read as "Yad-ha-Melek" which, when translated, means "Hand of the King." Suddenly, the "proof" that Judah was listed on the Bubastite Portal had become untenable. Yet despite this error, which modern scholars like Peter James, David Rohl and Kevin A. Wilson have made known through their books, the status quo that Shoshenq I and Shishak are one and the same has been maintained to the present day.

So who was Shishak? The answer to this mystery is not as difficult as it appears to be. I can say this with self-assurance because if one simply looks for the clues that are in plain sight in the Biblical text and put them together, the solution becomes inescapable. Nobody, as far as I am aware has used the methodology presented herein, at least not in the way I am about to show you. I therefore would like to invite you to join me in solving this mystery by using a methodology hitherto not tried before and one which truly identifies who Shishak was, and I can tell you without a shadow of doubt, he was not Shoshenq I.

Many people approach the Christmas story in the Bible the same way they do the story of jolly old St. Nick.  It’s a nice tradition to celebrate during the festive season, and possibly based in some historical fact, but more myth than truth.  However, the two earliest records of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth were written by a man who spent years following him (Matthew) and by a historian who carefully investigated the claims by speaking directly with eyewitnesses (Luke).  Further, they were written within the lifetime of those who actually knew Jesus: his mother, his siblings, and his disciples.1 Peter himself said, “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Pt 1:16). Finally, the accounts of that first Christmas contain numerous historical synchronisms and descriptions of specific places and customs.  Is it possible over 2000 years later to determine the credibility of the Christmas story through archaeology?  I believe it is.

Ephesus is one of the most excavated ancient cities, with some of the best preserved ruins. This gives us an excellent opportunity to test the reliability of Scripture.  When we compare the Ephesus of Scripture with the Ephesus that is being uncovered, we find that the Bible and archaeology tell the same story. 
This article was first published in Bible and Spade magazine (Summer 2018).  Bible and Spade is put out by the Associates for Biblical Research (biblearchaeology.org)

NEPHILIM = NEANDERTHALS : WATCHERS = CRO-MAGNONS

This book begins with the observation of a strange coincidence. The Bible and other ancient writings talk about three kinds of people living together at one time, Watchers, Nephilim and Humans. Then two of them disappear abruptly to leave only man to populate the earth with his kind.

Coincidentally, we find anthropologists over a period of one hundred and fifty years unearthing the remains of three species of hominids that are said to have co-existed at one time, Cro-Magnons, Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Then two of them suddenly become extinct leaving only Homo sapiens (modern man) to populate the planet.

Could it be that those beings dubbed Cro-Magnons may have in fact been the fabled "Watchers", the fallen angels described in the Bible who came to earth and mated with human women? And, if this is true, can we not reason that the results of their unnatural union resulted in hybrid children the Nephilim, the same beings that we call Neanderthals? What an intriguing possibility, one which this book investigates.

This study is truly ground breaking and proves once again how reliable the Bible really is. If you are a Christian then I hope that this book will encourage you to stand firm in your belief. If you are person of no particular persuasion but have been told that the Bible contains a load of bunkum, I hope that what this book shows will persuade you to reevaluate your position and take a closer look as to what the Bible has to say. And to those of you who believe in evolution, for you I have purposely not made reference to any Creationist publications. That way I cannot be accused of being a Creationist fundamentalist with a chip on my shoulder.

Hence, what you will read in some areas of this study will have been written and promoted by evolutionists themselves or reported by them in newspapers or science publications just as each discovery was made and presented to the world by evolutionary scientists. I have not glossed over or hidden anything from you. The theory of evolution stands or falls by the words of evolutionists themselves, not mine. I believe that what I have presented in the book offers a viable alternative to the one that evolutionists have taught for the last hundred and fifty years, with respects to the origins of man and especially where Cro-Magnons and Neanderthals have stood in the scheme of things.

This is truly a major work worthy of consideration and debate.

Available as Paperback
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nephlim-Skeletons-Found-Fred-Harding/dp/1500702323

Available for Kindle:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nephilim-Skeletons-Found-Fred-Harding-ebook/dp/B00CKU8I5M

Despite the fact that the name of many characters mentioned in the Old Testament, like David, King of Israel, have been recently confirmed by archaeology as well as their epoch and the events in which they were involved, most archaeologists, not to say all, continue to deny the historicity of the Bible they view as pious fiction or a mythical account. They argue that the major events in the Bible such as the victory of Abraham against Chedorlaomer, an unknown king of Elam around 2000 BCE, the victory of Moses against an unknown Pharaoh around 1500 BCE or the victory of Esther, an unknown Persian Queen, against an unknown vizier of Xerxes, never existed because they left absolutely no evidence. They also explain that according to what we know today, these events could not have occurred. These logical arguments are impressive but a precise chronological analysis based on absolute dates, coupled with a rigorous historical investigation, shows that all those major events really took place at the dates and places indicated (see comments on the three photographs on the cover page).
https://www.lulu.com/shop/gerard-gertoux/80-old-testament-characters-of-world-history-chronological-historical-and-archaeological-evidence/paperback/product-1mqgww8y.html?q=gertoux&page=1&pageSize=4

Often times the Bible is associated with rural pastoral settings. The Israelites wandering in the desert wilderness living in tents, David playing his harp for sheep out in the pasture, and Jesus strolling along dusty roads between remote villages. But what if I told you that the Bible is an urban book and that the center stage for where the drama of biblical events played out was truly the city? Starting in Genesis, all of the way to the end of the Bible in Revelation, the whole trajectory of humanity and the focal point for the Missio Dei was and is urban and not rural. When Jesus erupted into history through the womb of a teenager he lived in the most urban region in the world. The early church was birthed in the city and spread to the largest most influential cosmopolitan urban centers of the day. For the first-century Christian, to be a follower of Jesus was synonymous with being an urbanite. The Urbanity of the Bible explores the urban nature of the Bible and displays the urban trajectory of the Missio Dei. The city was and is a dominant theme of the setting, backdrop, and purposes of God throughout history. As the world today has flooded to the cities this book is good news. We were meant to live in the city.

The infamous king and queen of Israel in the 800's BC, Ahab and Jezebel, can be established in the archeological records by four items.  This talk discusses Jezebel's personal seal, the Kurkh Monolith, the Mesha Stele, and the Tel Dan Stele to show evidence for both Ahab and Jezebel.  In addition to Ahab and Jezebel, minor discussions show evidence for  these other Biblical characters:  Omri, Ahaziah,  Joram , and Jehu, kings of Israel; Ben-Hadad and Hazael, kings of Syria; and Ahazhiah, king of Judah.  This talk comes after "The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III" talk.

The Black Obelisk of Shalmaneser III provides important documentation that Jehu was king of Israel.  It also is evidence that Hazael, King of Aram Damascus (Syria) was a contemporary of Jehu, as seen in I Kings 19:17.  This talk comes after the "Going to the Bathroom in Lachich" talk.

In spite of Jerusalem’s difficult archaeological record, which has been the  topic of many  articles and books, I see a coherent image of ancient Jerusalem slowly emerging from the remnants and ruins of ancient Jerusalem, especially from excavations  conducted  during the past four decades. The focus of my archaeological audit is the material  culture  evidence  presented in these  primary reports, with an emphasis on what has actually been uncovered rather than on speculations regarding  what may have  (or should have) existed in antiquity. While there are many details that are unknown or remains that are no longer preserved, a fairly clear outline of Bronze and Iron Age (ca. 3000–586 B.C.E.) Jerusalem is emerging.

The article is an attempt to summarize the problems which come into view when the patriarchs of Israel are studied. More particularly, the attention is focused on the question of whether they are eponyms, legendary figures or historical persons. The narrative of Gen 12–50 was composed in the Persian period, so the distance from the possible time when Abraham, Isaac and Joseph/Israel lived is very long. This problem is connected with the role of archaeology and extra-biblical evidence. Regarding the patriarchs the question is posed whether they in fact “existed”, that is, if they are historical persons or literary imaginations invented by authors of the second part of Genesis.

It is commonly agreed that the Iron Age I-II transition was gradual and that processes of social complexity initiated in the Iron Age I simply matured in the Iron Age II. The emergence of Levantine kingdoms-whether the so-called "United Monarchy" (i.e., the highland polity) or other polities-was therefore seen as an outcome of this gradual maturation, even if the date of their emergence is hotly debated. The present paper challenges both the perceived gradual nature of Iron Age complexity and the dated understanding of state formation processes that lies behind the common scholarly reconstructions of Iron Age political developments. Instead, the paper shows that the Iron Age I-II transition was troubled and was accompanied by drastic changes in many parameters, whether settlement patterns, settlement forms, or various material traits. Acknowledging these transformations is therefore the first step in understanding the process through which local kingdoms emerged. The main part of the paper briefly outlines these changes, which are later incorporated into a suggested historical scenario, reconstructing the processes leading to the emergence of the monarchy in Iron Age Israel and accompanying it. The final part of the paper briefly embeds these processes within a broader discussion of state formation in general and within the debate about the highland polity

In its essence, history is the narration of the past through the art of storytelling. This is also true of biblical historiography, which brings together history, narrative and theology. Is the account of the sea crossing in Ex 14 a historical account or a narrative of fiction?

This is the PowerPoint presentation that corresponds with my paper  "How the Cyrus Cylinder and Historians of Antiquity Confirm the Prophecies about Cyrus Found in Isaiah 44 and 45".  https://www.academia.edu/33818061/How_the_Cyrus_Cylinder_and_Historians_of_Antiquity_Confirm_the_Prophecies_about_Cyrus_Found_in_Isaiah_44_and_45  This is a phrase-by-phrase comparison of Isaiah 44:26-28 and Isaiah 45:1-6, with the Cyrus Cylinder and the histories of Xenophon and Herodotus, shows with amazing accuracy how the prophesies of Isaiah about Cyrus, given nearly 200 years before they happened, were fulfilled.

In this essay I will argue that a strong defense of Scripture as the inspired Word of God must include a defense of Noah’s Flood as a historical event. Next, I will argue that the views other than the Caspian Basin theory have serious problems- either Scripturally, scientifically, or both. Last, I will argue that viewing the Flood as a Middle Paleolithic event in the Caspian Basin fits the Biblical and scientific data well… A Caspian Basin Flood serves as a robust apologetic tool in defending Scripture and by extension Christianity… this Caspian Basin theory gives the most robust defense of the Bible as inspired and inerrant. With this theory, we do not need to compromise faithfulness to God’s Word in Scripture or His word in nature.

In recent years the impact of Assyriology on Biblical studies and the knowledge of the history of ancient Israel has become more and more evident. Thanks to Assyriology the reconstructions of the history of Israel in the period of the First Temple are much fuller and more comprehensive than before. The same is true in regard to the very roots and nature of many books included in the Hebrew Bible. The up-to-date results of the cooperation of Biblical scholars and Assyriologists lead us to the conclusion that in the 7th century B.C. there existed a strong and fruitful Israelite diaspora in Assyria. Because information on its existence, influence and outcome are consequently scanty in the Bible (damnatio memoriae), so Assyriology helps to gain a new knowledge about it and to assess its impact on the religion of ancient Israel.

Jerusalem, in stone and imagination, is unique as a holy city of the world’s three monotheistic religions – Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. For many, both past and present, Jerusalem is imagined as an eternal future utopia, a vision that embodies national redemption, the reign of justice, peace, and religious fulfilment. At the same time, throughout Jerusalem’s contested history, it has been at the center of fierce political, social, and religious conflict.

An attempt to illustrate, with some methodological creativity, the importance of studying the background of biblical texts by paying attention to their "silences" or "gaps".  To this end and using Acts 21:1 as an example, this article presents some photographs of the most significant archaeological sites and discoveries on the island of Rhodes and exegetical observations that help bring to light information about the social environment that this biblical passage omits or does not allude to.

This chapter introduces readers to the main themes and approaches of essays published in this co-edited book: Jerusalem in Bible and Archaeology: The First Temple Period. This volume demonstrates how the integration of archaeology and biblical studies can take place with reference to the central site of Jerusalem. It also illustrates how biblical interpretation, historical investigations, and archaeological research can successfully dialogue even in the absence of consensus about the “facts.”

La parola greca “Diatessaron” significa “attraverso i quattro” e fin dal II secolo fu utilizzata in relazione ai Vangeli. Come indica il resto del titolo, “Le varianti testuali dei più antichi manoscritti dei Vangeli”, quest’opera è un commentario che presenta le varianti nel testo degli antichi papiri greci, dei grandi onciali su pergamena e delle più antiche traduzioni dei Vangeli in altre lingue (siriaca, latina e copta) tenendo anche conto del parere dei più grandi luminari in materia, come Bruce M. Metzger, Philip W. Comfort, gli Aland e altri. Con i metodi della critica testuale propone una revisione dell’odierno testo scientifico standard, il Nestle-Aland/UBS, che è alla base di ogni traduzione moderna dei Vangeli.

The starting point of the article is to explain the reasons why Megiddo was one of the most important Canaanite cities in the northern Palestine, as well as the presentation of scientific proposals explaining the etymology and meaning of its name. In this context, considerations regarding the Bible narration associated with Megiddo and references to it contained in extra- -biblical sources are included. The second part of the article presents an outline of the history of archaeological research in Tel Megiddo, which is the starting point for presenting the history of biblical Megiddo in the light of the results of these studies. The article presents various, often contradictory, views of researchers on the history of Megiddo based primarily on the analysis of archaeological data, from the Neolithic, through the Early, Middle and Late Bronze Ages to the Iron Age.

It is time Biblical archaeologists compared their dating with the Bible's own timeline rather than being deceived by the revised timeline of Xenophon.  The Bible's timeline dates the 1st of Cyrus to 455 BCE and thus the Exodus 19 jubilees earlier specifically to 1386 BCE, the beginning of the rule of Akhenaten.  Akhenaten converted to monotheism as a result of the 10 plagues.  But using 1386 BCE to date the Exodus gives you very compatible archaeological dating for the fall of Jericho, the rulerships of David and Solomon and the date for Shishak's invasion.  So archaeology and Biblical chronology are 100% compatible and confirmed.  Archaeologists are not historians though, and have no clue that they are using the wrong timeline.  Astronomy helps correct the timeline and science and the Bible can now be accurately compared.

Opinions regarding the exact dating of the activity of the prophet Hosea go mainly in two directions. One group of scholars puts it in the middle of the 8th century B.C., while the other prefers the next decades. Even though the difference is not huge, it is nonetheless very important. Both groups rely exclusively on the data given in the Book of Hosea and the knowledge about the history of the Divided Monarchy as it is presented in the Hebrew Bible. Until recently, another source of information was neglected, namely the Neo-Assyrian texts and sources. Taking them seriously into consideration, the solution given by, among others, Nadav Na’aman seems the most plausible. The early prophecies of Hosea should be connected with Israel’s disastrous defeat in its struggle with Assyria, which ended with the loss of large parts of its territory and the first big wave of forced deportations to Mesopotamia. The activity of the prophet Hosea should therefore be dated at the very beginning of the last decade of the Northern Kingdom (731-723 B.C.), hence in the context of the reign of king Hoshea, son of Elah. But quite differently to Na’aman, who suggests that the early scroll containing the message of the prophet was written in the North, possibly a short time after 720 B.C. when the Northern Kingdom collapsed, the author of this article avers that the “first edition of the book” was written in Mesopotamia at the very beginning of the process of consolidation of the Assyrian Diaspora. It means that the prophet Hosea was one of the Israelites who were deported to Mesopotamia by the Assyrians during the first wave of deportations. More than a hundred years later, his message was reinterpreted from a pro-Judaean (or pro-Jerusalem) perspective by the deportees who were brought to Mesopotamia by the Babylonians. The final elaboration of Hosea’s message, as we know it from the Book of Hosea, was made in the Persian, or possibly even in the Hellenistic period.