The Accuracy of the Bible

In our last lesson on evidences for God's existence we began to look at the testimony of the Bible. The Bible presents itself as a written record of several men who claim to have had direct contact with God. We argued that the testimony of these prophets constitutes a body of evidence which supports the conclusion that there is a God. We then listed several criteria that we can employ to assess these claims. We will now continue this line of inquiry.

One way that we can judge the reliability of the Bible is to see whether or not it is historically accurate. The Bible is somewhat unique among all the various religious writings of the past. It specifically puts forward the assertion that throughout history, God directly intervened to affect a long sequence of events in order to reveal a message to mankind. For this reason, much of the Bible is about historical events that are described in the normal narrative fashion. While it is not possible to prove the parts about the divine intervention, we can at least check the historical accuracy of the Biblical by a study of archaeology and extra-biblical records.

So, are the writers of the Bible good witnesses? Were they present when and where they claim? Did the things they describe take place? Or is the Bible one elaborate chain of myths, legends, and fanciful tales? The answer depends on who you ask. Modern historians and archaeologists will admit that many of the historical references in the Bible have been demonstrated to be accurate. Beyond this fact historians break down into three camps. On one side are those who argue that the Bible is largely make believe and should only be trusted when it can be verified from external sources. On the other end are believers who argue that the Bible has been proven accurate so often that we should trust its statements even when they can not be verified. In the middle are the majority of historians and archaeologists who acknowledge the Bible as a good source of information about the ancient world, but one that is not always right.

Of course, we would defend the second position. In the last two hundred years, scores of amazing discoveries have come to light which have verified in great detail specific references in the Bible. Many of these finds have proven the Bible to be accurate in matters which were previously held up by skeptics as proof that the Bible was mistaken. We would argue that as these discoveries continue to accumulate, the reasonable conclusion would be to give the writers of the Bible their due. They claim to have been at certain places and to have seen certain things. If the evidence we find supports their testimony, we should be willing to consider them credible witnesses.

We will now consider a series of examples where statements made in the Bible have been verified by archaeological evidence. There is a lot of this type of material. I have tried to concentrate on some of the more interesting finds, and also some of the more recent ones. Note that in several of these examples it would have been unlikely for anyone except a contemporary witness to have known these details. Consider:

I. The Patriarchal Age.

Thousands of cuneiform tablets have been found in different places in the middle east which date to the time covered in Genesis. One large cache of tablets was found at Tel Mardikh in Syria. These tablets are from the Empire of Ebla dating from around 2,000 BC. They confirm many details found in the Biblical stories about the Patriarchs. Versions of the Biblical stories about creation, the flood, and the tower of Babel have been discovered. Many of the specific social rules and customs described in the stories about Abraham and his sons have been verified as the current practice among the Semitic people in that time and region. This would include such things as the adoption custom, Genesis 15:4, having a child by a handmaid, Genesis 16:1-2, selling one's birthright, Genesis 25:27-34, selecting a son's wife, Genesis 24:10, and the price of slaves, Genesis 37:28. What's more, many of these tablets are written in a language very similar to the ancient Hebrew in which the Bible was written. They refer to many of the places visited by the Patriarchs, and they confirm the current use of names such as Abraham, Esau, Ishmael, Israel.

If the early books of the Bible were not written until the late kingdom period as many skeptics claim, how could the writers of these books have had such accurate knowledge of names and social customs that were current a thousand years before their

II. The Period of the Exodus and the Settlement.

The evidence from this period is still very much in dispute, but some findings have at least in part verified the accounts in the Bible.

A. Recent excavations in eastern Egypt have found Israelite style houses which were built during the time before the Exodus.

B. An Egyptian monument called the Mereneptah Stela dating from 1210 BC describes an Egyptian invasion of Canaan. Israel is mentioned as being one of the nations defeated. This proves that Israel existed as a nation in Palestine during the period of the judges.

C. Excavation of ancient Philistine temples revealed an amazing detail. The structures were so built that two columns standing close together supported much of the weight of the building. It was determined that pushing them over would cause the whole temple to collapse. How did the writer of Judges 16:23-30 know that?

III. The Period of the United Kingdom.

Evidence from this period is still sketchy, but some facts recorded in the Bible have been verified in recent years.

A. Fortifications believed to have been built by king Saul have been found at the cite of ancient Gibeah, confirming 1 Samuel 10:26.

B. The water shaft through which David was able to make a surprise attack on Jerusalem, 2 Samuel 5:6-8, has been found.

C. Remains of a palace built during the period of David's reign have been found in the ancient part of Jerusalem. The stone carvings are of definite Phoenician design. This would appear to confirm 2 Samuel 5:9-11.

D. The very existence of David has been verified by a recent find. Part of a monument was found at Tel Dan in 1993 which refers to the "house of David" and "King of Israel".

E. While no extra-Biblical references have been found which mention Solomon, a series of archaeological discoveries point to his existence. 1 Kings 9:15 says that Solomon built fortified walls around Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezer. Strong walls and elaborate gates of the same pattern have been found in each of these cities which date to the time of Solomon.

IV. The Period of the Divided Kingdom.

At this point most scholars are willing to grant that the history recorded in the Bible is essentially accurate. This is only because we have a lot more extra-biblical information from this point forward.

A. The invasion of Shishak recorded in 1 Kings 14:25-26 is verified by an Egyptian wall relief found in Karnak, Egypt.

B. Ahab's house of ivory and the pool of Samaria where they washed his chariot have been found , 1 Kings 22:38-39.

C. The Moabite stone is a monument that was carved by Mesha, king of Moab, in 850 BC. It confirms most of the Biblical story recorded in 2 Kings 3:4-27. It specifically refers to David, Omri, and several of the cities listed in the Bible.

D. The Black Obelisk is an Assyrian monument dating to 840 BC. It pictures Jehu, king of Israel, bowing and paying tribute to the king of Assyria. The reign of Jehu is described in 2 Kings 9-10.

E. Isaiah 20:1 says Sargon, king of Assyria, captured Ashdod. Absence of confirming evidence caused skeptics to question the existence of Sargon for many years. But then his palace was discovered in 1843 and a victory stela commemorating his victory over Ashdod was discovered in the ruins of Ashdod itself in 1963.

F. 2 Kings 18:13-19:37 describes the invasion of Judah by Sennacherib, king of Assyria. Many of the details of this story have been remarkably verified by archaeological discoveries. The Assyrian siege of Lachish has been verified by excavations and a large relief found in Sennacherib's palace. The fact that Sennacherib was unable to take Jerusalem is verified by his own account recorded on a monument known as the Taylor Prism which dates to 689 BC. The Bible records that Sennacherib was murdered by his own son, 2 Kings 19:37. This fact was verified when a clay tablet was found in the royal archives of Nineveh giving the same account.

G. Details of the invasion of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar mentioned by Jeremiah in Jeremiah 34:7 have been dramatically verified. Letters written on Ostraca were found in the ruins of Lachish which were written to the commader of Lachish from another outpost in the fight. The letters specifically mention Lachish and Azekah, the last strongholds to fall according to Jeremiah 34:7. One of the letters specifically mentions a prophet, possibly Jeremiah. Babylonian records verify parts of the Biblical account such as the deposing of Jehoiachin, 2 Kings 24:10-17, and the provisions supplied to him according to 2 Kings 25:27-30.

H. A very remarkable find in recent years was the discovery in Palestine of a pair of ancient clay bullae which bear the name of Baruch, son Neriah. Bullae were clay nodules that were used to seal important documents and items. They bear the impression of the seal mark of the owner. Since these particular bullae date to the correct time period, they are believed to be the seal marks of the scribe Baruch, son of Neriah, who recorded the book of Jeremiah, Jeremiah 36:4.

I. Another exciting find was the discovery of some small silver scrolls in 1979. These scrolls were found inside a Jerusalem tomb and are dated to around 600 BC, shortly before the Israelites' exile in Babylon. They contain a prayer from Numbers 6:24-26. Skeptics had long claimed that the early books of the Bible had not been written until the time of the exile or afterward, but this find has proven that at least portions of the Torah existed before the exile.

V. The Period of the Exile and Restoration.

A. Jeremiah 40:5 says that Gedaliah was put in charge over Judah after the Babylonian conquest. A clay seal was discovered at Lachish with the inscritption, "belonging to Gedaliah who is over the house."

B. 2 Chronicles 36:23 and the first chapter of Ezra records that when Cyrus of Persia conquered Babylon he allowed the exiles to return to their homelands. The Cyrus Cylinder is a contemporary Persian record that verifies that this was indeed his policy.

C. Remains of the wall built by Nehemiah as described in Nehemiah 2-6 have been uncovered in Jerusalem.

VI. The New Testament Period.

We have even more extra-biblical information and evidence for the NT period. These show that the writers of the NT were quite familiar with the exact details, events, and practices of the first century Roman empire. While there are still skeptics who argue that the writers of the NT were second or third generation Christians who falsely wrote under the names of the first Apostles, several factual details recorded in the NT make it clear that the writers must have been first hand witnesses of what they observed. We will limit our consideration to a few facts recorded by John and Luke.

A. Details recorded by John. The gospel of John purports to be a first hand account of the ministry of Jesus by John, the apostle and close disciple of Jesus, John 21:24-25. Some of the things which John describes which would require first hand knowledge would be:

1. The conditions and layout of the temple court before its destruction in 70 AD, John 2:13-16, John 8:20, John 10:23, and how long the temple had been under construction, John 2:20.

2. The location of such places as: Jacob's well, John 4:5-6, the pool of Bethesda, John 5:2, the pool of Siloam, John 9:7, and the village of Bethany, John 11:18.

3. The relationships of the high priests, John 18:13.

4. The existence of a place called "the Pavement", John 19:13. This site was unheard of in history until it was unearthed by archaeologists in the 50's.

5. The fishing practices in first century Galilee, including how many fish would overwhelm a net, John 21:1-11.

B. Details recorded by Luke. In both the gospel of Luke and in Acts, Luke records many historical details which verify the accuracy of his account. He assures us that he has carefully collected his information, Luke 1:1-4. Some of Luke's details were once used by skeptics to prove that Luke did not know what he was talking about. Subsequent discoveries have again and again demonstrated that Luke was an exact and careful historian:

1. That Quirinius was governor of Syria at the time of Jesus' birth around 6 BC, Luke 2:1-3. This was regarded as an error because the only information we had placed Quirinius as governor of Syria in 6 AD. But an ancient inscription found in Antioch confirms that Quirinius was indeed governor of Syria in 7 BC as well.

2. That Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar, Luke 3:1. This fact was disputed until an inscription was found near Damascus, dated between 14 and 29 AD, which reads, "Freedman of Lysanius the tetrarch." Luke was right.

3. That Iconium was a city of Phrygia and not Lycaonia, Acts 14:1-6. Because the ancient Roman historian Cicero said otherwise, historians long thought that Luke was mistaken. But monuments and inscriptions found in the past century have confirmed that Luke was right all along. The archaeologist William Ramsay concluded that this is an example of a "striking instance of local accuracy."

4. That the rulers of Thessalonica were known by the Greek name "politarchs," Acts 17:6. This name was absent from Greek literature, so it was thought to be a mistake on the part of Luke. But archaeologists have now uncovered several inscriptions which verify that this was exactly the title held by rulers in Macedonian cities in the first century.

5. Other examples of Luke's accuracy confirmed by uncovered inscriptions: That the head of government on Malta was called "chief man", Acts 28:7. That the city assembly of Ephesus met in the theater, Acts 19:23-41. That Sergius Paulus was proconsul of Cyprus at the time Luke states, Acts 13:7. That Gallio became proconsul of Achaia at the time Luke states, Acts 18:12.

VII. Some Quotations.

To conclude this line of argument we will close with some quotations from scholars and archaeologists who make this point:

Sir William Ramsay began his career in archaeology as a confirmed skeptic. He believed that Luke and Acts were written late in the second century and were historically inaccurate. After working a lifetime in the field he concluded: "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, he is possessed of the true historic sense...in short, this author should be placed along with the greatest of historians."

The great archaeologist, William F. Albright, said of the Bible: "Thanks to modern research we now recognize its substantial historicity. The narratives of the patriarchs, of Moses and the exodus, and of the conquest of Canaan, of the judges, the monarchy, exile and restoration, have all been confirmed and ilustrated to an extent that I should have thought impossible forty years ago."

The archaeologist Nelson Glueck said, "as a matter of fact, however, it may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or in exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical descriptions have often led to amazing discoveries."

Conclusion: We began by asking the simple question. Are the writers of the Bible reliable witnesses? They tell us that God has spoken to them and that they have had contact with God. Can we believe them? In this lesson we have tried to show that at least in terms of historical fact and accuracy the answer is yes. In coming lessons we will consider other ways to assess the testimony of the apostles and prophets of the Bible. For now, keep in mind that in many ways that we can check, they are telling us the truth. - D.R.-