THE BIBLE AND ARCHAEOLOGY

Discoveries in the field of Archeology in the past 200 years have provided abundant evidence supporting the historical accuracy of both Old and New Testaments. Over and over again people, places, events and customs described in the scriptures have been confirmed by modern archeology. On the other hand there has been nothing to date discovered which has contradicted or undermined the historical reliability of the scriptures. One would expect that a book given by God would be accurate and reliable regarding the information to which it gives witness including those of a historical nature. Archeology has proved that the Bible to be such a book adding to the evidence for the inspiration of the scriptures.

Geisler and Nix summarize the impact that Archeology has had on biblical studies in these words, " Historical confirmation of the Old Testament has come from all over the biblical world. Persons, places and events have been substantiated: from the Patriarchs to Israel in Egypt, to the conquest of Canaan, to the kingdom under Solomon, to the deportations of Israel and Judah to Assyria and Babylonia respectively. In the field of New Testament studies, the evidence has also been abundant. Even a casual survey of any good book on New Testament archeology will indicate that the accuracy of details in the events of Christ's life has been confirmed from the ruins of Palestine, as has been the case with the details about the journeys of the Apostle Paul."( Introduction to the Bible, p.122)

Josh McDowell in his book Evidence the Demands a Verdict presents the testimony of many world renown Biblical scholars and Archeologists who confirm the role that archeology has played in verifying the historical accuracy of the Bible. The interested reader is encouraged to obtain this book for further study. The following brief quotes are offered as representative examples.

"Nelson Glueck, the renowned Jewish archeologist, wrote that 'it may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference.' " (p. 68)

"William F. Albright, known for his reputation as one of the great archeologists, states: 'There can be no doubt that archeology has confirmed the substantial historicity of the old Testament tradition.' " (p. 68)

"Millar Burrows of Yale observes: 'Archeology has in many cases refuted the views of modern critics. It has shown in a number of instances that these views rest on false assumptions and unreal, artificial schemes of historical development. This is a real contribution and not to be minimized.' " (p. 69)

" The Yale archeologist adds to his above statement: " On the whole however, archeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the Scriptural record. More than one archeologist has found his respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine.' " (p. 69)

The gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts both believed to be written by Luke are vital witnesses to the life of Christ and the early church. When focusing on the New Testament record given by Luke McDowell writes, " Luke's reliability as an historian is unquestionable. Unger tells us that archeology has authenticated the gospel accounts, especially Luke. 'In Unger's words, The Acts of the Apostles is now generally agreed in scholarly circles to be the work of Luke, to belong to the first century and to involve the labors of a careful historian who was substantially accurate in his use of sources.' " (p. 72)

Finally McDowell quotes Sir William Ramsay regarded as one of the greatest archeologist to have ever lived saying, "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of facts trustworthy; he is possessed of the true historic sense...In short this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians." (p. 73)