Program / Course 17: Defending Scripture / Lesson 6.2
What you will learn
- Explain why most of the ancient world is not preserved and what this means for arguments from silence.
- Identify the ways in which archaeological finds depend on interpretation.
- Distinguish what archaeology can decide from what it cannot, including miracles and theological claims.
- Evaluate cases in which both believers and skeptics have overstated the evidence.
The big idea
Archaeology recovers only a small and random part of what once existed. Most ancient writing was on perishable material, most sites have not been excavated, and most of what was excavated was not recorded in full. Finds must be interpreted, and different scholars read the same data differently. For these reasons, the absence of a find is weak evidence, and the presence of a find shows less than people often claim. Archaeology cannot test miracles or inspiration, and it cannot by itself settle the truth of a religious claim.
Key terms
- Argument from silence
- The inference that something did not happen because no evidence of it has been found. It is weak when the evidence is expected to be rare.
- Sampling
- Excavating only part of a site or only some sites. What is found depends on where one digs.
- Interpretation
- The step from raw finds to a historical claim. Different interpreters may reach different conclusions from the same data.
- Provenance
- The recorded origin and history of an object, including where and how it was found. Objects without provenance are less reliable as evidence.
- Forgery
- A deliberately made false artifact. Several famous supposed biblical finds have proved to be forgeries.
- Confirmation bias
- The tendency to favor evidence that supports what one already believes.
Background
Ancient peoples wrote on papyrus, wood, leather and wax, all of which rot in most climates. Only in dry places like the Egyptian desert, the caves near the Dead Sea, or in buried or burnt buildings do such materials survive. Clay and stone last better, but even they are damaged by later building, since later peoples reuse stones and build over old sites. The result is that the record is full of holes.
Archaeologists also work under constraints of money, time and access. A dig may reach only a few squares of a large mound. Political limits close sites, as in the Temple Mount in Jerusalem where excavation is not permitted. Methods have improved, but many older excavations were poorly recorded, and reinterpretation of their finds is common. With these limits in mind, this lesson asks what can reasonably be inferred.
Step-by-step explanation
Step 1: The problem of silence
Imagine a scholar saying that no archaeological trace of a person or event has been found and that the person or event is therefore doubtful. The inference is sometimes right, but it depends on how likely a trace would be. For a famous king with a large palace, traces are more likely. For a family of shepherds, they are very unlikely. For many figures of the Bible, including most prophets, no inscription outside the Bible is known, and this is what would be expected in most cases.
A famous case helps. For many years some historians doubted that there had been a Hittite empire, since the Bible mentioned the Hittites and no other source did. In the early twentieth century, the discovery of the Hittite capital at Boghazkoy and its archives showed a great kingdom. The case is often cited by believers, and a skeptic can fairly reply that many biblical claims were never confirmed. The lesson is to be careful, not to conclude either way.
Step 2: Interpretation and dating
An excavated wall, a layer of ash or a set of pots does not label itself. Archaeologists date a layer by pottery styles, by coins or inscriptions, and by radiocarbon samples with ranges of error. Disputes about the date of a layer can swing the whole picture. The dispute between higher and lower chronologies for the tenth century before Christ is an example, and it affects whether the buildings at some sites are attributed to Solomon or to a later king.
Similarly, the identification of an object with a biblical person is often uncertain. Many seals bear common names, and a name like Hezekiah or Jeremiah could belong to many people. Reputable scholars mark claims as probable, possible or doubtful. The popular press often drops these distinctions.
Step 3: What archaeology cannot decide
A theological claim cannot be tested by digging. No excavation can show that God spoke to Moses, that a person was healed or that Jesus rose. Archaeology can show that a person was crucified in first-century Judea, since the remains of one crucified man have been found at Jerusalem, and it can show that a tomb was cut in the rock. It cannot show what happened in a tomb on the third day. For such claims, other kinds of argument are needed, including the study of texts, history and philosophy.
The same holds for those who deny the claims. The absence of an inscription mentioning a miracle does not show it did not occur, since miracles would not be expected to leave such traces. A skeptic who says archaeology has disproved the miraculous has stepped outside the evidence, as has a believer who says it has proved it.
Step 4: Fakes, hype and bias
Supposed biblical artifacts attract buyers and publicity, and forgeries are a risk. The ossuary inscribed with the words James, brother of Jesus, announced in 2002, was examined by experts who disagreed, and the Israel Antiquities Authority concluded that the inscription was a modern forgery. The owner was tried and acquitted on the forgery charge in 2012 on the ground that the prosecution could not prove it beyond doubt, so the case is a fair example of ongoing dispute. Other claims, such as the finding of Noah’s ark on Mount Ararat, have been rejected by scholars.
Bias affects everyone. A scholar who wants the Bible to be right is tempted to accept weak support, and a scholar who wants it to be wrong is tempted to accept weak objections. A reader can guard against this by looking for peer review, by seeing whether specialists from different perspectives agree, and by noting whether the author states what would count against the claim.
- Why is the absence of a find weak evidence in many cases, and when is it stronger?
- What would you ask about a news story reporting a spectacular biblical discovery?
- How should a believer respond when a respected archaeologist argues against a traditional reading?
- How should a skeptic respond when a respected archaeologist argues for one?
- What does it mean that archaeology cannot test miracles?
- How can you tell whether a writer is overstating the evidence in either direction?
Examples
The Hittites
The Bible mentions Hittites many times. For centuries, no other source spoke of them, and some scholars doubted the references. The excavation of a large archive at Hattusa in modern Turkey from the early twentieth century showed that a major Hittite empire had existed. The case shows the danger of silence.
The James ossuary
A limestone ossuary with an Aramaic inscription naming James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus, was announced in 2002. Many scholars doubted its authenticity, especially because it did not come from a controlled excavation. The case shows how lack of provenance weakens evidence.
A crucified man
In 1968, a Jewish tomb at Giv’at ha-Mivtar near Jerusalem yielded the heel bone of a man with a nail through it. It was long cited as evidence of Roman crucifixion practice, though later study questioned some of the original reading. The case illustrates that even a good find can be reinterpreted.
Different perspectives
Catholic
Catholic teaching holds that faith is reasonable but does not depend on the findings of any one science. Catholic scholars accept the results of archaeology and treat claims of proof with caution. The Church has encouraged historical research since the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu of 1943.
Orthodox
The Orthodox faith rests on the experience of the Resurrection and the life of the church, and does not wait on archaeology. Orthodox writers respect the sacred sites and warn against reducing faith to evidence from digs.
Protestant (conservative)
Conservative Protestants often welcome archaeology as support for the Bible and stress that the Bible has been found accurate in many details. Responsible voices among them also warn against claiming too much and note that faith does not rest on discoveries.
Protestant (liberal and critical)
Liberal Protestants stress that archaeological findings limit what can be said about the origins of Israel and the accuracy of narratives, and that religious authority does not depend on historical precision. They criticize apologetic uses of the evidence.
Secular scholarship
Secular scholars treat the Bible as one source among others and expect independent evidence for historical claims. Many hold that the lack of evidence for a large united monarchy or a mass exodus is significant, and others say that the evidence should not be expected in these cases. The debate is still open.
Why it matters
Because archaeology seems concrete, claims made in its name carry unusual weight. Knowing its limits helps you resist overconfident claims from either side. It also frees you from thinking that faith must wait on the next excavation, or that a new find must settle the matter. Careful reasoning about evidence is a habit that serves in every part of this course.
Common misunderstandings
Misunderstanding: If archaeologists have not found it, it did not happen.
Correction: Most of the ancient world left no trace that has been found. Silence is evidence only when a trace would be expected and a thorough search has been made.
Misunderstanding: Archaeology can prove a miracle.
Correction: It cannot. At most it can support the setting and the existence of persons and places. A miracle claim requires other kinds of argument.
Misunderstanding: Because some finds were forgeries, all biblical archaeology is suspect.
Correction: A forgery shows that care is needed. The great majority of finds from controlled excavations are not in doubt, and experts check them.
Misunderstanding: Minimalists always reject the Bible, and maximalists always defend it.
Correction: The labels refer to views about the historical usefulness of the text. Many scholars have changed positions with new evidence, and many hold mixed views.
Knowledge check
Why is an argument from silence weak in archaeology?
Only a small fraction of the ancient world survives or has been excavated, and most writing was on perishable material. A trace of a minor person or event would be unlikely to survive in any case. The argument is stronger only when a trace would be expected, and when a thorough search has failed. The case of the Hittites shows how a long silence was ended by a find.
How does interpretation affect archaeological claims?
Finds must be dated and identified, and these steps depend on methods with ranges of error and on judgments about context. Different scholars can read the same layer or object differently, as in the dispute over the tenth century chronology. Identifications of seals and objects with biblical persons are often uncertain, and careful scholars label them probable or possible.
What cannot archaeology decide?
Archaeology cannot test miracles, inspiration or other theological claims. It can show that people lived, buildings stood and events like crucifixion took place, but not that God acted in them. The same limit applies to denials, because the absence of a trace of a miracle does not show that the miracle did not occur.
What can protect a reader from forgery and hype?
A reader can look for provenance from a controlled excavation, publication and review by specialists, agreement among experts of different views, and a clear statement of what is known and what is uncertain. Sensational claims reported first in the press, or sold on the antiquities market, are more likely to be mistaken.
Think it through
- Have you ever accepted a claim about a discovery because you wanted it to be true? What did you do afterward?
- What is the difference between a reasonable hope for confirmation and an unreasonable demand for it?
- How can a person hold their faith steady while the evidence is debated?
Independent assignment
Audit a news claim
In your own notebook, choose a news article or video that claims a biblical discovery. Write 300 to 400 words assessing it with the questions in this lesson: where was it found and by whom, how is it dated, what is claimed, what would be expected if the claim were true and what alternative explanations exist. Conclude with a rating of probable, possible or doubtful. Do not send this to anyone or post it anywhere.
Further study
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fallacies Read the entry on fallacies, especially the argument from ignorance.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Philosophy of History Read for the problems of historical evidence.
- N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God Read selectively for a historical argument that does not rest on archaeology alone.
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Hume on Religion Read for Hume’s argument about miracles and testimony, which skeptics often cite.
- Luke 19:40 If these should hold their peace, the stones would cry out.
- Genesis 10:15 Heth, the ancestor of the Hittites, named in the table of nations.