Raiders of the Faux Ark

by nvrgnbk 9 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • nvrgnbk
    nvrgnbk

    http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/fauxark/

    online features

    Raiders of the Faux Ark October 10, 2007
    by Eric H. Cline

    Biblical archeology is too important to leave to crackpots and ideologues. It's time to fight back.

    This editorial was first published in the Boston Globe on September 30, 2007, and is republished here with their kind permission.

    [image]

    Eric Cline at Megiddo (Courtesy Eric Cline)

    Noah's Ark. The Ark of the Covenant. The Garden of Eden. Sodom and Gomorrah. The Exodus. The Lost Tomb of Jesus. All have been "found" in the last 10 years, including one within the past six months. The discoverers: a former SWAT team member; an investigator of ghosts, telepathy, and parapsychology; a filmmaker who calls himself "The Naked Archeologist"; and others, none of whom has any professional training in archeology.

    We are living in a time of exciting discoveries in biblical archeology. We are also living in a time of widespread biblical fraud, dubious science, and crackpot theorizing. Some of the highest-profile discoveries of the past several years are shadowed by accusations of forgery, such as the James Ossuary, which may or may not be the burial box of Jesus' brother, as well as other supposed Bible-era findings such as the Jehoash Tablet and a small ivory pomegranate said to be from the time of Solomon. Every year "scientific" expeditions embark to look for Noah's Ark, raising untold amounts of money from gullible believers who eagerly listen to tales spun by sincere amateurs or rapacious con men; it is not always easy to tell the two apart.

    The tools of modern archeology, from magnetometers to precise excavation methods, offer a growing opportunity to illuminate some of the intriguing mysteries surrounding the Bible, one of the foundations of western civilization. Yet the amateurs are taking in the public's money to support ventures that offer little chance of furthering the cause of knowledge. With their grand claims, and all the ensuing attention, they divert the public's attention from the scientific study of the Holy Land - and bring confusion, and even discredit, to biblical archeology.

    Unfortunately, when fantastic claims are made, they largely go unchallenged by academics. There have been some obvious exceptions, such as the recent film "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," which inspired an outcry from scholars by claiming that archeologists had found, but not recognized, the tomb of Jesus more than 20 years ago. But much more common is a vast and echoing silence reminiscent of the early days of the debate over "intelligent design," when biologists were reluctant to respond to the neocreationist challenge. Archeologists, too, are often reluctant to be seen as challenging deeply held religious beliefs. And so the professionals are allowing a PR disaster to slowly unfold: yielding a field of tremendous importance to pseudoscientists, amateur enthusiasts, and irresponsible documentary filmmakers.

    At a time when the world is increasingly divided by religion, both domestically and internationally, and when many people are biblically illiterate, legitimate inquiries into the common origins of religions have never been more important. I believe that the public deserves - and wants - better. We have an obligation to challenge the lies and the hype, to share the real data, so that the public discussion can be an informed one.

    It is time we take back our field.

    The first archeological endeavors in the Holy Land were conducted not by archeologists, but rather by theologians primarily interested in locating places mentioned in the Bible. Pride of place goes to the American minister Edward Robinson, who toured the Holy Land in 1838, accompanied by an American missionary named Eli Smith who was fluent in Arabic, in order to identify as many sites mentioned in the Bible as possible--in other words, to create a historical (and biblical) geography of Palestine. Others soon followed, including Sir Charles Warren, a British general who explored and recorded the features of Jerusalem in the 1860s. None of these men were archeologists, but they made important contributions to the field.

    Throughout much of the nineteenth century, the field of biblical archeology was dominated by men said to have been working with a Bible in one hand and a trowel in the other. The field soon became more scientific, thanks to the efforts of men like Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie, who introduced into archeology the dual concepts of stratigraphy (when two succeeding cities are built one on top of the other, the lower one will always be earlier in time) and pottery seriation (pottery types go in and out of style, just like today's clothes, and can be used to help date the stratigraphic levels observable at ancient sites).

    By the time Dame Kathleen Kenyon was excavating in Jericho and Jerusalem during the mid-twentieth century, archeology was in the hands of professionals trained not just in proper excavation techniques, but in the scientific method, and with years of schooling in ancient languages, cultures, and history. They also mastered bodies of literature and theory and spent years practicing their craft and being subjected to peer review. Theological motivation became less important.

    [image]

    Excavations at Megiddo

    Today there are strict standards concerning excavations in every country in the Middle East. Permission to excavate must be obtained from the proper authorities, with presentation of a detailed research plan, good reasons given for the questions being examined, evidence of sufficient funding, and often a strategy for conservation of the site upon completion of the excavation. Peer review of any large funding proposals is obligatory. In short, it is a serious and highly competitive field.

    As a result, however, we have seen a rise of two cultures - the scientists and the amateur enthusiasts. Lacking the proper training and credentials, the amateurs are sustained by vanity presses, television, and now the Internet.

    For example, in 2006, Bob Cornuke, a former SWAT team member turned biblical investigator--and now president of the Bible Archaeology Search and Exploration (BASE) Institute in Colorado - led an expedition searching for Noah's Ark. Media reports breathlessly announced that Cornuke's team had discovered boat-shaped rocks at an altitude of 13,000 feet on Mount Suleiman in Iran's Elburz mountain range. Cornuke said the rocks look "uncannily like wood. . . .We have had [cut] thin sections of the rock made, and we can see [wood] cell structures."

    But peer review would have quickly debunked these findings. Kevin Pickering, a geologist at University College London who specializes in sedimentary rocks, said, "The photos appear to show iron-stained sedimentary rocks, probably thin beds of silicified sandstones and shales, which were most likely laid down in a marine environment a long time ago."

    Then there is Michael Sanders, who has made a habit of using NASA satellite photographs to search for biblical locations and objects. From 1998 to 2001, Sanders announced that he had not only located the lost cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, but also the Garden of Eden, the Ark of the Covenant, and the Tower of Babel.

    Sanders describes himself on his website as a "Biblical Scholar of Archaeology, Egyptology and Assyriology," but according to the Los Angeles Times, he "concedes that he has no formal archeological training." Other newspaper accounts describe him as a "self-made scholar" who did research in parapsychology at Duke University.

    And we must not forget documentary filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici. He bills himself as "The Naked Archeologist" in a television series on the History Channel, but has repeatedly stated during media interviews that he is an investigative journalist rather than an archeologist. Jacobovici is perhaps best known for "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," which first aired in March 2007 and which has been described by professor Jodi Magness of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as making "a sensationalistic claim without any scientific basis or support."

    In short, the amateur arena is full of deeply flawed junk science. Important issues are cloaked in legitimate-sounding terminology, little attention is paid to the investigative process, and contrary evidence is ignored.

    Biblical archeologists are suddenly finding themselves in a position similar to the evolutionary biologists fighting intelligent design - an entire parallel version of their field is being driven by religious belief, not research principles. The biologists' situation makes the risk clear - they did not deign to mount a public refutation of the "science" of intelligent design for years, until it was almost too late, and thus anti-evolutionary science began making its way into the public schools.

    Why are we sitting the battle out?

    Partly, this is a matter of a strain of snobbery that runs through many academic fields: a suspicion of colleagues who venture too far from "serious" topics or appear in the popular media too often.

    Partly it is a matter of the uncertainty of the stories themselves: many biblical questions are so shrouded in uncertainty as to be inherently unsolvable. For example, even if the Garden of Eden once were a real place, and even if we knew the general location where it might have been, how would we know when we had found it? When most archeologists and biblical scholars hear that someone has (yet again) discovered Noah's Ark, they roll their eyes and get on with their business. This can leave the impression that the report might be true.

    And partly it is because scientific findings may challenge religious dogma. Biblical scholarship is highly charged because the Bible is a religious book and any research carries the prospect of "proving" or "disproving" treasured beliefs. What if the Exodus might not have taken place as described in the Bible? Similarly, what will people do when told that there are identical stories to Noah and the Ark, but they were recorded between 500 and 1,000 years earlier sans Noah? And that the flood was sent because the people were too noisy and the Gods couldn't sleep, not because people were evil and sinning? Or when you tell them that "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" was a concept expressed in Hammurabi's Law Code nearly 1,000 years before the Bible?

    This is where it can get daunting for academics, for it is at this point that the ideologues frequently weigh in. And these pundits are often sophisticated and convincing debaters, which can make them intimidating opponents for a scholar.

    But we don't need to go looking for Noah's Ark to find confirmation of details found in the Bible. During the past century or so, archeologists have found the first mention of Israel outside the Bible, in an Egyptian inscription carved by the pharaoh Merneptah in the year 1207 B.C. They have found mentions of Israelite kings, including Omri, Ahab, and Jehu, in neo-Assyrian inscriptions from the early first millennium B.C. And they have found, most recently, a mention of the House of David in an inscription from northern Israel dating to the ninth century B.C. These are conclusive pieces of evidence that these people and places once existed and that at least parts of the Bible are historically accurate. Perhaps none of these is as attention-getting as finding Noah's Ark, but they serve to deepen our understanding of, and appreciation for, the Bible.

    Religious archeologists and secular archeologists frequently work side by side in the Holy Land. Among the top ranks of researchers, there are evangelical Christians, orthodox Jews, and people of many denominations. It is not religious views that are the issue here; it is whether good science is being done. Biblical archeology is a field in which people of good will, and all religions, can join under the banner of the scientific process.

    Most archeological organizations, including the American Schools of Oriental Research, the Archaeological Institute of America, and the Society for American Archaeology, state that it is one of the obligations of professional archeologists to make their findings and discoveries generally available. But we need to do more than simply publish research if we are to successfully counter junk science. We need to take our information to the public not only via writing but also via radio, television, film, and any other available media.

    Remember that biblical mysteries are not just ancient history. For example, did Joshua really fight the Battle of Jericho and drive the Canaanites out of the land, as stated in the biblical account of the Israelite conquest of Canaan? If so, who was there first and to whom does the land really belong today? Does it matter? It does to many Palestinians, who exert a (dubious) claim as descendants of the Canaanites and Jebusites, and to many Israelis, who exert a similar claim based on their own understanding of their ancestors' history.

    Remember, too, that archeologists who speak out can make a difference. "Disclaimer statements" have recently been posted on Bob Cornuke's Web pages concerning the Ark of the Covenant, Noah's Ark, and the location of Mount Sinai. Now, for instance, we find the statement that the BASE Institute "does not make the claim that we have found Noah's Ark. We'll let you draw your own conclusions. In our opinion, it's a candidate. The research continues."

    Even when our own investigations come up empty - we can't solve all the mysteries in the Bible - we can present the current state of our evidence. And we can promote a shared methodology, and a shared body of facts, that can be used by everyone. The data and opinions that we provide may not end any debates, but they will introduce genuine archeological and historical data and considerations into the mix. We owe it to the ancient world, and to the people who inhabited it, to do no less.

    Eric H. Cline is the author of From Eden to Exile: Unraveling Mysteries of the Bible. He is chair of the department of classical and Semitic languages and literature at the George Washington University in Washington, D.C. He is also associate director (USA) of the ongoing excavations at Megiddo (biblical Armageddon) in Israel. He can be reached at [email protected].


    © 2007 by the Archaeological Institute of America
    www.archaeology.org/online/features/fauxark/
  • compound complex
    compound complex

    Thanx, never:

    Does the WTB&TS subscribe to "Junk Science Journal"?

    CoCo

  • The Oracle
    The Oracle

    Interesting article Nvrgnk.

    It is always refreshing to read a piece that is completely void of any alterior motives, and just sticks to discussing a subject while staying within the realms of reality.

    Thanks for posting it!

    The Oracle

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    Good piece.

    Echoes what I've been saying about Simcha Jacobovici and his "documentaries". The Exodus Decoded was such a steaming pile of rubbish. Most people however lack any expertise to spot the many, many errors and slippery logic that pepper the piece, and I am sure many found the claims at least partly credible.

    Who was the guy who claimed to have chariots in the Red Sea? That guy was an outright charlatan.

    It's sad that most of the biblical-themed docus on TV focus on crackpottery like Noah's Ark (I saw one the other day in which a guy unabashedly claimed that a photo showed the mighty ark standing firm in the midst of flowing glaciers on Ararat), Da Vinci Code pseudohistory, The "Bible Code", and the like. Quality programming that translates academic knowledge to the popular audience is so hard to find. The best program I saw like this was one that carefully explained how the Jehoash tablet was proved to be a fake. I thought that was a very well-done show.

  • badboy
    badboy

    TTHERE WAS A WT which mentioned that the james ossuary was evidence for the bible

  • 5go
    5go
    THERE WAS A WT which mentioned that the James ossuary was evidence for the bible - quote

    Yep, I heard this one recently as well. I damn near laffed too.

    Echoes what I've been saying about Simcha Jacobovici and his "documentaries". The Exodus Decoded was such a steaming pile of rubbish. Most people however lack any expertise to spot the many, many errors and slippery logic that pepper the piece, and I am sure many found the claims at least partly credible.

    You too! I watched it and the whole time I was wondering if this would be used by the dubs at some point.

  • Iron Rod
    Iron Rod

    Now you've done it, NVR...

    Any minute now JCanon will be along with a six page post about archeologists like Finkelstein being all wrong.

    Of course, this post will include that damn little gragh about carbon dating and Pharaoh Shishak.

  • Gopher
    Gopher

    The James Ossuary proves absolutely nothing. The names on it were quite common in that society anyway.

    Biblical archaeologists go about their work with the intention to prove their holy book correct. Piece by piece the Bible accounts are being shown to be forged history. The Bible claims that Solomon had an empire stretching from the Euphrates all the way to the Egyptian border and that tributes were paid to him. There has been absolutely no historical artifacts or records of that time to back that claim. The Bible speaks of a great building program that occurred during Solomon's time (circa 10th century BC) and yet the archaeology based on radio-carbon dating techniques developed during the 1990's shows that any such program occurred in the 9th century BC, during the time of "wicked" King Ahab. Perhaps the Jewish chroniclers didn't want to give Ahab his due?

    There's also a problem with the integrity of the Biblical manuscript itself, and what is now presented to us as "the Bible". There are no original manuscripts, and the earliest ones used for most modern translations only date back to medieval times. Then in 1947 the "Dead Sea Scrolls" containing copies dating prior to 100 AD were discovered, and contrary to what we were taught by the Watchtower Society, there were many significant changes from the time these scrolls were written until medieval times. There were entire new books that aren't in current Bible canon, and also significant changes to existing books. The Dead Sea Scrolls version of Jeremiah, for example, was significantly shorter than the one found in translations now.

    Significant changes and deletions were made, by men, to the book many people base their whole life and faith on.

    Similar problems arise surrounding the historicity of Jesus, who lived around 30 AD. The earliest available manuscripts of the "gospel" accounts date back to 125 AD. There were no accounts found to have been written during his lifetime by the Romans or anyone else for that matter. Why the gap of 95 years? One reasonable conclusion is that Jesus was a failed revolutionary, and the accounts built up around him were similar to the accounts surrounding the supposed "King Arthur" in Britain, which no doubt were greatly embellished.

    I mean, people have their myths and fables. The Israelites seemed to have built up David and Solomon to mythical proportions, and the early Christians did the same for Jesus.

    Bible archaeologists and scholars know or suspect a lot of these things, but not many want to shake things up by saying so. Too many people hold the Bible to be true and the "Word of God" when internal and external investigation is revealing quite the opposite.

  • nvrgnbk
    nvrgnbk

    Does this mean that much of the archaeological "evidence" that Bible apologists point to is suspect?

  • heathen
    heathen

    I think there is still some evidence that the bible is believable. I don't readily believe all that everybody says since all religionists are lying thieving frauds . I saw the specials on noahs ark and see there's no concrete evidence for anything . The account did say on the foot hills of ararat not on top of a mountain , which wouldn't make sense . I also saw the guy that discovered the egyptian chariot wheel in the red sea and various other coral formations that resembled axles of chariots .They weren't allowed to excavate because the egyptian government didn't allow it .I don't get what the big deal would be over that anyway. They did however find the passage that moses most likely took to get to the crossing area . It was still pretty interesting stuff .I think about stuff like the Roman occupation and the earthquake that destroyed the temple as factual .

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit