Tonight, Nova has an episode on called “The Bible’s Buried Secrets”. I had to walk in halfway through due to class, but I thought I would blog a bit as I watch.
1) Speakers are very much textualists and believers. This is not all true, they do have Dever, an agnostic who is largely an archaeologist, but by and large these are not archaeologists (buried secrets?) or skeptics. This bothers me quite a bit, but also follows the unfortunate trend in studies of this region and time period.
2) There are some clear biases. Saying that commoners in ancient Israel were not faithful because they worshiped Asherah is a complete anachronism. This worship would have been just as much a part of the religion as Yhwh. Additionally, calling Asherah a pagan goddess is implying modern and at the very least postexilic interpretations on it.
Calling polytheism a folly is also an implication that there is a correct god or religion.
I would also like to step back from the number of claims being made at present that monotheism became complete after the Exile. Polytheistic beliefs were still there, the book of Jeremiah is pretty clear on this. The claims being made are a rewriting of history.
3) “Transforms an ancient cult to a modern religion” is a painfuly biased statement. Can we step away from the word cult finally please? Religious scholars have a specific use for the term cult, this is not it. Additionally, it seems to imply that Judaism was born in the Exile in its modern form. This negelects centuries of development and change.
4) Stop calling ancient Israelites Jews!! This conflicts both with the terms I comment on in point 3 and actual history. The religion was very different than Judaism, it was polytheistic, it was a henotheistic faith, it held countless practices and beliefs not in common with Judaism.
I wish I has seen the first hour, but I really don’t know if there was anything great. In general this show seems to have followed the general pattern of science television in archaeology and in religion, ignoring science, fact, and interpretations that do not fit common hopes for the results.
Filed under: Archaeology, Archaeoporn, Pseudo-Science, Religion, Science Television | Tagged: Archaeology, Bias, Bible, Bible's Buried Secrets, Judaism, Nova, Religion
This program was very interesting but filled with skeptics looking to archeology to write the Bible. The Bible is Gods Word and the only method for humanity to know God. Its about faith in God through His Word that we are accountable. Humanity can question Gods Word but it is still faith in God and His Word that we are judged.
barry, what you wrote is unverifiable sophistry. Presumption without evidence: “The Bible is Gods Word and the only method for humanity to know God.” “Its about faith in God through His Word that we are accountable.” Who says we aren’t accountable without God? We do have a legal system last I looked… “Humanity can question Gods Word but it is still faith in God and His Word that we are judged.” More unverifiable presumption.
Skeptics looking to archeology? You mean like not taking the intellectually dishonest path that the bible is at all true (let alone historically accurate) before drawing conclusions based on hard evidence? How dare they!
I actually learned quite a bit from that program but found the idea that the bible is somehow bringing something new to the table in terms of morality and justice rather unjustified. The OT is filled with vile acts which they say their god approves (of course). And if it is such a great set of laws, why are modern legal systems not based on the OT?
Can you recommend a good book on the archaeology and history of this period? Something that covers the latest thinking in a reasonable amount of detail and aimed at the interested non-specialist?
“The Bible is Gods Word and the only method for humanity to know God”
The modern Bible versions are interpretations of an ancient language. Those interpretations come from numerous sources and societies through out history. While the majority of Christians believe that what they are reading in a modern bible are the direct writings of God, in reality they are reading interpretations of words written in an ancient Hebrew language (Aramaic), and translated, mostly by the Greeks, hundreds of years after. How do you explain the fact that a significant portion of the Septuagint, which the Old Testament was translated from, is only accepted by Christians of the Roman Catholic, Anglican, and Eastern Orthodox faith, and not by other Christian faiths because they believe those 14 books of the Septuagint are not the words of God.
No version of the Bible has ever been proven to be the direct words of God. If one chooses to believe they are the direct words of God, than it is merely a choice based on personal faith. Therefore, one does not have to accept that any version of the Bible is “Gods Word” to believe in God or to know God. This is why we all refer to religions other than our own as “other faiths”, because no one can present sound proof that their belief is right and another’s is wrong.