Patheos

BuddhistCatholicContemplativeEvangelicalGeneral ChristianHinduJewishLatter-day SaintMuslimNew VisionsProgressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Patheos

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

slacktivist

That’s funny … (more ‘biblical archaeology’)

Last updated on: January 26, 2018 at 6:49 pm   by Fred Clark

That’s funny … (more ‘biblical archaeology’) 2018-01-26T18:49:42-05:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

We’ve recently discussed white evangelicals’ selective enthusiasm for “biblical archaeology” (see here and here).

Researchers and scholars from all over the world are digging all over the place in the Holy Land, unearthing artifacts that help us to understand all sorts of amazing, fascinating things about this ancient crossroads of civilizations. Every once in a while, some dig will come across something congruent with a biblical story — some mention of a Davidic kingdom, for example — and news of that find gets splashed all over evangelical media here in America. The “news” reported isn’t so much the specifics of that particular discovery, it’s more about the reaffirmation of the Very Wrong notion that — as Michele Bachmann put it — “every archaeology find that has ever come forward has only proved the authenticity of the Bible.”

Bachmann’s claim is only true in the sense that by “come forward,” she — like most American evangelicals — refers only to those finds that align with their expectations. The vast majority of archaeological findings do not align with those expectations are simply ignored and thus have never “come forward.”

Like this one, for example: “Earliest Human Remains Outside Africa Were Just Discovered in Israel.” Researchers from the University of Haifa found a jawbone, a homo sapiens jawbone, “which they’ve dated to somewhere between 177,000 and 194,000 years.”

Smithsonian

This find does not “prove the authenticity of the Bible.” Nor, of course, does it disprove the authenticity of the Bible.

Here we should probably unpack Bachmann’s odd phrase. No archaeologist or historian would ever dispute “the authenticity of the Bible” any more than they would dispute “the authenticity of The Iliad.” These are authentically ancient texts. We may not have original manuscripts, but we have some very, very old versions of them, and long, extremely well-documented histories attesting to their existence and circulation going way back.

But of course that’s not what Bachmann or most evangelicals mean when they talk about “the authenticity of the Bible.” What they mean, rather, is that every assertion, description, and event in that ancient text is an “authentic” and accurate representation of something that happened exactly as written. It is, they say, “Literally true.” And that is something that no archaeologist or historian would agree was true of either the Bible or The Iliad.

This claim about “the authenticity of the Bible” isn’t really about the Bible, itself, at all. It’s about one group’s particular interpretive framework for understanding the Bible. It’s about how they choose to read that text. Archaeology isn’t concerned with that framework one way or another — it doesn’t set out to confirm or reject it. It just digs and recovers and finds what it finds. And what it finds, relentlessly, proves that this framework is indefensible. Inauthentic, even.

In any meaningful sense, the staggeringly ancient human jawbone unearthed in Israel’s Mislaya Cave has nothing at all to do with the Bible or with the world of the Bible. It’s from a world that existed at least 170,000 years before the Bible ever existed. But if one’s interpretive framework for reading the Bible is based on the idea that the universe is only 10,000 years old, then a 174,000-year-old jawbone cannot be. And the tangible fact that it is renders your framework unworkable.

Note that the illiterate literalism and pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo of young-Earth creationism isn’t the only interpretive framework upended by this latest discovery. It also stubbornly refuses to “authenticate” what had been, for a while at least, the prevailing accepted understanding of when it was that we humans first migrated out of Africa. As that Smithsonian report by Lorraine Boissoneault says:

For many years, the consensus view among archaeologists placed the exodus at 60,000 years ago — some 150,000 years after the hominins first appeared. … But this new discovery … if verified … would require reevaluating the whole history of human evolution — and possibly pushing it back by several hundred thousand years.

That’s why scientists find this discovery so giddily exciting. It doesn’t fit with their prior understanding. It threatens to upend what they previously thought they knew. And that, for scientists, is thrilling. They’re going to have to change their previous interpretive framework and they get to learn something new. And for them, learning something new is the whole point.

Isaac Asimov (maybe, or someone, anyway) described this way of thinking by saying: “The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! but That’s funny …” A human jawbone this old, this far from Africa, falls into this category — That’s funny … that’s odd … that’s not what we expected to find. And so it heralds the chance for us to learn something new, to improve our knowledge and our understanding.

The kind of fundamentalist mindset that denies everything that fails to confirm its pre-existing understanding views this as a weakness in science. See, those worldly fools are constantly changing their theories to account for new facts! That proves all their theories have been wrong, just like we’ve always said! Far better, in this way of thinking, to insist that one already has all the facts and theories one will ever need, and to perceive every opportunity to learn something new as a threat to be dismissed or denied.

That way of thinking precludes the possibility of learning — of ever knowing more than you know right now, at this moment. That is, you know, not good.

 

evangelicals

agnotology

Bible

creationism

science

Previous Post



January 26, 2018

LBCF, No. 170: 'Pruneface Stonagal'

Next Post



January 28, 2018 Sunday favorites


Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003


Follow Us!

Follow Us on Facebook



TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which king was killed at the Battle of Megiddo?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Josiah Amaziah Asa Jehoash

Related posts from slacktivist

Family

It's not 'pick and choose.' It's pick a...

slacktivist

Family

Is this the right room for an argument?

slacktivist

Family

Team Everybody sliding into our DMs

slacktivist

Family

Texts of terror? Terrific!

slacktivist

TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian

Minted in God's Image

Nearly every morning, I make the drive to Detroit with my high-school-age...

The Real AI Story Is Adoption Without Trust

Artificial intelligence has crossed a political threshold. It is no longer a...

Walking through History

  A new article, written by Jeff Lindsay and Gale L. Pooley,...

Swimfan: Forgotten Aughts Pleasures

This is a recovery effort. In 2002, My Big Fat Greek Wedding...

Top Three Anti-Catholic Lies About Catholicism

  This is my initial transcript for the video, "THE 3 WORST...

Pope Leo Celebrates Mass for Nurses & Docs...

I don't have any idea how he did it, but Pope Leo...

view all Progressive Christian blogs

Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Copyright 2008-2026, Patheos. All rights reserved.

Subscription Support Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In

Follow Patheos Patheos on Facebook Patheos on YouTube