First Person: Covering Controversy

004

We are sometimes accused of sensationalizing finds and their relationship to the Bible in order to sell magazines. At other times, we are accused of unjustly debunking claims related to the Bible in order to be controversial.

Neither is true. Our coverage is determined by the discoveries themselves and the interpretations that scholars give them. In a sense we are a prisoner of the archaeologist’s spade and the scholar’s interpretation. We do not create these things; we report them, mostly by printing the words of the archaeologists and scholars themselves.

We recently reported the discovery of the pool where the New Testament tells us Jesus cured a blind man—a sensational find.¹ We debunked the claim of other scholars who thought they had found a pool where John the Baptist baptized early followers.² (But we also opened our pages to the scholars who made the claim.³)

Some of our readers have complained because our pages are frequently filled with these controversies—perhaps more than might be expected from staid scholars. The fact is that our field is rife with controversy. Some say there is so much controversy in Biblical archaeology because, at bottom, there is so little to fight about. But really, I suspect it has something to do with the Bible. We all feel close to the Bible in one way or another, so all these seemingly little things are important. We want to know and understand the world in which this great book took shape.

Was Warren’s Shaft used to draw water?⁴ Was Jerusalem of the returning exiles big or small?⁵

In this issue, there is more controversy: Was Qumran a monastic settlement of Essenes who transcribed many of the Dead Sea Scrolls, or was it a pottery factory? (See “Qumran—The Pottery Factory”.) In popular Israelite religion, did the Israelite God Yahweh have a consort? (See “Did God Have a Wife?”) Was the earliest Philistine city at Ekron fortified or not? (See “Was the Earliest Philistine City of Ekron Fortified?”.)

Whether you agree with one side or the other, by reading about these controversies, you will end up learning a lot more about the Bible and the world in which the Biblical texts were formed and written down.

Another bit of important debunking can be found on our Web site. It is somewhat technical, but well worth looking at. In the past, we have all been told that the Israelites emerged out of Canaanite society of the Late Bronze Age (1550–1000 B.C.E.). That’s the so-called “consensus theory.” Not so, says Anson Rainey, one of the most prominent scholars in the field, recently retired from Tel Aviv University. He powerfully argues that the Israelites who emerged in the central hill country of Palestine in the 12th century B.C.E. came from the other side of the Jordan River—just as the Bible says. Rainey cites archaeological evidence, linguistic analysis and inscriptions to prove his case. In short, the earliest Israelites came not from inside but outside the land. They came as semi-pastoral migrants from across the river. Didn’t we read something like that before—in the Bible?⁶

If you would like to read a longer version of this argument, go to our Web site (www.biblicalarchaeology.org/AnsonRainey). There Professor Rainey likens scholars who still follow the old Canaanite theory to the long-necked dinosaur he was told about as a child. The dinosaur received a mortal body blow, but it took a long time before the brain realized what had happened. The scholars who still believe the theory about Canaanite origins of early Israel are like the dinosaur: Their theory has received a mortal blow, but their brains have not yet realized it.

We are sometimes accused of sensationalizing finds and their relationship to the Bible in order to sell magazines. At other times, we are accused of unjustly debunking claims related to the Bible in order to be controversial. Neither is true. Our coverage is determined by the discoveries themselves and the interpretations that scholars give them. In a sense we are a prisoner of the archaeologist’s spade and the scholar’s interpretation. We do not create these things; we report them, mostly by printing the words of the archaeologists and scholars themselves. We recently reported the discovery of the pool where […]