A two-hour program set to air Tuesday night claims to have “new discoveries that shake the foundation of biblical archaeology,” echoing claims by other contested documentaries such as “The Lost Tomb of Jesus,” which aired last year on The Discovery Channel.
-
(Photo: PBS)These tiny scrolls, made of corroded silver, contain prayers from the Book of Numbers. Dating to about 600 B.C., they are powerful evidence of the antiquity of the Hebrew Bible. -
(Photo: PBS)The site of Solomon's Temple is now occupied by the Dome of the Rock, a holy place for Muslims. NOVA's program offers insight into the roots of all three great monotheistic religions — Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. -
(Photo: PBS)Drawing on clues found in the biblical text, NOVA's animators created an accurate 3-D rendering of Solomon's Temple, something never before done.
“The Bible’s Buried Secrets,” produced by Rhode Island-based Providence Pictures for PBS's science series Nova, attempts to uncover who wrote the Hebrew Bible and whether it’s history or parable, delving into the origins of the Israelites to explore their gradual transformation into a monotheistic people.
The show also poses provocative ideas – including the “revelation” that many Israelites believed that God had a wife – and disputes literal readings of the text.
It is “a shocking film in many ways, but it’s truth, revolutionary, and it’s as fresh as yesterday,” said Bible scholar William G. Dever during the presentation for the program during the Summer 2008 Television Critics Association (TCA) Tour.
Dever, who specializes in the history of Israel in biblical times, says most of the two dozen biblical archaeology films he was involved in prior to “The Bible’s Buried Secrets” turned out to be “outrageously” dishonest.
"They either pander to the public's misunderstanding that the role of archaeology is to prove the Bible to be true or, at best, they're simply dishonest, outrageously so,” he said at a session for the program during the Summer TCA Tour.
“The Bible’s Buried Secrets,” however, is different, he claims.
“I vowed not to make any more such films until 'Nova' came along. I knew their reputation, and I knew this one would be good," he said.
For the documentary, Providence Pictures scouted and filmed at archaeological sites throughout the Middle East – including Israel, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria – and interviewed biblical scholars from around the world.
Producers say the interviews – along with historic works of art, ancient artifacts, animations of biblical passages and scenes, and dramatic recreations – provide the latest account of the ancient Israelites and how they found their one God – the God not only of modern Judaism, but also of Christianity and Islam.
"To this day, the Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament, is a sacred text for more than three billion people throughout the world," says Gary Glassman, the program's writer, producer, and director. "The film's international team of archeologists and scholars researches biblical texts and examines artifacts and ancient manuscripts to illuminate how the concept of one God emerged to later form the foundation of the three great monotheistic religions."
According to NOVA Senior Executive Producer Paula S. Apsell, the program is both a scientific detective story and dramatic adventure that digs deeply into the Bible and the history of the ancient Israelites through the archeological artifacts they left behind.
"In addition to exploring the historical authenticity of the biblical narrative, this powerful intersection of science, scholarship, and scripture also provides a unique insight into the deeper meaning of biblical texts and their continuing resonance through the centuries," she stated.
Producers say they are “confident that our film will be the definitive documentary on biblical archaeology for years to come.”
Many, however, are very skeptical of the film and one group is even taking their protest over the film to Congress. Continue >>
RSS
Reading the line "the public's misunderstanding of the role of archaelogy is to prove the Bible to be true," my thought was: "No, the Bible proves archaelogy to either be true or false!"
Finally, as Christians, we should take the Bible literally because the Lord Jesus Christ also took the Bible literally. Anytime the Lord Jesus quoted from the Old Testament, it was always clear that He was taking it literally. As an example, when Jesus was tempted by Satan in Luke 4, Jesus answered and quoted from the Old Testament. It is clear from the context that He took the Bible literally. Also, the disciples took the commands of Christ (which are part of the Bible) literally. Jesus commanded the disciples to go and make disciples of all nations-Matthew 28:19-20. In Acts 2 and following, we find that the disciples took Jesus command literally and went throughout the known world of that time preaching the Gospel of Christ and telling them to (believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved ) Acts 16:31. These are just a couple of numerous examples that can be given.
Anyway, I look forward to reading your response; take care.
Online4Him
Next, I disagree with your premise that truth can be objectively defined in a social context. Where do we find Jesus or the apostles looking to the surrounding culture for a definitive answer for truth? This is deeply subjective, completely relativistic, and spiritually confusing. If we rely upon society to determine what truth is, then we are most assuredly heading down a slippery slope. If one holds to this position, how can we properly hold accountable, lets say, a society which believes in and allows genocide? Havent they determined for themselves what truth is? I fear that you have immersed yourself in too much of this postmodern thought/textual criticism which has seeped into our churches. It has only broadened the confusion of spiritually reality and obscured the gospel of Jesus Christ. Why attend church if you do not believe the scriptures to be the Word of God and how do you determine whether or not you are hearing truth when you go?
Next, the New Testament, by contrast speaks the following with certain conviction: In Johns epistles, for example, we are told that we (know) the truth-(1John 2:211; 2 John 1; John 8:32), Paul speaks of coming to a (knowledge of the truth)-2 Timothy 2:25; 3:7-8; 4:4, the writer of Hebrews speaks of a (knowledge of the truth)-Hebrews 10:26, and Peter speaks of (obedience to the truth)-1 Peter 1:22). If truth is uncertain, elusive, out-of-reach, lost on us as we live in our own private worlds of (post) modern reality, then what on earth are the apostles talking about? Also, you stated, (certainly not going to discredit all of the knowledge I have so far acquired in my life); perhaps, all the knowledge that you have acquired thus far has in reality become a stumbling block by obscuring the revelation of God through his Word.
Blue,
I thought you were female but was not entirely sure. Thank you for disclosing a little of your personal life and for feeling comfortable enough to openly bare your theological thoughts here. I too enjoy an intellectual discussion that will challenge me and give me an opportunity to share the gospel of Jesus Christ. First, I would like to emphasize the importance of having someone properly interpret what you are saying-without interjecting their own biases; would you agree? For example, you said, (This bible-clinging attitude only keeps us down, and does not bring us forward in social context); now what if I misinterpreted what you said by stating the following; (This bible-clinging attitude only keeps us grounded and does bring us forward in our social context). This would be dishonest, frustrating, and most of all, a flagrant misinterpretation of what you posted, right? I begin here to illustrate a point, the point is; lets give the writers of Scripture the benefit of the doubt by taking what they wrote literally-this is only fair.
Second, scripture must be read in its context; that is, do not isolate a passage from what comes before or after it in the text. Instead, get the entire picture. To do this you will need to acquaint yourself with the context, the entire body of the text surrounding a passage, which sheds light on its meaning. Here is how one should contextually analyze the scriptures: The immediate context must be understood in the context of related passages, then in the context of related paragraphs, then in the context of an entire book, and finally in the context of the entire Bible. I must say though, ultimately, it is the Holy Spirit which enlightens the heart to understand His Word.
blue, let me clarify something, there are many parts of the Bible that can be taken literal such as the Genesis account of Creation and Noah's Flood, but there are also parts that were never meant to be taken literally such as cutting off limbs or hating others.
" do not believe that the Bible should not be taken literally. Neither should every scientists' or teachers' or politicians' (seriously) words be taken so literal that the mind clogs out all other perspectives. Do you really want to know what I believe the Word of God is, because I certainly do not believe that God wants His thoughts and expectations to be written down so critically that we have such great schisms in interpretations."
The problem here is that the Christians tend to NOT take the Bible literally, and thereby introduce their own opinions as to what the Scriptures are "alluding to". That's where the schisms come in.
blue, you're in a Christian law school, but are you a Christian?
blue, plus online does not take the Bible literally but like myself believes that in it's original writings is the God-breathed, inerrant, plenary Word of God, literally God's Word.
blue, so if we respond with biblically based responses we're not worthy of your response as we appear to be unintellectual to you?
blue, you say you come on these sites to be challenged, but what I've noticed is you are more of a hit and run poster, you share a view and then you disappear rather than hang around and respond to others posts back to you. What's up with that?
Actually, online, I am a female. Undergrad degree in history and theology and currently in a Christian law school. I still go to church, I volunteer, but no I am not some heretical witch who wishes to damn every evangelical post. The reason I come on this site with my obviously liberal thought is to be challenged. While I do not agree with others' opinions (you) I find them insightful, thought-provoking, and most importantly the types of discussions we Americans need to have. Unfortunately, I seek intellectual discourse, and not merely literal bible-clinging posture that is, in my academic opinion, wrong for our country. This bible-clinging attitude only keeps us down, and does not bring us forward in social context. As a law student, I find sites like this helpful in tackling the moral and legal struggles that confront a prospective legal student. So no, I am not 'allergic' to scripture, but perhaps you are 'allergic' to respect?
And no, for your reply, I do not believe that the Bible should not be taken literally. Neither should every scientists' or teachers' or politicians' (seriously) words be taken so literal that the mind clogs out all other perspectives. Do you really want to know what I believe the Word of God is, because I certainly do not believe that God wants His thoughts and expectations to be written down so critically that we have such great schisms in interpretations. Men and women have all died in history in believing what THEY think the Word of God is. Personally, I believe the bible is perhaps a fictional, symbolic start, but no, not literal - not definitive - and certainly not going to discredit all of the knowledge I have so far acquired in my life. That is why I highly respect these types of documentaries.
It all comes down to FAITH!!
bur,
"he's just thinking with the mind god gave him - or that developed from primordial soup. blue is interested, either way. but you aren't."
thank you for that well thought out, and extremely investigated insight.
how about this one "i am rubber, you are glue, it bounces off me and sticks to you."
that is about as "interesting" as what you said.
mb,
Blue and I have had previous discussions here on the CP, so, this is not our first introduction to one another. I am sure that blue appreciates your support but he/she is capable of speaking for his/her self. It is obvious that you too share the same allegorical interpretation of scripture, am I right? Are we not at liberty to debate . . . or are you trying to silence any opposition to your own narrow minded beliefs?
Also, I am still waiting for you to respond to my last post regarding (The code of Hammurabi. morality does not depend on Christianity. ask a Buddhist).
online, are you talking about blue? do you reallythink that is what he is doing. maybe that's how YOU operate but i don't think that's how blue is operating. this gives me insight into the narrow mind: the narrow minded man presumes the mind of the person he is criticizing is as narrow as he is. it is sometime true - but not always. i think blue is not narrow. he's just thinking with the mind god gave him - or that developed from primordial soup. blue is interested, either way. but you aren't.
Is it not convenient for those who have and for those who would like to introduced unbiblical dogmas to state that the Scriptures should not be taken literally? Those taking this position merely seek to elevate their own stature while at the same time discrediting the Word of God.
Blue,
So, I am assuming that you agree with the premise of this article: that Abraham, Sarah and their offspring did not exit, there was no Exodus, and Monotheism was a process that took hundreds of years, etc; am I right?
I find all of this fascinating - in a good way. Archeology is an amazing field, and this is simply another step in the progressiveness of deciphering the past. If people want to cling to their bibles (and in all honestly probably guns) and believe its literal word, go ahead! But the rest of us, who are more interested in understanding the origin and contributors of this amazing document would prefer intellectual and academic research.
We can not keep allowing our culture to remain primitive in thought; i praise researchers who attempt to dig far into the context of religious documents. It may disappoint a few people, but the research is well worth it.
Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision.
Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him (Psalm 2:1-12).
does PBS stand for "Promoting B.S."?
is that too much?
ar, a huge AMEN!!! to that my brother or sister, be blessed as you continue to serve Him, believer
Well Praise the Lord. I am one of those " Christians " Followers of Jesus Christ, Who believe that the Bible is the Inerrant Word of God.
I also believe that pbs has tried time and time again to dis-prove the Bible as the Word of God, They try to cause people to doubt the Bible.
If we cannot trust the Bible in ways such as, Did Jesus marry and have children, then how can we believe anything it says.?
Of course we know that the Bible does not say that Jesus married or had children, but if people can be made to doubt, then the battle is won.
satan, the devil is hard at work, blinding those who really in their heart want to be blind( Spiritually speaking ).
But the Church must stand strong, stay true to the Bible, And earnestly contend for the Faith.
pvl, yes, Christians who profess themselves to be wise, your liberal, moderate, carnal, and false Christians, who are truly foolish have convinced themselves and other gullible people that the Bible in its original manuscripts is not the God-breathed, inerrant, plenary Word of God, but for those of us who choose to trust in God's wisdom as opposed to man's wisdom, well we're just gonna keep trusting and believing His Word as well.
BTW if your local PBS program airs this NOVA episode. The decision to do so was the decision made at the local level, by those who may consider themselves to be Christian.
Christians themselves, have already proven, the Bible, can't be the unerring word of God. In the event it where such, there wouldn't be so many Christian sects, each sect created by liberals.Those who view PBS regularly understand, that very few tax dollars fund any individual program. That's a tired argument of the ignorant, who have ran out of facts to use in their argument.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning....The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."
The Bible is the physical expression of who God is.
Dear didymus, I worship the God of the Bible, not the Bible itself. However, I can't exclude its message from the reason to worship its author. I don't know why you say I'm an idolator? Because I interpret the Bible literally?
The truth has to be somewhere, the Bible says Jesus is the Truth, as Creator, Sustainer and Lord of all creation; one can read the Bible and accept its message or deny it, there's no middle ground; lukewarm won't cut it.
(Eph 4:21 NASB) - if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus
Dear philo777, NO excuse me - I meant Talmid,
You queried, "can you actually bring a compelling argument? Why don't you answer the questions raised? ... If the Bible can't be interpreted literally, how then is it to be interpreted? Why don't you tell us friend?"
Oh, why bother answering your questions, I'm sorry if I come across mean here, but you're really not worth the time, especially since I know you couldn't care less about anything I say; the film mentioned above makes a good introduction to things. I recommend you go and actually see it. I believe it will be replaying on most PBS stations tomorrow night.
But before you watch it, remember - (Pro 28:26 NASB) *He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But he who walks wisely will be delivered.* - You need to pray and repent of your idolatry, and walk more wisely.
Sorry philo777! I meant didymus, wrong scoffer...
Dear philo777, can you actually bring a compelling argument? Why don't you answer the questions raised? Or do you just get by besmirching others who don't agree with your heretical view of the Bible. If the Bible can't be interpreted literally, how then is it to be interpreted? Why don't you tell us friend?
(Pro 28:26 NASB) - He who trusts in his own heart is a fool, But he who walks wisely will be delivered.
Well Talmid, I didn't charge you with 'trying to sound smart', I said I was amazed that you think you sound smart. Let me try to make this a little more clear - you sound like you're as dumb as an ox.
From your posts it is also evident that you need to repent of your sin of idolatry. You idolize your man-made interpretation of the Bible, and condemn all who disagree with your idol. (Now I know this will be hard for you to understand, but your man-made interpretation is not the same as the Bible itself.)
I know philomath777, wouldn't confuse you with philo777.
Please note that philo777 is not the same person as me and I do not accept his viewpoint. I have used my handle, philomath777 for about ten years.
Dear didymus, I'm simply contending for the faith as it's commanded to us in the Scriptures. His charges (philo777's) are without foundation and facts, though he claims to have them. As for your charge that I'm trying to sound smart, I guess that's your opinion, I haven't written anything that isn't easily understandable...
(Jud 1:3 NASB) - Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.
Talmid said, "Hey Philo777, you've spoken like a true heretic. ...[innocuous blather removed]... You're the one sounding a bit ignorant and uninformed! Wise up."
What amazes me, Talmid, is that you apparently think that you sound smart.
Hey Philo777, you've spoken like a true heretic. I guess you consider yourself an enlightened man? How do you reconcile the anthropic principle, the chirality of DNA, the order of amino acids in all proteins for the existence of life, the irreducible complexity of the cell, and so on with the evolutionary theory's blind faith that it all came fortuitously?
And just for your information and enlightenment, the Bible declared thousands of years ago that the earth was round: (Job 26:10 NASB) - "He has inscribed a circle on the surface of the waters At the boundary of light and darkness.
(Isa 40:22 NASB) - It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
Now regarding the documentary hypothesis of the Pentateuch, is a totally biased and unfounded theory, just because some egg heads agree on something doesn't mean it's true, have you not thought about that? Here is an excerpt from WHO WROTE THE BIBLE? by Richard E. Friedman: "The whole structure of the Documentary Hypothesis is so vitiated with obscurantism and circular reasoning on the basis of unproved and unprovable hypotheses that it hardly deserves the status of true scholarship at all. It appears rather to be an exercise in biased subjectivism that shuns any serious consideration of conflicting evidence"
You're the one sounding a bit ignorant and uninformed! Wise up.
This doesn't surprise me one bit; that a bunch of liberal theologians along with evolutionary-thinking archeologists are trying to disprove the Bible. Unfortunately tax-payers' dollars are going in to fund these and other abominations, such abortion on demand, to which the left in America is married to.
(2Pe 3:16 NASB) - ...which the untaught and unstable distort, as {they do} also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Be very suspicious of anyone who claims to be un-biased in their approach. As Marvin Lubenow in *Bones of Contention* put so eloquently: "In theory, fact determines theory, but in fact, theory determines fact." People who say they are *tabla rasa*, just looking for facts to find out what *really* happened actually have their *tabla* full of baloney, and they're trying to fill yours full of it, too.
I caught some of this presentation last night. There were admissions that archeology does corroborate at least some of the Old Testament, as agreed apon by most scholars. There was speculation (expressed definitively but speculative nonetheless) that older scrolls were edited to render the "modern" version of Genesis, particularly Abraham, through the Assyrian accounts of exile in the Old Testament.
Some good summary ... the tiny scrolls pictured with this article appear to confirm and legitamize the Isrealites as a people, being biblically supported.
And the scrolls were found purely by accident; I'll stay with divine intervention, praise God the Almighty, thank you :^)
Oh ... it was stated that before these scrolls were found, many "scholars", learned or erudite people who have PROFOUND knowledge of these related fields, speculated and believed that the Isrealites never existed as a people. I started laughing out loud at this part.
No proof of the flood? To quote Ken Ham, how about, "Billions of dead things buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the earth."? If Genesis isn't lteral, what need is there for a savior if there wasn't a literal fall? Atheists certainly understand the connection and so should Christians. Paul is very explicit about this in his writings. Jesus himself refers to the flood in Matthew 24 as well as referring to Genesis 1 & 2 in Matthew 19:4&5.
The goal is to cast doubt on Christianity. I read in Genesis where someone said "Did God really say that?" and we know who that was...
Why doesn't PBS do a "hypothesis" story on Islam: it is hypothesized that Mohammed really promoted pork, really acknowledged that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and was surprised when the idea he hatched gained footing with people. Go ahead, PBS, run that, and I'll call the fire department when your buildings are burned to the ground.
SAFox,
You said, "Proof of Genesis as literal? Sincerely ask Christ to forgive your sin..."
Wow man... that is some really convincing evidence right there. "If you don't kowtow and submit to my truely true divine interpretation of the Bible - then fry in ultimate Hell." I'm convinced. Amazing. Thumbs up to you man.
"How about some proof for evolution? There is none." I stand in awe of the deep and vacuous insight you have. It is truely amazing.
It is tough on those out side trying to look in without wanting to actually get in.
Proof of Genesis as literal? Sincerely ask Christ to forgive your sin, cleanse you in His blood & come into your being (heart). I did that in '69 & I now have all the proof I need. Jesus IS real, His words are life & He can show you this is true if you choose to let Him.
How about some proof for evolution? There is none. In fact the Theory of Evolution does not have enough evidence to support it to raise it from a hypothesis in the 1st place. To be accurate& honest, Darwin's work should be called the Hypothesis of Evolution.
Trying to disprove the Bible has always proved to a futile quest. Read Josh McDowell's "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" & Lee Strobel's "The Case For..." series. If you are really trying to find the truth & not playing mind games you will learn a lot from these two authors.
SamFox
Buried Secrets is not a secret at all. Now that the true Israelites never existed, and the
reason an exiled people to Babylon is now a mystery? It's clear that those of the talmud
are removing they"re gloves. American Christianity will be in serious danger for real.
But. lets not get nervous! We have a Commander and Chief in Jesus Christ, that
will put an end to what plagues our Nation. True faith, slaughters evil every day!
I just watched it. Not too bad, but not NOVA's best. It makes much of the documentary hypothesis, which I agree with, but it makes some assumptions that I think ultimately may not hold much weight.
One thing I found really interesting, and it was something new, something I hadn't heard about before, those silver scrolls pictured above, I'd like to learn more about them.
You folks are something! Most of the findings in the special are not in dispute, and still you act as though science was some sort of conspiracy.
Perhaps you are miffed about the total dismissal of Genesis as "folks myths and fairy tails." Well sorry, but that's what the science indicates at the present time. If you don't want to believe it, go find evidence that contradicts evolution, or find something that corroborates the flood or a flat earth, for that matter.
Many of the facts presented in the special, such as the four authors of the Pentateuch, have been known and agreed to for some time, there was not much new here.
I know most of you would disagree, but many Christians get along just fine without a literal interpretation of Genesis, and why should it matter, for your purposes, when the Jews started believing in one God? Frankly, when I started studying biblical origins several years ago, I was surprised that any of the old testament was historical at all.
DRJ:
AMEN to your posted truth pointing to the so-called scientific scholarship of PBS, funded by our tax dollars. "Bible Scholars" who are not interested in the ultimate truth, which is saving souls by the presentation of the Gospel of which they have no interest in promoting.
If scholars had any respect for the Bible they would respect the message...they simply do not believe. It's easy to look for supporting evidence when the conclusions has already been reached.
Believing the message in the Bible would preclude wanting to cast doubt on it from so called enlightened scientific study.
Note to all...Anytime an EXPOSE is given on the Bible, Jesus, or anything related to God, there should also be a clear presentation of the Gospel that leads to salvation. When you hear of someone giving a dissertation on something or someone who represents the Kingdom of God, if there is no clear message of salvation, you can bet it is of Satan's doing! Got it? It is the express desire of God that all come to faith in Jesus. How can they if no one relates the Gospel to them? Mere information for information's sake is a sign that whoever is disseminating the info is not interested in the eternal souls of those who are listening. Jesus saves! Amen?
you folks tickle me.
There is a difference between knowledge of God, and knowing God.
Even if these individuals were willing to prove He does exist, they would still choose not to. They have followed their master's instructions well, and they truly already have their reward.
As for me and my house, we will server the Lord! We know Him, not just of Him.
We need to stand firm in our faith. God's name and reputation will be blasphemed and besmirched by the end times culture as Satan tightens his grip on the minds of people in his self-lie that he is winning.
We should refute as we can, but not worry about it. God's plan unfolds at His will, and we are either part of it or not.
Abraham, Sarah and their offspring didnt exist.
There is no archaeological evidence of the Exodus.
Monotheism was a process that took hundreds of years.
The Israelites were actually Canaanites.
Another liberal account from this postmodern culture . . . the scholars interviewed for this piece are probably from the Jesus seminar . . . I will have to pass on this one.