The Lost Bible
A book by Yehoshua Etzion
PRINCIPAL SUBJECTS OF THIS PAGE: Biblical
archaeology; Archaeology of Israel; Archaeological dating methods; Carbon
14 dating: Parallelism of Bible and archaeology; Accuracy of the Bible;
Science and the Bible; Scientific revolutions; Responses of archaeologists
"http://www.haaretz.co.il/daily" Friday, November 12,
1999
THE LOST BIBLE MAY STILL BE FOUND
by
Prof. Doron Lancet
ABSTRACT: "New archeology" expands the
use of technologies such as carbon dating and the analysis of ancient DNA.
By changing dramatically the system of dating Israel's archeological finds,
these techniques may reveal agreement between biblical accounts and evidence
on the ground
Last week, Ha'aretz Magazine published Prof. Ze'ev Herzog's startling
announcement that the Bible period never existed, as no evidence has been
found for it in archeological excavations. Most other archeologists interviewed
expressed complete agreement, and even said that Herzog's statement was
nothing new. A minority continues to claim that material evidence exists
for the biblical accounts, but the consensus seems to go the other ay.Non-archeologists,
religious and secular alike, unanimously said that whether the Bible is
truth or legend, its standing as a colossal work will always prevail. But
disturbing voices were heard, urging that the archeologists and their findings
should be entirely dismissed.
Herzog's article poses a seminal question: is archeology
an exact science? The scientific discipline disregards a scientist's status
or the emotional reaction to his work. In the famous quote attributed to
him, "But it does move," Galileo expressed his revulsion with the church's
attempts to let emotions take precedence over his observations showing
that the earth is not the center of the universe.
It is inconceivable that politicians and poets will have
a say in a dispute among archeologists. If one assumes that archeology
is a bona fide science, involved with collecting data and explaining them
by means of historical theories, then the only way to settle the archeological
incongruity is to obtain more accurate results and if necessary to change
the theory. In the last few decades, archeology has undergone a major transformation,
from being less a part of the Humanities, where it is being taught now,
and more associated with the Natural Sciences.
The "New Archeology" expands the use of technologies such
as carbon 14 dating and ancient DNA analysis, and involves extensive use
of quantification and statistics. The Weizmann Institute of Science has
recently launched the Kimmel Center for Archeological Science, headed by
Prof. Stephen Weiner. It offers students with degrees in exact sciences
the opportunity to obtain a Ph.D. in archeology. Similar changes are taking
place in other universities in Israel and abroad. Could this revolution
help settle the conflict between the excavations and the holy scriptures?
The old testament has three main components: myths intended
to establish a new nation, texts that form the basis for the world's first
monotheistic religion, and detailed historical accounts. Setting aside
the first two, it is impossible to ignore the sentiment that the bible's
historical parts are utterly believable and worthy of detailed scientific
pursuit. No jury would dismiss its painstaking portrayal of kings and prophets,
cities and temples, battles and religious wars, as pure figments of the
authors' imagination. The verisimilitude of the Bible led to the establishment
of biblical archeology in the 19th century, aimed at validating biblical
accounts through excavations. Are we in a position to state now that this
century-long effort has totally failed?
When science runs into a clash between fact and theory,
all hell breaks loose. This happened in 1887, when the Michaleson-Morely
experiment demonstrated that the speed of light is unaffected by the velocity
of the lantern. This contradicted Newton's equations, and led to Einstein's
theory of special relativity. The reform was all but smooth, and years
of meticulous experiments were needed for it to be accepted by the entire
scientific establishment. It appears that a new theory combined with careful
fact-finding will be required also for the biblical archeology quandary.
How do scientists decide whether a theory is worth the effort required
to confirm or to refute it? A theory surely has to explain the newly discovered
facts. But what if several theories appear equally successful? In that
case, scientists use the principle of "Occam's Razor," named after William
of Occam, a 14th century English theologian. This principle states that
in case of doubt, the simplest, most parsimonious theory should be favored.
An example is the contradiction discovered between the distribution of
matter inside galaxies and their apparent luminosity. Most astronomers
still explain this by assuming that galaxies harbor dark matter, but are
then forced to invoke a special ad-hoc mass distribution for each galaxy.
Prof. Mordechai Milgrom of the Weizmann Institute has proposed an alternative:
to change (again) one of Newton's laws. Surprisingly, a small change in
the equation leads to complete agreement for hundreds of different galaxies.
Physicists find the idea extremely difficult to accept, but relate to it
with considerable respect because of Occam's rule. Is there an alternative
theory for Israeli archeology? Seven years ago, Yehoshua Etzion published
"The Lost Bible" (Shocken Press). The book, based on an extensive literary
search, provided a verbatim account of almost every discrepancy listed
in Herzog's article. And more importantly, it offered an explanation in
terms of a radical change of the dating for archeological strata, extending
Immanuel Velikovsky's writings ("Ages in Chaos"). Etzion is not a professional
archeologist, and the book has therefore been greeted with contempt and
disregard by the archeological establishment. While it is indeed difficult
to accept such a radical idea, particularly from a person lacking formal
training, the scientific method demands that two questions are answered:
does the new view settle a key problem and does it conform with Occam's
principle? "The Lost Bible" proposes to stop relying on the dating system
developed for Egyptian archeology, and try to establish an independent
scale for Israel. This sounds truly heretical, just as was initially true
for the theory of relativity. But it turns out that if one changes the
dates attributed to the different archeological strata, by making them
about 500 years younger, a surprising agreement emerges between the bible
and archeology. This is true for dozens of excavation sites, and includes
remains of nomadic wandering in the Sinai Desert, a sudden and comprehensive
destruction at the time of Joshua's conquests, massive building activity
in the time of David and Solomon, and evidence for the gradual destruction
brought upon by the Assyrians and Babylonians at the end of the first temple
period. The dating change also helps understand the systematic absence,
at numerous sites, of a layer from the Persian period, when Jews came back
from Babylon led by Ezra and Nehemiah. It seems as if Etzion's proposal
settles many discrepancies, and at the same time conforms to Occam's Razor:
widespread agreement is obtained by a single change, which is much simpler
than assuming that hundreds of biblical accounts are fictitious. Of course,
the scientific scheme does not require that the alternative theory should
be immediately accepted. It is also not necessary to perform any experiments
uniquely devoted to testing this particular theory. Comprehensive and careful
data collection will confirm or refute it, along with the testing of many
other potential theories. All that is required is to introduce a profound
change in the use of novel technologies. Carbon 14 dating has reached a
point of providing aaccuracy of plus or minus 20 years, as long as appropriate
resources are devoted to each measurement. If archeologists, including
those with training in the natural sciences, perform innovative measurements
on thousands of artefacts in numerous mounds and layers, it will be possible
to settle the painful disagreement between the scripture and the excavations.
Science offers the means to do this. All that is needed is a courageous
and creative attitude among archeologists and the authorities that fund
them.
Prof.Lancet is the head of the Crown Human Genome Center
at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel
copyright 1999 Ha'aretz. All Rights Reserved
Back to Hopepage