I submitted this paper for New Testament Introduction at Bob Jones University on March 25, 2002.
There are many fields of study that have assisted in understanding the Bible. For example, over the years modern science has contributed greatly to the proper understanding of the Scriptures. A classic illustration of this is Copernicus and his heliocentric theory. The church had historically believed that the earth was the center of the universe. But in this case the scientific findings of Copernicus proved to contribute to a more accurate understanding of God’s universe. Over the last couple centuries, archaeology has begun to play a similar role. New discoveries are continually shedding more light on the study of the Scriptures. The reason that these various fields of study can so benefit one’s understanding of the Bible is based on the fact that all truth is consistent because it all finds its source in God. God’s Word, God’s creation, and God’s history are all in total harmony. And for this very reason archaeological discoveries are very beneficial for a fuller understanding of the New Testament Scriptures.
definition of archaeology
Archaeology is simply the study of ancient things. The word comes from the two Greek words ἀρχαῖος (“what was in former times” or “ancient”) and λόγος (“word”),1 and thus it involves the study of ancient things.2 These things include buildings, sculptures, art, bones, coins, tools, clothes, weapons, food, and written documents on a variety of materials. Biblical archaeology is narrower in its scope in that it focuses on the study of these ancient things only as they relate directly or indirectly to the content of the Scriptures. One vital thing to keep in mind when dealing with archaeology is that the truthfulness of the Bible does not rest upon findings in favor of or against the biblical claims. Archaeology has no role in proving the Bible, but only in confirming that one’s understanding of it is accurate.3 In other words, archaeology deals with the Bible’s interpretation, not its authority.
Manuscripts
The discovery of manuscripts, both biblical and non-biblical, is often very helpful in the study of the New Testament. The contributions concern the dating of books as well as linguistic studies. One manuscript that was significant for disproving a late date of John’s Gospel is p52 of the John Rylands papyri.4 This manuscript dates from about a.d. 125 and is currently known as the oldest extent portion of New Testament literature.5 It contains only a portion of John 18, verses 31–33 and 37–38; yet this manuscript is very significant because it proves an earlier date than the critics of the last century had argued for the book of John. Many critics wanted to date the book in the late 2nd century due to what they regarded to be Gnostic influence. But this internal evidence is insufficient for dating the book so late.6 The external evidence shows that John’s Gospel must at least have been authored a number of years prior to the date of this manuscript, thus fitting perfectly with the historical, orthodox position of authorship by the apostle John toward the end of the first century.
Another group of manuscripts that have been of significance in the last century are the Nag Hammadi texts.7 These texts were discovered in Egypt in 1945 close to Chenoboskion.8 The collection contains thirteen different papyrus codices. The manuscripts date from the middle of the fourth century and probably reflect originals from the first century. Most scholars believe that these Coptic manuscripts are translations of their Greek originals.9 One of the most helpful of these codices is The Gospel of Thomas. This particular book shares many similarities with later Gnosticism. Prior to this collection of texts, the only knowledge of early Gnosticism came from secondary sources. But now these 112 to 118 saying of Jesus give an early, primary testimony to the beliefs of incipient Gnosticism. This is very helpful for understanding what the early church was battling against (e.g., Colossians). There is additional benefit as well in textual studies by comparing these writings with the writings of the New Testament that deal with Gnostic issues.10
Inscriptions
A number of helpful inscriptions have also shed light on some difficult passages of Scripture. For example, Luke 2:1–3 has often been attacked by critics as being entirely unhistorical. In this passage Luke claims: (1) there was a census taken prior to the birth of Christ; (2) during this time Κυρήνιος was the governor of Syria; (3) and everyone had to return to the home of his ancestry. Historical records had shown that Cyrenius (or Quirinius) was governor of Syria in a.d. 6. But this would not coincide with the date of Christ’s birth some years earlier. However, in Rome in 1828 an inscription was found that testified that Cyrenius was governor twice. In addition, a later discovery of a monument in Asia Minor gave additional evidence to this very fact.11 While this does not answer all of the questions relating to this issue, it at least shows that archaeology is consistent with the fact that Cyrenius was likely the governor of Syria during the time mentioned in Luke’s Gospel.
Another inscription that is helpful comes from an ossuary.12 The Greek word διδάσκαλος is often used of Christ in the gospels.13 Certain critical scholars have argued that this term reflected a borrowing from second century usage, and thus was anachronistic. It occurs quite frequently in the Mishnah.14 But in 1930 E. L. Sukenik discovered on Mount Scopus an ossuary with διδάσκαλος inscribed on it in reference to a man named Theodotion.15 Apparently, the use of this term in this way was not as late as critics would like to assume. This evidence serves to disprove the anachronistic critical claims of the use of διδάσκαλος in the Gospels.16
Cities
Finally, there is a great amount of information provided for biblical studies concerning the cities of New Testament times. Probably the most thoroughly excavated city is the ancient city of Ephesus.17 Acts 19 records a very informative historical account of Paul’s activity in Ephesus, mentioning the god Artemis five times (vv. 24, 27, 28, 34, 35). Archaeological findings of the past two centuries have verified the preeminence of Artemis in the pagan worship of Ephesus. An inscription describes several statues of Artemis, and recently an extensive history of the Artemisian shrine was discovered.18 Archaeologists have uncovered the temple of Artemis as well. All of this data shows why the Ephesians responded so angrily to the preaching of Paul in that city. Their idolatrous business would suffer due to the conversion of many to the Way.
Although Laodicea has not been excavated very extensively, some significant things have surfaced that illuminate the indictment given in Revelation 3:14–22 to the church at the end of the first century. M. J. S. Rudwick and E. M. B. Green discovered that Laodicea did not have a natural water supply. Their water came from the hot springs of Denizili, which they received by means of a stone aqueduct.19 Apparently, as the water neared the city it cooled to lukewarm. Thus the imagery of the spiritual condition of the church becomes clearer. This archaeological evidence serves primarily to add a fuller understanding to the things mentioned in the passage in Revelation.20
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, it is quite apparent that archaeological discoveries are very beneficial for a fuller understanding of the New Testament Scriptures. While Christians should definitely not depend upon archaeological findings to prove the claims of Scripture, archaeology is profitable in giving a fuller understanding of the historical context and culture, in furnishing vital details of historical events that fill in some of the gaps of the Scripture, in supplying linguistic knowledge, and in putting to silence the attacks of foolish, God-hating critics. Thus Scripture becomes more clearly understood and its historical reliability is vindicated. From manuscripts to inscriptions to cities, there is a plethora of information available. Every student of the Scriptures should avail himself to the wealth of valuable data offered through biblical archaeology.
Albright, William Foxwell. The Archaeology of Palestine. Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1949.
Campbell, Edward F. Jr., and David Noel Freedman, ed. The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 2. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books, 1964.
Carson, D. A., Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.
Danker, Frederick William, ed. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Feinberg, Charles Lee. “The Value of Archaeological Studies for Biblical Research.” In Tradition and Testament: Essays in Honor of Charles Lee Feinberg, edited by John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg, 265–91. Chicago: Moody Press, 1981.
Free, Joseph P. Archaeology and Bible History. Wheaton, IL: Van Kampen Press, 1950.
Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1990.
Harrison, R. K. Archaeology of the New Testament. New York: Association Press, 1964.
Kyle, M. G. “Archaeology and Criticism.” In The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, edited by James Orr, 1:226–33. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1952.
Pfeiffer, Charles F. “Archaeology.” In The Biblical World: A Dictionary of Biblical Archaeology, edited by Charles F. Pfieffer, 59–66. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1966.
Smith, Marsha A. Ellis. “Archaeology and the New Testament.” In Foundations for Biblical Interpretation, edited by David S. Dockery, Kenneth A. Matthews, and Robert B. Sloan. Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1999.
Thompson, J. A. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1960.
Notes
1. Its cognates have meanings like “learned” and “reasoning.” This is why it is used in the sense of “the study of.” ↩
2. Frederick William Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 137, 598–601. ↩
3. Charles Lee Feinberg, “The Value of Archaeological Studies for Biblical Research,” in Tradition and Testament: Essays in Honor of Charles Lee Feinberg, ed. John S. Feinberg and Paul D. Feinberg (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981), 266. ↩
4. This piece of papyrus is only three and a half inches by two and a half according to J. A. Thompson, Archaeology and the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1960), 139. ↩
5. Marsha A. Ellis Smith, “Archaeology and the New Testament,” in Foundations for Biblical Interpretation, ed. David S. Dockery, Kenneth A. Matthews, and Robert B. Sloan (Nashville, TN: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1999), 357. See also D. A. Carson, Douglas J. Moo, and Leon Morris, An Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 172, where they suggest a date of a.d. 130. ↩
6. Even apart from this external evidence, that there are Gnostic type elements in the gospel does not prove a non-first century date. Other archaeological evidence shows that Gnostic elements were present in the first century. See the following discussion on the Nag Hammadi texts. ↩
7. For other significant archaeological manuscript findings see the massive amount of literature on the Dead Sea Scrolls of the Qumran community. ↩
8. Smith, 358. ↩
9. Ibid. ↩
10. Ibid. ↩
11. Joseph P. Free, Archaeology and Bible History (Wheaton, IL: Van Kampen Press, 1950), 286. ↩
12. An ossuary is a bone chest containing bones in order for a tomb to be reused. It usually had the name of the individual inscribed on the top. Free, 300, n. 20. ↩
13. It is used 49 times in the Gospels, almost always in reference to Jesus. ↩
14. William Foxwell Albright, The Archaeology of Palestine (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1949), 244. ↩
15. Ibid. See also Free, 299–300. ↩
16. Another such example is the use of names in the Gospels that critics regard as fictional. But ossuary inscriptions have given support for these as well. See Albright, 244. ↩
17. Smith, 368. ↩
18. R. K. Harrison, Archaeology of the New Testament, (New York: Association Press, 1964), 46. ↩
19. Ibid., 55. ↩
20. There is a great amount of information available from archaeology and history concerning this city that illuminates the meaning of this passage of Scripture. ↩