OBST 800 Geography and Archaeology Short Paper 09-24-2023

docx

School

Liberty University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

800

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Oct 30, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by kristophermichaelwilliams

LIBERTY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF DIVINITY Short Paper: Geography and Archaeology in Genesis 12-50 Submitted to Dr. Michael Graham, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the completion of the course OBST 800-B02 Old Testament Backgrounds by Kristopher Williams 25 September 2023

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………. 1 GEOGRAPHY AND TRAVEL ROUTES IN THE PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVES…... 2 INTRODUCTION TO THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PATRIARCHS……………….. 5 BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………..9 ii

INTRODUCTION The physical, geographical world of the Ancient Near East affected not only the settlement and movement of various people groups, but it also helped to direct the economic, cultural, political, and military interactions these entities experienced. Various material remains obtained through archaeological excavations, unearthed not only at locations determined to have been permanent settlements but discovered along ancient trade routes known from continuous use, can be interpreted in order to add insight into the broader world that the generations of people chronicled in Genesis 12-50 inhabited. While present archaeological discoveries across the Fertile Crescent, coupled with topographical evidence and geographical information referenced within the Old Testament narratives that dovetail remarkably with patterns recognized by modern scholars, have not provided direct material evidence for the existence of the biblical patriarchs that the narratives of Genesis 12-50 describe, the data obtained offers plausible evidence for their story’s collective placement into chronological eras that correspond to known periods of secular history. This permits multi-disciplinary scholarly discussion to examine the available evidence and offer interpretations of the data. One goal of the biblical exegete is to utilize the sometimes seemingly contradictory information observed by those who interpret literary sources and archaeological remains while explaining what the author of Genesis 12-50 is seeking to communicate to his original audience. Through examination of the geographical data contained in the patriarchal narratives against the patterns currently known, if not providing definite proof for the travels of the patriarchs, we will present a preliminary case that rejects outright dismissal of these accounts as myth or anachronistic fiction. Moreover, we will see that interpretations derived from scientific examination of archaeological data supports claims of cultural, linguistic, and religious 1

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

interaction between the biblical patriarchs and the peoples of the ANE. The conclusion is that the text of Genesis 12-50, though a religious text, contains accurate historical data that can be positively correlated. In this brief essay, what is sought is an awareness of the issues and some of the major items in scholarly discussion rather than attempting a detailed, monograph-length examination and analysis. GEOGRAPHY AND TRAVEL ROUTES IN THE PATRIARCHAL NARRATIVES The author of Genesis 12-50, whether a later redactor who pieced together multiple extant sources into a more coherent narrative or a near contemporary writing a continuous account, takes special pains to identify locations familiar to the original audience while signaling their significance in the greater narrative. Even casual readers of Genesis 12-50 recognize the mention of topographical features such as rivers, plains, town or city names, and mountains in the recounting of events as the author explains how the descendants of the patriarchs acquired and solidified their claims to the land of Canaan. While periphery to the overall theological message of the text, the inclusion of these data allows for a positive apologetics approach since it demonstrates an attempt to locate the accounts into “real history” rather than a mythical, allegorical past, a “once upon a time” for lack of a better term. While mention of geography and potential travel routes do not guarantee veracity on the part of an author, the accuracy of these may lend credence to the greater theological messaging attempted by the author(s) of Genesis. In his Illustrated Guide to Biblical Geography, Paul Wright presents the idea that biblical texts, beginning with Genesis, are intended to be read as “accounts of real people living in specific places at specific times,” claiming that this presentation by the author stresses that this particular “attribute sets it apart from all other sacred texts.” 1 This observation is important since 1 Paul H. Wright, Holman Illustrated Guide to Biblical Geography: Reading the Land (Nashville, TN: B&H, 2020), accessed 16 September 2023, https://ebookcentral-proquest- com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/lib/liberty/reader.action?docID=6461797 . 2

it provides a literary basis for the claims made by the authors of the text while seeking to securely locate the occurrence of the events in specific temporal and spatial locations. These data can be compared with presently observable features of the landscape to provide clarity to the literary accounts for modern readers while also serving a dual role in apologetics contexts. The narrative of Genesis, temporally speaking, slows down considerably once the so- called “Primeval History” of Genesis 1-11 comes to an end. Introduced by a “toledoth,” or “generations,” 2 formula in Genesis 11:27, the closing verses of Genesis 11 provide proper introductions to Abraham and his family. These verses seemingly stress the idea of a Mesopotamian provenance for Abraham and squarely locate his origin in the region by noting that one of his brothers died “in the land of his kindred, in Ur Kasdim” (Gen. 11:28). 3 The author of Genesis first notes that Ur is the land of Abraham’s brother’s family, which by extension includes Abraham. He then continues by noting that Abraham and the remainder of the family unit under the direction of Abraham’s father, Terah, “went forth together from Ur Kasdim to go into the land of Canaan, but when they came to Haran, they settled there” (Gen. 11:31). While some have noted the anachronistic expression associated through identifying Ur Kasdim, or “Ur of the Chaldeans,” as problematic when placing Abraham and the patriarchs in the early 2 nd millennium B.C., later redactor clarifications intended for then contemporary readers do not necessitate fictional accounts. In other words, later clarification of place names current when the texts were written do not lessen the accuracy of the account simply because the geographical region was not called by that name during the time of Abraham. 4 Importantly, the 2 Toledoth = תֹ֣דְלֹוּת , variously translated as “generations,” and appearing eleven times in Genesis. 3 Kasdim = םיִִֽדְשִַכ , traditionally translated as "of the Chaldeans." 4 A present American historian noting that George Washington first commanded troops “around Pittsburgh” during the French and Indian War could be charged with anachronism since Pittsburgh did not exist at that time. Fort Pitt and Fort Duquesne did exist at that time, but a “lay” reader may not be readily aware of their historical existence, but possess knowledge of the location of Pittsburgh or be able to locate it quickly on a contemporary map. 3

place names, such as Haran, can be clearly identified along with the traditional routes utilized in antiquity by referencing known topological features clearly observable “on the ground” in the present-day. While these data do not “prove” the existence of Abraham and his travels from Mesopotamia into Canaan, they do not deny the possibility of his existence. Further data regarding the travel routes and places of residence of the patriarchs can be seen through close examination of the biblical texts and comparison with current geographical features that allow for reasonable reconstructions of more convenient movements of people. One observation is that Yahweh explicitly recognizes the Mesopotamian origin of Abram when, in Genesis 12:1, the command is made for Abram to “Go from your country and your kindred and your father's house to the land that I will show you” (emphasis added). Genesis 12:5 notes the movement of Abram, stating that he “took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother's son, and all their possessions that they had gathered, and the people that they had acquired in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan.” Further details in verses 6 and 7 stress Abram’s arrival at Shechem, Yahweh’s “appearance” there, and Abram’s construction of an altar. 5 The importance of these data is that reconstructions of travel routes based on geographical features can be clearly demonstrated through observance of current geographic features in the region, and the on-going importance of Shechem through the biblical narrative allows for positive identification of the site in the historical record. Thus, this allows for strong evidence that can plausibly identify the route taken by Abram, which of course assumes that Abram was rational and utilized the most natural and safe routes, as he attempted to faithfully perform the tasks dictated by Yahweh by traveling. Hostile skeptics may object to the actual existence of Abram, but the geographical and historical evidence of people movements in the same corridors is much more difficult to deny. 5 My bias understands this appearance of Yahweh to be one of embodiment rather than some mystical voice. 4

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

INTRODUCTION TO THE ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE PATRIARCHS William Lasor claims that the art and science of archaeology has “added a tremendous about to our knowledge and understanding of the Bible.” 6 In this claim, he is likely correct. While archaeological remains are subject to interpretation and cannot reliably recount “history” on their own, the material remains may allow greater insight into the contemporary world that produced and utilized these items in order to better understand their thoughts and worldview. Much like the data observable from geography and the travel routes used by the patriarchs, archaeological information cannot offer definitive proof of the biblical accounts. The data offers evidence and demonstrates that it exists in a particular context and can demonstrate that believers are reasonable actors for placing their faith in the greater theological claims behind the material remains. 7 Scholarly consensus does not exist regarding a specific range of dates in which to locate the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. William F. Albright, the “Father of Biblical Archaeology,” arguing for an Amorite origin of the patriarchs, felt secure in placing the four generations chronicled in Genesis 12-50 in the early 2 nd millennium B.C. 8 This dating has become part of the “traditional/believer” timeline, though not without challenge in either chronological direction. 9 In his "Archaeological Data and the Dating of the Patriarchs," John Bimson seeks to place Abraham in the late 3 rd millennium B.C., thereby placing the tale of Joseph near to 1900 6 William S. Lasor, "Archaeology," in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), 243. 7 Ibid., 244. 8 See William F. Albright, From the Stone Age to Christianity: Monotheism and the Historical Process , 2 nd ed. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1957, especially pp. 200-205. 9 Tremper Longman, III, How to Read Genesis , (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 90, for acknowledgement of agreement with an early 2 nd millennium B.C. date and existence of divergent views. 5

B.C. in the belief that this eliminates some of the issues with dating in the so-called Middle Bronze Age period. 10 John van Seters denies the possible historicity of the patriarchs, pressing the idea that the recoverable material and literary data do not demonstrate a Bronze Age provenance, but anachronistic composition during the Babylonian Exile in the 6 th century B.C. 11 First and foremost, Genesis itself does not provide modern readers with either an absolute or relative date for any of those events since an exact date was not the purpose of the writer. What can be substantiated through archaeological and comparative literary remains is that personal names for the patriarchs are recognized to be common in Mesopotamia for the early 2 nd millennium B.C. Importantly, seasonal movements of herds reminiscent of those recounted in Genesis appear in extra-biblical literary finds. Many place names mentioned in Genesis can now be reasonably deciphered through archaeological remains. Though secular skeptics are unconvinced, the relative importance of telling later people that the creator of the universe spoke to humans versus the exact date it occurred seems to be misplaced. Caricatured, it appears as: “God spoke to people? Okay, but when?” The greater claim is that God spoke to people. One of those questions, and the answer, seems more important. Again, the details sought by later individuals cannot be satisfied since the writer had specific ideas he wanted to communicate. It seems to me that the greater claim would still be rejected regardless of the evidence marshalled for its defense. Even if the texts did provide us with absolute dates for events, we must recall that systems used in antiquity do not correspond to those in use today. Just because a modern individual cannot match up dates does not necessitate a false report. Relative dating does exist in 10 John J. Bimson, "Archaeological Data and the Dating of the Patriarchs," in Essays on the Patriarchal Narratives , eds. Donald J. Wiseman and Alan. R. Millard (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 84-85. 11 John van Seters, Abraham in History and Tradition (New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1975), 10, 67- 68, 75, and 121. 6

the Bible, meaning that we can examine events and see their correspondence with absolute dates recorded by other nearby empires. For instance, the Assyrian Empire that we see threatening the kingdoms of Israel and Judah in the 8th and 7th centuries B.C. recorded an eclipse that can be dated absolutely to June 763 B.C. Utilizing this, it is possible to use the relative dates preserved by biblical authors to furnish approximate reign dates for Solomon and David, the date of the Exodus from Egypt (mid-15th century B.C.), and the approximate time of Abraham’s arrival in Palestine (c. 2000 B.C.). Whether this is satisfying to modern critics may say more about their pre-suppositions and proof standards rather than the text itself. Some of the more recent major finds that shed light on Genesis 12-50 are literary remains referenced as the Ebla Tablets, the Mari Tablets, and the Nuzi Tablets. These archaeological/literary finds, ranging from marriage agreements and last wills and testaments to commercial contracts, allow for analysis of some “odd” items that appear in the patriarchal narratives that had evaded explanation until greater understanding of the cultural milieu could be obtained. This also recognizes that our knowledge remains fragmentary and incomplete. In their Archaeology and the Bible: An Introductory Study , Donald Wiseman and Edwin Yamauchi note that, of the some 6000 (as of publication in 1979) archaeological sites in Israel, less than 200 had been excavated, with less than 30 of these experiencing “extensive” archaeological surveys due to a variety of concerns. Moreover, they argue that less than 10% of nearly 500,000 recovered items have undergone scholarly analysis. 12 What this means is that much more could be known with what is currently available, but limitations of scholars and accessibility have stunted greater insight. In addition, future digs will certainly uncover more remains, which will compound the available data and strain resources. The “final word” on archaeological finds has yet to be 12 Donald J. Wiseman and Edwin M. Yamauchi, Archaeology and the Bible: An Introductory Study (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1979), 4-6. 7

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

written. All of the data is not presently available. We continually discover new information, whether through archaeology or through random textual finds in medieval libraries. We truly suffer from ignorance since we “do not know what we do not know” and have too much to presently sort through. BIBLIOGRAPHY Albright, William F. From the Stone Age to Christianity: Monotheism and the Historical Process . 2 nd edition. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1957. Lasor, William S. "Archaeology," in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia . Edited by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979. Longman III, Tremper. How to Read Genesis . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005. Rasmussen, Carl. Zondervan Atlas of the Bible . Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014. Roskop, Angela R. The Wilderness Itineraries: Genre, Geography, and the Growth of Torah . Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2012 8

van Seters, John. Abraham in History and Tradition . New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1975. Wiseman, Donald J. and Alan. R. Millard, eds. Essays on the Patriarchal Narratives . Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1983. Wiseman, Donald J. and Edwin M. Yamauchi. Archaeology and the Bible: An Introductory Study . Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1979. Wright, George E. Biblical Archaeology . Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1962. Wright, Paul H. Holman Illustrated Guide to Biblical Geography: Reading the Land . Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2020. Yamauchi, Edwin. The Stones and the Scriptures: An Introduction to Biblical Archaeology . Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1972. 9