BIBL 471 DB 1_Minimalism and Maximalism
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Liberty University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
471
Subject
Religion
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
2
Uploaded by MateNewtPerson973
Compose a response that addresses why biblical Minimalists (those who limit
the historicity of biblical accounts) and Maximalists (those who do not limit the historicity of biblical accounts) disagree on early Israel. What do these 2 views have in common and where do they differ? What are the arguments of those who feel that archaeology should be studied apart from the biblical text?
For help in addressing this topic consult pages 20–21 of
Zondervan Handbook of Biblical Archaeology
by Price & House, Consult pages 65–70 of
Biblical Archeology: Second Edition
Vol 1 by Graves, and Lemche, Niels P., Thomas L. Thompson, William G. Dever, and Kyle P. McCarter, Jr. “Face to Face: Biblical Minimalists Meet Their Challenge,”
Biblical Archaeology Review
23, no. 1 (July–Aug 1997): 26–42, 66.
In order to accurately state why Biblical Minimalist and Maximalists disagree on early Israel we have to first understand what these two archaeological views mean. Price and House gave us this simple comparison of biblical minimalists and maximalists in their book, Zondervan
Handbook of Biblical Archaeology
, “biblical minimalists are those who minimalize the biblical data in deference to the archaeological data. Biblical maximalists are those who maximize (or prioritize) the biblical data with reference to the archaeological data.”
1
In other words, Biblical Minimalists
view the biblical narratives as less reliable historical sources,
their approach minimizes the significance of the biblical text when reconstructing ancient Israel’s history. They emphasize the need to critically evaluate biblical texts and avoid assuming their accuracy without corroborating evidence from archaeology. Biblical Maximalists, on the other hand, prioritize the biblical data and consider it a valuable historical source. They believe that the Bible
provides essential information about ancient Israel’s past.
While both views primarily find some value in the Bible, the difference is found in the amount of value each place with the Biblical text. Biblical Archeology: Second Edition
Vol 1, by Graves, tells us that, “
the difference between the two in that ‘where the combatants disagree is on
the value placed on the biblical record.’”
2
It appears that the main challenge lies in determining how to weigh the biblical record against other historical data. According to Graves minimalists who feel that archeology should be studied apart from the Bible are “driven by its perceived association to biased research, antiquated methodology, 1 Randall Price and H. Wayne House, Zondervan Handbook of Biblical Archaeology
(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 20.
2 David Elton Graves, Biblical Archaeology: An Introduction with Recent Discoveries That Support the Reliability of the Bible
, vol. 1 (Electronic Christian Media, 2018), 68.
rigid ideology, lack of objectivity, and contempt for the scientific method…”
3
This is a narrow-
minded view as was explained in detail in our assigned text, “it requires archaeologists to discriminate against the Bible as a valid primary-source document originating from the ancient Near-Eastern world.”
4
Every event in the Bible cannot be automatically assumed to be untrue, there has to be some evidence or data to prove it to be false. While the provided descriptions of Biblical Minimalism and Maximalism are generalizations of the views held by archeologists, it is
safe to say that the majority of archaeologists would likely adopt a position that falls somewhere between these two methodologies of biblical history.
3 David Elton Graves, Biblical Archaeology, 67.
4 David Elton Graves, Biblical Archaeology, 67.
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