Probably every tour guide who visits the site of Qumran makes note of the fact that a portion of every Old Testament book was discovered in the nearby caves with the exception of Esther (given that Ezra-Nehemiah were a single book). You may have heard a suggestion or two offered for this lack, but I found helpful a summary of possibilities given by Sidnie White Crawford in her article on the Book of Esther in the Encyclopedia of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1: 269).

1. The fact that no fragments have been preserved is simply owing to accident or chance. The book is relatively short and may have been in existence in the community but simply not preserved or discovered.

2. The male community at Qumran was not interested in a book in which the hero was a female.

3. The Qumran community was opposed to the book which describes a Jewish woman marrying a Gentile king and not following the Jewish laws.

4. The book of Esther was not known in the land of Israel in the first century.

5. The book was written too late to be included in the body of sacred scrolls.

I would be inclined to believe that because of #2 and #3, #1 is true. It may also be observed that the book of Esther is never quoted in the New Testament, nor is Purim mentioned.

Qumran cliffs with caves aerial, tb010703350

Cliffs near Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found

A seal from the days of the First Temple has been discovered below the southwestern corner of the Temple Mount. From the press release by the Israel Antiquities Authority:

The remains of a building dating to the end of the First Temple period were discovered below the base of the ancient drainage channel that is currently being exposed in IAA excavations beneath Robinson’s Arch in the Jerusalem Archaeological Garden, adjacent to the Western Wall of the Temple Mount. This building is the closest structure to the First Temple found to date in archaeological excavations.
In the excavations, underwritten by the Ir David Foundation, a personal Hebrew seal from the end of the First Temple period was discovered on the floor of the ancient building. The seal is made of a semi-precious stone and is engraved with the name of its owner: “Lematanyahu Ben Ho…” (“למתניהו בן הו…” meaning: “Belonging to Matanyahu Ben Ho…”). The rest of the inscription is erased.

Two people with the name Mattaniah are mentioned in 1 Chronicles 25:4, 16 and 2 Chronicles 29:13.

The full press release is here. Leen Ritmeyer comments on the location of the find. Joseph Lauer passes on word that some information in the press release is incorrect. According to Zachi Dvira (Zweig), “This was not sifted at our site. And the visitors sift only the debris from the Temple Mount.

Only our staff workers do the sifting for other excavations.”

mattaniah-seal-jerusalem-iaa_0105

Mattaniah seal. Photo by Clara Amit, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority.

It’s May 1, not April 1, but it might as well be with an article entitled “The Real Indiana Jones” that includes an interview with me. Originally published in the excellent Insight’s Archaeology Handbook, the interviews with Bryant Wood and me are now online. Here’s a snippet:

What can archaeology prove or teach us about the Bible? What are its limitations?

BW: Archaeological findings have revolutionized our understanding of the Bible. Through the discoveries of archaeology, we have ancient texts that help us better understand the original languages of the Bible as well as the world of the Bible. The people, places, history, religion, and material culture of the Bible are much better understood as a result of archaeological finds. Many finds are limited in that they are “silent,” and have to be interpreted. This leads to a variety of understandings by various scholars.


TB: Archaeology illuminates the world of the Bible. The Bible was written to a contemporary audience, who didn’t need an explanation of what a house looked like, how a city gate functioned, or what types of tombs people were buried in. Its original readers knew all of this and much more. But today we live in a different world and culture, and archaeology helps to bridge the gap so that we can more properly understand the context in which the Bible was written. Archaeology cannot prove the Bible as a whole, but it can support and confirm the Bible’s records of events. Some people today think that the Bible was a myth written hundreds of years after the events it purports to describe, but archaeological evidence reveals the names of people and places that confirm that the Scriptures were written by first-hand witnesses. Archaeology cannot prove many aspects of the text, such as the faith of the people or the supernatural work of God. Furthermore, archaeology has a significant weakness: All discoveries are subject to a human interpreter, who is fallible. Many archaeological discoveries have been misinterpreted, both by those who believe the Scriptures and by those who deny them.

This is the nature of the discipline of archaeology, and believers should not place too much confidence in the discoveries of archaeology per se because of the ambiguity involved in much of the evidence.

The full article is here. Now where’s my bullwhip? Smile

Tell Deir Alla excavators, tb061104012

Archaeologists interpret stratigraphy at Tell Deir Alla (Succoth?)

If I subscribed to magazines without regard for the cost, Eretz would be high on my list. At $89 a year (six issues), I will be content to read it in the library when time permits, but I was pleased recently to see several affordable books that collect many articles published over the years.


Pilgrims Companion: Galilee (170 pages; $14.50)


ERETZ the Book: A Selection of Articles 1985-2005 (336 pages; $32.00)image


ERETZ Guide and Handbook to Israel (400 pages; $49.90)


ERETZ Guide and Handbook to Jerusalem (352 pages; $49.90)


Hiking In Israel: 36 of Israel’s Best Hiking Routes (202 pages; $24.90)


ERETZ Guide to Parks and Sites of Israel (322 pages; $39.90)


Pilgrims’ Companion: The Land of Abraham (64 pages; $3.95)


ERETZ Guide to Museums and Historic Sites in Israel (56 pages; $3.95)

More details about each are given here and here on the magazine’s website.

Question: How do you address the skeptic who argues that Chorazin did not exist in Jesus’ day? –J.H.


Answer: Two of the Gospels record that Jesus condemned Chorazin for its lack of faith (Matt 11:21; Luke 10:13). Scholars have identified Chorazin as Khirbet Karazeh, a site located two miles north of Capernaum, but excavations have not revealed remains earlier than the 2nd century AD. You’re asking if this contradicts the New Testament.

First, the incidental reference to Chorazin would hardly have been invented by a Gospel writer. One could potentially use the reference to argue that the Gospels were written only much later in the second century, but there is abundant evidence dating Matthew and Luke to the first century.

Second, in some cases the name of a site is preserved in the area but not at the specific location.

Names did move in antiquity as well as today (e.g., Beth Zur, Socoh), and this possibility cannot be ruled out.

Third, another ancient text, the Talmud, refers to the existence of Chorazin in the first century. Rabbi Yose said that they would have brought the wheat from Chorazin to the temple for the Omer offering if it had been closer to Jerusalem (b. Men. 85a).

Fourth, in an unpublished report written in 1926, J. Ory described an earlier synagogue 650 feet (200 m) west of the second-century synagogue: “A square colonnaded building of small dimensions, of a disposition similar to the interior arrangement of the synagogue, 7 columns, 3 on each side…with sitting benches in 5 courses” (cited by Foerster on page 26 of Ancient Synagogues Revealed). This building has not been re-located, but it is possible that this is the synagogue of Jesus’ time.

Finally, we must recognize that archaeology has recovered so little of the ancient world. First-century synagogues in Galilee are a great example, as textual sources indicate the existence of dozens and yet archaeology has found only a handful (e.g., Magdala, Gamla). The fact that these are not known today hardly means that they did not once exist. Perhaps the architecture was different than what archaeologists have been looking for, perhaps the Roman destruction was severe in some cases, or perhaps it is just a case of not having sufficient resources to excavate the hundreds of archaeological sites in Galilee.

A telling example of just how limited archaeology is during this time period is the apparent complete disappearance of the nearby city of Bethsaida-Julias. Archaeologists excavating et-Tell so much want it to be the glorious first-century city constructed by Herod Philip but they have not found it (despite their claims to the contrary). The problem is not with the ancient sources but with the preserved remains and archaeologists’ ability to find them.

Chorazin panorama from west, tb041103211-labeled

Chorazin from the west

There are difficulties in identifying certain cities in the biblical text, but I’ve never seen anything as strange as the location as Bethulia in the book of Judith. The following is abridged from the Bethulia entry by Sidnie Ann White in the Anchor Bible Dictionary (1: 715-16).

BETHULIA (PLACE) [Gk Baityloua (Βαιτυλουα)]. City where the events of the book of Judith are located (Jdt 4:6). The author of Judith gives many indications of the location of Bethulia: it is N of Jerusalem (11:19), near Betomasthaim (4:6), over against Esdraelon (4:6), near Dothan (4:6), in the hill country of Samaria (6:11). It is described as having a spring below the city (7:12–13), and it is positioned to hold the narrow mountain pass giving access to Jerusalem from the N hill country (10:10–11). However, the name Bethulia is unknown to modern readers, and its exact location, despite all the descriptive material, is uncertain. Enslin (1972) points out that we do not even know whether the city was actually known to the author.

[…]

None of these locations is definitive. It is possible that the author of Judith modeled his city on one of the major cities in the N hill country (Shechem being the most likely candidate), but that does not lead to an absolute identification. It seems most helpful to follow Craven (1983) when she says, “It seems best to leave the details of the Book of Judith alone as the products of a fertile, creative imagination.”

This reminds me of an interview once in which I was asked about various place names that sounded somewhat biblical but were clearly misinformed. Though not without its challenges to interpreters 2,000 years later, the Bible clearly stands apart from other religious texts.

To say it another way, there is no Pictorial Library of Apocryphal Lands or Pictorial Library of Mormon Lands because one cannot photograph what did not exist.

Shiloh from west, tb120806860

Judges 21:19 (NIV) “But look, there is the annual festival of the Lord in Shiloh, to the north of Bethel, and east of the road that goes from Bethel to Shechem, and to the south of Lebonah.”

Footnote: Not all apocryphal or deuterocanonical texts are ahistorical or a-geographical, but as readers have long recognized, the biblical books are unique.