Search the Community

Oldest mention of Jehovah's name Once again, archeology agrees with the bible.

Here is part of an interesting article that shows how scientists, scholars, archaeologists, need humility when trying to understand history. Otherwise they will dismiss certain real historical events as just myths, including those in the Bible. It's called "Chronological Snobbery" or you could call it "Historical Snobbery". Perhaps the Ancients Weren’t So Dumb: A Flood of Evidence Is Embarrassing the ‘Experts’ By Eric Metaxas | August 12, 2016 Were the ancients dummies? If so, why does archeology keep confirming what they wrote? I’ll tell you why a healthy dose of humility can help us understand the past. In his conversion story, “Surprised by Joy,” C. S. Lewis explains how his close friend, Owen Barfield, demolished his “chronological snobbery.” Lewis defined chronological snobbery as “the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate of our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that count discredited.” In Lewis’s time, much of academia was already convinced that every past generation formed a staircase of progress, leading (of course) to enlightened modernity. And since Lewis’s death, many intellectuals have only become more convinced of their own perch at the pinnacle of history. These days, we barely even notice the snobbery. Dr. Paul Goldin of the University of Pennsylvania derides what he sees as a “fixation” among Chinese archaeologists with “[proving] that all the ancient texts and legends have some fundamental truth … It shouldn’t be every archaeologist’s first instinct,” he says, “to see if their findings are matched in the historical sources.” Come again? Shouldn’t archaeologists want to know if what they’re digging up has significance in known history? Sadly for many in the West, the answer is a resounding “not really.” This dismissal of ancient writings—including the Bible—is rooted in chronological snobbery. The ancients, experts today assume, were just too dumb or superstitious to get their own histories right. This attitude has not only blinded us to potential discoveries, it’s made it very embarrassing for archaeologists when the ancients do turn out to be correct. I think, for example, of the recent discovery of Goliath’s hometown, Gath. Or what about the unearthing of evidence for the biblical King Hezekiah, the likely discovery of the palace where Pilate tried Jesus, or the compelling evidence that “the house of David,” contrary to decades of secular scholarship, was founded by a real, historical man after God’s own heart? All of these discoveries came as shocks to archaeologists and historians who doubted that such figures, places, or people ever existed. But again and again, our belief that the ancients were better at making myths than they were at recording history has handicapped archeology, and left a lot of smart folks scraping egg off their faces. They were not dummies. And we who dig up the remains of their civilizations aren’t always as clever as we like to believe. http://cnsnews.com/commentary/eric-metaxas/perhaps-ancients-werent-so-dumb-flood-evidence-embarrassing-experts