Kale Hintz- History of the Old Testament
Garfinkel, Yosef. “ The Death of Biblical Minimalism” , Biblical Archaeology Review, VOL 37(
2011) NO. 3, 3-78.
Summery
The article “The Death of Biblical Minimalism”, starts off by talking about Egypt’s main
archeologist that was causing some controversy on bringing some artifacts back to Egypt and
how some of the findings can be useful for Biblical knowledge, with the findings of Israelites in
Egypt. The finding bring light to the fact of David and Solomon rule over urbanized Judahites in
the 10th century BCE. These finding back the Bible and its historical accuracy. These findings
were originally found by a metal detector. The findings were some Christian items and gold
objects, these objects are under the protection of British law and are to be studied and put into
museums after they have been examined. The major find that this article is looking at was a
fragment of an Aramaic stela that was found in the Tel Dan excavation site, under the lead of
Avraham Brian from the Hebrew Union College in Jerusalem. This artifact is dated back to the
9th century BCE and the reason that it is getting so much attention is that it specifically
mentions a king of Israel and a king of the Davidic blood line. With this find there is at least
one and possibly two clear references to the Davidic bloodline in the ninth century. This find
also ended the mythological paradigm, by proving that there was a tracked record of the
dynasty that was mentioned in the Hebrew Bible.
The next strategy of the minimalist was the central method, which was trying to lower the
original dating of the findings. This method was brought forward by Israel Finkelstein, from the
Tel Aviv University, it relied on archeology alone. The question that is raised with this method
is weather Solomon and David were alive during the Iron Age I or the Iron Age II. The Iron Age I
is categorized as tribal where the second age is categorized as urban states. By doing this all of
the artifacts that were found that were dated to the time of Solomon and David were moved
back and all previous material as well. The proposition of this method relied on carbon dating
to date material that was thought to be left from the Iron ages. The problem with carbon dating
is that it can be difficult and inaccurate. The original carbon dating system used C-14 to date the
material and this was much less reliable than the modern methods used recently in 2007, which
used Stratum K-4, these results were published in 2009. The findings were that the date was
around 1000 BCE which supports the high chronology. So in trying to prove the low chronology,
Finkelstein proved that is was not true. This also shot down the argument that David and
Solomon could not have ruled over a industrialized kingdom, with the findings at the Khirbet
Qeiyafa excavation.
The Qeiyafa, was heavily fortified which clearly reflects that a highly organized society called
that place home. Using the carbon dating process they have discovered that the area could not
be dated later than 969 BCE which is the time between David and Solomon, thus ending the
Low chronology argument.
This was countered by a minimalist question what if the site was Philistine rather than Israelite?
This was answered by the facts that pig and dog remains (that would have been eaten in a
philistine village) were not found, and the fortress that was built around the city were double
walled (an Israelite fortification) The critics say that the bible cannot be considered historically
accurate because it is thought to be a edited and written hundreds of years later than the
events that are foretold in it. If this is true then outside sources must be used to prove the
existence, the Assyrian scripts were used and dated and support the low chronology model.
The excavation of standardized pots indicates that a system for collecting taxes and inscriptions
was being used in the city. The term “united kingdom” is not used because there has not been
sites found in the northern kingdom of Israel.
Overall there has been a number of ideas that have been created to disprove the fact that
Solomon and David ruled over a urbanized state. The methods of carbon dating and archeology
have been used but have proven furthermore that David and Solomon did rule over an
urbanized state.
Analysis
Overall I found this article to be very interesting. I think that this journal provides some very
strong proof that it is important to consider the Bible as a historically accurate material, and
that it should be used to study or past. This article basically went through the arguments that
Biblical critics “minimalists” have brought froth in the past and how they have been disproved. I
particularly like how the supporters of the low chronology were not afraid to run test and allow
the opposition to run the tests to find the true findings of the archeological sites. I believe that
the material has spoken for itself. When the opposition of the Bible’s relevance in historical
facts, ran test they not only disproved themselves, but also added more evidence that the bible
does contain some very accurate documents. I also found that the findings of the standardized
pots in the site were a good backing for the Bible supporters as well. With this they first needed
to prove that the city was an Israelite city instead of a Philistine city as some critics had claimed
it to be. The archeologists did this by looking at the remains of the animals that the people in
the city would have been eating and by looking at the design of the defenses around the city.
First, the animals that were used as food. No pigs or dogs were found in the city as they would
have been in a Philistine city; this is because the Israelites would not have used these animals as
a food source. Second the fortifications. The archeologists found that there was a double wall
defense around the city, a trait that was specific to the Israelite fortifications. This leads me to
several questions. First, in the next 10, 20, or even 100 years, with the advances in modern
technology, what will be discovered and will it support the factual information of the Bible.
Second, what other urbanized traits did the David and Solomon kingdoms have and what do we
still have to learn about them.
Overall I found this material to be very educational and very interesting. This material also
proved yet again that no matter how many ideas are made up to try to disprove the bible and
its accuracy, the true facts will always come forward in the end.