This book is a very good introduction to the subject of biblical archeology. It is a very readable and well organized into three parts in chronological order. Part I deals with the bearing of archeology on our understanding of the Old Testament up to 587 B.C., the beginning of the Babylonian exile. Part II covers the "pre-christian centuries" with the remaining Part III covering New Testament times.

The author speaks primarily as an archeologist, but also as a believer. He treats his subject in a very objective and professional manner without being too objective and impersonal. This is a refreshing and honest treatment. The book does not attempt to unlock and interpret key passages in the Bible for the purpose of understanding its teaching and modern application. Nor does it attempt to "prove the Bible true" with archeological evidence. Rather, it enlightens the reader's view of Scripture by illuminating the cultural context in which the events of the Bible were acted out and written down. In our desire to understand the Bible's message for today, we often overlook this perspective and underestimate its importance.

One important affect of reading about archeology and the Bible is that it helped me to see the biblical narratives in context. The Pentateuch, for example, focuses on the stories of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph and Moses and we may tend to view their actions in isolation from the surrounding world at the time. But these people did not live in a vacuum. Many of the customs that might seem unique or odd to us in reading the Bible, seem much more natural against the backdrop of the culture in which the biblical characters lived.

One of these customs concerns the inheritance of property. Possessions were theoretically viewed as inalienable and could not pass from family to family. A property owner who had no son would normally adopt an heir. Many times this heir would be a slave in the man's household. Abraham's first attempt to secure an heir apparently employed this custom (Gen. 15:2,3). Sarah's later suggestion that Abraham raise up children by her maid Hagar (Gen. 16:2) was also a common practice in that day. When this method was used, it was understood that if the man's wife later conceived and bore a son, that son would be the rightful heir; not the one born of the concubine. If this happened (as it did in Abraham and Sarah's case when Isaac was born), there was a strong taboo against casting out the former heir. Although the son of the slave woman would no longer be the primary heir, he was still to be treated as a son and not cast out on his own. This explains Abraham's strong displeasure with Sarah's intent to cast Hagar and Ishmael out of their house. Only God's permission allowed Abraham to accept such an act (Gen. 21:12).

An interesting point of history concerns the background and rulers of Egypt during the patriarchal period. Study of ancient Egyptian history has revealed a period of time when Egypt was not ruled by Egyptians but by a Semitic (largely Canaanite in origin) people known as the Hyksos (from the Egyptian term meaning "rulers of foreign lands"). The Hyksos invaded Egypt c. 1720-10 B.C. and made the Egyptians their vassals. They used the existing form of state administration and employed many Egyptian officials. The capitol city was eventually set up at Avaris, in the northern delta region. Before that, and afterward when the Egyptians drove the Hyksos out again c. 1570 B.C., the Egyptian capitol was at Thebes; 400 miles to the south, up the Nile River. The land of Goshen, where Jacob and his sons settled, is believed to be near Avaris; a little to the southeast. The Hyksos rulers were eventually driven out with intense hatred by the Egyptians. The Egyptians made every attempt to destroy all evidence of the Hyksos.

If Joseph was sold into Egypt during the time of the Hyksos, this would help explain the sympathy shown to Joseph and his family by the pharaoh. The Hyksos were related to Jacob and his sons in a broad ethnic sense. Later when in Egypt a king arose who "knew not Joseph" the Hebrews were ill-treated. The Egyptians' hatred of the semitic peoples and their concern that they not multiply too greatly probably arose from the fear of being conquered again (cf. Exodus 1).

Thompson gives some evidence for a probable date of the Exodus at about 1280 B.C. (pp. 60-64). This would make Ramesses II the pharaoh of the Exodus. Previously, 1440 B.C. had been thought to be the date of the Exodus. This was based on 1 Kings 6:1 which says that Solomon began construction of the Temple in the fourth year of his reign, 480 years after the Exodus, and that there is good reason to believe that Solomon began his reign about 950 B.C. To reconcile the later date with 1 Kings 6:1 it has been suggested that a symbolic use of numbers was employed. The Septuagint differs from the Hebrew text in that it gives a figure of 440 years as the time between the Exodus and the building of the Temple. 1 Chronicles 6:3-8 gives a list of eleven high priests between Aaron and Zadok, the priest of Solomon's time. If a generation is taken to be (roundly) forty years we can see how the Septuagint figure was obtained. If an actual generation was somewhat less, a later date for the Exodus can be reconciled with the 1 Kings 6:1 passage.

Some passages of Scripture in the Old Testament which refer to common objects are made more vivid by archeological findings. One example is in passages that speak of Israel smiting her enemies "with the edge of the sword" (Exod. 17:13; Deut. 13:15; 20:13; Num. 21:24). A more literal translation in these passages is "to the mouth of the sword". This seems curious until we know that swords of that day were often decorated with the mouths of animals at the top of the blade so that the blade appeared to extend from the animal's mouth (p. 72).

The chapter on "The Religious Community of Qumran" made very interesting reading. I could feel the excitement and understand the significance of such a find as the Dead Sea Scrolls. Copies of most of the Old Testament writings, as well as commentaries and other writings have been found in several caves near Qumran.

The insight into the manner of living of the Qumran sect and their reasons for separating themselves was valuable to me. The group was an apocalyptic community. They abhorred the heathen (Greek and, later, Roman) influence on jewish culture and separated themselves for the sake of purity and to await the coming of the Messiah. It's interesting that, from the Christian perspective, the Messiah did come during the time that the community flourished. Jesus fulfilled the figures of prophet, priest and king that the community expected. He did not fulfill them in the way that they expected, however.

The Qumran approach to the Old Testament bears strong resemblance to the approach of some groups of modern Christians. Their commentaries tended to ignore the historical meaning of the text, using them as a source of interpretation for their own situation instead. It was as if God was using the prophets to speak just as directly to Qumran as to the prophets' own historical situation.

Tombs are important sites for archeological excavation. Artifacts found here have a greater chance of surviving intact since burial places were not often disturbed. In burial caves near Jerusalem, some evidence has been found of the Roman practice of crucifixion. A skeleton of a crucified man has been found with the nail that was driven through his heels still in place. The nail is about seven inches long. Nails had also been driven through each of the man's wrists ^[1]. Both of his shin bones had been smashed by a severe blow (cf. John 19:31-34).

Of all the New Testament biblical writers, Luke seems the most concerned to anchor his narrative in the events of history. Thompson devotes a chapter to the evidence which corroborates Luke's account in his Gospel and Acts. He spends most of this chapter following Paul's missionary journeys, giving background information on the places that Paul visited. One interesting example is the city of Ephesus.

Ephesus was the center of the Artemis [Diana] cult of the East. ... Her temple was one of the seven wonders of the world. It was considered so sacred and inviolable that not only the Ephesians, but also foreign individuals, kings and peoples deposited money there for safekeeping (p. 406).

In addition to being like a bank, expensive gifts were given to the temple which increased its wealth. It was really no wonder that Paul's teaching that "they be no gods, which are made with hands" caused such a stir. The Ephesians' devotion to Diana was extreme.

Another chapter on the New Testament is devoted to John's Gospel and the book of Revelation. Thompson discusses the evidence which helps to date the Gospel to the early part of the first century. He cites the work of W. F. Albright who concludes that John must have been well acquainted with the features of Palestine which were obliterated after A.D. 70. Previously many critics maintained that the Gospel could not have been written before the second century. ^[2]

This chapter also contains some brief but interesting sketches of the seven cities where the churches addressed in the book of Revelation were located.

The final chapter concludes with an explanation of how papyrus was used and offers a look at some examples of papyri that have been found and preserved. Sheets of papyrus were often sewn together into long rolls, but early Christians seem to have pioneered the use of the codex (leaf-book, like our modern books), probably because of their need to reference different parts of Scripture more quickly (pp. 426-427).

I found this book to be a very useful introduction to the background of the Bible. Although it is hard to put my finger on specific instances where reading about archeology has helped me understand the Bible better, I think it will help me to read the Bible with a better sense of context. The Bible assumes much detail which the study of archeology helps make explicit.

[1] Many paintings of Christ depict the nails as having been driven through the palms of his hands since, I suppose, this is how the Bible appears to describe it (e.g., John 20:20,25,27). But nails placed there would not have supported the weight of the upper body. Perhaps the word for "hand" in the Bible passage more generally refers to the end of the arm (including the wrist).

[2] For an example of one liberal scholar who has changed his mind and now argues ofr an early date for the New Testament books, see Redating the New Testament, by John A. T. Robinson (1976, Westminster Press).