archaeology and the Bible

today i ran into the anticipated description of archaeology and the Bible. the example given was joshua 6 and the battle of Jericho. the archaeology findings show that there were no inhabitants at the Jericho location directly after 1550 BCE. the findings did show that people lived there years before and that people settled there far later as well. estimates, using the Bible, locate the Jericho narrative to have occurred around 1200 BCE.

many questions come from this. my response 2-3 years ago would be to quickly research and point out other evidence that shows that Jericho truly was inhabited during the 1200 BCE time mark. other parts of me would want to deconstruct the dating methods and/or the choice of locations. my initial response was to question the location selected for study. how do archaeologists truly know where to dig for a specific city?

i'm sure there are good answers to these questions.

i have some more questions however. my questions are how should i respond to these findings. should i ignore them and go into a retreat of commitment? should i take them at face value and then try to reconstruct my faith in terms of Bible that has stories that didn't really happen?

furthermore, how should i care for the people under my leadership when i serve in the church? should i ignore this information and only talk about when somebody reads these ideas in a book or on the internet and then challenges the Bible to my face?

these questions remind me of a struggle i went through 5-6 years ago. i met with mormon missionaries for months (elder fluckiger will remember). one of my arguments (the key word being 'argument') against the mormon faith was the archaeological evidence against the existence of the Nephites and Lamanites in America during the time of the wars cited in the Book of Mormon. i started asking tough questions about the text and its relationship to archaeology. i started to see, however, that i couldn't answer these questions myself for my Christian faith and the Bible. i decided to stop engaging these questions due to my inability to continue pressing the Mormons with questions while not being able to answer them myself.

where does that leave me now?

i will continue to search. i definitely see the potential slippery slide with this. if Jericho was not inhabited and Joshua 6 is only recorded for the Jewish people as a story for their national identity, then did the kings of Israel exist, namely, King David? how do i keep this from slipping all the way to Jesus himself and the death/resurrection/ascension?

i see a wide spectrum. one side is a view that the Biblical narratives are a set of stories pulled together by a specific redactor who wanted to make theological points following theological themes. the other side is a extreme literal position that takes every description of the Bible to be historical fact that also includes specific references that apply in a type/antitype relationship all the way to the Christ's return (and beyond).

i will continue to search and pray regarding these things...