Archaeology and Christmas

Archaeology is a branch of history. Whereas history deals with documents, archaeology deals with artifacts. Artifacts are tangible objects that often verify what appear in documents. The term artifact can also be used to refer to the remains of an object, such as a shard of broken pottery or glassware.

For instance, Luke reports that the birth of Jesus happened when “Quirinius was governor of Syria.” For years, some scholars questioned the accuracy of the statement. However, we now have evidence that Quirinius was governor of Syria around 7 B.C. This assumption is based on an inscription found in Antioch ascribing to Quirinius this post. As a result of this finding, it is now supposed that he was governor twice -- once in 7 B.C. and in 6 AD. This historical detail helps to confirm the accuracy of Luke’s report on the timing of the birth of Jesus.

Both Matthew and Luke refer to Nazareth as the place from which Joseph and Mary left for Bethlehem. For many years the existence of Nazareth was questioned. Doubters contended that there was no archaeological evidence to support its existence in the first century. With that skepticism, the reliability of the biblical text was questioned. More specifically, stories of the birth and upbringing of Jesus.

René Salm was a case in point. In his book The Myth of Nazareth, The Invented Town of Jesus, he argued that Nazareth didn’t begin to exist until the second century AD, after Jesus was born. To be fair, for years the archaeological evidence for a first-century Nazareth was scant.

As is often the case, however, archaeological finds in recent years have vindicated the biblical record, with numerous first-century discoveries. Tombs with fragments of ossuaries (bone boxes) have now been excavated in Nazareth, indicating a Jewish presence there in the first century. Storage pits and cisterns from the time of Jesus have been discovered. Archaeologists contend that about 350 persons may have lived in Nazareth with Jesus. Today, more than 50,000 persons live there. Again, Archaeology corroborated the biblical text.

In May 2012, the Israel Antiquities Authority announced the discovery of a bulla (a tiny clay seal) which mentions Bethlehem, the city of David and the birthplace of Jesus. The report said: ‘The first ancient artifact constituting tangible evidence of the existence of the city of Bethlehem was recently discovered in Jerusalem. The three lines of ancient Hebrew script stamped on the bulla read: ‘From the town of Bethlehem to the King’.

However, I would be the first to agree that Archaeology does not prove that the Bible is true. Archaeology is extremely useful in that it supplies cultural, epigraphic and artifactual materials that provide the background for accurately interpreting the Bible. Because of Archaeological discoveries, many liberal and conservative scholars contend that Luke is “erudite, eloquent and that his use of Greek approaches classical quality.”

Archaeology then, has illuminated and corroborated the Bible in numerous ways. The interpreter finds in archaeology a good friend for understanding and substantiating Scripture. One’s confidence can be enhanced where the truths of Scripture impinge on historical events.

In his book, What Mean These Stones, Yale Professor of Archaeology, Millar Burrows, makes the point, that “archaeological work has unquestionably strengthened confidence in the reliability of the Scriptural record. More than one archaeologist has found his respect for the Bible increased by the experience of excavation in Palestine.”

My faith is strengthened whenever I read the reports of Jesus’ birth, as told by Matthew and Luke. Other than the theological matters of Jesus’ messiahship, I believe that the events actually happened. Nazareth, Jerusalem and Bethlehem actually existed in the first century. Quirinius, Herod and Caesar Augustus were actual political leaders. Historical details like these undermine notions of myth, fiction and legend. Instead, historical details deal with reality and state what actually happened.

I strongly recommend that you read the first two chapters in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke this Christmas. You will see where the writers tell their stories to convince their audiences that the birth of Jesus and the events around the birth actually happened. However, just as the writers were convinced that they were reporting on what actually happened, they were equally convinced that someone from outside of our human experience, played a big role in the birth of Jesus.

Paul contended, the person who played that bigger role was God. This is how he described it, “But when the time had fully come, God sent his Son (Jesus), born of a woman…” (Galatians 4:4). This is a good season to remember that the science of Archaeology corroborated the story of the birth of God’s son.