>In an article published in the Star-Telegram.com, Steven Ortiz, an associate professor of archaeology and biblical studies at Southwestern Baptist Seminary, is reporting that a dig at a fortification in Gezer has revealed collapsed mud-brick walls which were probably burned by the Assyrians in the eighth century B.C.
In addition, archaeologists also found a cylinder seal with the image of a king, with his outstretched bow in hand, and riding on a animal. Archaeologists also found a silver coin dating to the reign of Ptolemy IV (207-205 B.C.). According to Ortiz, the coin is only the third of its kind excavated in Israel.
According to Ortiz, the people working at Gezer “were quite surprised at the preservation of the Assyrian destruction.”
Read the complete news report by visiting the Star-Telegram.com.
Of course, Jim West is skeptical about the findings. Jim wrote:
Perhaps it’s time to remind ourselves that without substantive evidence, the marriage of the Bible to scrapings in the dirt is tenuous at best; and the use of any and every bit of remains as linkage to the biblical narrative is disingenuous and ultimately misleading.
I wonder what it would take to convince Jim that some archaeological findings may demonstrate that some events in the Bible are based on historical facts.
Claude Mariottini
Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary
Tags: Archaeology, Gezer, Solomon
Dr. Claude Mariottini - Professor of Old Testament 
>I wonder what it would take to convince Jim…”In the spirit of Luke 16:31 (that Jesus, what a guy–He thought of everything), it’s safe to say that if Nebo-Sarsekim himself were to knock on Jim’s door & insist, “Yes, I really was there during the destruction of Jerusalem–I even met Jeremiah!”, he still wouldn’t be convinced–too many con artists on the loose nowadays.On the other hand, I agree with the spirit of Jim’s point: It takes faith to believe in any links between artifacts & the Biblical record. But the point he misses is that it also takes faith to believe that there is no link, & that there never will be a definitive link.The ill-logic of skeptics amuses me. On the one hand, if a name is found via archeology, they’ll say the OT writer used the names of real people from an archive to concoct a fictitious story (to make it believable); then the same skeptics argue that the people absent from the archeological record never existed (e.g., Abraham & Moses). It’s no wonder that these inconsistent skeptics believe in an inconsistent picture of history!It’s the same logic used by Evolution adherents. When a new discovery (“junk DNA” being a good example recently in the news) contradicts established beliefs, instead of dropping the theory & going back to the drawing board with an open mind, proponents close their minds even tighter & find a way to work it into their theory.
LikeLike