Abstract
This is a rejoinder to N. Na'aman, "Does Archaeology Really Deserve the Status of A ‘High Court’ in Biblical and Historical Research?," B. Becking and L.L. Grabbe (eds.) Between Evidence and Ideology (OtSt, 59; Leiden: Brill, 165–183) that claims that although archaeological evidence can be fragmentary and may be misinterpreted, when solid data from well-excavated sites is compared to assumptions regarding the nature of biblical texts and their date of compilation, the former should prevail, at least until tested by new archaeological evidence or extra-biblical texts.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
