Abstract
Advocates of robust biblical historicity often express concern that critics of this view act from partisan purposes, and should instead treat biblical testimony as innocent until and unless it can be demonstrated otherwise—virtually an impossible task in light of the exiguity of the evidence. These claims are seldom undergirded by a canvas of extra-biblical materials and even then, never beyond the ancient Near East. This article draws a small sample of examples from a variety of times and places to argue that the incidence of error, fraud, and misplaced trust is well beyond the point that would justify this deferential treatment. It urges those who would too readily accept the reliability of the biblical account of early Israel to canvass more widely before committing themselves.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
Disclaimer: 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.