fbpx

Bible Software Review has recently posted a helpful review of the Pictorial Library of Bible Lands

Rubén Gómez lives in the Mediterranean basin, but has not traveled to the biblical lands.

The saying goes that an image is worth a thousand words, and this is truer than ever in the case of The Pictorial Library of Bible Lands (PLBL). No review can make justice to the fine pictures and excellent presentation of this product. It is the next best thing to actually being there! I love it!

He put the Pictorial Library to the test in preparing a sermon.

Since the proof of the cake is in the eating, I used the slides on Capernaum (Figure 2), among others, to prepare a series of sermons on John 6. I can assure you that watching the shots from the Sea of Galilee and spending some time looking at the remains of the synagogue in Capernaum, built on the earlier basalt level where the original edifice once stood — and where Jesus most likely delivered his bread of life discourse –, brought everything to life and certainly helped a lot in seeing the whole picture of the episodes found in that chapter. It certainly enriched me in no small degree.

The review includes several helpful screenshots that illustrate several of the methods to access the photographs and notes.  Ruben’s kind words are greatly appreciated, as is his faithful work in reviewing various Bible software products.  His site is a beneficial resource to all!

Share:

Muslim leaders in Jerusalem today announced that they have no opposition to Israeli archaeologists excavating on the Temple Mount. Such work would be invaluable to understanding the history of one of the most sacred places in the world, and they have acknowledged that their previously-held objections are surpassed by the potential gains.

Israeli archaeologists do not have any immediate plans to excavate, but now that the invitation has been made, experts expect that the several proposals will quickly be made from leading universities.

One of those on QAWF, the Islamic committee that approved the move, denied that the Muslims feared the recovery of Jewish remains on the mount. Muhammad Husseini was quoted as saying, “We recognize that every historical source agrees that the Jewish temple was on the site of our holy mosque. Finding archaeological evidence for that building will not change history.” Another religious official, Ali Abdullah, indicated that this move was intended to show good-will. “There is no reason why we must deny the Jewish people access to their most holy place. We will be delighted if they accept our invitation to excavate and increase their understanding of their ancestors.”

Some scholars, however, are skeptical. Dr. Yosef Rosenthal suggests that the excavation will never begin, because “the Israeli people will debate the matter endlessly, and in the end, the Muslims will look magnanimous and the Jews will never move one spade of earth.”

Muslims authorities have made it clear that excavation will only be permitted outside of Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, and that prayer services may not be disturbed. Israeli archaeologists are still thrilled because the large majority of the enclosure lies outside of the sacred structures.

This change of position is a most unexpected one, especially in light of recent violent protests because of an Israeli removal of an earthen ramp outside of the Temple Mount adjacent to the Jewish holy area of the Western Wall. Such a radical shift may be largely explained by the fact that today is April 1.

Share:

This has been a busy month with little spare time lately for blogging.  Here are some recent articles of interest before I head out on another trip.

Several sites in Israel were given World Heritage status recently, including Megiddo, Hazor, Beersheba, and the Spice Route.

Some archaeologists have vented about the manner in which excavations have been carried out in Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount ramp.  The source is Haaretz, so don’t expect a fair report.

And on the tomb of Jesus discovery, Gordon Franz of the Associates for Biblical Research responds. 

The Jerusalem Post has a lengthy interview with the moviemaker/investigative journalist/naked archaeologist, Simcha Jacobovici.

The Biblical Archaeology Society has an interview with two scholars who lost their faith and two who didn’t.  Despite its appearance, the four are not exactly a representative group.  Shanks should have looked harder to find a real Christian.  There’s much here worthy of commenting on, but time does not allow for it today.

Share:

Things have been too serious here lately, so it’s time for something more fun.

On a recent trip with my students to southern Israel, we took the chance to act out some biblical stories.

The challenge is for you to identify the biblical characters in the photograph below. 

I’ll give you two hints:

1. We were at Beersheba and though all of the action didn’t occur here, some did (and the rest not far away).

2. Characters from several separate stories are posed together here, but the stories are told in a two consecutive chapters of the Bible.

When you’re ready, you can check your answers here.

Share:

There continues to be significant discussion about the purported tomb of Jesus’ family.  Here are some of the highlights.

The Pulpit Magazine has a helpful list of quotes from various experts about the issue.  Many experts have weighed in on the issue, making it the most one-sided debate I’ve seen in a long time.

Stephen Pfann has posted an article in which he concludes that the “Mariamene” ossuary should actually be read “Mary and Martha” (and see the response of James D. Tabor).  Pfann is one of the top scholars in inscriptions from this period, and it is guys like him who should have been consulted before sensational conclusions were published.  He also has written an essay on “The Improper Application of Statistics in ‘The Lost Tomb of Jesus.’”  He promises a detailed review in the future.

The SBL Forum has several good articles on the issue, including:

Jonathan Reed says, “Like many biblical scholars and archaeologists, to use William Dever’s phrase, I don’t have a dog in the fight over faith and resurrection. But, as a field archaeologist and professor of biblical studies, I do have a stake in what archaeology is made to do and how scholars are manipulated on television. It smacks of exploitation.”  It’s short and worth reading in full.  Tabor has responded here.

Christopher A. Rollston writes on “Prosopography and the Talpiyot Yeshua Family Tomb: Pensées of a Palaeographer” in which he concludes:

Thomas Lambdin’s famous dictum is that within the field we often “work with no data.” This is a hyperbole, but the fact remains that we do work with partial data, and sometimes the data we have are just plain opaque. With the Talpiyot tomb, there is a dearth of prosopographic data, and this is a fact. Based on the prosopographic evidence, it is simply not possible to make assumptions about the relationships of those buried therein, and it is certainly not tenable to suggest that the data are sufficient to posit that this is the family tomb of Jesus of Nazareth. Finally, it should be stated that at this juncture there is nothing in the statistical or laboratory data that can sufficiently clarify the situation, and I doubt that there ever will be.

Tabor responds to the articles of Magness and Rollston in which he concludes that the possibility that this is not Jesus’ family tomb should not be dismissed but is worthy of further investigation.  I think all scholars like the idea of further investigation, but why this is being done after the “conclusion” was foisted upon the public in dramatic fashion is still a mystery.

As of now, Tabor has two blog posts pending, including one that promises “breaking news.”

Share: