Dates and Bible Literally

[FaithT]

LCMS believes the Bible is literal but there have been problems with dates being questioned. Isn’t that a problem?
Like in the documentary Patterns of Evidence the filmmaker arrives at the conclusion that the Exodus didn’t happen when typically thought.

Or in Answers in Genesis I read an article that said that sometimes the reason archaeologists think there’s no proof the Bible is true is the dates are messed up. I can’t link the article but I could copy and paste some of it, if that’s allowed here.

 

[mlepfitjw]

Hi hope1960, all I know is that all of the old testament, and all the letters and gospels of the new testament all seem to have been written and established since before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70ad, or at least that is what I personally believe.

What is LCMS/WELS/ ELS/ LCC ? I have never heard of it before. Thank you for the reply ahead of time.

 

[FaithT]

Hi hope1960, all I know is that all of the old testament, and all the letters and gospels of the new testament all seem to have been written and established since before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70ad, or at least that is what I personally believe.

What is LCMS/WELS/ ELS/ LCC ? I have never heard of it before. Thank you for the reply ahead of time.

LCMS is Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. Not sure about the others.

 

[Friedrich Rubinstein]

It's rather difficult to get a continuous timeline just from the Bible, and there had always been 240 years difference between the Jewish calendar and the dates of archaeological excavations.
That was until the egyptologist and archaeologist David Rohl found stela in Pi-Ramesses that enabled archaeologists to re-date the Exodus. Those stela explained the missing 240 years and synchronized the Biblical timeline with the archaeological discoveries.
Kathleen Kenyon, who was leading excavations in Jericho 1952, claimed that the city had been destroyed before the Israelites even arrived there - but thanks to the discovery of David Rohl the dates of the fall of Jericho's walls and the land's occupation by the Israelites fit perfectly together.

Below you see a graphic from David Rohl's book "Pharaohs and Prophets" (which I got in German only, sorry) that illustrates where the 240 years used to be missing. Since then archeology and biblical dates are perfectly synchronized.

 

[Daniel9v9]

Well, are you talking about the dates of particular Biblical events, such as the Exodus, that is being challenged? Or are you talking about the practice of dating in general? Such as dating when Biblical books were written etc.

 

[FaithT]

Well, are you talking about the dates of particular Biblical events, such as the Exodus, that is being challenged? Or are you talking about the practice of dating in general? Such as dating when Biblical books were written etc.

I guess both.

 

[Daniel9v9]

I guess both.

Dating events and books is not easy and it's an area that is heatedly debated among scholars and historians. It's a complex study with many proposals for different timelines. As quick a sidenote - the kind of ideas we often find on the History Channel etc can pretty much be disregarded. What they do, generally speaking, is just not a serious, objective, or honest study of the subject.

Anyway, the further back in history we go, the more difficult it is to date something, simply because there's less evidence to go by. Regarding the Exodus specifically, though, The Lutheran Study Bible (used by LCMS and WELS) suggests the date 1446 BC.

I think to understand how and why something is dated the way it is, I can recommend a video by Dr. Daniel Wallace, who is a leading expert on the subject. The video is a bit long, but highly recommended if you're interested in dating and how it all works. It'll save you a lot of time in researching it on your own.

A Lutheran expert would be Dr. Andrew Steinmann, who wrote a book on dating the Biblical events, called From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology. From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology I haven't read it myself, but I believe it to be very good!

 

[FaithT]

Dating events and books is not easy and it's an area that is heatedly debated among scholars and historians. It's a complex study with many proposals for different timelines. As quick a sidenote - the kind of ideas we often find on the History Channel etc can pretty much be disregarded. What they do, generally speaking, is just not a serious, objective, or honest study of the subject.

Anyway, the further back in history we go, the more difficult it is to date something, simply because there's less evidence to go by. Regarding the Exodus specifically, though, The Lutheran Study Bible (used by LCMS and WELS) suggests the date 1446 BC.

I think to understand how and why something is dated the way it is, I can recommend a video by Dr. Daniel Wallace, who is a leading expert on the subject. The video is a bit long, but highly recommended if you're interested in dating and how it all works. It'll save you a lot of time in researching it on your own.

A Lutheran expert would be Dr. Andrew Steinmann, who wrote a book on dating the Biblical events, called From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology. From Abraham to Paul: A Biblical Chronology I haven't read it myself, but I believe it to be very good!

 

[FaithT]

But doesn’t the fact that there are discrepancies in the dates go against what we’re taught in Lutheranism, that it’s all literal?

 

[Daniel9v9]

But doesn’t the fact that there are discrepancies in the dates go against what we’re taught in Lutheranism, that it’s all literal?

I'm not sure what you mean, but there are no discrepancies in the Bible itself. The Holy Bible is the true and inerrant Word of God, but people's effort to pin-point exact dates is not.

 

[FaithT]

I'm not sure what you mean, but there are no discrepancies in the Bible itself. The Holy Bible is the true and inerrant Word of God, but people's effort to pin-point exact dates is not.

Ok, you answered me......people pinpointing exact dates isn’t a problem in the LCMS. I was having trouble trying to articulate my question.

 

[Daniel9v9]

Ok, you answered me......people pinpointing exact dates isn’t a problem in the LCMS. I was having trouble trying to articulate my question.

Ah, OK.

The same goes for locations and people as well. Even though we may not know exactly where something took place, it has no bearing on the Biblical account, which is true. And time and time again, we've found strong evidence that the details in the Bible are reliable. For example, it wasn't long ago since critical scholars denied the existence of Pontius Pilate, but now we have solid and tangible evidence to show that he did exist. So the Bible and history go hand in hand, because God worked in time and space.

 

[tampasteve]

What is LCMS/WELS/ ELS/ LCC ? I have never heard of it before. Thank you for the reply ahead of time.

LCMS - Lutheran Church Missouri Synod
LCC - Lutheran Church Canada
WELS - Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod
ELS - Evangelical Lutheran Synod

I also listed them by size of the denomination. WELS and ELS are in communion with one another, as are LCMS and LCC. LCMS, WELS, and ELS are national denominations in the USA, LCC is in Canada.

 

[J_B_]

But doesn’t the fact that there are discrepancies in the dates go against what we’re taught in Lutheranism, that it’s all literal?

FWIW, though my label only says "Christian", I'm LCMS.

I wouldn't say there are discrepancies in the dates, but uncertainty about how it all fits together.

 

[FaithT]

FWIW, though my label only says "Christian", I'm LCMS.

I wouldn't say there are discrepancies in the dates, but uncertainty about how it all fits together.

Can you elaborate? And does that uncertainty go against what we’re taught?

 

[J_B_]

Can you elaborate? And does that uncertainty go against what we’re taught?

Taught by whom? I don't know that I've ever heard an LCMS pastor make definite statements about dates. It's usually more along the lines of, "It happened roughly between these dates."

But, FYI, there is a Biblical chronology created by an LCMS scholar. It's called From Abraham to Paul by Andrew Steinmann. It's an easy read, but quite boring. Still, a great reference for an LCMS perspective on the Biblical timeline.

 

[FaithT]

Taught by whom? I don't know that I've ever heard an LCMS pastor make definite statements about dates. It's usually more along the lines of, "It happened roughly between these dates."

But, FYI, there is a Biblical chronology created by an LCMS scholar. It's called From Abraham to Paul by Andrew Steinmann. It's an easy read, but quite boring. Still, a great reference for an LCMS perspective on the Biblical timeline.

I’m fairly new to Lutheranism but never heard a pastor make statements about dates, either. I just meant what we believe.

 

[J_B_]

I’m fairly new to Lutheranism but never heard a pastor make statements about dates, either. I just meant what we believe.

The LCMS understanding of "literal" is different from that of evangelicals. In the LCMS it means we interpret poetry as poetry, history as history, parables as parables, etc. Granted that can be tricky in a few places, but it means we take Adam through Paul as history.

However, history is not exact. I have an M.A. in history, and I can tell you it is a lot more uncertain than most people realize. People will argue over the date of birth for Jesus, but we're not even certain about the date of birth for Luther. People will argue about whether John actually wrote the gospel of John, but historians also argue about who actually wrote the Declaration of Independence. The historical arguments about the Bible are not unusual, as much as many unbelievers try to make it so.

Yet in all that, historians never doubt that Luther was real - that Thomas Jefferson was real. We, likewise, never doubt that Abraham was real and Jesus was real. And from the clues in the text, we know roughly when they lived.

And that's enough. Why? Because our faith starts with Christ, not with the ability of human historians to determine when Jesus was born. Once we know Christ, the Bible becomes a rich source for stimulating our spiritual life. For Lutherans, hearing the Gospel is a near sacramental act. In fact, there's a great book about Lutheran spirituality that draws a distinction between us and the Evangelical and Eastern Mysticism that dominates the conversation in the U.S. Grace Upon Grace by John Kleinig.

I hope that wasn't too long, and that it helps.

 

[FaithT]

The LCMS understanding of "literal" is different from that of evangelicals. In the LCMS it means we interpret poetry as poetry, history as history, parables as parables, etc. Granted that can be tricky in a few places, but it means we take Adam through Paul as history.

However, history is not exact. I have an M.A. in history, and I can tell you it is a lot more uncertain than most people realize. People will argue over the date of birth for Jesus, but we're not even certain about the date of birth for Luther. People will argue about whether John actually wrote the gospel of John, but historians also argue about who actually wrote the Declaration of Independence. The historical arguments about the Bible are not unusual, as much as many unbelievers try to make it so.

Yet in all that, historians never doubt that Luther was real - that Thomas Jefferson was real. We, likewise, never doubt that Abraham was real and Jesus was real. And from the clues in the text, we know roughly when they lived.

And that's enough. Why? Because our faith starts with Christ, not with the ability of human historians to determine when Jesus was born. Once we know Christ, the Bible becomes a rich source for stimulating our spiritual life. For Lutherans, hearing the Gospel is a near sacramental act. In fact, there's a great book about Lutheran spirituality that draws a distinction between us and the Evangelical and Eastern Mysticism that dominates the conversation in the U.S. Grace Upon Grace by John Kleinig.

I hope that wasn't too long, and that it helps.

It was helpful, thanks.

 

[Roymond]

LCMS believes the Bible is literal but there have been problems with dates being questioned. Isn’t that a problem?
Like in the documentary Patterns of Evidence the filmmaker arrives at the conclusion that the Exodus didn’t happen when typically thought.

Or in Answers in Genesis I read an article that said that sometimes the reason archaeologists think there’s no proof the Bible is true is the dates are messed up. I can’t link the article but I could copy and paste some of it, if that’s allowed here.

When you say "the LCMS believes the Bible is literal", that word doesn't mean what fundamentalists mean by it -- or at least it didn't used to; the LCMS has picked up a few fundamentalist infections over the last century!
The dates for the Exodus have been questioned relative to the standard Egyptian dating scheme, but the other side of that story is that scholars are questioning the standard dating as well. Another aspect to it is that there have been discoveries about how the ancient Hebrews write down numbers, and we may have been reading the numbers wrong all along, so the scholars who say that there couldn't have been more than a tenth the number of Israelites coming out of Egypt as the Bible seemed to say may just be right.

But it's not a problem: the meaning of the scriptures doesn't depend on us getting the dates right; that idea actually comes from scientific materialism, which holds that in order to be true a thing has to be 100% scientifically and historically accurate, so if you don't get the dates right you can't say the story is right. The account of the Exodus isn't about history the way we think about it, it's about God fulfilling a promise made to Jacob and Joseph and displaying His mighty power to the world -- and we don't have to know the actual dates to understand the point!
That's true of everything in Genesis; we don't have to know what the date was when Adam and Eve were booted from the Garden, and we don't even have to know if the six days are literal or not, because it isn't about dates or time spans, it's about God's mighty work and His plan. Just as a comment on that, it's been known for a fair number of years that the first Creation account follows pretty much the same order of events as the Egyptian version, and we don't need to wonder if the Egyptians got the order right somehow in order to understand the point of the story; the point is found in the way that everything that in the Egyptian version is a god -- the sky, the Earth, the sea, the sun, the moon, etc. -- is in the Genesis account shown to be nothing but something God made. In fact, we could summarize the main point of that first Genesis story as "All the Egyptian gods are belong to Yahweh!" and not be far off, because the children of Israel living in Egypt would have heard the Egyptian version over and over, and when they heard the 'new' version they would have recognized that Moses had knocked over every major Egyptian god and said, "Nope, not a god, just God's tool". Whether that Creation story happened six thousand years ago or six billion doesn't matter; the message is the same: God is God, and everything else is something He made.