Talk:The Bible Unearthed

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

I deleted the phrase "but thoughtful" in the first sentence because while I agree with this characterization of the book, I think its presence in this article violates NPOV.

This article needs to cite its sources.Rec Specz 01:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Biblical Archaeology Review etc.

The assertions of the book depend upon a "low chronology" which on the basis of the paucity of archaeological finds of the reigns of David and Solomon would shift dates a century. In the July–August 2006 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review, Michael Coogan of Stonehill College, editor of The New Oxford Annotated Bible, contends that Finkelstein and Silberman "move from the hypothetical to the improbable to the absurd."^{[citation needed]}

Finkelstein's revised chronology is "not accepted by the majority of archaeologists and biblical scholars," Coogan asserts, citing four scholarly anthologies from the past three years.

However, Professor Baruch Halpern, one of the scholars on whom Coogan relies, praised The Bible Unearthed, as "the boldest and most exhilarating synthesis of Bible and archaeology in fifty years."^{[citation needed]} Professor David Noel Freedman, editor of the authoritative Anchor Bible series, called it "readable and revolutionary."^{[citation needed]}