Scan barcode
jervonyc's review against another edition
3.0
This could have been a really fascinating look into the archeological research of famous Biblical events and objects, but instead it feels a bit catty; most of the book is spent trashing amateurs, and he comes to conclusions much too quickly - he'll say, "so-and-so, a respected archeologist, says thus-and-such", and that's the end of that.
And as you might expect, none of the 7 "mysteries" in the book (including the location of the Garden of Eden, the whereabouts of the Ark of the Covenant, the loaction of Sodom and Gomorrah) are led to any definitive conclusion; the Bible has some serious chronological deficiencies when compared to recorded history, and most of his conclusions end with either "it was probably a story embellished by Biblical authors" or "nobody knows."
And as you might expect, none of the 7 "mysteries" in the book (including the location of the Garden of Eden, the whereabouts of the Ark of the Covenant, the loaction of Sodom and Gomorrah) are led to any definitive conclusion; the Bible has some serious chronological deficiencies when compared to recorded history, and most of his conclusions end with either "it was probably a story embellished by Biblical authors" or "nobody knows."
kipahni's review against another edition
3.0
Didn't really answer any of the mysteries at all. It read more like a simplified peer or lit review of studies in semitic/assyrian neo babylonian history. Which was fine. I think the author's take home point was not so much where what and who but Why were these paticular stories saved and recorded and what impact should or do they have on our lives today.
magicschooltokoro's review against another edition
3.0
"Some readers will be disappointed that we have not solved all of the mysteries here. To that, I would say that it is acceptable not to have a definitive answer at the end of each chapter, especially if we are trying not to abuse the data presently available. Moreover in some cases it is the journey that matter more than the destination...
...What we really should be promoting is a shared methodology that can be used by everyone, even if it turns out that we cannot reach a consensus on the final results. In fact, such a methodology already exists [suggested by Randall Younker, director of the Institute of Archaeology and professor of Old Testament and biblical archaeology at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan]:
1) Be forthright with findings. Do no minimize problems or stretch interpretations of data to explain things away.
2) Do not make claims beyond what the data can support.
3)Be quick and complete in publishing results.
4)Engage and work within mainstream scholarship.
5)Include a diversity of people and specialists.
6) Take the history of the Bible seriously, but do not place upon archaeology the burden of "proving" [of the Maximalists or disproving of the Minimalists he mentions at the beginning of the book] the Bible." (184,7)
Generally, he decides that for most of these mysteries there is little or no evidence either for or against, and discourages arguments from silence or absence regarding both the Maximalists and Minimalists, and private lay enthusiasts. He's persuaded the Biblical chronology is mistaken to some extent on the Hebrew presence in Egypt and Canaan/Palestine and recognizes some literary exaggeration/double-entendre for effect (mythical or otherwise, as sometimes other well-known ancient kings and rulers have done to maximize their mythical status, taking credit for their predecessors' achievements (e.g. Rameses: Visions of Greatness from History Channel).
...What we really should be promoting is a shared methodology that can be used by everyone, even if it turns out that we cannot reach a consensus on the final results. In fact, such a methodology already exists [suggested by Randall Younker, director of the Institute of Archaeology and professor of Old Testament and biblical archaeology at Andrews University in Berrien Springs, Michigan]:
1) Be forthright with findings. Do no minimize problems or stretch interpretations of data to explain things away.
2) Do not make claims beyond what the data can support.
3)Be quick and complete in publishing results.
4)Engage and work within mainstream scholarship.
5)Include a diversity of people and specialists.
6) Take the history of the Bible seriously, but do not place upon archaeology the burden of "proving" [of the Maximalists or disproving of the Minimalists he mentions at the beginning of the book] the Bible." (184,7)
Generally, he decides that for most of these mysteries there is little or no evidence either for or against, and discourages arguments from silence or absence regarding both the Maximalists and Minimalists, and private lay enthusiasts. He's persuaded the Biblical chronology is mistaken to some extent on the Hebrew presence in Egypt and Canaan/Palestine and recognizes some literary exaggeration/double-entendre for effect (mythical or otherwise, as sometimes other well-known ancient kings and rulers have done to maximize their mythical status, taking credit for their predecessors' achievements (e.g. Rameses: Visions of Greatness from History Channel).
bkbarons's review against another edition
1.0
I was disappointed with this book. It read like a freshman term paper rather than a scholarly text. Of the seven 'mysteries' the author set out to address, no real conclusion was arrived at for any of them. Obviously, I don't want to be unrealistic - I am not expecting Cline to have found the Ark of the Covenant, but I dont understand the point of writing a book when you have nothing to really say or proved. Everything was inconclusive.
As another reviewer mentioned, he definitely spent too much time criticizing 'amateur historians' and their flawed practices. There wasnt enough about the actual bible. Lastly, I wish he had picked 2 or 3 (or 1) mysteries and really got into them in depth instead of a ton of superficial information on 7 different topics.
As another reviewer mentioned, he definitely spent too much time criticizing 'amateur historians' and their flawed practices. There wasnt enough about the actual bible. Lastly, I wish he had picked 2 or 3 (or 1) mysteries and really got into them in depth instead of a ton of superficial information on 7 different topics.
kellswitch's review
4.0
This book looks at the attempts to prove many of the most famous stories in the bible through archeology and science and how most of them failed and why.
It was well written, somewhat short considering the topic but still very informative without being to dry and, I felt very respectful towards the topic.
Each chapter covered a specific biblical event, place or object, such as the Garden of Eden, the Ark of the Covenant or the Exodus and discusses the various efforts to prove or discover their whereabouts, pointing out why they have failed, the difficulties one faces when even trying to prove something from one source and from so long ago and offers his own opinions on whether or not something can be proved and why or why not.
While I was familiar with many of these stories and some of the attempts to prove or disprove them, I still feel I learned a lot from reading this book and am actually curios to read more about biblical history.
It was well written, somewhat short considering the topic but still very informative without being to dry and, I felt very respectful towards the topic.
Each chapter covered a specific biblical event, place or object, such as the Garden of Eden, the Ark of the Covenant or the Exodus and discusses the various efforts to prove or discover their whereabouts, pointing out why they have failed, the difficulties one faces when even trying to prove something from one source and from so long ago and offers his own opinions on whether or not something can be proved and why or why not.
While I was familiar with many of these stories and some of the attempts to prove or disprove them, I still feel I learned a lot from reading this book and am actually curios to read more about biblical history.
More...