It seems that we’ve been inundated of late with archeological “finds” that are the death knell of Christianity.  We read of the gnostic Gospel of Judas or the family tomb of Jesus- both were discredited some time ago but were recycled only to be discredited again.

Now we have the latest known as “Gabriel’s Revelation”.  Al Mohler, on his blog, does an excellent job of shedding light on this latest “crushing blow” to Christianity (note: quotation marks are used to enhance use of sarcasm).  Mohler references an article in TIME magazine written by David Van Biema and Tim McGirk that explains the recent controversy that has made headlines:

A 3-ft.-high tablet romantically dubbed “Gabriel’s Revelation” could challenge the uniqueness of the idea of the Christian Resurrection. The tablet appears to date authentically to the years just before the birth of Jesus and yet — at least according to one Israeli scholar — it announces the raising of a messiah after three days in the grave. If true, this could mean that Jesus’ followers had access to a well-established paradigm when they decreed that Christ himself rose on the third day — and it might even hint that they could have applied it in their grief after their master was crucified. However, such a contentious reading of the 87-line tablet depends on creative interpretation of a smudged passage, making it the latest entry in the woulda/coulda/shoulda category of possible New Testament artifacts; they are useful to prove less-spectacular points and to stir discussion on the big ones, but probably not to settle them nor shake anyone’s faith. [Emphasis mine.]

The authors of this piece in TIME magazine obviously get it.  This is much ado about nothing.  Al Mohler, in his blog post, then rightly puts archeology in its place.  It is useful as a testimony to the validity of the gospel, but weak as a proof (to borrow a phrase from Hermann Bavinck).  Archeology is fraught with its own difficulties and academic biases.  Mohler’s conclusion gives us the firm place to stand:

Authentic Christianity is based upon the inscripturated revelation of God — the Bible — as our authority.  In the end, archaeology cannot prove or disprove the biblical text.  Nothing can be found, or not found, that should shake our faith in the total truthfulness and trustworthiness of the Word of God.  Archaeology can expand our knowledge and understanding, but cannot establish the authority for our faith.

That authority is the Word of God, and the Word of God alone.

(HT:  Al Mohler)