A meticulous examination devoid of mythological leanings, based in the accuracy of measurable examinations yielding erudite conclusions throughout. Such works should not dismiss ones want of faith; as unbiased research only affirms the footing of facts which are truly there and those which in word or deed, never were. Simply put, this is a sophisticated, wonderful work.

What if there was no evidence for most of the major stories of the Hebrew Scriptures? What if the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are fictional characters? What if Moses is also fiction? What would you think if there was no record in Egyptian annals of any massive group of people being held as slaves, or that there was a miraculous emancipation of such people, though we have records of times before and after the time of the supposed events? What if the Israelites appear to have been just one of the native peoples to the land now known as Palestine? What if there was no evidence of a major united kingdom in Judah preceding that of Israel, and what if the stature of Judah never came close to that of Israel? If Solomon's kingdom stretched from the Mesopotamian kingdoms to the Egyptian one, why are there no records to be found of him in those kingdoms? It is as if he either did not exist, or the stories about him were exaggerated.

If you are interested in the questions and possible answers, this book is a must read.

What if there was no evidence for most of the major stories of the Hebrew Scriptures? What if the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are fictional characters? What if Moses is also fiction? What would you think if there was no record in Egyptian annals of any massive group of people being held as slaves, or that there was a miraculous emancipation of such people, though we have records of times before and after the time of the supposed events? What if the Israelites appear to have been just one of the native peoples to the land now known as Palestine? What if there was no evidence of a major united kingdom in Judah preceding that of Israel, and what if the stature of Judah never came close to that of Israel? If Solomon's kingdom stretched from the Mesopotamian kingdoms to the Egyptian one, why are there no records to be found of him in those kingdoms? It is as if he either did not exist, or the stories about him were exaggerated.

If you are interested in the questions and possible answers, this book is a must read.

Ancient Israel was not an empire of great cities but was a tiny kingdom. The spell-binding saga of the Exodus was not a historic epic but was a moving product of human imagination. Many of the stories happened in a different era than portrayed in the Bible; many were exaggerated and misrepresented; some didn't happen at all.

Here's just one example of how we know this:

The stories of the patriarchs are loaded with camels but archeology clearly tells us camels were not domesticated and widely used until centuries later. The camel caravan in the Joseph story carried gum, balm, & myrhh, products of 7th & 8th century BCE trade during the Assyrian empire, but not before. Likewise, numerous cities, significant in the 7th & 8th centuries BCE, were mentioned in Genesis, but were either non-existent or were merely insignificant villages at the time.

This is just a tiny part of the voluminous evidence that tells a story much more mundane than does the Bible. The stories of the patriarchs reflect concerns of a seventh century Israel - projected onto the lives of legendary figures from a mythical past. The first archeologists studied the holy land with a "Bible in one hand and a shovel in the other." William Albright provided us with the first book representing more modern archeological methods in 1945. F&S have provided us with the first comprehensive update to that book - well worth the time of anyone interested in this subject.

The thesis set forth in this book is not new for those who have been following modern research on the Tanach (Hebrew Bible), and the bibliography is not the kind one would expect in a serious scholarly treatise.
However, the book was not written with the intention of being an original contribution to the scholarly discourse - ecen so, in some ways it is - but to provide the educated reader with the latest theorization about the origins of the Tanch, in particular its historiographical literature, and this it does with great success.
The writing is lucid and readable, the ideas clearly presented. The bibliography at the end of the book is basic, but it includes some of the most important biblical research literature.
I recommend this book to all my Bible students (in its Hebrew translation), and in one of my courses, several chapters are required reading.
Dr. Jonathan D. Safren
Dept. of Biblical Studies
Beit Berl College
Beit Berl, Israel

This is one of the books by Finklestein and Silberman. Based on verified archaeological finds, they reconstruct the history of the early Bible and show it did not happen in the time period or in the way claimed by the Bible. The conservative Christian will not like this book, because it contradicts much of hat many consider to be the history of the Bible. I found the book to be scholarly and very well documented. If Abrah, Isaac and Jacob did not exist, or did not exist in the appropriate Biblical history, if David and Solomon are historically questionable and the Biblical claims are fairy tales, where does this leave Christianity, initially based on the early Jewish texts?

Book was promptly delivered in excellent condition, just as I have learned to expect from Amazon.

Many reviewers claim that this book is biased...well duh. Obviously Finkelstein and Silberman have an opinion/theory and they are presenting that in this book. You only have to read the back cover to figure that out. I enjoyed this book. It adds another perspective in which to view an extremely important document and historical period. Most of the theories are very reasonable, that does not mean they are correct or incorrect. The authors freely admit that the history of the bible does at times fit the physical evidence and at other times it does not. They do occasionally make the mistake of saying,"It MUST have happened this way" or,"That could NEVER have happened", or similar statements. But these statements are easily ignored. Nothing in this book is extremely radical and most of their claims are very reasonable, again this does not mean they are true or untrue, just reasonable. I would not recommend this book to religious fundamentalists OR devout atheists either, as material like this just pisses them off and causes them to write annoying reviews sighting other questionable sources such as readers digest and such. (Sorry had to slip that in) I would recommend this book to those like myself who are interested in the study of humanity. I also feel that this book ought to be read concurrently with the bible as it can improve ones understanding of both books. And finally, one should also study the history of the other cultures in the area at that time, as again this provides a greater understanding and puts things into a larger context. I also recommend these, all are books that I have read recently or am in the process of reading.The Dead Sea Scrolls - Revised Edition: A New Translation, Torah/Pocket Edition, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt, The Essential Koran: Heart of Islam, The, The Koran, Dune, 40th Anniversary Edition (Dune Chronicles, Book 1)

"The historical saga contained in the Bible -- from Abraham's encounter with God and his journey to Canaan, to Moses' deliverance of the children of Israel from bondage, to the rise and fall of the kingdoms of Israel and Judah --was not a miraculous revelation, but a brilliant product of the human imagination."

I will provide some problems that this book provides about the Biblical story:
"1 - According to the Biblical chronology, Abraham and the patriarchs of Genesis were active roughly 2000 BCE. The stories make repeated mention of camel caravans. However, archaeology has shown that camels were not domesticated until much later; camel caravans were no earlier than 1000 BCE.
2 - There is no evidence for the Exodus as the Bible describes it. The Bible does not give an exact date for the Exodus, nor refer to the pharaoh of the time by name. There is a stele of Pharaoh Merneptah mentions a people named Israel living in Canaan by 1200 BCE, so the Exodus should have occurred some time before that. However, there is no Egyptian documentation of any large group of slaves of any ethnicity leaving Egypt during a likely time frame. The population of Egypt was not over 5 million at the time, and it is out of the question that nearly 1 million people could leave without some kind of record or evidence.
3 - There is no evidence for a swift, decisive military conquest of Canaan by Israelites by 1200 BC. And it does seem implausible that a ragtag group of slaves, however numerous, could have managed a well coordinated attack on an entire region after 40 years of wandering in the desert.
4 - According to the bible, King David and his son Solomon reigned over a large territory, from Mesopotamia to Egypt, and had the wealth to build impressive temples and palaces. This monarchy would have had to have ruled in the range of 1000 to 900 BCE or so. Yet archaeologists have not found any monumental architecture at all dating to this time in Judah. Apparently Jerusalem was a rather small village at the time."

This book asserts that the patriarchs didnt exist, that exodus never happened, and that we only have recent history. There is one fact alone that puts this book in the trash bin: the fact that kohanim DNA is genetically traceable to one common ancestor who lived about 4000 years ago. That sort of puts a nice wrinkle in the assumptions found here, doesn't it. I wonder if they can explain that one away.

This book doesn't aim to disrespect the Bible or discredit it in a mean spirited way. It simply shows who was behind writing the different segments and why it was written. If we can all forget for a moment that some invisible being had it's hand in the project then we can see how utterly fascinating this look into the past really is. I found the book to be very informative. The section on GENESIS is great...one has to only read GENESIS anew to see that the stories seem to repeat themselves with slight variations. Once you are aware of this it is almost easy to see the differences between the various authors that are responsible for the stories of Adam & Eve, Noah, Exodus and so much more...
I fail to see how this is somehow terrible since we all know the Bible was written by mortal people.
I think that religious people can enjoy this Book for getting a fuller picture of an ancient time some of their beloved stories originated from and non-religious people will enjoy this for it's historical value.
We all win.

Finkelstein and Silberman have written an excellent synopsis of what unfortunately has come to be called the minimalist view of Biblical archaeology. I found the arguments in this book well presented and logical. "The Bible Unearthed" does much to place Biblical life and culture in the context of its times, stripping away the mythology and Hollywood imagery which has so obscured our view of that period. Not everyone will appreciate their having done so, however.
This book has the ring of truth, and is a "must read" for anyone seriously interested in understanding Naer Eastern culture and society in Biblical times. John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan Reed's book did much the same for the time of Jesus.
This book is a most welcome breath of fresh air from an otherwise dry and stuffy subject, and a welcome reality check!

This book should be read in conjunction with Thomas Thompson's "The Mythic Past." Both attempt, and succeed, in this reader's opinion, in demolishing the myth of the bible as "history." Using the latest archaeological research, Finkelstein and Silberman demonstrate that the portrayal of a United Kingdom, of a prosperous pre-7th century Jerusalem, of an historical exodus, are stories. They never happened as portrayed in the the Bible.

The archaeology shows that ancient Palestine was not a collection of "city states" united under a powerful monarchy at ANY period of its early existence. It certainly did not conquer the Canaanites. These were later myths projected onto an uncertain past for political purposes. While Finkelstein and Silberman opt for an earlier date for the composition and collection of these myths, Thompson makes a better case for the Maccabean era.

The bible is a fiction that has been used for too long as an imperial document. A scientific study of Palestine's history, and of the fabrication of said history must be taken in order to grasp that absolute absurdity of the Zionist claim to modern-day Palestine.

The Bible Unearthed attempts to provide a historical and archaeological context for the stories contained in the Hebrew Bible (especially the books comprising the Deuteronomistic history). This book is divided into three parts. The first part discusses the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) up to David and Solomon; the second part discusses the kingdom of Israel (the northern kingdom) from inception to Assyrian destruction while the third part deals with Judah (the southern kingdom) from King Rehoboam through the return from Babylonian exile.

The authors attempt to relate both the content and the style of writing in the Hebrew Bible with the various political and social issues surrounding early Israel (particularly focusing on Josiah's reign as king of Judah in 639 BCE). Various scriptural passages are compared with archaeological evidence and the authors give their opinions on likely historical scenarios. While these opinions regarding realistic scenarios do not always coincide with the scriptural version of events, the authors do try to provide a historical backdrop for the scriptural accounts and try to grasp the underlying message of the scriptures without holding them to exact historical accuracy.

I enjoyed the archaeological perspective that this book provides. I also enjoyed reading about the proceedings of Israel's neighboring countries throughout the time period discussed in the book, especially with respect to the various empires (mainly the Egyptian, Assyrian and Babylonian empires). I would recommend this book to those interested in an archaeological perspective on biblical criticism. I would also recommend Richard Friedman's Who Wrote the Bible? (which the authors cite) for those who are interested in more of a textual analysis of the Hebrew Bible (Friedman's book deals mainly with the compilation of the Torah although some of the Deuteronomistic history is covered as well).

I read this book, translated to the portuguese, here in Brazil.This book shows you some trues, with large amounts of proofs.Bible hadn't nothing writen by Moses or Abraham.This was a believe by a french catholic priest, in XVIII Century, but this book shows you the proofs.Well, if God wrote the bible, then God likes to lie too much.
I'm a catholic, but this book is for everyone, from atheists to biblical fundamentalists.

A very interesting book about recent archaeological discoveries in Israel and how they contrast with the stories laid out in the Hebrew Bible. To put it mildly, the latest findings shows much of what is in the Bible to be pure myth. To wit: 1) there is no archaeological evidence for the existence of Abraham or the patriarchs. What's more, much of the description of the land laid out on Genesis (e.g., domesticated camels, trade in exotic goods) corresponds to much later periods in time, 2) the exodus never happened. There is zero archaeological record of the Hebrews living in Egypt at the time, 2) there was no invasion of Canaan. The Hebrews were probably natives of that zone, dedicated to a pastoral existence, who slowly started settling down in villages, 3) David and Solomon might have existed, but in any case they were leaders of small tribal communes, and in no way the powerful kings the Hebrew Bible describes, 4) Much of the Bible was probably written during the kingdom of Josiah (seventh century b.c.), as an ideological project whose goal of cementing monotheism was seen as instrumental in creating a national identity that would serve the king in the attempt of resisting foreign occupiers. There is much more, and authors Finkelstein and Silberman write in a very elegant way. This is also, I think, a very courageous book, since the debunking of the Bible myths would upset not only religious people (not just Jews, but Christians and Muslims as well, who have used extensively the myths of the ancient Hebrews in their religious texts) but secular Zionists as well, who know that the mythological past of the Jews still comprises much of the heart of the national identity of the Israelis. A small criticism: I feel the authors put too much emphasis on Josiah, and a particular passage in the book of Kings, describing the "finding" of an ancient text in the temple. In doing so, they reject the possibility that parts of the Bible were written before that time, which I think it's more probable.

Traditional scholarly and homiletical approaches to the Hebrew scriptures have often seemed contradictory, or at best somewhat schizophrenic. Many Christians, especially preachers, use the material addressed by Finkelstein and Silberman as a combination of history and didactic pronouncements from the divine throne. Many, if not most, scholars approach the same material from a more literary standpoint. They attempt to discern the various layers of writing and editing that produced the Pentateuch, the books of the kings, the chronicles, and certain other texts. Thus we are introduced to the notion that various writers contributed various strands to the narratives that are central to the Hebrew Bible.

The usefulness of the first approach has largely been normative: Christian preachers, especially evangelicals and pentecostals, declare that these stories reveal God's expectations of a righteous people. The usefulness of the second approach is that it opens the door to honesty in evaluating the documents. The genius of Finkelstein and Silberman's work is that they show how both approaches combined in the original production of these valued scriptures. F and S understand that the Bible is always used as a political and pastoral document. Preachers/pastors routinely use it in this way. It can provide unity to the faith community and comfort to those perplexed and afflicted by life. As recent American history has shown, it is maddeningly easy to fall into the same kind of apostasy decried by the original writers of the Hebrew Bible--using God's purported word to serve less-than-noble ends. F and S want us to appreciate the political and pastoral genius of, as they contend, the seventh-century BCE Judahite community that produced the scriptures for the same ends for which they are often used today. Their insistence on evaluating every claim against the plumb line of archaeology is a necessary corrective against the distortion of the documents in any age.

I see no greater relevance than in assessing the current situation in the very lands F and S discuss. Israel's claims to primacy in the Holy Land are not borne out by the Biblical record, but neither are the Palestinians'. Further, Christian claims that the Hebrew Bible contains the inerrant word of God cannot be sustained by the archaeological evidence, by reference to the history of empires contemporary with the periods discussed in the scriptures, or by simple common sense. Instead, the Hebrew scriptures should be read for what they are: Brilliant literature, produced by a particular community at a particular time in history, with particular goals in mind. Millennia later, we still use them that way.

To quote from an extensive review in the Denver Jounal:

"This book must be used with caution because it pretends to describe what we now really know about archaeology and how it contradicts various biblical claims; however, it does so in a biased and non-objective manner. Contrary opinions in interpreting the new evidence are not discussed, much less given a fair hearing. The book is ideologically driven and should be treated that way by any one who reads it."

I give this book a high rating not because of the conclusions the author makes - for I am not qualified to judge those, but for the organization and clarity of the book.

The reader should not be surprised to find that the field of `Biblical Archaeology' can be highly controversial. A major source of conflict is the degree to which the archaeologist relies on the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) as a historical source. There is a spectrum from the `maximalists' who take the writings as very being accurate and interpret their findings through that lens all the way to the `minimalists' who disregard the historicity of the writings completely.

Dr. Finkelstein appears to lean heavily in the minimalist direction. While he does not disregard the writings of the Old Testament, he places them in a particular context that makes sense in combination with the physical evidence. He espouses the idea that most of the Old Testament was written/compiled/edited during and after the reign of Jewish King Josiah in an effect to bolster national pride and unity.

He presents this by examining distinct sections of Jewish history in chronological order beginning with the Patriarchs, then the exodus, pre-monarchy, Davidic monarchy, post-split kingdom, and on into the Babylonian captivity and exile. Through each of these chapters, he presents the archaeological evidence to support his theory. The most controversial parts of which are that there was not exodus from Egypt, that the Davidic kingdom was tiny and insignificant and that there was never a united kingdom of the twelve tribes.

Does this book present ALL the facts? Probably not. Are the conclusions of the authors correct. Probably not all of them. There is considerable controversy among archaeologists in the field of study. But I did find the book easy to read and understand. I would recommend reading it in combination with other books on the subject.

I give this book a high rating not because of the conclusions the author makes - for I am not qualified to judge those, but for the organization and clarity of the book.

The reader should not be surprised to find that the field of `Biblical Archaeology' can be highly controversial. A major source of conflict is the degree to which the archaeologist relies on the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) as a historical source. There is a spectrum from the `maximalists' who take the writings as very being accurate and interpret their findings through that lens all the way to the `minimalists' who disregard the historicity of the writings completely.

Dr. Finkelstein appears to lean heavily in the minimalist direction. While he does not disregard the writings of the Old Testament, he places them in a particular context that makes sense in combination with the physical evidence. He espouses the idea that most of the Old Testament was written/compiled/edited during and after the reign of Jewish King Josiah in an effect to bolster national pride and unity.

He presents this by examining distinct sections of Jewish history in chronological order beginning with the Patriarchs, then the exodus, pre-monarchy, Davidic monarchy, post-split kingdom, and on into the Babylonian captivity and exile. Through each of these chapters, he presents the archaeological evidence to support his theory. The most controversial parts of which are that there was not exodus from Egypt, that the Davidic kingdom was tiny and insignificant and that there was never a united kingdom of the twelve tribes.

Does this book present ALL the facts? Probably not. Are the conclusions of the authors correct. Probably not all of them. There is considerable controversy among archaeologists in the field of study. But I did find the book easy to read and understand. I would recommend reading it in combination with other books on the subject.

As Jew who wishes to know how archeology can be used to debunk Biblical propaganda, I found this book full of useful ammnition. It ranks with others such as "Who were the Ancient Israelites" and with the second book by this highly qualified team on David and Solomon. I wish the same kind of work will manage to produce an archeological view of the Exodus.

This book is fascinating. I am not a student of the bible, but I am enthralled by the complexity and thoroughness of the research. Whether Christian or any other religion, it holds the archelogical proof of the time tables.

As Jew who wishes to know how archeology can be used to debunk Biblical propaganda, I found this book full of useful ammnition. It ranks with others such as "Who were the Ancient Israelites" and with the second book by this highly qualified team on David and Solomon. I wish the same kind of work will manage to produce an archeological view of the Exodus.

This book compares the people, places and events written about in the Old Testament to the extensive actual archaeological evidence known at this time. It does not appear to me, in reading this book, that the authors have any sort of hidden agenda or ax to grind. The factual examination of the hard archaelological evidence, along with the reader's own knowledge of the old Testament, combine to produce a far more plausible and believable history of the Jews than what is now commonly believed by most Bible literalists. I strongly encourage anyone who has devoted their life to Christianity to read this book with an open mind. Much of the contents of this book have been known for some time and are in fact taught and accepted at many seminaries.

As archaeology in this region of the world continues, the real story will continue to become more compete and some of the explanations and theories of this book will prove to be incorrect. But until that time, it provides a fascinating, fact based look into the real world of the old Testament Jews.

The Bible Unearthed, and other books in the same genre', are long overdue in becoming available to the general public. For decades this material has only been available in dense dry tomes not at all suited to a general readership. Largely this has been due to a distaste in the American palette for anything requiring the rethinking of cherished superstitions, and an almost certain backlash of public opinion against anyone so bold as to question the assumptions of American religiosity. As a result, the so-called "Educational" television companies are content to churn out mind-numbing nonsense that merely reinforces the status quo in religious matters. A staus quo of credulous gullibility and absense of critical thinking.

That said, don't hold your breath waiting for reality to seep into the minds of fundamentalists. Their belief is not grounded in factuality, in the objective and verifiable. Rather, their mind has been infected by a meme and usually nothing short of death or an NDE can cure those suffering from a meme.

For anyone needing assistance in getting the literalist Bible monkey off their back and out of their psyche, this book is a giant step in that direction. Don't stop here, however. Consult the bibliography for further titles to investigate. I hope to live to see the day when the mythical nature of much of the Bible has become a peaceful thread in the weave of American culture. Four stars and two thumbs up for The Bible Unearthed.

A five-star companion volume is JEHOVAH UNMASKED which is a fascinating Gnostic look at the identity of the god Jehovah. Is Jehovah the Almighty God or just a pretender? Is God an insane murdering lunatic as the Old Testament says, or is that just a pretender god? Did the first Christians believe in God the Mother? What and where is the Kingdom of God? Who told the First Lie in the Garden of Eden, Jehovah or the Serpent? Are you SURE? Who or what was it that gave us the list of New Testament books as we have them now? The answers to these questions will shock you.

Israel Finkelstein has been accused of being a "minimalist" by some of his colleagues. This accusation is ridiculous. Minimalism asserts that the entire Bible is a product of the Persian and Hellenistic ages. Finkelstein argues that much of the Bible has its origins in the Late Iron Age, which is the mainstream view.

Where Finkelstein departs from the mainstream, however, is in exactly when in the Late Iron Age the biblical sources can be dated. The Late Iron Age, after all, lasted from about 900-600 BC, so that's a span of 300 years. The most widely held view, as articulated by Richard Elliot Freidman in "Who Wrote the Bible?", puts the J and E sources before the fall of Samaria in 722 BC, after which they were quickly redacted together. P and D are seen to be the product of the late period in Judah, from the late 8th to early 6th centuries BC. The final redaction of all the sources is attributed to an Aaronid priest (possibly Ezra) in the 5th century BC.

Finkelstein and his partner Silberman however, point out that some of the locations mentioned in JE did not exist until the 7th century BC. On the basis of this, they propose that J and E, in addition to P and D, are also the product of the late period in Judah, more specifically to the 7th century BC. Their theory is compelling, but a revision as large as this may not be needed. Both J and E bear other hallmarks that suggest they were written before the fall of Samaria, and redacted together shortly afterward. In order to explain the 7th century anachronisms, it seems more economical to theorize that, about a century after after its initial redaction, JE was re-edited again in the late 7th century BC, perhaps by the Deuteronomist, who incorporated it into his history. In adding geographical information and other details, he used some anachronisms that reflected his own day.

As for Finkelstein's redating of the allegedly Solomonic gates from the traditional 10th century BC date down to the 9th century BC, I am pretty much on the fence. Finkelstein gives some good evidence for this Low Chronology, but William G. Dever, in "What Did the Biblical Authors Know and When Did they Know It?", gives equally good evidence for the conventional chronology. Ultimately, only further excavations at the sites will be able to clear this disagreement up.

Highly recommended.

Israel Finkelstein and Neil Silberman have earned their pay. "The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts" rocks. This book simply puts to rout the sickening mythology underlying Judaism and Christianity. Even though I found the lack of end or foot notes and the authors employment of 'begging the question' bothersome, the findings of modern archaeology dispel the darkness of superstition. Without the patriarchs, Moses and the Exodus, the conquest of Canaan, or a unified kingdom, the basis of the three major monotheisms crumble.

This is very good. Humanity need no longer be chained to vile and destructive mind viruses. As light replaces darkness, so truth supplants lies. The Israelites were indigenous to Canaan rather than invaders from Egypt. The Northern kingdom did not succeed from the united monarchy, rather it formed as a natural expression of the times. The Omride dynasty was not the villainous evil portrayed by the bible, but were instead strong and competent rulers for their people. Despite contradictory assertions regarding the size of settlements in Jerusalem during the middle bronze age, (On page 239-240 the authors indicate the late Middle Bronze age settlement Urusalim "... was a small highlands stronghold, located in the southeastern ridge of ancient Jerusalem..." while on page 323 the authors tell us "Shechem ... Bethel and Jerusalem - all three were massive Middle Bronze strongholds.") there is much to learn from this book.
The authors conclusion regarding the Omrides is strongly at odds with the biblical tone expressed by the writers and editors of the Kings and Chronicles. On page 194 we read: "The true character of Israel under the Omrides involves an extraordinary story of military might, architectural achievement, and (as far as can be determined) administrative sophistication. Omri and his successors earned the hatred of the Bible precisely because they were so strong, precisely because they succeeded in transforming the nothern kingdom into an important regional power that completely overshadowed the poor, marginal, rural-pastoral kingdom of Judah to the south. The possibility that the Israelite kings who consorted with the nations, married foreign women, and built Canaanite-type shrines and palaces would prosper was both unbearable and unthinkable."

Indeed it was unthinkable to the blood thirsty barbaric cult of the hill god YHWH. The human and animal sacrifice practiced by the proto Judites (as well as most of the other peoples in the region) and supression of Asherah fertility cults show how unthinkable northern success was. Changing from a matriarchal to patriarchal society brought with it the mindset prohibiting acceptance of the Northern kingdom as well as the debasement of women. Finklestein and Silberman briefly touch on YHWH's married status (to Asherah ) on page 242 in the course of describing the polytheistic practices of the poor and jealous southern kingdom. This rich area of study is being harvested by others. Surely the authors of "The Bible Unearthed" could have devoted more than a couple of paragraphs to this topic as it underlies the murders and degradations heaped upon women of most cultures.

Buy this book and Finkelstein's new one. Perhaps, like the Assyrians, the time of Judaism and Xianity will come to a close.

Thirty years ago I read John Bright's, "A History of Ancient Israel." I found nothing in it that would offend any adherent of Judaism or Christianity. A great deal of research both textual and archeological has been conducted since that date on the matter of the history of Isreal prior to 300 BCE.

In "The Bible Unearthed," the results of that research have been painstakingly laid out for inspection by the authors along with their conclusions. In workman like fashion, Silberman and Finkelstein write a tightly reasoned history of Ancient Israel. At each turn, they marshall their source materials in depth with dexterity and certainty to support their historical construction. The title of the book is underwhelming and the presentation is dispassionate to say the least. It would seem obvious that the authors were acutely aware of the incendiary nature of their work.

If this history is accepted, one must abandon the notion that the Bible provides the historical underpinnings for Judaism and Christianity, and Islam will have to do without Abraham. And now, the scholarly state of the art does come down to "The Bible Unearthed." The future may modify this, but will not modify the general validity of the authors' work. One could fruitfully spend the next twenty years debating and studying the development of the Jewish proto Old Testament and other sacral writings from the 8th Century BCE through the suppression of the Jewish revolt of circa 70 CE.

It is the devastation of the Bibilical "history" of Israel prior to the 8th century BCE that makes this book so offensive to some of the religiously faithful. If one will not accept the current scholarly consensus which Silberman and Finkelstein have so clearly laid out in this book, so be it. As I do concur with the authors, if I wish, I will need to find a different way to approach the Diety that does not depend on the historical accuracy of the Bible.

The authors take the absence of evidence as evidence that something did not happen, how ridiculous. On top of that there is indirect evidence that the exodus occured, the authors do not take this into consideration. Also ridiculous is their ignoring the fact that the bible teaches the clothes of the wandering israelites DID NOT WEAR OUT. Hmmm, could it also be that their utensils likewise didn't wear out? What in the world would archeologists be looking for? The buried poop?

A fascinating and boldly reasoned book. Not for hide-bound literalists and those enamoured of superstition. And the tone is not one of cynical disdain but exhuberance and excitement. These authors love history, they love the bible, but, more importantly, they love the truth.

Most people educated in the West have come to understand that word for word the Bible is not exactly accurate. Most people will accept that the crossing of the red sea, the miracles and all, are a myth. Likewise most people can assume that to some extend the stories in the Bible, like Joshua's conquest of Israel, are mythologized.

But the claim in this book is not that these myths are reminiscent of some history but rather that no Israelites existed, no Hebrews ever existed and everything about the stories of the Bible is fake. So while we are told to accept that the Caananites are real, even though the source for them is also biblical, we are told that the idea of a single God is totally made up and that the entire history of ancient Israel never happened.

The evidence for this is simply the lack of evidence. It is sort of tantamount to saying since we don't have evidence as to when the Native Americans came to America then apparently they never came. Well then who are all those people? Its almost like saying that since we don't know how the pyramids were built, then apparently they were never built. But they got there somehow? If Josiah created the history of the Israelitenation, then where did Josiah come from? If King Solomon is fake then why is his presence confirmed in other traditions throughout the ancient world, throughout Africa and the middle east. If ancient Israel didn't exist and they never believed in one God then who built the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, and who fought the Romans in 70 A.D and who was Jesus born to. The problem here is that archeological evidence does actually date all the digging in Israel to the time of David and Solomon. Evidence exists from Persia and from Egypt of diplomatic dealings with an Israelite and even a Canaanite state. Thus the Bible is accurate in many of its time line descriptions, it is simply inaccurate in its descriptions of Miracles. This book is revisionism and should not be read by anyone interested in the accuracy of the Bible.

Seth J. Frantzman