False Testament: Harper's joins the Materialistic Propagandists
Doug S. Grauman
March 2002

In the March 2002 issue of 'Harper's Magazine", Daniel Lazare's article, "False Testament: Archaeology Refutes the Bible's claim to History", is a lie-filled attempt at discrediting Jewish rights to the Holy Land by attacking their historicity, as recorded in the Old Testament, and without any acknowledged references to support his claims.

Lazare doesn't seem to have any experience in the physical or life sciences and the case he presents is only a very bias side of the story. Most archeologists studying the Biblical period today would be wary of dismissing the Biblical accounts as easily as Lazare does. Unfortunately, because of articles such as his, reader's may never know this debate is far from over.

To better understand the basis for Lazare's claims, it is important to first recognize the preconceived-predilections he holds, as they are the reasons for his statements. First, his overtones audibly represent those of a person promoting the claim Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian territories, and so he sets out to discredit the historicity of the Torah - the Jewish Old Testament. Secondly, it's apparent, over the course of the entire article, he dislikes the idea of being accountable to a Creator God and for these two reasons he risks credibility in an effort to discredit anything affiliated with the Biblical model.

In his article he accuses early-scientists of "...not letting the facts speak for themselves." because he says they held preconceived biases loyal to the Bible that influenced their wrongful interpretation of the rocks and fossils. The author should practice what he preaches as it is exclusively because of his two preconceived-biases that he writes this article. Moreover, he used research from individuals with like-minded nepotisms to build his case, which doesn't qualify one's findings in any way as truthful or factual, but rather partial and questionable.

In reading through his attempt to misinform the Biblical and scientific illiterate, I quickly realized the content was that of more lies than truth. Not even the Richard Dawkin's of the evolutionary community denigrate the data as bad as Lazare has and since no increased economies of scale can be achieved by refuting every individual paragraph, I have circumscribed myself to a select few. I am confident that the exposure of lies within these few will simultaneously discount those that have been pardoned from refutation.

So that his words may be used against him

Throughout this article Lazare reveals his Biblical, logical, and scientific illiteracy. In his opening paragraph, he states:

Obviously? How is this? Lazare offers no evidence to support his point nor does he give an example of a Biblical contradiction so perhaps he does this in an effort to hide his Biblical illiteracy for which he will later reveal.

Lazare, obviously more arrogant than scientific, begins his second paragraph by stating:

This statement alone refers to the 'absolute' yet he then contradicts himself two sentences later when he presents his point, in theoretical terms, by saying:

Scientific theories are always initially presented in terms like, "it is believed to be..., it is possible that..., the thought is..., it is thought to be..., it appears to be..., one reason may be..." because they are unproven and unverified. Scientists reveal their theories in these terms because they recognize such new ideas have generally not been proven and each will experience intensive peer-scrutiny. Moreover, prior to the revelation of a new theory, the burden of viability is always on the proposer to verify it complies with the laws of science. Lazare's claims consistently violate these laws, which illuminates the fact his field of expertise is in the area of science fiction rather than science fact.

In a continuation of truth-butchering, he says:

Here he uses the word, "...appear..." which, again, represents unverified, then he contradicts himself when he says, "...Moses was no more historically..." which represents an absolute. It is examples like this, which are too numerous to identify, that requires me to ask Lazare whether he is 'proposing' these statements as theories or if he is declaring them individually conclusive because they have each been verified for absolute-accuracy? This question must be asked as he has presented no evidence to support his point nor has he offered any references to verify his claims.

He further says:

To claim that Archaeology is dismantling the Biblical origins of ancient Israel is just another ridiculous statement absent of fact. Later in this article I provide a detailed example of evidence for early Jewish origins in their exodus from Egypt that will expose the severity of Lazare's lies but for now I would encourage you to look up the references identified below as they are articles that will individually refute his statements.

Naturalism; a house divided

Now to address his comment that science and faith are drawing further apart, allow me to correct him here as well.

The early 1800's witnessed two primary camps within the field of science; pure fundamental creationism and pure fundamental naturalism. Although it is important to note that a variety of beliefs within the science community can date back to as much as 700 years, those out-of-the-mainstream views were isolated to the darkest corners with no outsource for promotion.

In the last 120 years, fundamental Creationism has spread where as fundamental naturalism has become a house divided amongst three warring clans:

As far as his usage of modern physics as an example, that too is absent of fact as, for example, the laws of thermodynamics - increasing entropy, does not contradict the faith-based model of a Creator God but by many ways those laws confirm His omnipotence. This law is perhaps the best proven law of science and a literal, recent creation as they both acknowledge a constant state of increasing entropy which the Bible says resulted from the curse of man's sinning against God in the Garden of Eden - "...the wages of sin is death." and everything is "...subject to the bondage of decay."

Let the facts interpret themselves

Lazare steps on his own toes here when he says:

Yet the very reasons why he himself wrote this article attacking the Biblical record was because of his preconceived biases. Guess what Lazare? Scientists still build their models from bias, preconceived framework so allow me to offer just two of the many examples to, once again, support my point, and prove his wrong.

• In the November 1999 issue of National Geographic is an article entitled, "Feathers for T-Rex." Here's an example of evolutionists with preconceived biases that will go to any length to try and prove 'dinosaur to bird evolution'. A bird fossil was glued together with that of a dinosaur and promoted in National Geographic as 'the missing link', yet, only to later find out, it was all a hoax.(2) They did NOT let the facts speak for themselves as their preconceived biases controlled their findings. Nevertheless, let's identify what is required for such a transition from dino to bird.

It is pre-conceived biases, such as those identified here, that have misrepresented good science and that allows evolutionists to promote to the world we were all once single-cell organisms in some ancient primordial soup that, by random chance, spontaneously arose to life.

Lazare's next blunder is when he attempts to discredit the Bible by saying:

At this point it's a toss-up as to which of his statements are the most absurd. Lazare doesn't understand that animal bones, or even fossils for that matter, prove only two facts: first, the animal existed, and second, that it died in the general vicinity of where the bones were found. To state anything else as dogma is absent of scientific fact and full of scientific fiction. Bones don't tell what day, time, or year the animal died or precisely where it died as scavengers have been known to drag such remains away for miles. Only seldom do the remains offer ideas as to the cause of death. The fact that Lazare uses such a remark as evidence only further illuminates the level of desperateness he's willing to employ to deceive.

Furthermore to promote such dogma based on Carbon Dating is a stretch in itself as C¹⁴ decay rates to C¹² don't confirm anything about once living organisms as there are libraries full of known dates that such dating techniques have given erroneous dates on Please see (What is radioisotope dating and how can science attach dates to rock formations?). Furthermore, there are too many problems with the various forms of dating to be able to accurately develop a chronological historic model.(4)

Ancient Egypt and its Biblical confirmations

Lazare next attempts his hand as an Egyptologist when he says:

The present Egyptian chronology promotes the 18th dynasty (1550 to 1320 BC) as ruling during the time the Bible reports the exodus to have occurred (1446 BC). However, there is a growing number of scholars who believe an error has been made in calculating the dates of Egyptian history and that they should be reduced by centuries.(5) Such an act would bring the 12th dynasty down to the time of Moses establishing perfect harmony between archaeology and the Biblical account. In doing this, there would then be abundant evidence for the presence of large numbers of Semitic slaves and their sudden departure at the time of Moses.

Sesostris III was one of the last kings of the 12th dynasty and his statues depict him as a cruel tyrant capable of convicting harsh slavery on his subjects. Sesostris III had a son named Amenemhet III, who appears to have ruled for 46 years. Moses would have been born near the beginning of his reign. Through Amenemhet III son, Amenemhet IV, we may find evidence for the existence of Moses. Evidence shows Amenemhet IV may have been a co-regent with his father who suddenly and mysteriously disappears before the death of Amenemhet III. Could it be he was Moses who left in the Exodus? Let's look what other evidence reveals what Lazarre doesn't tell you.

We know he had a daughter named, Sobekneferu who had no children.(6) We can speculate here that if she was the daughter of Pharaoh who came down to the river to bathe it was not because she had no bathroom in her palace. She most likely would have been there praying to the river god of fertility, Hapi. Having no children she would have needed such a god, and when she found the beautiful baby Moses there she would have considered it an answer to her prayers.

Moses' Exodus left a vacuum on the throne and when Amenemhet III died there was no male successor. Sobekneferu ascended the throne and ruled for eight years as a Pharaoh, but when she died, the dynasty was succeeded by the 13th dynasty.

In 1991, Egyptologist, Peter James, published a book, 'Centuries of Darkness,' where he laid claim that the chronology of Egypt should be reduced by 250 years.(7)  And in 1995 David Rohl published, 'Test of Time,' in which he stated the chronology should be reduced by 350 years.(8) Such revisions would place the end of the 12th dynasty of Egypt in the 15th century BC, which would be around the time of the Exodus and Israelite slaves known to be living in Kahun laboring in building the 12th dynasty pyramids.

Professor Bryant Wood, from the Associates for Biblical Research, has also concluded that the Semitic slaves who lived at Kahun were indeed the Israelites.(9) He reaches his conclusion from a different perspective but the end result is the same. He concludes that the period of 430 years mentioned in Exodus 12:40 was not the total period of time from Abraham to the Exodus, as seemingly implied in Galatians 3:17, but was the actual period of the Israelite presence in Egypt. This assumption would likewise place the Israelite slaves in the 12th dynasty.

Sir Flinders Petrie excavated the city of Kahun in the Faiyyum and Dr Rosalie David wrote a book about his excavations and the following quotes are from her book:

Neither Rosalie David nor Flinders Petrie could identify these Semitic slaves with the Israelites because they held to the traditional chronology which placed the Biblical event centuries later than the 12th dynasty.

She continued unknowingly making scientific confirmations of the Bible:

How can anyone deny the Biblical explanation for this? Remember, Pharaoh had ordered the Hebrew midwives, ' When you do the duties of a midwife for the Hebrew women, and see them on the birth stools, if it is a son, then you shall kill him' (Exodus1:16). The midwives ignored this command so 'Pharaoh commanded all his people saying, "Every son who is born you shall cast into the river..." '

Another striking feature of Petrie's discoveries was the fact that these slaves suddenly disappeared off the scene. Ms. David further wrote:

The departure was sudden and unpremeditated! Nothing could better fit the Biblical record. 'And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years - on that very same day - it came to pass that all the armies of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt' (Exodus 12:41).

Pharaoh had yielded to Moses' demands to allow his slaves to leave because of the ten devastating plagues that fell on Egypt (Exodus 7-12). The waters of the sacred River Nile were turned to blood, herds and flocks were smitten with pestilence, lightning set combustible material on fire, hail flattened the crops and struck the fruit trees, and locusts blanketed the country and consumed what might have been left of plant life. The economy of Egypt would have been so shattered that there should be some record of such a national catastrophe - and there is.

In the Leiden Museum in Holland is a papyrus written in a later period, but most scholars recognize it as being a copy of a papyrus from an earlier dynasty. It could have been from the 13th dynasty describing the conditions that prevailed after the plagues had struck. The following excerpts were taken from it:

There are records of slavery during the reigns of the last rulers of the 12th Dynasty - Sesostris III, Amenemhet III and Sobekneferu (some include an obscure figure known as Amenemhet IV before Sobekneferu). With the death of Sobekneferu the 12th dynasty came to an end as she had no children born to her. Moses, the adopted heir, had fled to Midian.

A period of instability followed the demise of the 12th dynasty. Fourteen kings followed each other in rapid succession, the earlier ones probably ruling in the Delta before the 12th dynasty ended. Kings of the 13th dynasty had already started to rule in the northeast delta and, when the 12th dynasty came to an end, they filled the vacuum and took over as the 13th dynasty. (The idea of dynasties was not an Egyptian idea at the time. It was a later invention of Manetho, the Egyptian priest of the 3rd century BC who left a record of the history of Egypt and divided the kings into dynasties.) The elevation to ruler ship over all Egypt by these kings resulted in fierce contention among themselves, resulting in a rapid succession of rulers and more or less anarchy in the country. This only settled down when Neferhotep I took the throne and restored some stability, ruling for 11 years.

Some scholars identify Khasekemre-Neferhotep I as the pharaoh from whom Moses demanded Israel's release. They do so because Petrie found scarabs of former kings at Kahun. But the latest scarab he found there was of Neferhotep, who was apparently the pharaoh ruling when the Israelite slaves suddenly left Kahun and fled from Egypt in the Exodus. According to Manetho, he was the last king to rule before the Hyksos occupied Egypt 'without a battle'. Without a battle? Where was the Egyptian army? It was at the bottom of the Red Sea (Exodus 14:28). Khasekemre-Neferhotep I was probably the pharaoh of the Exodus. His mummy has never been found.

In his lecture, Professor Wood associated the name Rameses mentioned in Genesis 47:11 and Exodus 1:11, 12:37 with the Egyptian word 'RW3TY', meaning 'Door of two roads'. He connects it with Stratum d/2 of the new population center at Tell el-Daba (Avaris, the Capital of the Hyksos), a site being excavated by the Austrian archaeologist Manfred Bietak. According to Bietak this stratum has definite evidence for a Canaanite element. It is Stratum d/2 Wood connects with the Israelites in Egypt. Those who identify Rameses II as the pharaoh of the Exodus cite these verses, which include the name 'Rameses' as evidence to support their identification. But if Rameses was the Pharaoh of the Exodus, his body should be at the bottom of the Red Sea, not in the Cairo Museum where it is today. Wood's argument dispels the necessity of linking the name Rameses with the Biblical references.

There is plenty evidence for Israelite slavery in Egypt - the sudden disappearance of these slaves, the devastation of Egypt by the ten plagues, the destruction of the Egyptian army - if we look for it at the right time, and time is a vital element in the interpretation of ancient history.

According to the Biblical records, the Exodus occurred 480 years before Solomon laid the foundations of his temple at Jerusalem (1 Kings 6:1). This would place the Exodus about 1446 BC. God's covenant with Abraham was 430 years earlier (Exodus 12:40, Galatians 3:16, 17) about 1850 BC. From the ages of his predecessors back to Noah, given in Genesis 12 and 13, it can be calculated that the great universal flood occurred 427 years earlier, about 2302 BC. But according to most authorities on Egyptian chronology the pyramids were built about 1550 BC, and the first dynasty of Egypt ruled about 3100 BC.(16)

Thus, there is a conflict between Egyptian chronology as generally interpreted and the Biblical records. Neither the first dynasty of Egypt nor the pyramids could have existed before the flood. If the Bible is historically reliable, as I believe it is, then there must be a mistake in man's interpretation of Egyptian chronology, which needs to be reduced by centuries.

The issue is clear. An acceptance of the present chronological interpretation of Egyptian history, and a rejection of the Biblical chronology, opens the door to skepticism of the rest of the early Biblical records, including the record of the Creation of the world in six days. But if Egyptian chronology can be proven flawed, a major obstacle to the acceptance of the Bible records is removed, and the Genesis history stands justified. The point is that Lazare is only giving you one side of an unproven story and he is promoting it as fact. As identified here, there is more evidence to the contrary so one shouldn't be so dogmatic since we are making new discoveries quite frequently.

Further erroneous statements made by Lazare later in the article are:

Does he think there should be a photo album lying around? Because we don't find Solomon's skeleton lying in the midst of bones from 1,000 females with a dog tag around his neck doesn't mean anything other than we haven't found it. This type of logic would conclude that while Pompeii was still hidden and buried it therefore never existed. Because of the various restrictions in a number of countries with regards to excavating suspected sites, archaeologists are limited as to their place of research. In addition, there will always be a considerable number of unverified claims that will exist because of the sensitivity to their suspected location, i.e., 'Dome of the Rock'. But because they haven't been found is no evidence for their lack of existence. When creationists use this form of reasoning to prove the fossil record "still says no" to evolution, we are attacked, yet evolutionists are allowed to use it in attacking the historicity of the Bible and Creationist arguments without scrutiny.

Examples from ancient Rome

Let me offer an example to prove my point using the "newly discovered cities of Seleucia and Apamea, known together as Zeugma, Turkey. Zeugma was a Roman metropolis of some 60,000 citizens that thrived up until about 300 AD before wasting-away in memory."(17) The fact that it was just recently re-discovered is puzzling since the land around the find has maintained a variety of peoples and their agriculture but for some strange reason the city was forgotten. How? Why did the inhabitants leave? Why did the stories of Seleucia and Apamea stop being told? Moreover, it's discovery was of a freak accident in 1992 AD as a result of the rising waters from the newly constructed Birecik dam in southeast Turkey.(18) If we forgot these towns existed after only 1,700 years, couldn't we logically conclude that this must be the case with other forgotten civilizations and cultures? Just because their history's were lost and forgotten does not mean they never existed?

"Hundreds of scholars specializing in Roman military studies have for years lamented our appalling ignorance of the entire Near East. Roman military structures of the first and second century AD are virtually unknown and not a single one of the handful of early imperial legionary fortresses has ever been excavated. Even the precise locations of those at Samosata and Zeugma are unknown or uncertain and nothing is known of their character."(19) Does this mean that these structures too never existed when we have artifacts referencing their existence? Again, of course not. There are more discoveries to be found than there are found discoveries. Perhaps, in Lazarre's science fiction world, a group of men chose to mislead future generations by planting false information over the course of their lives. In fact, maybe they're the ancestors of the infamous, "Kennedy second gunmen."

A Bias revealed

Lazare's entire thesis is finally identified in the left hand column of page 45 when he says:

These statements reveal his true intentions for this article and the ideology behind the claims. To say "The only way that the Israelites could establish a moral right to the land they inhabited was by claiming to have conquered it sometime in the distant past." is denying reality. Israel did historically own and occupy the land and only from a variety of 'won-loss' military battles over the centuries were they discharged from it. How can one argue for the Palestinians based on the premise they were militarily/diplomatically removed in the 1948 battle and simultaneously deny the Jewish people that argument? Let's not forget that on May 15, 1948, Israel asked their Palestinian residents to refrain from joining the seven Arab nation invasion of Israel and in return, Israel would promise their continued-residency. The Palestinians disregarded that promise in a gamble by joining allegiances with their Arab-brothers only to witness their devastating military defeat thus resulting in their expulsion from Israel while simultaneously their own allied-brothers (the seven Arab nations) also shunning their requests for safe refuge. What comradery?

So it's clear this argument Lazare makes for the Palestinians can equally be assigned to the Israelis yet he skirts around that logic. To better understand the roots of this issue I recommend one reads Genesis 17:19-21 and, The Arab Jewish Conflict, as no Jew or Arab denies these historical facts but might only rather disagree with some of the decisions made during those times.

At last, a Biblical Ignorance Revealed

Lazare finally and unknowingly reveals his Biblical illiteracy when he thinks he is presenting a Biblical contradiction when describing:

What he fails to understand is that the Bible is a Christian's ultimate authority and its understanding is revealed only through a maturing, intimate-relationship with Jesus Christ. The wisdom to understand the Creator's character and His divinely-inspired book only evolves from such a relationship. For Christians, the Bible is to be interpreted in a straightforward manner, that is, where it is meant to be literal, it is literal, and where it is figurative or poetic, it is not to be taken literally (i.e. "the trees will clap their hands"). I'm glad that Lazare poses these statements as questions as I'm pleased to take this opportunity to, perhaps, give him his first Sunday school lesson ever.

Midianites corrupted Israel through idolatry worship and sexual impurity and the constant Biblical theme is that God, who is Holy, always judges sin and the penalty for sin is death. "For the wages of sin is death." - Romans 6:23. The order to kill the Midianites was not a personal choice ordained by Moses but was rather from God as it was His vengeance on a guilty people - "vengeance is mine saith the Lord." Murder results in someone taking revenge in his own hand instead of giving it to God. God said in Deuteronomy 32:35, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay."

God carried out His judgment on the sins of the Midianites by choosing to use Moses and the Israelites to perform the sentencing. God could have chosen to send a plague to destroy or punish them like He did with the Israelites in Numbers 25 or like He did with the Pharaoh of Egypt in Exodus 7-12. And even after witnessing first-hand God's judgment on Israel, the Midianites still refused to repent of their sin.

God chose this method of execution to teach the Israelites the seriousness of sin and its consequences. This sentence was to execute and exterminate the guilty people to prevent the cancer of sin from spreading. It was not a war for wealth, land, and private revenge, as Lazare wrongfully interprets. The Lord is to be avenged because the Israelites souls, as well as their bodies, have been ruined by their idolatry. The Midianites were idolaters and idolatry is an offense against God - 'Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.'

The civil power has no authority to meddle with what belongs to God and their seduction had violated the divinity and honor of God. God wanted the Israelites to feel the anguish of carrying out the death-sentence on the Midianites for sinning by killing their friends and lovers. The Israelites stopped short of completing the task by allowing them the live that is why God, through Moses, had commanded them to finish the job.

It was a lesson to Israel about the seriousness of sin and that they better think twice before they fall again into temptation and sin with their neighbors. Sin is ugly and a Holy God cannot have sin in His presence. Israel bears God's name and they represent Him. God must keep Israel pure for His namesake.

Conclusion

There are many more articles circulated monthly that are equally deceitful in their claims which go unrefuted. Unfortunately, the majority of these lie-filled articles deceitfully influence the Biblical and scientific illiterate because their readers are unsuspecting of the secular framework that preconceives their promotion. Nevertheless, the crimes identified in this particular article will at least reveal the degree of the errors many of their authors are willing to go to promote their individual ideologies and I hope such refutations as this one will educate readers to be suspicious regarding such vividly imagined claims.