Archaeologist Confirms Creation and The Bible

Archaeologist confirms creation and the Bible
Page 1 of 10
Upholding the Authority of the Bible from the Very First Verse
Creation Archive > Volume 14 Issue 4 > Archaeologist confirms

creation and the Bible
Archaeologist confirms
creation and the Bible
Interview with archaeologist Dr Clifford

Wilson by Dr Carl Wieland
by Carl Wieland
First published:
Creation 14(4):4650
September 1992
Browse this issue
Subscribe to Creation
Magazine
Q: Dr Wilson, what sort of experience do you have in the field

of archaeology?
A: I started as a lecturer with the Australian Institute of Archaeology
more than 35 years I agoI was with them for some time. Later I
came back as its director when I had certain other qualifications. I am
not only recognized in the field of archaeology, I am also a registered
psychologist and a Fellow of the Commercial Education Society of
AustraliaI have a number of different hats!
I was an area supervisor at the
excavation of Gezer in Israel with the
American Schools of Oriental Research.
Later I was the associate director of the
first dig at TelNusieh, which is possibly
the biblical site of Ai. I have visited sites
in nine Bible countries and have had the
privilege of being taken seriously where
Ive gone. I even excavated briefly at
Nineveh (Kouyunjik)thats out of
Mosulwhere I personally uncovered a
little pathway between the palace of
King Sennacherib in Iraq and the
temple, with an inscription stating that
Dr. Clifford Wilson has a
considerable background in
archaeology. He has a
this pathway was dedicated to the

goddess Esagilla.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/archaeologist.asp...
4/20/2007

Bachelor of Arts and a Master
of Arts from Sydney
University, a Bachelor of
Divinity (which was postgraduate, including Hebrew
and Greek) from the
Melbourne College of Divinity,
and a Master of Religious
Education from Luther Rice
Seminary. His Ph.D. is from
the University of South
Carolina, and Included As for
field work in archaeology
undertaken In association with
Hebrew Union College in
Jerusalem.
Page 2 of 10
Q: What was your most interesting

hands-on experience?
A: I think it was at Gezer, where we
excavated over a period of quite a few
days. All we were going through in one
area was a whole lot of black ash, and it
was very discouraging. Professor Nelson
Gluecka very important archaeologist
who gave the world the idea of
Solomons minessuggested that we
ought to do more sieving. So we sieved,
and we found evidences of a civilization
which had Egyptian and Canaanite artefacts with a Solomonic wall

nearby. The team found little god-figures and the like; I was in charge
of that area. All the excavation leaders were very excited because they
realized the ash was from the time when the Egyptians had burned the
city of Gezer and then handed it over to Solomon as a wedding
present when he married the Pharaohs daughter.
Q: That was, of course, consistent with the Bible?
A: Very much sothe burning is referred to in 1 Kings 9:16. I found it
interesting at that time that here were some of the worlds leading
archaeologistsG. Ernest Wright of Harvard, for instance. They
werent so much pleased about proving the Bible, but rather that they
had found something in history they could now peg their hats on, as it
were. What impressed me was that the Bible was taken by them as an
acceptable textbook, reliable in its historical statements. They were
very pleased that they had something that fitted into acceptable
history. And that history was in the Bible.
Q: Have you found in your researches in archaeology anything
that has contradicted the biblical account in a definite sense?
A: There have been plenty of claims that things contradict the biblical
account, but the Bible has a habit of being proved right after all. I will
remember one of the worlds leading archaeologists at Gezer rebuking
a younger archaeologist who was rubbishing the Bible. He just quietly
4/20/2007
Page 3 of 10
said, Well, if I were you, I wouldnt rubbish the Bible. When the
younger archaeologist asked Why?, he replied, Well, it just has a
habit of proving to be right after all. And thats where I stand.
Professor Nelson Glueck, who I suppose would be recognized as one of
the top five of the greats in biblical archaeology, gave a marvellous
lecture to 120 American students who were interacting with the Arabs.
He sad, I have excavated for 30 years with a Bible in one hand and a
trowel in the other, and in matters of historical perspective, I have
never yet found the Bible to be in error.
Professor G. Ernest Wright, Professor of Old Testament and Semitic
Studies at Harvard University, gave a lecture at that same dig. He
made the point that (because of the researches associated with the
Hittites and the findings of Professor George Mendenhall concerning
what are called the Suzerainty Covenant Treaties between the Hittite
kings and their vassals) it had become clear that the records of Moses,
when dealing with covenants, must be dated back to the middle of the
second millennium BC. Thats about 1500 BC. Also, that those writings
should be recognized as a unity. In other words, they go back to one
man. That one man could only be Moses.
I went to Professor Wright later and said, Sir, this is very different
from what youve been putting out in your own writings. He looked at
me and said, Clifford, for 30 years Ive been teaching students coming
to Harvard to train for the Christian ministry; Ive been telling them
they could forget Moses in the Pentateuch, but at least in these
significant areas of the covenant documents that are there in the
Pentateuch, Ive had to admit that I was wrong.
They were two scholastic giants. One says, Ive excavated for 30
years and Ive never found the Bible to be in errorbasically thats
what he was saying. The other says, For 30 years Ive been wrong.
Its rather sad, isnt it, that a good man such as Professor Wright had
been so swept along with the ridiculous documentary hypothesis* that
he had taken a wrong stand for so long. Let me stress that Professor
Wright was a man of the highest integrity.
4/20/2007
Page 4 of 10
Dr Wilson uncovered this brick

at Kouyunjik (Nineveh). It was
part of a pavement, and
declared that the nearby
temple was dedicated to the
goddess Esagilla.
Q: Can you recall any other experience relevant to the

authenticity of Genesis in particular?
A: Yes. In the late 1970s soon after the excavation of Ebla in North
Syria (between Damascus and Aleppo), Italian archaeologist Professor
Paulo Matthea, and epigrapher (translator) Professor Pettinato, were
making known to English-speaking scholars their findings at Ebla.
Their whole lecture tour was arranged by Professor David Noel
Freedman, the man who gave to the English-speaking world the
information about these fantastic new tablets which had been
discovered. His picture was on the front of TIME magazine.
I had the privilege of being invited to a dinner with about a dozen
leading archaeologists because I was in the area and so was invited by
Professor David Noel Freedman.
After the meal, technical questions were being asked backwards and
forwards, and frankly I wasnt too interested in some of them, because
I am not a cuneiform scholar. But Id heard a rumour, and so after a
while I said to Professor Freedman as chairman, Sir, I hear there is a
new creation tablet that has been found. Is that a fact? He shrugged
his shoulders, and said, Ask him. I put my question to Professor
Pettinato and, after some hesitation, he indicated that the information
shouldnt be made public. So I made the point, If there is a new
4/20/2007
Page 5 of 10
creation tablet you simply cant hold it back; it must he made known.
After thinking about it he revealed that there was indeed a new
creation tablet.
I found it very interesting to hear those world-leading scholars
discussing the impact this would have on what is called the
documentary hypothesis. This basically says that the Old Testament
documents are oral traditions, so that only after the time of Solomon
were the various strands brought together. They were supposedly
brought together at intervals of about a century, from the time of
Solomon up to Ezra who, ultimately, with his team of chroniclers,
brought these things into Scripture.
One of those scholars, as a result of this revelation of a new creation
tablet that was even earlier than Moses, declared It looks like weve
got to forget the P document. Now the P document is the Priestly
document that supposedly dates to the time of Ezra. The argument
used to be that the creation story did not come into the Pentateuch
(the records of Moses) until the time of Ezrathat Moses could not
have had it. But in fact we not only find that Moses could have had it
but that it was known even earlier than the time of Moses.
Q: That seems to raise a problem, because isnt the first
knowledge of it heard in the Bible with Moses?
A: The answer is, Yes. But there is very good evidence to suggest
that the Genesis records were compiled by Moses from written records
on clay tablets. Donald Wiseman, formerly Professor of Archaeological
and Semitic Studies at London University, recently edited and revised
a book put out by his father P.J. Wiseman, back in 1948, called New
Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis. It is now called Clues to
Creation in Genesis. In it he acknowledges that his fathers approach
was basically correct, which is this: through Genesis there is the
regular use of a literary form called a colophon. It tells you that this is
where a particular tablet ends and then another one starts. In the
Genesis record this centres around the expression, These are the
generations of These records of early Genesis were presumably
carried over the Fertile Crescent by Abraham, and eventually they
4/20/2007
Page 6 of 10
were used by Moses (centuries after Abraham) under the inspiration of

the Holy Spirit to compile what we have in Genesis.
Of course there never was such a thing as a P document. We can just
accept the Genesis records as being what they claim to befactual
eye-witness records. There is legitimate editing to make things
understood to a later generation (for instance, Genesis 14:3 talks
about the Vale of Siddim and then it says, which is the Salt Sea), but
the basic text is there in writing right from the very times of Genesis
itself.
Q: Dr Wilson, we are often told that religion has evolvedthat
people started off worshipping spirits, then there were lots of
gods, then fewer gods, and eventually came the idea of one
true God. Can you tell us if this is confirmed in the
archaeological records of the civilizations with which you are
familiar?
A: At the time just after the Flood, we find a record of three gods
the god of the earth, the god of the sky, and the god of the waters.
And fairly soon after that youve got hundreds of gods in ancient
records. You start with the concept of monotheism (one God), leading
up to polytheism (many gods). It does not start with dozens of gods.
And even at Ebla, although there are some 500 gods there, there is
also in ancient Canaan the concept of a great one, Lugal, who was
associated with creation. Later the word Lugal came to mean king.
Q: So that would be consistent with what Paul tells us in
Romans, that people abandoned the worship of the one true
God and turned to the worship of other things?
A: Absolutely. The specific reference to only three gods just after the
Flood may, in a vague way, be associated with the Trinity, because it
does stem that Satanic forces are prepared to offer a parody of
spiritual realities. The Canaanites had three main gods. They had El,
the father, Baal, the son, and Asherah, the mother who is the wife of
El (and also the mother of Baal, according to some scholars). There is
some challenge as to the interrelationships, but you have three gods
there. So when the Israelites got away from Jehovah, they were
4/20/2007
Page 7 of 10
offered the worship of the Canaanites and their three gods without all
the problems of bring a holy people and so on. It seems to be a
parody on the Trinity, which of course is not fully revealed until New
Testament times. But the demonic spirits have always known about
the Trinity.
Q: People raised on evolutionary thinking might find it hard to
see how an archaeologist who digs through the earth can
possibly believe that the Bible can be right about Genesis
which of course would imply that the earth is young. Have you
ever been involved in any other research or seen any other
evidence which would lead you to cast doubt upon the
evolutionary geological system of dating?
A: Well, many years ago I was lecturing at a college in the United
States and declaring that the earth could be as old as you would like
to have itmillions or billions of yearsand a student came to me and
asked me to read some research papers by Professor Tom Barnes. And
that led me on a search. I even found myself with the scientist who
had done the investigation for Professor Barnes arguments about the
depletion of the earths magnetic field. This person was associated
with one of the biggest institutions in America. I asked him about his
conclusions. He said, Well, its not a matter of my conclusions, its the
institution I represent. And he made it quite clear that he would
personally recommend (and could not flaw) Dr Barnes arguments.
However, the institution was not prepared to accept them, because
this would mean accepting that the earth was youngjust a few
thousand years rather than billions of years. And their argument was,
We know that Professor Barnes is wrong. We knowsimply because
of the establishment belief, it seems.
Q: Do you encounter that attitude in archaeology, too?
A: Sometimes. For instance, in the excavations at Gezer to which I
have referred, on the last day of two particular digs, we actually found
a cache of Philistine pots, which were about 150 years out, based on
the argument that the Exodus took place about 1290-1270 BC (which
is the date taken by many modern scholars). They are plain wrong, by
4/20/2007
Page 8 of 10
the way. The evidence from Dr Bryant Wood today is being taken very
seriously these days: he has done a great deal of work to show that
Jericho fell about 1400 BC, which gives you an Exodus date of about
1440 BC. So these particular Philistine pots just shouldnt have been
there on this accepted theory. And they didnt know what to do with it,
so they just went quiet on it.
Thats what happens from time to time. My own experience is that if
the Bible says something is accurate, well, be very slow to suggest
otherwise, because it does have a habit of proving to be right after all.
Q: Have you handled or seen any fossil evidence which would
contradict the geologic column?
A: Yes, Ive excavated a number of times at the Paluxy River in Texas,
and theres very interesting evidence there. Ive talked to the lady,
Jeannie Mack, who with her mother found a famous trilobite. She is
the curator of the Somervill County Museum at Glen Rose, at that
location in Texas. She and her mother found this trilobite in the same
fossil limestone strata where there have been plenty of undeniable
dinosaur footprints found. And when I challenged her because of the
sensational nature of a trilobite and a dinosaur track being found in
the same place, she was upset with me because she thought I was
calling her a liar. She knew what dinosaur limestone strata were and
where dinosaur prints would be, and she was emphatic that just across
from where she lives at the Paluxy River this trilobile was found in
exactly that stratum with dinosaur footprints.
Q: Did you see the fossil yourself?
A: Ive handled the trilobite, yes. Its in about four inches of limestone.
But it was undoubtedly a trilobitenobody argues about that. And it
was found in the same stratum as dinosaur footprints, which according
to evolutionary theory is impossibletheyre supposed to be separated
by tens of millions of years.
Q: I understand that you know something about some dinosaur
prints at the Paluxy River that are found in the wrong place.
A: Yes, its very interesting. Back in 1982, we had come to the last
4/20/2007
Page 9 of 10
day of that particular excavation and the field supervisor came to us

and said, I think Ive seen what might be the start of a dinosaur
footprint on the top stratum over there. And the leader of the
excavation and I (the associate) said, Well, forget it. Thats on the top
stone stratum of the earths surface in this area. There are no dinosaur
footprints up there. Then he said, Look, the machinery is sitting here,
weve paid good money for it and weve finished with it. Let me just
remove the overburdenthe topsoiland see whats there. So we
agreed and off he went.
He came back in a little while and said, I think theres something up
there. We all went up to where he had removed the overburden on
top of the stone (an average of between six and 11 feet of topsoilthe
debris that accumulates over the centuries). It was about 30 feet by
30 feet in area. I got down into the mud and personally excavated the
six dinosaur footprints that I found there. I stepped them out as being
approximately three feet six inches from each other. There were
cameras going, and there were people there; theres no possibility of
this being faked. We found six dinosaur footprints that started from
the edge of the Paluxy River and led over to where the overburden
was no longer removed.
About two years later I was in the area, and well-known scientistauthor Dr Charles Thaxton was there this time, and we had quite an
interesting chat. He said, By the way, do you remember those
dinosaur footprints you found up there in that top stone stratum?
Yes. Well, do you know how that was written up? No. Well, they
claim that they couldnt possibly be there, they couldnt be genuine
because thats not the Cretaceous limestone (a layer supposedly 70100 million years old). So they claim that those footprints were either
carved there by Indians or you people faked them.
Well, we checked out with a particular Indian art history man at a
nearby university to find out what the usual practice was with Indians
and carving. Did they carve into a rock? No. They would paint into the
caves, just on the outside of the caves and sometimes just inside, but
certainly they did not get into the rock and make carvings. And in any
4/20/2007
Page 10 of 10
case, how they would do that under deep overburden, I dont know.
Im glad I was the one who dug them out, because I can say before
God that there is no faking in this whatever. I personally got down in
the mudwe could see the beginnings of one of the dinosaur
footprints. I uncovered that, and if I stepped it out in the direction in
which it pointedI would, and did, find the others. And so we found a
total of six of them.
They were dinosaur footprintsthe same pattern of dinosaurs as at
other places in that region. However, these prints were supposedly in
the wrong place and so this plain, straightforward evidence is
rejectedsimply because it doesnt fit the evolutionary timetable.
[Dr Wieland:] Dr Wilson, thank you very much.
Footnote
* The documentary hypothesis (J,E,D,P,H hypothesis) is still, sadly,
taught in many Christian institutions. It claims that the five books of
Moses were written not by him, but by at least five different sources
(code-named J,E,D,P,H) which gradually came together over many
centuries. The hypothesis has been amended from time to time, but is
still taught in many institutions despite clear evidence opposing it. The
basic Bible documents come from eye-witnesses with legitimate
minimal editing to make them clearer to later generationssee far
example Genesis 14:3, where the Vale of Siddim had become part of
the Dead Sea.
Available online at:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/archaeologist.asp
COPYRIGHT 2007 Answers in Genesis
4/20/2007

Archaeologist Confirms Creation and The Bible

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Archaeologist Confirms Creation and The Bible

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Archaeologist confirms creation and the Bible

Creation Archive > Volume 14 Issue 4 > Archaeologist confirms

Interview with archaeologist Dr Clifford

Q: Dr Wilson, what sort of experience do you have in the field

this pathway was dedicated to the