Archeologly proves the Bible?

[Lucian]

In fact, literacy and conversion to Christianity went hand-in-hand. This is true also of the Welsh myths found in various madieval codeces and eventually compiled in the Mabinogion. The Celtic gods are presented as mortal heroes. In Beowulf, Grendel is, if I remember, supposed to be a descendent of Cain. There were certainly pre-Christian elements in the poem, but the Christian aspects in it are important as well. It's not simply a pagan work with a Christian gloss.

In any case, appealing to Beowulf as an archaeological proof of the Bible stretches credulity right from the outset.

To vent my rage about the creationist claims regarding Beowulf, I started a thread on the topic: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=152638

 

[supercorgi]

Kathy,

I haven't followed this thread because it got out of control once DOC started posting. You claim that there were tons of archaeological proof for the veracity of the Bible. That's why I started this thread asking you to give me one well researched, done by an archaeologist respected by his/her peers, of a case study of some archaeology. There are good Biblical archaeologist, but there are also many with questionable credentials - these people try to shoe horn the evidence into their theories. A good archaeologist, starts out with a hypothesis, then if the evidence doesn't fit that hypothesis, the either revise it or abandon it. They don't dogmatically start with a believe and then either try to shoe horn the evidence into it, or ignore evidence that doesn't support it.

And I'm not looking for evidence that such and such a city existed. I'm looking for evidence of some of the god-related aspects of the Bible - the walls of Jericho coming down, the historical evidence that Herod order a purge of all the first born males, etc.

KK, I know you don't have the education and experience to support this, but if that is the case, don't make statements that the Bible is factual and that there's lots of archaeological evidence to support it.

 

[shadron]

I feel like breaking into song............Bringing in the sheep, bringing in the sheep.
Trouble is, that's all I can remember of the hymm.

Bringing in the sheaves^WP
That's sheaves, amb. Sheaves. of wheat.

 

[shadron]

In fact, literacy and conversion to Christianity went hand-in-hand. This is true also of the Welsh myths found in various madieval codeces and eventually compiled in the Mabinogion. The Celtic gods are presented as mortal heroes. In Beowulf, Grendel is, if I remember, supposed to be a descendent of Cain. There were certainly pre-Christian elements in the poem, but the Christian aspects in it are important as well. It's not simply a pagan work with a Christian gloss.

In any case, appealing to Beowulf as an archaeological proof of the Bible stretches credulity right from the outset.

Besides, where does it say anything in the Bible abut ripping anyone's arm off?

 

[eccles]

There are good Biblical archaeologist, but there are also many with questionable credentials - these people try to shoe horn the evidence into their theories

I read somwhere a description of the average Biblical Archaeologist: A man with a Bible and a Spade.



Robert

 

[Simon39759]

Kathy,

I haven't followed this thread because it got out of control once DOC started posting. You claim that there were tons of archaeological proof for the veracity of the Bible. That's why I started this thread asking you to give me one well researched, done by an archaeologist respected by his/her peers, of a case study of some archaeology. There are good Biblical archaeologist, but there are also many with questionable credentials - these people try to shoe horn the evidence into their theories. A good archaeologist, starts out with a hypothesis, then if the evidence doesn't fit that hypothesis, the either revise it or abandon it. They don't dogmatically start with a believe and then either try to shoe horn the evidence into it, or ignore evidence that doesn't support it.

And I'm not looking for evidence that such and such a city existed. I'm looking for evidence of some of the god-related aspects of the Bible - the walls of Jericho coming down, the historical evidence that Herod order a purge of all the first born males, etc.

KK, I know you don't have the education and experience to support this, but if that is the case, don't make statements that the Bible is factual and that there's lots of archaeological evidence to support it.

That's what she thought, because that's what she was told in church/in her apologetic websites.
She never checked for herself and could not know it was B.S.

 

[eccles]

Besides, where does it say anything in the Bible about ripping anyone's arm off?

Now there is nothing in the bible about tearing them up. So I do. I tear up bibles.



Robert

 

[supercorgi]

There are good Biblical archaeologist, but there are also many with questionable credentials - these people try to shoe horn the evidence into their theories

I read somwhere a description of the average Biblical Archaeologist: A man with a Bible and a Spade.

A good description of many of them, but there are some reputable, well trained archeologist who do Biblical archaeology. But a lot of them are untrained. I started to watch the show the Naked Archeologist and I just couldn't because he was the worst example of a Biblical archeologist that I've seen. I can't believe he got a show on Discovery (?) - it was a large part sloppy research and conclusions that didn't fit the evidence.

 

[kurious_kathy]

Kathy,

I haven't followed this thread because it got out of control once DOC started posting. You claim that there were tons of archaeological proof for the veracity of the Bible. That's why I started this thread asking you to give me one well researched, done by an archaeologist respected by his/her peers, of a case study of some archaeology. There are good Biblical archaeologist, but there are also many with questionable credentials - these people try to shoe horn the evidence into their theories. A good archaeologist, starts out with a hypothesis, then if the evidence doesn't fit that hypothesis, the either revise it or abandon it. They don't dogmatically start with a believe and then either try to shoe horn the evidence into it, or ignore evidence that doesn't support it.

And I'm not looking for evidence that such and such a city existed. I'm looking for evidence of some of the god-related aspects of the Bible - the walls of Jericho coming down, the historical evidence that Herod order a purge of all the first born males, etc.

KK, I know you don't have the education and experience to support this, but if that is the case, don't make statements that the Bible is factual and that there's lots of archaeological evidence to support it.

Did you get a chance to view the Archeology Bible yet? I will get one soon but I have only seen them and they seem to have a lot of info you should check out. As for documents on the internet I do not have that much at my finger tips at this point but I will keep working on it as I get time.

As for the walls of Jericho, well I had heard once or twice they have discovered some of the remains but I need to dig a bit to find it. I just want to add when we look at this wall of Jericho story we must also think in terms of the spiritual sense. What do you think the walls represent and why did God make this illistration of victory for us? I see it kind of like this... People have walls built up because of sin and God is the one that can crumble the walls we set up ourselves to set us free from the bondage sin creates. This passage of scripture has a lot more meaning to it but unless you let the spirit of God show you I do not think you'll understand.

As for Herod, He's in big trouble! Can't you see how power hungry men are sometimes threatened by losing power and so they lash out and missuse their power every chance they get? Herod was a man taken over by his sin and it was surely the death of him. All of that did happened and you can trust the Bible as a reference to the truth of history.

 

[eccles]

What do you think the walls represent and why did God make this illistration of victory for us?

Kathy. Do I detect that you are Christian? Don't worry I won't burn you at the stake if you are. But remember that there was no "god' and all the bible stories were written by primative tribes in about the 5th or 6th century BCE and these days should be regarded as pure fiction.



Robert

 

[supercorgi]

Did you get a chance to view the Archeology Bible yet? I will get one soon but I have only seen them and they seem to have a lot of info you should check out. As for documents on the internet I do not have that much at my finger tips at this point but I will keep working on it as I get time.

Sure I'll read it. Send me your copy. I'm not about to spend $40+ dollars to read this apologic book written by a guy who taught 20 years at an Evangelical College. I'll reimburse your for your postage and send it back to you. You do have a copy don't you? I would think so since you cite it.

As for the walls of Jericho, well I had heard once or twice they have discovered some of the remains but I need to dig a bit to find it. I just want to add when we look at this wall of Jericho story we must also think in terms of the spiritual sense. What do you think the walls represent and why did God make this illistration of victory for us? I see it kind of like this... People have walls built up because of sin and God is the one that can crumble the walls we set up ourselves to set us free from the bondage sin creates. This passage of scripture has a lot more meaning to it but unless you let the spirit of God show you I do not think you'll understand.

You're preaching again which I asked you not to that but present evidence -not symbolic interpretations (and I thought you accepted the Bible as literal - so how can you now interprete as symbolic?.) The ruins of the city of Jericho go back to 9000 BCE (whch sort of spoils your Young Earth Creationist stuff). No evidence of the walls falling down although it was occupied by many different people over many different ages. The Wikipedia entry on Jericho is quite comprehensive.
-

for Herod, He's in big trouble! Can't you see how power hungry men are sometimes threatened by losing power and so they lash out and missuse their power every chance they get? Herod was a man taken over by his sin and it was surely the death of him. All of that did happened and you can trust the Bible as a reference to the truth of history.

Yet there is no historical evidence that Herod ordered a purge on all the first born sons. The Roman kept excellent records of EVERYTHING. Don't you think that they would have recorded such a massive undertaking? Again, you are trying to use the Bible as proof of the Bible - this just doesn't cut it. It's circular reasoning. I cannot trust the veracity of the Bible - it was written by humans who had an agenda. You cannot use it as proof.

Please present some solid archaeological proof that the god-inspired events of the Bible really took place. I'll accept solid, well-reseached archeological evidence as well as verifiable historical evidence. This was a literate culture - there's got to be more records of these events than just the Bible.

 

[pakeha]

hi, kurious_kathy.
I'm glad to see you've posted here, but really gutted you didn't answer any of my questions.
Still, your post was interesting for a variety of reasons. Like supercorgi, I'm hoping you'll send me a copy of the Archeology Bible (we'll set that up later, ok?)
Your posts really inspire me to look up things on the Web. Isn't it amazing how much there is out there?
So today it's Jericho. I was really impressed by your take on the 'falling down' of the walls of that sin-soaked city and so I wanted to ask you about that 9,000 year figure for the city's age.
What do you reckon, kurious_kathy?
Is it simply a mistake or misinterpretation or is it a devil-inspired lie to test the faith of true Christians everywhere?

As for Herod, He's in big trouble! Can't you see how power hungry men are sometimes threatened by losing power and so they lash out and missuse their power every chance they get? Herod was a man taken over by his sin and it was surely the death of him. All of that did happened and you can trust the Bible as a reference to the truth of history.

I'll get around to Herod after I've looked up Jericho. One thing at a time!

 

[amb]

A good description of many of them, but there are some reputable, well trained archeologist who do Biblical archaeology. But a lot of them are untrained. I started to watch the show the Naked Archeologist and I just couldn't because he was the worst example of a Biblical archeologist that I've seen. I can't believe he got a show on Discovery (?) - it was a large part sloppy research and conclusions that didn't fit the evidence.

The whole Sinai Peninsula has been dug up practically by amature archeologists and christians, yet not a single bit of evidence has ever been dug up to prove a single tale as told in the babble.

 

[pakeha]

Jericho.
First of all, it seems to be over 11,000 years old.

Natufian
Epipaleolithic—construction at the site apparently began before the invention of agriculture, with construction of the stone structures of the Natufian culture beginning earlier than 9000 B.C.E.


PPN A
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (8350 B.C.E.–7370 B.C.E.) Sometimes it is called Sultanian. The 45,000 square yard settlement is surrounded by a stone wall with a stone tower in the center of one side of the wall. This is so far the oldest wall ever to be discovered, thus suggesting some kind of social organization, even if based on charisma. The town contained round, mud-brick houses, but no street planning.[4] The population of approximately two thousand people used domesticated emmer wheat, barley, and pulses and hunted wild animals.

This is from:
http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache...+origins+archeology&cd=34&hl=es&ct=clnk&gl=es

Not a definitive site, obviously.
Still, I have to admit I got really tired of reading fanatics bashing each other with Jericho as proof (or not) of the Joshua account.

What IS interesting is that Jericho seems to destroy any claim to veracity the Young Earthers might have had.
Its definitely pre-4,000 bc and and shows no signs of the Flood.

 

[pakeha]

More on Jericho.
I found this site interesting:
http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/bryantwood.php

Especially on the subject of the 'missing millenium' theory which tries to conciliate the Joshua account with Jericho's story.

 

[amb]

Jericho.
First of all, it seems to be over 11,000 years old.


This is from:
http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache...+origins+archeology&cd=34&hl=es&ct=clnk&gl=es

Not a definitive site, obviously.
Still, I have to admit I got really tired of reading fanatics bashing each other with Jericho as proof (or not) of the Joshua account.

What IS interesting is that Jericho seems to destroy any claim to veracity the Young Earthers might have had.
Its definitely pre-4,000 bc and and shows no signs of the Flood.

Or of any walls that come crashing down at the sound of a trumpet.

 

[eccles]

Bible and Spade yet again.

See what happens when the quacks cant find what they want - they "move the goal posts", change the rules, time shift to fit in with their BS ideas.

That was tried by some quack Egyptologists. It was called the New Chronology.



Robert

 

[pakeha]

One more reflection on Jericho:

...to meet their burden of proof, defenders of the biblical account must not only show that a site was conquered at the right time but must also give good reasons why we should identify the Israelites, as opposed to any other potential cause, as the ones responsible. After all, it is quite possible that what agreements exist between the biblical text and the archaeological record exist not because the Israelites conquered a city and then recorded their victory, but because later scribes patriotically sought to link their country's origins to the once-impressive cities whose ruins could still be seen at the time of their writing - the etiological explanation, as given previously.

at:
http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/otarch3.html#lbsummary

amb- bad trumpet playing IS responsible for a lot of disasters and I think we should never underestimate the Power of Music as revealed, for example, in the Historical Documentary "Mars Attacks"

 

[eccles]

Pepi II and Exodus

While I was on that site "Biblical Chronologist" I noticed somethime about the Exodus and found another quack theory time shifting back to the 6th Dynasty:

A Long Reign
Before the account of the Exodus itself, the Bible tells of the enslavement of the Israelites and the first 80 years of the life of Moses. One remarkable feature of this story is apparent from the following sequence of events:

A new king comes to power in Egypt who "did not know Joseph." (Exodus 1:8)
This king orders the death of all newborn Hebrew boys. (Exodus 1:22)
Moses is born into this regime. (Exodus 2:2)
Moses is adopted by the Pharaoh's daughter. (Exodus 2:5)
Moses grows up, murders an Egyptian, and flees the country. (Exodus 2:12,15)
Moses marries Zipporah and they have a son. (Exodus 2:12,15)
Eventually, "in the course of those many days", the king of Egypt dies. (Exodus 2:23)
God meets Moses and sends him to the new Pharaoh. (Exodus 3,4)
Moses is 80 years old when he stands before the new Pharaoh. (Exodus 7:7)
The Bible indicates that the same Pharaoh whose daughter adopted three-month-old Moses died when Moses was nearly 80 years old! This Pharaoh must have reigned for a very long time.

Only one pharaoh in the history of Egypt can meet this Biblical requirement---Pepy II.

Well my BS detector screamed out because, even without checking I remembered his pyramid at Saqqara, a very old site - location of the first pryamid of Zoser: the famous stepped pyramid - 4th Dynasty.

From wikipedia:

Pepi II (reigned c. 2278 BC–c. 2184 BC) [3] was a pharaoh of the Sixth dynasty in Egypt's Old Kingdom. His throne name, Neferkare (Nefer-ka-Re), means "Beautiful is the Ka of Re". He succeeded to the throne at age six, after the death of Merenre I, and is generally credited with having the longest reign of any monarch in history at 94 years (c. 2278 BC - c. 2184 BC) although this figure has been disputed by some Egyptologists who favour a shorter reign of not much more than 64 years.[4][5] This is based on the complete absence of higher attested dates for Pepi beyond his Year after the 31st Count (Year 62 on a biannual cattle count).

Thank the God Horus that I know something about Egypt.




Robert

 

[amb]

You don't have to be an expert Egyptologist to see that the Moses tale is BS.
People in those days were very lucky if they lived beyond 60 let alone 90s.