Archaeology and the Hebrew Bible

[OCaptain]

Noone is forcing you to post here, Aepervius.

If you'd like to contribute to the discussion of Finkelstein and Silberman's takes on the formation of ancient Israel, you're more than welcome. Or, if you'd like to address the broader questions and issues of archaeology and its relation to the Hebrew Bible, please pick a topic and we'll have at it.

 

[OCaptain]

What does it matter if, any or all of the OT (or NT) stories have an archaeological basis? Because the town of Nazareth existed doesn't mean one way or the other that Jesus existed. Likewise, because Jericho simply existed or even was besieged and its walls knocked down - that doesn't mean a magic horn/flute/tuba was involved.

New York City is real. That doesn't mean Spider-Man lives there.

Please keep it within the context of the thread. We're discussing Finkelstein and Silberman's recent works on their theories regarding how Israel came to be, both in reality and in their writings.

Silberman's strength is biblical studies and Finkelstein's archaeology. There are different ways ancient sources can fortify or nullify one or the other. F & S use the Merneptah Stele (found in 1207 BCE) and the Exodus narratives as fortifying evidence that there was "a group named Israel" (The Bible Unearthed, p. 77) already in Canaan by that time.

That is certainly a safe and unassailable assertion that noone challenges anymore.

Now, Silverman certainly sees D ( Following Noth, 1943, the Deuteronomist (D) is one of the sources of the Torah postulated by the Documentary Hypothesis (DH). Martin Noth argued that there was an underlying unity in language and cultural content of the books from Deuteronomy to 2 Kings) as a quite late compilation, explaining the inaccuracies in Joshua).

One thing we see in any ancient histories is that the more reliable records tend to be more recent. (I don't offer that as a truism, only as a reminder that, as we dig further back in time, reinforcing evidence becomes more of a challenge to uncover).

 

[Aepervius]

Noone is forcing you to post here, Aepervius.

Yes nobody is forcing me to. But neither is anybody forbidding me to give a feedback. You could have simply admitted that you should have provided the link to your list and you were quick to react angrily. But no you accuse people of a 300+ pages thread of poisonning the well and attacking you. It would have been so easy to excuse yourself and start fresh. And instead we got your two paragraph of intro.

We'll see how that thread continues.

 

[MG1962]

What does it matter if, any or all of the OT (or NT) stories have an archaeological basis? Because the town of Nazareth existed doesn't mean one way or the other that Jesus existed. Likewise, because Jericho simply existed or even was besieged and its walls knocked down - that doesn't mean a magic horn/flute/tuba was involved.

New York City is real. That doesn't mean Spider-Man lives there.

Because the Bible has little nuggets of information that can be useful. The Bible tells Jericho fell due to an external invasion by the Hebrews. As far we can tell no such external invasion occurred at the time. Jericho had very extensive fortifications, but someone somehow brought them down and forced the city to be abandoned for hundreds of years.

To use your New York analogy - Spiderman living there means nothing. But why is New York now a ruin is a great question for archeologist to peruse.

 

[OCaptain]

Yes nobody is forcing me to. But neither is anybody forbidding me to give a feedback. You could have simply admitted that you should have provided the link to your list and you were quick to react angrily. But no you accuse people of a 300+ pages thread of poisonning the well and attacking you. It would have been so easy to excuse yourself and start fresh. And instead we got your two paragraph of intro.

We'll see how that thread continues.

You could contribute to the thread...

 

[OCaptain]

Because the Bible has little nuggets of information that can be useful. The Bible tells Jericho fell due to an external invasion by the Hebrews. As far we can tell no such external invasion occurred at the time. Jericho had very extensive fortifications, but someone somehow brought them down and forced the city to be abandoned for hundreds of years.

To use your New York analogy - Spiderman living there means nothing. But why is New York now a ruin is a great question for archeologist to peruse.

And, to be clear, this thread is not about any supernatural claims by or about the Bible.

 

[Bad vibe]

Because the Bible has little nuggets of information that can be useful. The Bible tells Jericho fell due to an external invasion by the Hebrews. As far we can tell no such external invasion occurred at the time. Jericho had very extensive fortifications, but someone somehow brought them down and forced the city to be abandoned for hundreds of years.

To use your New York analogy - Spiderman living there means nothing. But why is New York now a ruin is a great question for archeologist to peruse.

wouldn't it be prudent to say "something brought down the walls rather than someone which somewhat begs the question I seem to remember reading there was evidence of local flooding at Jericho aswell as earthquake damage. People aren't the only reason walls fall over or habitats abandoned.

 

[welshdean]

wouldn't it be prudent to say "something brought down the walls rather than someone which somewhat begs the question I seem to remember reading there was evidence of local flooding at Jericho aswell as earthquake damage. People aren't the only reason walls fall over or habitats abandoned.

Oh we know how the walls came a-tumblin' down.

It's in the book man, it's in the book.

 

[Marduk]

This guy Robert Feather, is apparently a Metalurgist, so I would hope he knows what he is talking about here:
.

Robert Feather is a metalurgist, not an egyptologist he is also a well known pseudohistorian, who's ideas generally are on a par with any other person who hasn't studied a culture properly but who believes he can be one of the special people to show the world that God is real through their artifacts.
i.e. he's a nut
also because of his eyebrows he always reminds me of a Gerry Anderson puppet

And, to be clear, this thread is not about any supernatural claims by or about the Bible.

everything about the bible is supernatural, from Genesis all the way through to revelation
its a book of mythology, not a book of accurate history, if you want to accept any part of it as real, then you need to accept that on the whole the subject of the book is God, there is nothing more supernatural than that.

 

[welshdean]

Originally Posted by OCaptain
And, to be clear, this thread is not about any supernatural claims by or about the Bible.

everything about the bible is supernatural, from Genesis all the way through to revelation
its a book of mythology, not a book of accurate history, if you want to accept any part of it as real, then you need to accept that on the whole the subject of the book is God, there is nothing more supernatural than that.

Maybe next time I should express myself as Marduk did, instead of giving you a glaring example and hoping you could 'join the dots'.


Excavations my ass, trumpets my boy, trumpets.

 

[welshdean]

And not for one second does it occur to you, the horns and the parading might be cover for a tunneling operation. That unfortunately does not lead to such an appealing story.

Mate, when I was a kid, I was brought up on WWII stories. If I had a chance to go to Sunday School and listening to stories about tunnels and 'blowing up' walls, I'd have been there.
Unfortunately the story writers went for bleedin' trumpets. I thought it was just a bit silly then, I now find it ridiculous.
As has been said we may well establish provenance for many parts of this particular story, as easily as we can for Harry Potter. But archaeology, as noble a career as it is, unfortunately, will never dig up a 'Nimbus 2000", nor will it ever find a shred of evidence for a burning bush, a talking snake or the 16 commandments.

<thread moot>

 

[carlitos]

Because the Bible has little nuggets of information that can be useful. The Bible tells Jericho fell due to an external invasion by the Hebrews. As far we can tell no such external invasion occurred at the time. Jericho had very extensive fortifications, but someone somehow brought them down and forced the city to be abandoned for hundreds of years.

To use your New York analogy - Spiderman living there means nothing. But why is New York now a ruin is a great question for archeologist to peruse.

Are you talking about the period from 1550 BCE 'til around 900 BCE? Do you have a citation for the abandonment thing? Wikipedia doesn't.

As for horns and parading as a cover for a tunneling operation ... are you serious?

 

[Border Reiver]

Using the parade of a large noisy body of troops carrying a big golden box as a bit of deception to cover for a covert op to allow a small band inside who are then able to facilitate the storming? Sounds plausible.

Having it written down insuch a way as to make it look like a supernatural hitman was backing that group? Also plausible.

Having that story worked into a fairly coherent story where said supernatural being backs that group if they follow his rules. Also plausible.

 

[Marduk]

Are you talking about the period from 1550 BCE 'til around 900 BCE? Do you have a citation for the abandonment thing? Wikipedia doesn't.?

Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman (The Bible Unearthed) say that Jericho, Ai, Gibeon, Chephirah, Beeroth and Kiriath-jearim did not exist at the time.

Professor Isserlin, Head of Department of Semitic Studies and Reader in Semitic Studies at the University of Leeds, and author of The Israelites, says that Jericho had fallen c 1550BCE and afterwards there was only a very limited and impoverished settlement, apparently unwalled, between 1425 and 1275, then entirely abandoned.

Archaeological evidence indicates that in the latter half of the Middle Bronze Age (circa 1700 BCE) the city enjoyed some prosperity, its walls having been strengthened and expanded. According to carbon dating the Canaanite city (Jericho City IV) was destroyed between 1617 and 1530, but rounded as c.1550. The site remained uninhabited until the city was refounded in the 9th century BCE

 

[carlitos]

Do why does wiki tell me that some think it is the oldest continually-inhabited city? I'm being serious; I read a couple of websites and it seems like the consensus is that it was abandoned for that 600 years.

 

[OCaptain]

I thought Joshua was considered a bit of a fake and wiki agrees:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Joshua


So I don't know if we need to really worry about all that business with trumpets and walls...

But:

I would be interested to see an Archeologist's opinion of this thing I found online about "the Copper Scroll" from the Dead Sea Scrolls:
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/mistic/scroll_qumran.htm



Is this guy just another internet kook, or what? Could there be anything in this link between Akhenaten (the one in Egypt, not Broadford) and Judaism?

Be careful how much you lean on Wiki for scholarly writings and views. Wiki doesn't know much when it comes to recent pubs and discussions.

I use Wiki just as a jumping off point ONLY. Scientific publications aren't their focus, sadly.

 

[OCaptain]

Do why does wiki tell me that some think it is the oldest continually-inhabited city? I'm being serious; I read a couple of websites and it seems like the consensus is that it was abandoned for that 600 years.

You're selling yourself short OR giving the Wiki too much credit if you think they're going to tell you all you need to about the subjects we're discussing. It would be worth your while if you're going to participate in the thread to read up on some of the works.

 

[I Ratant]

Not wiki.
http://www.bibleplaces.com/jericho.htm
.
"oldest"...etc..

 

[OCaptain]

Not wiki.
http://www.bibleplaces.com/jericho.htm
.
"oldest"...etc..

Bibles Places is a beautiful site with largely accurate information. Its images of locales and topography are gorgeous.

Good start going beyond wikipedia. I like to start looking on University sites and press sites, as the can tell you who teaches where, and is a good introduction to relevant scholars. Of course, look at Harvard, Princeton, Liverpool, etc.

You'll get a list of scholars from Stager, to Kitchen, to Dever, just for starters.

Widen your search out to schools in Israel and Europe and you'll get Raz Kletter, Israel Finkelstein, Thomas Thompson, Keith Whitelam, Francesca Stavrakopoulou (Exeter), and so on.

 

[I Ratant]

I'm not searching for anything.
I have no reason to believe that Jericho isn't one of the oldest "continuous" inhabited places on earth.. there's others scattered around.
I also have no reason to believe that the events in the bible prior to say Solomon are fact in any manner.
A fortuitous conflation of some ancient destruction added to a fanciful story of an invasion which never occurred is all the biblical version is.