Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible.

[Niggle]

Paul's letter to the Ramones.

Nommed for pith!

 

[Piggy]

Yes. I know that. But the point would be that the very early Church in Jerusalem weren't what we would call "Christian" anyway. James and his followers were strictly Jewish, as far as I can tell. Paul was the only one talking about a divine Jesus until the Gospel of John, and Paul was preaching his divine Jesus to the Gentiles. James was emphasising the teachings of Jesus, of salvation through "The Way of The Lord" and preaching to the Jews. Am I wrong?

In one very important point, yes, you are wrong.

All of the early variations that we know of were indeed Christian, in that they believed Jesus to be the prophecied "annointed one", which is to say the messiah or christ.

That includes Jewish Christians, Ebionite Christians, gnostic Christians, and Paul's churches.

It wasn't just the proto-orthodox who were Christian.

One does not have to believe that Jesus was in any way divine in order to believe that he was a christ, or even The Christ.

 

[Brainache]

In one very important point, yes, you are wrong.

All of the early variations that we know of were indeed Christian, in that they believed Jesus to be the prophecied "annointed one", which is to say the messiah or christ.

That includes Jewish Christians, Ebionite Christians, gnostic Christians, and Paul's churches.

It wasn't just the proto-orthodox who were Christian.

One does not have to believe that Jesus was in any way divine in order to believe that he was a christ, or even The Christ.

How many of these early variations are dated to before the destruction of the second Temple?

 

[Piggy]

Ok, to get back to the OP....

Our first external substantiation of anything in the Biblical literature comes from the Menerptah stele, a stone slab commemorating the military victories of the Egyptian Pharaoh Menerptah (son of Rameses the Great) who ruled in the 13th century BCE.

Like the Hebrew epic fragment excerpted in Exodus (cited upthread) this deals with the conflicts between the tribes of Israel (among others) and the Egyptians in Canaan.

It's much shorter than the Biblical excerpt, however: “Canaan is captive with all woe. Ashkelon is conquered, Gezer seized, Yanoam made nonexistent; Israel is wasted, bare of seed.”

What's significant about it is that it confirms (a) that Egypt and Israel did indeed engage in military conflict, (b) Israel was worth mentioning, which means they weren't just some ragged band of goatherds at this time, circa 1209 BCE, the era of the judges, (c) they were nevertheless much less significant than the Egyptians, given the short mention they are afforded compared to the extensive commemoration the Hebrews give to a single victory over Pharaoh, and (d) they were a confederation at that time -- the language indicates a group of nomadic tribes rather than a city-state such as the others mentioned in the passage.

So the Biblical account of the early Israelites as tribes at war with the various landed nations is supported here.

 

[Piggy]

How many of these early variations are dated to before the destruction of the second Temple?

Paul's churches, certainly, and James's Jewish church in Jerusalem, and other Jewish groups to which Simon the Rock was a missionary, as well as certain other "Judaizers", and Christian groups in Egypt with a slant toward "wisdom".

Ebionites are more difficult to date. Their christology is the most primitive of all known christologies, so they may well have been quite early, and their claims tracing the tradition back to James might actually be accurate.

 

[Piggy]

Ok, so this brings us to another epic poem, Judges 5, the Song of Deborah, which celebrates the victories of the tribal confederation. This is widely considered to be the second most ancient material found in the Bible (although some argue that it may actually be the oldest) and it is not purely mythological, although it is certainly told from the point of view of a people with a mythological worldview.

Again, this is too long for me to type from my New Oxford Annotated, but you can read a somewhat less reliable translation here.

Like all ancient victory songs, it is exaggeratedly boastful, and like all ancient Hebrew writings it is overtly religious, but that said, it does provide us some window into the historical past.

Specifically, it agrees with the Egyptian reference to the early Hebrews as a confederation of tribes at war with the competing powers in Canaan. The subsequent establishment of an Israelite nation in Palestine with territories divided along tribal lines, corroborated by archaeology, is objective confirmation of the gist of the song -- that a prolonged multi-front war was fought over possession of the land at the eastern end of the Mediterranean, and that the Israelite confederacy was a player in that cross-generational conflict.

An interesting sidenote -- I wish I still had my specific references, but I've lost them over the years -- is that primitive nomadic semitic peoples in Yemen still follow the ancient division of literary labor we find in the Song of Deborah and the Song of Miriam: The men memorize and study the written scripture, while the women sing the news of the day, and praise and criticize the current leadership.

It's a pattern we'll see repeated in the ancient Hebrew literature as we go forward.

 

[VanillaCone]

In response to the OP, there's a pretty good episode of NOVA on the topic of comparing archaeological evidence with purported historical facts written in the Old Testament. The focus was not on confirming or refuting claims of supernatural events but rather to determine if, when and where some of the major characters in the Bible actually lived. For instance there's some archaeological evidence that a real King David existed in the correct place and time, but there also is evidence that the Israelites did not invade Canaan and were in fact Canaanites themselves. The show's available on the pbs.org website. It's called "The Bible's Buried Secrets."

ETA: When I say "available," I mean available for free viewing. (It is PBS, after all.)

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

In response to the OP, there's a pretty good episode of NOVA on the topic of comparing archaeological evidence with purported historical facts written in the Old Testament. The focus was not on confiring or refuting claims of supernatural events but rather to determine if, when and where some of the major characters in the Bible actually lived. For instance there's some archaeological evidence that a real King David existed in the correct place and time, but there also is evidence that the Israelites did not invade Canaan and were in fact Canaanites themselves. The show's available on the pbs.org website. It's called "The Bible's Buried Secrets."

ETA: When I say "available," I mean available for free viewing. (It is PBS, after all.)

http://video.pbs.org/video/1051895565

 

[VanillaCone]

http://video.pbs.org/video/1051895565

Aha - why didn't I think of that?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Aha - why didn't I think of that?

Meh, I just happened to be there already, watching "Radioactive Wolves."

 

[MG1962]

In response to the OP, there's a pretty good episode of NOVA on the topic of comparing archaeological evidence with purported historical facts written in the Old Testament. The focus was not on confirming or refuting claims of supernatural events but rather to determine if, when and where some of the major characters in the Bible actually lived.

Sometimes such exercises can turn up some very good science. A ways back a group of researchers were looking at the crossing of the Red sea. They considered the body of water may have been misidentified so went in search of candidate lakes and marshes.

In doing so they found a series of aerial photos taken during WW2 that showed the remains of a complex marsh area that has since been covered up by sand and such.

While they eventually ended up finding nothing to validate their theory, good stable water sources always throw up the opportunity to discover unknown human settlements and possibly whole cultures lost to time

 

[Piggy]

there also is evidence that the Israelites did not invade Canaan and were in fact Canaanites themselves.

The Egyptians certainly lumped them all in together.

Having descended from nomads, and being as obsessed as they were with identifying their culture against all of the cultures around them by not just emphasizing but actually codifying the differences and punishing violators, it's not surprising that their origin myths identify them as outsiders... but, of course, outsiders who simultaneously deserve to be there.

 

[VanillaCone]

Meh, I just happened to be there already, watching "Radioactive Wolves."

I had no idea wolves were radioactive. Gonna have to watch that one. Public television rules.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I had no idea wolves were radioactive. Gonna have to watch that one. Public television rules.

Check out "The Wolf That Changed America" while you're at it.

 

[Piggy]

I think the next thing we find is archaeological evidence for the destruction of Bethel, Debir, and Lachish at the end of the Late Bronze (13th c. BCE).

Which isn't that strong, but it's consistent.

 

[Leumas]

I think the next thing we find is archaeological evidence for the destruction of Bethel, Debir, and Lachish at the end of the Late Bronze (13th c. BCE).

Which isn't that strong, but it's consistent.

So if Argentina claimed that they toppled Saddam and 3000 years from now we found that in fact Iraq was destroyed then that proves that they were right? Even despite the fact that there are written records found that show that the USA did it?

In one of the stories of Sherlock Holmes, he worked for Queen Victoria to prevent some German Spy ring.

It is a fact that there were German Spies in England in the Victorian era that were discovered and apprehended.

So the Sherlock Holmes book got it right on

1. Victoria existed
2. England existed
3. Germany Existed
4. German Spies Existed
5. They were apprehended

Conclusion..... Sherlock Holmes was real and the story was HISTORY.

 

[Piggy]

So if Argentina claimed that they toppled Saddam and 3000 years from now we found that in fact Iraq was destroyed then that proves that they were right? Even despite the fact that there are written records found that show that the USA did it?

Of course not, don't be silly.

What we're looking for here is evidence to substantiate (not prove) those parts of the Bible that may be historical.

What I've been looking at for the last few posts is the conquest of Canaan. And there is some external substantiation, including the later establishment of Israel and Judah, and the destruction of certain cities at the end of the Late Bronze which as I said in the post "isn't that strong, but it's consistent" with one of the versions of the conquest as recorded in Joshua and Judges.

The other version we know to be false because, for example, of its improper description of the supposed destruction of Tyre.

If we start tossing out every piece of potential evidence because it does not, by itself, "prove" the case, then we'll be left with no evidence at all.

 

[Leumas]

If we start tossing out every piece of potential evidence because it does not, by itself, "prove" the case, then we'll be left with no evidence at all.

The problem is in trying to find evidence as if it REQUIRES one.....Sherlock Holmes does not need any evidence.....nor does Moses.


Just because there is "evidence" does not mean anything.

Even if we find that the bible was correct on ALL the city names and ALL of them were destroyed exactly as described and even if ALL the names of the Kings mentioned are REAL.......it still does not negate the fact that the Bible is a FABLE concocted by humans to PROPAGANDIZE, JUSTIFY, SANCTIFY and FABRICATE.

As I mentioned above....if you take a Sherlock Holmes story you will find that probably 85% of it is FACTUAL.....so if we find that the Bible is 85% factual....does it make it VALID History? or does it remain a HUGE PLAGIARIZED LIE?

One may argue...aha....but then we can learn from it SOME history....

Well....no....because in fact we learnt about the facts before we could say that the Bible’s version of them was factual.

So then someone might say....aha...but then we can use it to interpolate some other facts we did not know....

Well...DEFINITELY NOT.... since you cannot use Sherlock Holmes to interpolate from it any facts that you can be sure are not FABRICATED to make the story plot more interesting or flow better or better serve the purposes of the writer.

So this whole pursuit of comparing the bible to facts we glean from other sources is in vain. All it does is give the feeble minded an "aha" casuistic moment.

But that is in fact the whole impetuous behind the ridiculous Biblical Archaeology field of "study"

 

[Brainache]

The problem is in trying to find evidence as if it REQUIRES one.....Sherlock Holmes does not need any evidence.....nor does Moses.


Just because there is "evidence" does not mean anything.

...

I don't think anyone here is saying otherwise.

The point, as I see it, is that the bible is a very old book and some of the things it describes happened, some of them didn't. This thread is only looking for things that did happen and which were recorded in one way or another by the bible authors.

We know that Moses didn't lead thousands of Hebrew slaves out of Egypt, but there does seem to be archeological evidence that there were Hebrews living under Egyptian authority in Canaan. There is therefore the possibility that battles between Hebrews and Egyptians happened, not exactly as we are led to believe by the bible, but real battles nevertheless.

Nobody is claiming this as evidence that JHWH is real.

 

[Piggy]

The problem is in trying to find evidence as if it REQUIRES one.....Sherlock Holmes does not need any evidence.....nor does Moses.

Who said anything about evidence for Moses?