Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible.

[Piggy]

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.

No need to shout, I'm not blind.

Even if that were true -- fable is a pretty weak genre in the Bible, actually -- it's still simply off-topic if the issue is "what do we have any substantiation for?"

 

[Piggy]

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.

Well sure you can use Sherlock Holmes to improve your understanding of history.

Sherlock Holmes books are just artifacts, like shoes or pottery or boats or garbage heaps, whatever you got.

And like all artifacts, they have something to contribute to our knowledge of the past.

Where were these printed? Who printed them? Why? What were they printed on? Who read them? To what extent are the descriptions of the times accurate, and if they're highly accurate, can they fill in any holes in our current understanding of the place with possible answers, especially any that we can look for other types of evidence for?

The Bible has a whole bunch of genres included in it, from religious visions (which do help us learn things about the history of the real world) to different types of law, folk tales, love poetry, building specs, genealogies, epic poetry, origin myths, and on and on.

Some of it is pasted together from much older material, so it has redactors instead of authors. Some of it is forged for political purposes (e.g. Deuteronomy). Some of it has a single author.

And of course, it's all written from these folks' ancient, highly religious, distinctly Jewish (and later Christian) point of view. A point of view which, btw, also tells us something about the real world.

So if you look at the layers of, say, commandment myths (there are several, spanning the nomadic to the priestly period), the war legends, the development of the law, sure, you learn something. You can learn a lot, in fact.

Triangulate it with other ways of investigating the Ancient Near East and its peoples, and you can learn a great deal.

For people 2,000 years from now, copies of Sherlock Holmes might be quite interesting and informative. You never know.

 

[Piggy]

Oh, by the way, the exile in Babylon is supported by research into Mesopotamian language, art, and culture, compared with Hebrew language, art, and culture. In fact, the loanwords, new ideas, and iconography can help us date Biblical material.

In fact, that's one of the reasons we know Deuteronomy is a forgery.

 

[Piggy]

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"

Well, now you're insulting some very bright and hard-working people.

Sure, there are the cranks who go around trying to find Noah's Ark or the bones of the Nephilim or naturalistic explanations for miracles. But every field has cranks.

On the other hand, there are people who devote years of their lives to piecing together old manuscripts, comparing the formation of letters, studying writing materials, digging things up from the desert or traveling to tiny remote churches, just so we get a better picture of the people who did the writing.

In order to evaluating the writing -- all aspects of it, right down to what the heck it is, not just "what's historically accurate and what's a myth?" -- the textual critics have to talk with the archaeologists, the anthropologists, and so forth.

The genuine field of study is done just like any other.

 

[Robrob]

I'm not sure why it matters if the Bible contains verifiable historical events or not? It could be 100% historically accurate and still be full of mythological magical miracles. Or, it could be 100% non-historical and be full of mythological magical miracles.

Either way, it's full of mythological magical miracles.

You either believe in magic or you don't.

 

[Brainache]

I'm not sure why it matters if the Bible contains verifiable historical events or not? It could be 100% historically accurate and still be full of mythological magical miracles. Or, it could be 100% non-historical and be full of mythological magical miracles.

Either way, it's full of mythological magical miracles.

You either believe in magic or you don't.

(my bold)
So is Homer, and The Mahabarata and the Icelandic Sagas etc etc etc ... people don't study these things to worship the old gods (some do I suppose, but it's not compulsory), but there is still, as Piggy pointed out, a lot to learn by studying these things.

 

[Piggy]

I'm not sure why it matters if the Bible contains verifiable historical events or not? It could be 100% historically accurate and still be full of mythological magical miracles. Or, it could be 100% non-historical and be full of mythological magical miracles.

Either way, it's full of mythological magical miracles.

You either believe in magic or you don't.

As Brainache points out, believing in magic has nothing to do with the legitimate study of any ancient text.

The historical study of literary artifacts helps us study ancient peoples and their times... which often helps us to better understand ourselves and our times.

ETA: Understanding the various genres is critical to that study, and confirming points of historical accuracy and inaccuracy is important to the larger field of inquiry of which textual study is a part.

ETA2: Even the errors teach us something, btw. Researchers don't simply discard and ignore them.

 

[Leumas]

Well sure you can use Sherlock Holmes to improve your understanding of history.

Sherlock Holmes books are just artifacts, like shoes or pottery or boats or garbage heaps, whatever you got.

And like all artifacts, they have something to contribute to our knowledge of the past.

Where were these printed? Who printed them? Why? What were they printed on? Who read them? To what extent are the descriptions of the times accurate, and if they're highly accurate, can they fill in any holes in our current understanding of the place with possible answers, especially any that we can look for other types of evidence for?

The Bible has a whole bunch of genres included in it, from religious visions (which do help us learn things about the history of the real world) to different types of law, folk tales, love poetry, building specs, genealogies, epic poetry, origin myths, and on and on.

Some of it is pasted together from much older material, so it has redactors instead of authors. Some of it is forged for political purposes (e.g. Deuteronomy). Some of it has a single author.

And of course, it's all written from these folks' ancient, highly religious, distinctly Jewish (and later Christian) point of view. A point of view which, btw, also tells us something about the real world.

So if you look at the layers of, say, commandment myths (there are several, spanning the nomadic to the priestly period), the war legends, the development of the law, sure, you learn something. You can learn a lot, in fact.

Triangulate it with other ways of investigating the Ancient Near East and its peoples, and you can learn a great deal.

For people 2,000 years from now, copies of Sherlock Holmes might be quite interesting and informative. You never know.

Ok..... I stand corrected.... I agree with you....as long as it is studied from an anthropological point of view and as an artifact...then OK.

My problem though is that due to the nature of this artifact it seems people are willing to accept any GLIMER of truth in it as PROOF that it was a Historical reality.

For instance take the Iliad. Schliemann used it and gleaned where he thought Troy was. He dug and found something. Of course it was not Troy and in fact it was many "Troys" on top of each other.

He found a few trinkets but then went ahead and planted more jewelry and claimed that he excavated them to make his claim a lot more spectacular and convincing.

This kind of shenanigans are exactly was being done by some Biblical "Archaeologists" since 1850.

Now ask any fundamentalist about this and they would say that all it proves is that the Iliad was a fable based on some mundane facts.

But when they hear of some city name being verified as a real city they start jumping up and down that this proves the Bible was the word of God.

Therein lies the problem. In addition there is a CADRE of people with major funding behind them trying to PROVE the Bible using Archaeology.


It is like someone going to London trying to PROVE that Sherlock Holmes existed and using his Chronicles as a guide to find proofs for its veracity.

Oh, by the way, the exile in Babylon is supported by research into Mesopotamian language, art, and culture, compared with Hebrew language, art, and culture. In fact, the loanwords, new ideas, and iconography can help us date Biblical material.

In fact, that's one of the reasons we know Deuteronomy is a forgery.

OK.... I agree.


"The 'scandal of philosophy' is not that a proof for the existence of the world has yet to be given, but that such proofs are expected and attempted again and again." – Martin Heidegge

Well, now you're insulting some very bright and hard-working people.

Sure, there are the cranks who go around trying to find Noah's Ark or the bones of the Nephilim or naturalistic explanations for miracles. But every field has cranks.

On the other hand, there are people who devote years of their lives to piecing together old manuscripts, comparing the formation of letters, studying writing materials, digging things up from the desert or traveling to tiny remote churches, just so we get a better picture of the people who did the writing.

In order to evaluating the writing -- all aspects of it, right down to what the heck it is, not just "what's historically accurate and what's a myth?" -- the textual critics have to talk with the archaeologists, the anthropologists, and so forth.

The genuine field of study is done just like any other.

Any Archeologists who do real archaeology but just happens to be in Israel.... are not Biblical Archaeologists...they are Ligitimit Archaeologists.

Bilbical Archaeologists are the kinds of Hershel Shanks who bend over backwards to accept even forgeries and they want to interpret anything in terms of the Bible.

Like the comic I posted above....they read the Bible and then interpret anything they find in terms of the Bible.....just like the video posted a few posts ago by Gawdzilla....the Gates are Solomon's gates....despite the fact that they are the wrong time.

(my bold)
So is Homer, and The Mahabarata and the Icelandic Sagas etc etc etc ... people don't study these things to worship the old gods (some do I suppose, but it's not compulsory), but there is still, as Piggy pointed out, a lot to learn by studying these things.

I agree.....I was wrong.....but so long as it is made very clear that those facts that HAPPEN to coincide with the Bible are not in any way proof that the Bible is a history anymore than Sherlock Holmes was history.

 

[edge]

Well, now you're insulting some very bright and hard-working people.

Sure, there are the cranks who go around trying to find Noah's Ark or the bones of the Nephilim or naturalistic explanations for miracles. But every field has cranks.

On the other hand, there are people who devote years of their lives to piecing together old manuscripts, comparing the formation of letters, studying writing materials, digging things up from the desert or traveling to tiny remote churches, just so we get a better picture of the people who did the writing.

In order to evaluating the writing -- all aspects of it, right down to what the heck it is, not just "what's historically accurate and what's a myth?" -- the textual critics have to talk with the archaeologists, the anthropologists, and so forth.

The genuine field of study is done just like any other.

Piggy look at this have you heard of this being there?
I know that one of these or both, you might look at and say...Crank.


After leaving Egypt and crossing the Red Sea, the Israelites arrived at the foot of the holy mountain and gathered there in anticipation of the words of God.


Saudi Arabia

This is from a private personal investigation/vacation.



From Ron Wyatt I Know he is one of your favorites.
Look at 18:42

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/mt__sinai_found.htm


Where they claim Sinai is, on the Sinai Peninsula there isn’t any archeological evidence to prove it is the place where Moses received the Ten Commandments. If it was supposed to be the
Reed Sea wouldn’t you think they would have been clear on that?

 

[Hokulele]

Ron Wyatt was a fruitcake.

 

[Leumas]

Piggy look at this have you heard of this being there?
I know that one of these or both, you might look at and say...Crank.


After leaving Egypt and crossing the Red Sea, the Israelites arrived at the foot of the holy mountain and gathered there in anticipation of the words of God.


Saudi Arabia

This is from a private personal investigation/vacation.

From Ron Wyatt I Know he is one of your favorites.
Look at 18:42

http://www.arkdiscovery.com/mt__sinai_found.htm


Where they claim Sinai is, on the Sinai Peninsula there isn’t any archeological evidence to prove it is the place where Moses received the Ten Commandments. If it was supposed to be the
Reed Sea wouldn’t you think they would have been clear on that?

Good Edge.... Good Edge.....let's keep this up..... if this idea takes hold maybe we can "convince" the United Nations to give Saudi Arabia to Israel (or at least part of it).....now there is a bit of land that is worth all the hassle of fighting over it.....not because of the Honey and Milk.....there ain't much of that.....but there are oodles of BLACK GOLD.....now that darned liquid is worth fighting over....no?

So can we start digging up more "PROOF" so as to LEGITIMIZE taking over the place as Eretz Israel Part II.

That's a piece of Land I can wrap my head around the idea that YHWH would promise to Israel.....at least it is worth all the massacring and genocide aided and abetted by him.

I read this book that PROVES that it is all correct and facts.....just read the book and you will see^*:

The Alexandria Link​

^*But seriously the book is a fun fiction based on the above CT just as much as The Davinci Code was.

 

[I Ratant]

The more direct route to and from Egypt and the Holy Land follows the shore of the Mediterranean Sea... Joseph traveled that route after being sold.
Most commerce traveled that route, as did military expeditions.
Why wander for 40 years in a desert when the shortest route might be only 2 weeks of foot travel?
This of course presumes there actually was an Exodus and all the gim-crackery that goes along with it.

 

[edge]

.

Good Edge.... Good Edge.....let's keep this up..... if this idea takes hold maybe we can "convince" the United Nations to give Saudi Arabia to Israel (or at least part of it).....now there is a bit of land that is worth all the hassle of fighting over it.....not because of the Honey and Milk.....there ain't much of that.....but there are oodles of BLACK GOLD.....now that darned liquid is worth fighting over....no?

So can we start digging up more "PROOF" so as to LEGITIMIZE taking over the place as Eretz Israel Part II.

That's a piece of Land I can wrap my head around the idea that YHWH would promise to Israel.....at least it is worth all the massacring and genocide aided and abetted by him.

I read this book that PROVES that it is all correct and facts.....just read the book and you will see^*:

The Alexandria Link​

^*But seriously the book is a fun fiction based on the above CT just as much as The Davinci Code was.

All I know is that it would be interesting to know for sure, but then, you are insinuating something that never entered my mind?
What ever I’m waiting on Peggy’s input

Hokulele said, " Ron Wyatt was a fruitcake".
Maybe so?
What if he's not in this case, after all this could be disproved in a matter of days with the right team that is honest.
They won't let outsiders look and examine the site?
I mean really what’s the big deal?
People are funny.

 

[edge]

The more direct route to and from Egypt and the Holy Land follows the shore of the Mediterranean Sea... Joseph traveled that route after being sold.
Most commerce traveled that route, as did military expeditions.
Why wander for 40 years in a desert when the shortest route might be only 2 weeks of foot travel?
This of course presumes there actually was an Exodus and all the gim-crackery that goes along with it.

I got a feeling that wander isn't the correct view.
If you goggle and use maps it is now as then livable and the area can grow crops as they are even today in that area.
You just need water and fertilizer.
I would think a better word would have been explored.
I had a typo above I meant Piggy not Peggy.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Is there any evidence from other reliable/believable sources that validates the concept of a deity as put forward in the Holy Bible?"

No.

 

[I Ratant]

I got a feeling that wander isn't the correct view.
If you goggle and use maps it is now as then livable and the area can grow crops as they are even today in that area.
You just need water and fertilizer.
I would think a better word would have been explored.
I had a typo above I meant Piggy not Peggy.

.
Quite true.
It is said the Hebrews remained in one location in Sinai for 38 years or so.
This extensive community of 1,000,000 people would leave, among other things, a cemetery with 1,000,000 people in it, given the life expectancies of the times.
Where is it?

 

[MG1962]

.
Quite true.
It is said the Hebrews remained in one location in Sinai for 38 years or so.
This extensive community of 1,000,000 people would leave, among other things, a cemetery with 1,000,000 people in it, given the life expectancies of the times.
Where is it?

Depending on the funerary rites of the times, lack of a cemetery is far from conclusive, however the total lack of any midden in the area pretty much disproves any even temporary settlements.

 

[Resume]

I got a feeling that wander isn't the correct view.
If you goggle and use maps it is now as then livable and the area can grow crops as they are even today in that area.
You just need water and fertilizer.
I would think a better word would have been explored.
I had a typo above I meant Piggy not Peggy.

I would like to hear from Peggy on this issue.

 

[edge]

I would like to hear from Peggy on this issue.

I think you need a certian phone service to get through to Peggy, she's in Russia somewhere. LOL

 

[edge]

Depending on the funerary rites of the times, lack of a cemetery is far from conclusive, however the total lack of any midden in the area pretty much disproves any even temporary settlements.

Exactly and this is what those people and their web sites/links are trying to tell us also.