• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Archeology and the bible???

smalltlalk_2k

Student
S
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
36
A while back I saw a show on some station about the Ark of the Covenant and how it has been found in ethiopia. It was being held by some natives in a building, the only thing was that their high priest was the only one that is allowed in the building. (very convenient). So i did some searching on archealogical proof of biblical statements. I've found a few websites that are interesting reads for skeptics and religious people.

BiblePlus
BiblePlus amaZING discoveries it seems they have actually found chariots from the pharoah's drowned army that chased the isrealites. hmm... They found Sodom and Gomorrah?? Seems like the big find of Troy. Just a ruined city that seems to be in the right place. But I don't think they've found a sign that says this is Troy, or sodom or gomorrah. They have found the Ark of the Covenant also, but alas the Isreali government has locked it up tight so noone can see. Those cursed governments!!


Of course there is alot of stuff you can order also, that further explains these factual discoveries.
 
I thought the Troy discovery was generally accepted as genuine and was not based on the Bible so much as the writings of Homer?
 
Here's the problem with saying, "we found the site of Troy, or Sodom & Gomorrah:" Since we don't know if those were ever real places or not, how can we say that the ruined city we found is or isn't it? I'm not doubting necessarily that there was a city in Ionia where the Aecheans fought some big battle. Probably more than one similar occurence. Nor is it implausible that some desert cities near the Dead Sea got showers of flaming sulfur balls (brimstone) set off by an earthquake. But that information comes to us through so many layers of oral tradition before it was recorded in writing, that we're probably in the zone of 'half right, half not' in the sense that these legends are composites of real events and fantasies anyway.
 
Here's a complete list of all the archaeological findings supporting the Mormon claims of a Christian society in pre-Columbian North America:
 
arcticpenguin said:
Here's a complete list of all the archaeological findings supporting the Mormon claims of a Christian society in pre-Columbian North America:
Click to expand...

In a discussion on Mormons here is what Bernie, an archeologist friend, had to say:

You mention the lack of archeological support for their notions. Of course.

However, there is a curious twist to this. Due to their belief that Jesus preached in the New World, and that American Indians are descended from the Lost Ten Tribes and all, the Brigham Young University long ago developed quite a modern and progressive archeological department to do research and field archeology in North American studies. (I am speaking now of back to the '50's).

Back when I was much more active in archeological affairs, I used to see their published field work and read their reports some, etc. I have to tell you that as far as field technique and adherence to standards, their work was exemplary! Their digs were crisp and well-done. The subsequent reports models of organization, illustration, etc. The only glitch would always come toward the end when one gets to the "Summary" or "Conclusion" of these otherwise scientific papers... here, of course, they would go wildly awry as to what they would infer or thought they had determined, etc.

It was sort of a commonplace among many of us to read (even anticipate!) the field reports of the Mormon workers - knowing that all you had to do was just skip their final, concluding remarks!

bernie
Click to expand...
 
As for Troy. To me it seems shaky. They found a city that had been destroyed that was in the approximate place that the city of Troy was supposed to be as descriped by Homer. That doesn't mean that it was Troy, just accepted as being Troy. I don't think(but i could be wrong) they ever found some kind of tablet or writing that said this is Troy. Something like a buried tax record or other thing. I just like proof, not accepted views. But on a side note. I hope it is Troy. I like it when things work out.
 
If you are interested in "real" biblical archeology I would reccommend the book "The Bible Unearthed" by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein. The general idea of the book is that virtually no evidence exists for anything in the Old Testament prior to 850 BC or so. After that a suprising amount (well, suprising to me) of non-Jewish inscriptions and whatnot exist that refer to various Jewish kings and battles that are reported in the bible. If I recall, the bible was also fairly consistent with the archeological evidence as far as dates go. The kings referenced in the inscriptions, according to the Old Testament, lived around the same time the inscriptions supposidly were made.
 
mort said:
If you are interested in "real" biblical archeology I would reccommend the book "The Bible Unearthed" by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein. The general idea of the book is that virtually no evidence exists for anything in the Old Testament prior to 850 BC or so. After that a suprising amount (well, suprising to me) of non-Jewish inscriptions and whatnot exist that refer to various Jewish kings and battles that are reported in the bible. If I recall, the bible was also fairly consistent with the archeological evidence as far as dates go. The kings referenced in the inscriptions, according to the Old Testament, lived around the same time the inscriptions supposidly were made.
Click to expand...
Of course the line between old legend from the oral tradition (later written down) and old legend from the written record of contemporaneous events (and then add in literary fiction) can be set at when the Hebrews picked up literacy from the Phonecians. All was compiled during the Babylonian exile.

Funny to note that in the time that Hebrews were supposed to have received the 10 commandments, they were an illiterate tribe. How then to read God's commandments? I know not.
 
The search for troy is a somewhat proselike discussion of the arcaeology of troy.

Why should there have to be a sign that says troy, it is where the story says that it should be. Stories can often contain some accuracy. And then there is the whole issue of provenance, what if this just happens to be the place where they make the signs for the cities, so heres one that says thesolonica, and another that say constantnople, and another that says instanbul.

What si questionable is if the battle of troy took place as related in the illiad. There are two levels of troy that look to be substantialy destroyed, schlieman probably didn't recognise the one he wanted.

But chariots on the bottom of the red sea, yeah right! Sounds like questionable science to me, do you know how much that would be worth? It would certainly be quite the discovery.

The problem with the bible and archaeology is this, they didn't find the Noah's ark, the ark of the covenant is not contempoary but a great story, there is a jericho, and a soddom and a gemorah, but as to wether the events alleged to take place there actualy did....

Remeber people, the ancients were no stupider than you, when they describe a city on a trade route or the good from there, this is economics and not fiction.

Other interesting thing,

It should be Jesus the Nazarene, not jesus of nazareth,

byblos the city from which we get the word bible was a city of sin

modern judaism is not ancient judaism, which is why the dead sea scrolls have remanied unpublished, they were not from the essenes and monthesits but from polytheists and saducees

Most of the hebrew laws were written at 500 bc , long after the time of Moshesh, who by the way was an egyptian, not a hebrew.
 
Dancing David said:

Most of the hebrew laws were written at 500 bc , long after the time of Moshesh, who by the way was an egyptian, not a hebrew.
Click to expand...
He's the one the mosh pit is named after.
 
smalltlalk_2k said:
As for Troy. To me it seems shaky. They found a city that had been destroyed that was in the approximate place that the city of Troy was supposed to be as descriped by Homer. That doesn't mean that it was Troy, just accepted as being Troy. I don't think(but i could be wrong) they ever found some kind of tablet or writing that said this is Troy. Something like a buried tax record or other thing. I just like proof, not accepted views. But on a side note. I hope it is Troy. I like it when things work out.
Click to expand...
Well, and as far as we know, Homer could based a fictional city he called "Troy" on this real city that they found, I suppose.
 
Dancing David said:
snip...

... what if this just happens to be the place where they make the signs for the cities, so heres one that says thesolonica, and another that say constantnople, and another that says instanbul.

... snip
Click to expand...
One for Constantinople and another for Istanbul? Well, you know what they say, all roads lead to ... um ... Rome?

"Istanbul" 1953

Words by Jimmy Kennedy
Music by Nat Simon

Lyrics:

Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Now it's Turkish delight on a moonlit night

Every gal in Constantinople
Lives in Istanbul, not Constantinople
So if you've a date in Constantinople
She'll be waiting in Istanbul

Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can't say
People just liked it better that way

So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

Istanbul (Istanbul)
Istanbul (Istanbul)

Even old New York was once New Amsterdam
Why they changed it I can't say
People just liked it better that way

Istanbul was Constantinople
Now it's Istanbul, not Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

So take me back to Constantinople
No, you can't go back to Constantinople
Been a long time gone, Constantinople
Why did Constantinople get the works
That's nobody's business but the Turks

Istanbul
Click to expand...
 
I read a Tom Clancy novel the other week, and it was set in this place called New York. Then I went east and actually found a city called New York! So everything that happened in the novel must be true!

HGC - Excelent TMBG reference.
 
smalltlalk_2k said:
A while back I saw a show on some station about the Ark of the Covenant and how it has been found in ethiopia. It was being held by some natives in a building, the only thing was that their high priest was the only one that is allowed in the building. (very convenient). So i did some searching on archealogical proof of biblical statements. I've found a few websites that are interesting reads for skeptics and religious people.

BiblePlus
BiblePlus amaZING discoveries it seems they have actually found chariots from the pharoah's drowned army that chased the isrealites. hmm... They found Sodom and Gomorrah?? Seems like the big find of Troy. Just a ruined city that seems to be in the right place. But I don't think they've found a sign that says this is Troy, or sodom or gomorrah. They have found the Ark of the Covenant also, but alas the Isreali government has locked it up tight so noone can see. Those cursed governments!!

Of course there is alot of stuff you can order also, that further explains these factual discoveries.
Click to expand...

Ron Wyatt (who died a few years ago) was a fraud and a charlatan.
http://www.tentmaker.org/WAR/
 
Alas, the most convincing proof for the Sodom and Gommorah story was ground up and sprinkled on lamb kebabs long ago.
 
mort said:
If you are interested in "real" biblical archeology I would reccommend the book "The Bible Unearthed" by Neil Asher Silberman and Israel Finkelstein.
Click to expand...

Agree. Great book
 
The whole story of Lot is a laughable exercise in bias tribal storytelling.

- the destruction of Sodom is a 'just so' tale about a big-ass burn spot where a city used to be on the edge of the Dead Sea

- Lot's wife turns into a pillar of salt. This is a 'just so' story to that has fun with the many salt pillars that can be found around the dead sea.

- Lot's daughters give birth to incestuous, bastard children:

19:30
And Lot went up out of Zoar, and dwelt in the mountain, and his two daughters with him; for he feared to dwell in Zoar: and he dwelt in a cave, he and his two daughters.

19:31
And the firstborn said unto the younger, Our father is old, and there is not a man in the earth to come in unto us after the manner of all the earth:

19:32
Come, let us make our father drink wine, and we will lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.

19:33
And they made their father drink wine that night: and the firstborn went in, and lay with her father; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.

19:34
And it came to pass on the morrow, that the firstborn said unto the younger, Behold, I lay yesternight with my father: let us make him drink wine this night also; and go thou in, and lie with him, that we may preserve seed of our father.

19:35
And they made their father drink wine that night also: and the younger arose, and lay with him; and he perceived not when she lay down, nor when she arose.

19:36
Thus were both the daughters of Lot with child by their father.

19:37
And the first born bare a son, and called his name Moab: the same is the father of the Moabites unto this day.

19:38
And the younger, she also bare a son, and called his name Benammi: the same is the father of the children of Ammon unto this day.

Moabites and Ammonites were the tribal enemies of the Israelites. So in the Israelite history there is an account of how their enemies came to be - by daughters getting their father drunk and playing 'hide the salami'. That's hi-larious!
 
babylon

I thought that they had found the actual Babylon. And that it was dated to be about 5000 years old. And that they had full scale reading and writing at that time (on clay tablets).

If this is not accurate please let me know.
 
Pharaoh's army found in the Red Sea

I was going to start a thread on this!!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=33168
The hub had the remains of eight spokes radiating outward and was examined by Nassif Mohammed Hassan, director of Antiquities in Cairo. Hassan declared it to be from the 18th Dynasty of ancient Egypt, explaining the eight-spoked wheel was used only during that dynasty around 1400 B.C.

Curiously, no one can account for the precise whereabouts of that eight-spoked wheel today, though Hassan is on videotape stating his conclusion regarding authenticity.
Click to expand...
There are other sites that talk about human bones, but so far no mention of a ship wreck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom