Bible Archeology
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-03-2017, 09:48 AM
RE: Bible Archeology
(16-01-2017 07:51 AM)sneroul the thinker Wrote:  I came across quite a phew christians who said that there are lots of archeological evidence that the events happened. Now i try to be skeptical when i read these things so wish to ask you what events really happened. for example i heard the battle of jericho happened like it was told in the bible. Now I wish to know if you have Archeological evidence for or against the bibles tales wise.

The hand-wringers who moan about fake news overlook the fact that for years the world's been knee-deep in deliberate and widespread attempts to misinterpret the evidence and mislead the gullible. Generations back, it was séances and automatic writing connecting us to the inhabitants [Aunt Ethel and the twins] of the next world. Then there were fairies at the bottom of Conan Doyle's garden. In the middle of the twentieth century we first encountered Foo Fighters and the Church of Roswell. Half of the population has an IQ which is below average. In a huge proportion of cases, that would in fact be 'well below' average.

Christian apologists, to the same degree as Mr and Mrs Trump and the rest of the racist scum in their birther movement, are free to put forward any theories they like about resurrections and 'the Exodus'. They'll just never get any of them taken seriously by professional archaeologists and anyone whose attended a Grade Six - or better - science lesson.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Gert Heide's post
15-03-2017, 09:58 PM (This post was last modified: 15-03-2017 10:05 PM by Cheerful Charlie.)
RE: Bible Archeology
An old list of quotes I assembled some years ago.

The Rise of Ancient Israel
A Symposium held at the Smithsonian Institution, october 26, 1991
Edited by Hershel Shanks
Biblical Archeology Society 1992
ISBN 1-880317-07-9

Hershel Shanks Page 5

"Well, archeology is no longer a crutch in the classic sense
of the conquest model. We simmply cannot posit a series
of destructions in Canaan that can rationally be identified
as the result of the Israelite conquest. Recently, our
archeological methodology has improved, we can date levels
much more securely, and more sites have been excavated. As a
result, we can longer say that archeology supports what we may
call the conquest model of Israel's emergence in Canaan."

Page 22.

"The purpose of the biblical account is not what we bow regard
as history. The purpose of the biblical account is to explain
god's acts in relationship to man on this earth. It really
isn't concerned with detailed accuracy. That is not its purpose.
....
Most biblical scholars do not accept the bible as literally true.
So what you have to do, is treat it almost like an archeological
tell, and excavate it as it were, and analyze it to see whether
what it says is historically true in the details, whether we
would accept it as historically accurate by modern historians'
standards."


William G. Dever
Page 28
"The word "history" does not even occur in the Hebrew bible.
The bible is not history and does not pretend to be. It is
literature, and a peculiar kind of *theological* literature
at that. It is a reconstruction of the past after the past was
essentially over, written, edited, and put together in
its present form, long after the collapse of of both the
Northern kingdon (Israel) and the Southern kingdom (Judah).
It therefore refracts as well as reflects the past.
The bible is a kind of revisionist history."

Page 29
"The conquest model is not subscribed to by most biblical
scholars today - certainly no one in the mainstream of scholarship -
and that's been true for some time. Moreover, there isn't a
single reputable professional archeologist who espouses the
conquest model in Israel, Europe or America. We don't need
to say any more about the conquest model. That's that.
(laughter) Not to be dogmatic about it or anything, but ...
(laughter)."

Page 84
"The literal biblical story of an Exodus from Egypt, and
a subsequent pan-Israelite conquest of Canaan can no longer
be salvaged, for all the wishful thinking in the world."


From Nomadism to Monarchy - Archeological & Historical Aspects
of Early Israel
Edited by Israel Finkelstein and Nadav Na'aman
Biblical Archeology Society 1994
ISBN 1-880317-20-6

The Conquest of Canaan - Nadav Na'aman

Page 249
"It is commonly accepted that the majority of conquest stories
in the book of Joshua are devoid of reality."

Page 250
"The entire concept of an invasion and conquest of
the highlands in the thirteenth-twelth centuries is
alien to historical reality. The Iron Age I settlement
process in the hill country is hardly illuminated by
the biblical conquest tradition."

"Or take the Patriarchal narratives. After a century of
exhaustive investigations, all respectable archaeologists
have given up hope of recovering any context that would
make Abraham, Isaac or Joseph credible "historical
figures". Virtually the last word was written by me
more than twenty years ago for a basic handbook of
biblical studies, "Israelite and Judean" history.1
And as we have seen, archaeological investigation of
Moses and the Exodus has similarly been discarded as
a fruitless pursuit. Indeed, the overwhelming archaeological
evidence today of largely indigenous origins for early
Israel leaves no room for an exodus from Egypt or a 40-year
pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness."

William G. Dever "What Did the Biblical Writers Know &
When Did They Know It? - What Archaeology Can Tell Us
About the Reality of Ancient Israel"
2001 - William B. Eerdmans Publishing ISBN D-8028-4794-3

1
"The Patriarchal Traditions" in "Israelite and Judean
History", Ed. John H. Hayes and J. Maxwell Miller
Philadelphi: Westminister 1977


Check out Donald B. Redford's Egypt, Canaan and Israel during Ancient
Times, Princeton University Press.

"In fact, the Biblical writers are wholy and blissfully unaware of the
colossal discrepency to which their "history" and their "chronology
have given rise."
- Donald B. Redford


Donal B. Redford in "Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times has this to
say:

"[T]here are virtually no references to Israel, its congeneres, or Biblical
associates prior to the 1200 century B.C.; and beyond that point for four
centuries a mere half dozen allusions can be elicited."

The dearth of citations is also paralleled on the Biblical side by a similar
absence of any specific reference betraying a knowledge of Egypt or the
Levant during the second millenium B.C. There is no mention of an Egyptian
empire encompassing the eastern Mediterranean, no marching Egyptian armies
bent on punitive campaigns, no countermarching Hittite forces, no resident
governors, and no Egyptianized kinglets ruling Canaanite cities. On the
latest and most disastrous migration of the second millenium, that of the
Sea Peoples, the Hexateuch knows nothing: Genesis and Exodus find the
Philistines already settled in the land at the time of Abraham. There are
many errors and omissions, so that we cannot help to conclude that Biblical
writers of the seventh to sixth centuries B.C. lacked precise knowledge of
Egypt as recent as a few generations before their own time."

Redford then details the many tricks employed to fit the historical evidence
to the scriptures -- fascinating reading. He adds:

"Such manhandling of the evidence smacks or prestidigitation and numerology;
yet it has produced a shaky foundation on which a lamentable number of
'histories' of Israel have been written.

[...] If we examine what evidence we have for the Israelite appearance and
settlement in Canaan, we shall find that it falls in three disparate and
unequal bodies of material. In the first place we have the historical
traditions preserved in parts of Numbers, Joshua, and Judges, which far
outweighs in sheer volume the other two; second, the extra-Biblical textual
evidence; and finally, the archeological data of excavation.

[...] But even a cursory reading of this account [in Numbers, Joshua, and
Judges] is bound to excite suspicion. Cities with massive fortifications
fall easily to rustic nomads fresh off the desert a feat Pharaoh's armies
had great difficulty in accomplishing. [...] A detailed comparison of
this version of the Hebrew takeover of Palestine with the extra-Biblical
evidence totally discredits the former. Not only there is a complete
absence, as we have seen [in the previous chapters], in the records of the
Egyptian empire of any mention or allusion to such a whirlwind of
annihilation, but also Egyptian control of Canaan and the very cities Joshus
is supposed to have taken scarcely wavered during the entire period of the
Late Bronze Age. Far more damaging, however, than this argument from
silence is the archeological record.

[...] No one can prove or disprove that the federation 'Israel' originated
on Palestinian soil. No one can prove that the major component of that
federation had always existed on Palestinian soil. All that is know for
certain is that, some time during the fourth quarter of the thirteenth
century B.C., Egypt knew of a group, or political entity, called 'Israel'
and occupying part of Canaan; but whether the group had recently arrived or
taken shape is not stated in our sources."

When I shake my ignore file, I can hear them buzzing!

Cheerful Charlie
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Cheerful Charlie's post
17-03-2017, 02:06 PM
RE: Bible Archeology
Actually, what the Merneptah stele says reads "Ysirir." No one really knows what Ysirir actually means in Egyptian as the word appears no where else in the entire corpus of Egyptian literature to give it a context.

The equivalency between Ysirir and Israel was started by Flinders-Petrie who found the stele and thought it sounded like Israel. That's a silly game to play. As Redford points out in his book, one of the Egyptian names for Canaan was "The Land Beyond the Sand."

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: