BIBLE
Out of context: Reply #285
- Started
- Last post
- 302 Responses
- ********0
OK, next you list the archaeological discoveries that correlate with certain elements of the Bible. No one is disputing that fact, that Ur existed (see my John Grisham/Robin Hood analogy). However I’ll be fucked if I’m gonna pay for that Britannia and Encarta article again just to counter your annoying belligerence. So I’ll re-quote some of the Wikipedia stuff (which none of what you pasted contradicts – except that it uses a very excitable tone).
Let me first quote something from Britannica that I quote earlier in this thread:
“Archaeology tells us about historical eras and kingdoms, ways of life and commerce, beliefs and societal structures; however only in extremely rare cases does archaeological research provide information on individual families. Thus, archaeology was not expected to, and indeed has not, provided any evidence to confirm or deny the existence of the Biblical patriarchs.”
And then....
“The Patriarchs are Abraham, his son Isaac and his grandson Jacob. The Biblical narratives about them are generally held to be myths, that is stories which may have a basis in fact but are not themselves historical. (The King Arthur myth is a good example — there is a kernel of historical truth there, though finding it is difficult and requires much archaeological detective work. Several Biblical passages narrate realistic and detailed cultural traits of the 2nd millenium BCE, as corroborated by archeology, fueling the debate.) No archeological evidence supporting the person of the Patriarchs was found, nor was it likely to expect archeological proof for the existence of a single household in the 18th century BCE.”
“The historicity of the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt is a matter of some speculation. Looking for hints in the extensive Egyptian records, some scholars identify the Israelites with the Hyksos, Asian tribes that inhabited Egypt in the 17-16 centuries BCE. Others suggested the Apir which are reminded occasionally between the 15th and 11th centuries BCE. The earliest known reference to "Israel" (c 1200BCE), is the "Victory Stele" (or "Merneptah Stele", refered to erroneously as the "Israel Stele") of the Egyptian pharaoh Merneptah, in which among other victories it is recorded that "Israel is laid waste; his seed is not". Egypt continued to rule the area until the 10th century BCE. Some researchers have speculated that the stories of Exodus simply reflect the liberation of Israel from the Egyptian yoke in the land of Israel as presented in the Merneptah Stele, although the validity of the Stele's claims of victory is questionable. Supporting the idea, however, that Israel began as roving nomads as suggested in Exodus is Donald Redford, whose research indicates of a band of roving people- the Shasu- included among their number a Yahwistic group, providing a potential origin for the nation of Israel.
The number of Israelites stated in the Bible, 600,000, cannot be taken at face value, as this number is thought to exceed the total Egyptian population at the time. (The record shows significant periodic movements by Asiatic populations in and out of Egypt, in particular retreating to the fertile Egyptian delta in times of drought.) Researchers however differ widely in their opinion on the true number, and indeed if the event ever took place”“The historicity of the book of Joshua was strongly suspected, as archeological research found no evidence of a massive population increase in Canaan during the traditionally calculated time dates. At this time the land had a population of between 50,000 and 100,000. Kathleen Kenyon excavated in Jericho from 1952-1958, using improved methods of stratigraphy, and found many details which would seem to conform to the Biblical account of the conquest of Jericho, but she determined that the siege took place 150 years too early for it to have been the city Joshua's army destroyed. She dated the city by the absence of a type of imported pottery common to the era around 1400 B.C. She concluded, as had Sellin and Watzinger before her that the Biblical account of the conquest of Jericho was untenable if the traditional dates were upheld. Jericho and other settlements do show signs of violent disruption (an event common on the other hand throughout early history in the area), but, so far, archeology does not suggest that the Kingdom of Israel was formed by a violent struggle, nor does archeology show the Israelite Kingdom as having existed before at the very latest 853 BC.”
It seems to me your “stunning” archaeological discoveries are not as exciting and convincing are you make them out to be. And all of this was in my own words save the stuff I clearly put in quotation marks. So stick that in your Bible and burn it.