BIBLE
Out of context: Reply #291
- Started
- Last post
- 302 Responses
- discipler0
kuz,
Again, you site only a portion of what the Encyclopedias state on these issues. Encyclopedias are not recognized as demonstrable authority on Biblical Archaeology. So, you're beginning with a faulty premise. You make the claim, "Their entire credibility is based upon the wider academic community." Please name those involved in this community. And furthermore, please list for everyone the comprehensive treatments that the Encyclopedias actually give on these issues. Kuz, just as there is a community of Minimalists, there is a vast community of Traditionalists - from which the science of Biblical Archaeology originated. And no, the minimalist's presupposition about the Bible record being myth stems from a postmodern prejuidice against the supernatural. They begin with this premise. I say there is a frightful lack of objectivity. Look at the evidence! My sources do not stem from "Christian websites" but from Biblical Archaeological reviews, communities, scholars and Professors of History, like Dr. Paul Maier, to name just one. Rohl is someone I just recently became acquainted with actually. To say that my sources are contrived... well, the burden of proof lies with you. It seems that there are people in all camps with an agenda and who begin with certain presuppositions.
And now let's talk about the shoddy methodology of said minimalists...