FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-15-2001, 10:39 AM   #1
Ion
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,817
Post Lack of Biblical fossils.

This is beating the same bush, it was mentioned before by an atheist, but for theists who are newcomers since then, it is worth to bring it up again as a way to knock them out:
theists complain evolution is lacking in fossils linking different stages of evolution; however, by the same standard, creationism has no fossils whatsoever to support the exorbitant ages of Biblical figures (Adam, Noah, Moses, etc.); so at least evolution has fossils with some missing links, but creationistm has none.

To repeat old news also (from two months ago), archaeologists disprove Exodus.
Ion is offline  
Old 07-15-2001, 03:37 PM   #2
sighhswolf
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Charlotte,NC USA
Posts: 379
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Ion:
<STRONG>This is beating the same bush, it was mentioned before by an atheist, but for theists who are newcomers since then, it is worth to bring it up again as a way to knock them out:
theists complain evolution is lacking in fossils linking different stages of evolution; however, by the same standard, creationism has no fossils whatsoever to support the exorbitant ages of Biblical figures (Adam, Noah, Moses, etc.); so at least evolution has fossils with some missing links, but creationistm has none.

To repeat old news also (from two months ago), archaeologists disprove Exodus.</STRONG>
Yea, its kinda of funny that in all of the digging around the middle east,
that nothing has been unearthed to place the Hebrews in the desert for 40 years.
Civilizations always leave traces behind,
in most all places inhabited by humans, they leave artifacts. Why then has there been no artifacts discovered that would place the hebrews in the desert wandering around lost for 40 years?
Wolf
sighhswolf is offline  
Old 07-15-2001, 04:45 PM   #3
Datheron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 553
Post

Quote:
Why then has there been no artifacts discovered that would place the hebrews in the desert wandering around lost for 40 years?
Wolf
Tsk, tsk. We all know that God sent down his Sphinxes to pick them...uh.... Nevermind.
Datheron is offline  
Old 07-16-2001, 06:40 PM   #4
Ion
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,817
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by sighhswolf:
<STRONG>

Why then has there been no artifacts discovered that would place the hebrews in the desert wandering around lost for 40 years?
Wolf</STRONG>
I agree sighhswolf, it is because as the Los Angeles Times, Friday April 13, 2001 writes in page A1, Column One regarding Exodus:
"After a century of excavations trying to prove the ancient accounts true, archaeologists say there is no conclusive evidence that the Israelites were ever in Egypt, were ever enslaved, ever wandered in the Sinai wilderness for 40 years or ever conquered the land of Canaan under Joshua's leadership. To the contrary, the prevailing view is that most of Joshua's fabled military campaigns never occured...".

Now, theists who are newcomers in the Forum since the topic of the veracity of the Exodus was brought-up here three months ago (Les Benton, etc.) or who are old-timers: there are similar scientific criterions to disprove the Genesis, the Biblical ages, Noah's Ark, the empty Jesus tomb's, 'miracles', etc. Theists, do you want to try them?
Ion is offline  
Old 07-16-2001, 08:20 PM   #5
critical thinking made ez
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX
Posts: 536
Post

Here is an even bigger Missing Fossil puzzle that most Christians don't think about.

If Noah's flood cause sea shells and other aquatic fossils to be found on Mountain tops (as they have been found and xians get plenty of mileage out of that fact), why don't we find ANY ground based animals included in those same strata? Now, land animals are found in the same date (strata time), but clustered in small areas completely separated from the aquatic finds, such as if they had died on Land!



[ July 16, 2001: Message edited by: critical thinking made ez ]
critical thinking made ez is offline  
Old 07-17-2001, 03:15 AM   #6
sighhswolf
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Charlotte,NC USA
Posts: 379
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Datheron:
<STRONG>

Tsk, tsk. We all know that God sent down his Sphinxes to pick them...uh.... Nevermind.</STRONG>
It's kinda like when Bush took over as president. My wife said the last time someone
listened to a Bush, they wandered around lost for 40 years.
sighhswolf is offline  
Old 07-17-2001, 04:59 PM   #7
E_muse
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: na
Posts: 329
Question

Quote:
Yea, its kinda of funny that in all of the digging around the middle east,
that nothing has been unearthed to place the Hebrews in the desert for 40 years.
Civilizations always leave traces behind,
in most all places inhabited by humans, they leave artifacts. Why then has there been no artifacts discovered that would place the hebrews in the desert wandering around lost for 40 years?
Wolf
True, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

It would be of more profit to hear specific examples of how archeology points away from the children of Israel being in the desert.

Anything else simply seems to be arguing from authority.
E_muse is offline  
Old 07-17-2001, 05:32 PM   #8
Metacrock
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Dallas, Texas, USA
Posts: 1,734
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by Ion:
<STRONG>This is beating the same bush, it was mentioned before by an atheist, but for theists who are newcomers since then, it is worth to bring it up again as a way to knock them out:
theists complain evolution is lacking in fossils linking different stages of evolution; however, by the same standard, creationism has no fossils whatsoever to support the exorbitant ages of Biblical figures (Adam, Noah, Moses, etc.); so at least evolution has fossils with some missing links, but creationistm has none.

To repeat old news also (from two months ago), archaeologists disprove Exodus.</STRONG>
You do realize of course, that one doesn't need to be a creationist to be a Christian don't you? In fact over 50% of Chrsitains accept evolution.
Metacrock is offline  
Old 07-17-2001, 08:33 PM   #9
Ion
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,817
Post

Quote:
Originally posted by E_muse:
<STRONG>

True, but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

It would be of more profit to hear specific examples of how archeology points away from the children of Israel being in the desert.

</STRONG>
The same article, summarizes the up-to-date knowledge on this topic as:
"Today, the prevailing theory is that Israel emerged peacefully out of Canaan -modern-day Lebanon, southern Syria, Jordan and the West Bank of Israel- whose people are portrayed in the Bible as wicked idolators. Under this theory, the Cannanites who took on a new identity as Israelites were perhaps joined or led by a small group of Semites from Egypt -explaining a possible source of the Exodus story, scholars say."
Ion is offline  
Old 07-17-2001, 09:00 PM   #10
Ion
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 2,817
Post

To Metacrock:

The evolutionary theory supports every branch of biological science. Biblical events classified today as 'miracles' (birth from a virgin, baby found in a basket adrift in the Egyptian Nile, raising from a tomb, 'healings', exorbitant Biblical ages, etc.) are in contradiction with the evolutionary's biological science.
Ion is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:13 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.