Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Duvduv · 05-20-2013, 12:38 PM

What does that have to do with the issue of archaeology proving or not proving the Exodus?

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

As I stated, this thread deals with archaeology. I was pointing out the fact that historians take so much for granted without the slightest SHRED OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL evidence, don't they? I am not discussing various types of corroborative DOCUMENTARY evidence. That's a different thread.
Please reread my last posting.

Why do you ignore that Israelites factually evolved from displaced Canaanites and a vast minority of other Semetic people who settled the highlands after 1200 BC?

outhouse · 05-20-2013, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

What does that have to do with the issue of archaeology proving or not proving the Exodus?

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Why do you ignore that Israelites factually evolved from displaced Canaanites and a vast minority of other Semetic people who settled the highlands after 1200 BC?

It factually proves the origins of Israelites were not from a mythical exodus as written.

It proves from 1200 BC to 1000 BC ALL evidence is from Canaanite origins and nothing from Egypt what so ever.

Archeologist have long given up the hunt trying to prove mythology is real in this case.

steve_bnk · 05-20-2013, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

The issue is not with the Exodus but with the limitations of the field of archaeology. A big difference........

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

'...I do not rely on archaeological evidence. And neither do those who reject the Exodus..'

As is continually said in the atheist-theist debates, the onus is on the claimant to make the case.

We on the thread judge Exodus false on a lack of archeological evidence and analysis that show how physically in terms of resources such as area, food, water, and waste it is hard to support the story..

Add to that given the mass of people, someone would have seen it and commented on all those people in the dessert. There we would have been contact with outsiders, even trade.

If you assert Exodus is true, then you must supply evidence for us obvious skeptics.

More hand waving.

Make your case for Exodus. If it is based on your faith I actually do not have a problem with that.

After going through all the usual arguments and attempts at proof the Christian theists tend to just say they have no proof, they know god exists, and they know the bible is true. Fine as personal faith.

Here us skeptics are debating evidence.

steve_bnk · 05-20-2013, 01:29 PM

If you want to debate Jewish origins these days you have to look at the genetic studies.

Using genetic markers to trace genetic history is now a validated science and that would be another thread.

outhouse · 05-20-2013, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

If you want to debate Jewish origins these days you have to look at the genetic studies.

Using genetic markers to trace genetic history is now a validated science and that would be another thread.

Nope

We don't have enough markers for individual people such as Canaanites.

We can read that they are from the levant and a few other details. In this case archeology has already factually proven their origins.

semiopen · 05-20-2013, 01:46 PM

Archaeology aside, the logistics of the 3 million people is too difficult. In addition to the logistics, it's just too many people to have come out of a late bronze age culture.

Christians have some advantage because they have some leeway to play with the numbers as discussed above. However, Haredi Jews don't have that advantage; they are stuck with the 600,000 men.

I don't know how this can be defended. Instead of what might have been a brilliant defense, we have to endure an absurd distracting attack on archaeology.

Toto · 05-20-2013, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

..

On the contrary, if an enormous amount of resources is required to satisfactorily demonstrate the specific existence of several million people in the desert, then the resources need to provide evidence for smaller cases should be less. So unless you believe archaeologists are too lazy or stupid to come up with any evidence for the cases I mentioned, then you have to wonder about what archaeology can demonstrate given existing resources and technology.

No, the point is that several million people in the desert should have left a lot of evidence that would not be hard to find. The smaller groups that you mention would probably not leave such identifiable evidence.

Future archaeologists will have little trouble excavating shopping malls, but you wouldn't expect them to find evidence of a network of Green Party or Tea Party activists who meet in public or in each others' homes.

steve_bnk · 05-20-2013, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve_bnk

If you want to debate Jewish origins these days you have to look at the genetic studies.

Using genetic markers to trace genetic history is now a validated science and that would be another thread.

Nope

We don't have enough markers for individual people such as Canaanites.

We can read that they are from the levant and a few other details. In this case archeology has already factually proven their origins.

I looked at a reference the other day. I'll see i i can find it.

There was a show on PBS hosted by the historian Gates.

He took prominent people, researched the records of ancestry, and compared to genetic testing. They can tell by parentage where they came from. For blacks specific tribes are not identified, but regions of Afrca are.

Duvduv · 05-20-2013, 02:46 PM

So then where is the same lots of evidence for all kinds of other cases, especially in permanent places of habitation even 3000 years ago??!! And how about a LITTLE less evidence for the cases I mentioned?! And how much evidence is enough to confirm a million people? What resources are needed for that?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

..

On the contrary, if an enormous amount of resources is required to satisfactorily demonstrate the specific existence of several million people in the desert, then the resources need to provide evidence for smaller cases should be less. So unless you believe archaeologists are too lazy or stupid to come up with any evidence for the cases I mentioned, then you have to wonder about what archaeology can demonstrate given existing resources and technology.

No, the point is that several million people in the desert should have left a lot of evidence that would not be hard to find. The smaller groups that you mention would probably not leave such identifiable evidence.

Future archaeologists will have little trouble excavating shopping malls, but you wouldn't expect them to find evidence of a network of Green Party or Tea Party activists who meet in public or in each others' homes.

Duvduv · 05-20-2013, 02:50 PM

We are talking archeology, not your suppositions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

Archaeology aside, the logistics of the 3 million people is too difficult. In addition to the logistics, it's just too many people to have come out of a late bronze age culture.

Christians have some advantage because they have some leeway to play with the numbers as discussed above. However, Haredi Jews don't have that advantage; they are stuck with the 600,000 men.

I don't know how this can be defended. Instead of what might have been a brilliant defense, we have to endure an absurd distracting attack on archaeology.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-20-2013, 01:29 PM	#94
steve_bnk Contributor Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Seattle Posts: 27,602	If you want to debate Jewish origins these days you have to look at the genetic studies. Using genetic markers to trace genetic history is now a validated science and that would be another thread.

05-20-2013, 01:46 PM	#96
semiopen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Hillsborough, NJ Posts: 3,551	Archaeology aside, the logistics of the 3 million people is too difficult. In addition to the logistics, it's just too many people to have come out of a late bronze age culture. Christians have some advantage because they have some leeway to play with the numbers as discussed above. However, Haredi Jews don't have that advantage; they are stuck with the 600,000 men. I don't know how this can be defended. Instead of what might have been a brilliant defense, we have to endure an absurd distracting attack on archaeology.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.