anevilpetingzoo

I have been doing some studying on the side and was wondering where do I begin my search for places where archeology has shown the bible to be in error... are there any such places anything akin to a smoking gun? Where should I begin?

Sarpedon

Try the destruction of Tyre. The bible (Isaiah I believe) predicted that it would be destroyed by Nebucchanedzar, and never be inhabited again.

Today its a thriving city in Lebanon, and you occasionally hear about it on the news, like when the Israelis drop a bomb on it.

EarlOfLade

The walls of Jerico (no walls found)

Toto

The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts (or via: amazon.co.uk)

Diogenes the Cynic

Read the book linked by Toto.

Some highlights: The archaeological evidence shows that the distinct cultural group known as "Israelites" emerged from indigenous Canaanite tribes within Canaan rather than migrating in with "Abraham." They were never enslaved in Egypt, never escaped, never wandered in the Sinai Peninsula and never conquered Canaan. Jericho was already a ruin by the alleged time of Joshua and it had no walls.

There was also no unified kingdom of Israel under David and Solomon. David and Solomon may or may not have existed but if they did exist, they were minor local chieftains rather than kings with large territories and wealth.

mountainman

Begin in the fourth century, at which time the OT and the NT
were first bound together. Understand that the the OT is the
traditional Judaic (BCE) writings transcribed to Greek, but that the
NT is a fiction of men composed by wickedness in the 4th CE.

See this thread:
http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=168491
archeological evidence for pre-Nicaean christianity?

There is no archeological evidence for the inference that there
existed anything christian in the pre-Nicaean Epoch, apart
from the following disputed exceptions:

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/article_070.htm



Pete Brown

Jayrok

I read this book this spring and found it fascinating. Why doesn't it get any publicity among scholarship? It seems that christians simply wave it off as complete folly. Other than places like this, I've never heard it talked about... at all.

It would seem something like this would be more controversial. Instead, people get all up in arms about something silly like the Davinci Code. Apologists should be worried about books like this instead of fiction novels.

Maybe Finkelstein and Silberman should make it a documentary on film.. The Daily Show or something else might air an interview plugging it. Just wondering.

Dean Anderson

That's simple - they wave it off because they fundamentally disagree with it.

I've often been told by Fundies that William Dever has "thoroughly debunked" the book - but I've never read Dever's work, so I can't judge that. The people who tell me this can never summarise Dever's arguments for me - so I assume that they haven't read either author, but are just repeating what they have been told.

I've seen Finkelstein on a Channel 4 (British TV) documentary - but then British TV is rather different from American TV when it comes to this sort of subject...

cognac

I doubt fundies have read Dever. I've skimmed Dever -- it's easy enough to do so using the Amazon reader (at least it used to be) -- and no fundie would ever agree with what I read. The books of Genesis and Exodus are not history. No Exodus from Egypt. No conquest. He has a theory about "vague memories," but fundies I know would choke on that more so that DaVinci code.

Jayrok

Interview with Finkelstein:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/S...ID=0&listSrc=Y

I wish they'd televise a documentary on this book on Discovery or something in the states.