FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-09-2009, 11:40 PM   #91
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
Default

Quote:
Third, as has been argued by other archaeologists who specialized in this period, there are too many people represented in the village settlements to explain as all originating as highland nomads.

And which "archaeologists" might those be? Other "maximalists?" This is a circle jerk. They quote each other and ignore the artifacts that have been dug up since 1967.

Lets remember that it wasn't only Finkelstein and his students out doing surveys on the West Bank. In the aftermath of the 1967 war a whole generation of young Israeli archaeologists headed for the Sinai, too.

They found NOTHING at Kadesh Barnea, Arad, or Beersheba related to the Late Bronze Age. These were all Iron Age settlements and the bible-thumpers have every reason to try to pretend that this evidence does not exist.

There are numerous anachronisms in the OT for anyone who takes the blinders of faith off and looks at these tales honestly. Goliath has the correct accoutrements of a hoplite soldier...a form of warfare which developed in the 7th century BC...oddly, just when Finkelstein claims this stuff was written.
The Egyptian army of the Pharaoh Necho used Greek mercenary hoplites.
Minimalist is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 02:40 AM   #92
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
Default

.
Quote:
Originally Posted by renassault View Post
They didn't live in a camp, they took dumps in the desert somewhere and moved on quickly as the article says. We barely found one of Kublai Khan's ships from 1200 AD some few decades ago, let alone the virtually unsurvivable things the Jews would have left in the desert. Even if something could survive, there would be so little of it and it would be buried under 3 meters of sand (this is the depth at which the layer is considered 1600 BC in Mayan archaeology).
Haha you have obviously never been to a refugee camp. We have them now and you can conduct an experiment quite easily with a camp of 50,000 and how easy it is to simply walk out of the camp and relieve yourself and return. Or rather, it isn't. You have numerous problems with poisoning the groundwater, you have problems if it rains and uncovers your defecation, you have problems with how far out of a camp you'd have to go for 50,000 people to spread out (far too far for a people likely to be dealing with dysentry - roughly 2-3 miles), you have problems with how big or small the camp would have to be - too small and you get congestion and serious risk of infectious disease, too big and people at the centre will never be able to get to their toilet spots in time. Do you know how big a camp of 50,000 would have to be? Or 500,000? Or 2 million? SPHERE standards for humanitarian response recommend a safe distance in habitation of 45 square metres per person (not per household mind you). This assumes modern water and sanitation facilities we've only been able to construct in the last 50 years. They didn't have modern machinery to excavate defecation when it filled up common boreholes.

The question is: how many Isreaelites do you think there were in the desert? The picture in the Bible would not work for a camp of more than about 1,000 including women and children. Hardly the numbers you'd need to conquer the Levant 40 years later.
Celsus is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 02:53 AM   #93
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Quote:
(by the way, 153 is mentioned only once in the New Testament)
I am fascinated by this response, it deserves forensic examination. I never said anything about the number of times it is mentioned, 153 is of interest in itself as it is not a random number but is the equivalent of "quantum".

Now the author who put that in may or may not have known its significance, much as the woman on the clapham omnibus would know the word quantum but may not have Physics A level.

Which leads to a further question - was your non sequiteur deliberate or what does it show?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:26 PM   #94
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles, US
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celsus View Post
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by renassault View Post
They didn't live in a camp, they took dumps in the desert somewhere and moved on quickly as the article says. We barely found one of Kublai Khan's ships from 1200 AD some few decades ago, let alone the virtually unsurvivable things the Jews would have left in the desert. Even if something could survive, there would be so little of it and it would be buried under 3 meters of sand (this is the depth at which the layer is considered 1600 BC in Mayan archaeology).
Haha you have obviously never been to a refugee camp. We have them now and you can conduct an experiment quite easily with a camp of 50,000 and how easy it is to simply walk out of the camp and relieve yourself and return. Or rather, it isn't. You have numerous problems with poisoning the groundwater, you have problems if it rains and uncovers your defecation, you have problems with how far out of a camp you'd have to go for 50,000 people to spread out (far too far for a people likely to be dealing with dysentry - roughly 2-3 miles), you have problems with how big or small the camp would have to be - too small and you get congestion and serious risk of infectious disease, too big and people at the centre will never be able to get to their toilet spots in time. Do you know how big a camp of 50,000 would have to be? Or 500,000? Or 2 million? SPHERE standards for humanitarian response recommend a safe distance in habitation of 45 square metres per person (not per household mind you). This assumes modern water and sanitation facilities we've only been able to construct in the last 50 years. They didn't have modern machinery to excavate defecation when it filled up common boreholes.

The question is: how many Isreaelites do you think there were in the desert? The picture in the Bible would not work for a camp of more than about 1,000 including women and children. Hardly the numbers you'd need to conquer the Levant 40 years later.
They didn't have a camp, they were constantly moving. I think therefore it would have none of the effects it would otherwise have that you've pointed out.
renassault is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:29 PM   #95
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles, US
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minimalist View Post

And which "archaeologists" might those be? Other "maximalists?" This is a circle jerk. They quote each other and ignore the artifacts that have been dug up since 1967.

Lets remember that it wasn't only Finkelstein and his students out doing surveys on the West Bank. In the aftermath of the 1967 war a whole generation of young Israeli archaeologists headed for the Sinai, too.

They found NOTHING at Kadesh Barnea, Arad, or Beersheba related to the Late Bronze Age. These were all Iron Age settlements and the bible-thumpers have every reason to try to pretend that this evidence does not exist.
Hmm, well I can't tell you anything, since Hess' article on the settlements and another book and article is all I've read on the subject. I do remember Hauer and Young in their "An Introduction to the Bible: A Journey into three Worlds" paint a much less bleaker picture than you, and they pretty much summarize the current research regarding the historical aspect of the Bible.

Quote:
There are numerous anachronisms in the OT for anyone who takes the blinders of faith off and looks at these tales honestly. Goliath has the correct accoutrements of a hoplite soldier...a form of warfare which developed in the 7th century BC...oddly, just when Finkelstein claims this stuff was written.
The Egyptian army of the Pharaoh Necho used Greek mercenary hoplites.
The relatively vague depiction of his armor can hardly be narrowed down so specifically as to be a hoplite..
renassault is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:34 PM   #96
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles, US
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
Quote:
(by the way, 153 is mentioned only once in the New Testament)
I am fascinated by this response, it deserves forensic examination. I never said anything about the number of times it is mentioned, 153 is of interest in itself as it is not a random number but is the equivalent of "quantum".

Now the author who put that in may or may not have known its significance, much as the woman on the clapham omnibus would know the word quantum but may not have Physics A level.

Which leads to a further question - was your non sequiteur deliberate or what does it show?
If 153 was used once, it wouldn't be a very classical spiritual number in the NT imo.
renassault is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:37 PM   #97
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by renassault View Post
They didn't have a camp, they were constantly moving. I think therefore it would have none of the effects it would otherwise have that you've pointed out.
Haha you evidently haven't read your own Bible. How many years did they spend at Kadesh Barnea?
Celsus is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:46 PM   #98
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles, US
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celsus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by renassault View Post
They didn't have a camp, they were constantly moving. I think therefore it would have none of the effects it would otherwise have that you've pointed out.
Haha you evidently haven't read your own Bible. How many years did they spend at Kadesh Barnea?
Seeing how they established camp there, I think they would have had the logistics similar to a town.
renassault is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:47 PM   #99
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by renassault View Post
You think the whole desert constitutes the equivalency of a camp?
How many years did they spend at Kadesh Barnea?
Celsus is offline  
Old 10-10-2009, 01:54 PM   #100
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Los Angeles, US
Posts: 222
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Celsus View Post
How many years did they spend at Kadesh Barnea?
Genesis 14:7 and 16:14 seem to suggest it was some sort of town before the Israelites came there. I don't know if it was, but even if it wasn't, why is it impossible for 1.5-2 million people to make a settlement? Refugee camps are hardly a good comparison since the people don't have the skills and resources to make it liveable by themselves.
renassault is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:19 PM.

Top

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