Freethought & Rationalism Archive

firebug · 05-26-2008, 06:01 PM

Is there any Astronomical Find that disproves the celestial teapot? Is there are any Biological Find that disprove the existence of unicorns?

If you treat bible as a source of (potentially distorted) historical accounts, fine. I think everyone agrees that some things in the book are based on historic events. Your mistake is that you fail to recognize that the most ridiculous claims there are not historical. The wall of Jericho was destroyed, but god has nothing to do with it.

Mythra · 05-26-2008, 06:18 PM

I'm not so sure that your info on Jericho is correct. Looks to be based on the (not unbiased) perceptions of William F. Albright around 1930.

From "The Bible Unearthed" by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, pg 81-82:

In the midst of the euphoria - almost at the very moment when it seemed that the battle of the conquest was won for Joshua - some troubling contradictions emerged. Even as the world press was reporting that Joshua's conquest had been confirmed, many of the most important pieces of the archaeological puzzle simply did not fit.

Jericho was among the most important. As we have noted, the cities of Canaan were unfortified and there were no walls that could have come tumbling down. In the case of Jericho, there was no trace of a settlement of any kind in the thirteenth century BCE, and the earlier Late Bronze settlement, dating to the fourteenth century BCE, was small and poor, almost insignificant, and unfortified. There was also no sign of a destruction. Thus the famous scene of the Israelite forces marching around the walled town with the Ark of the Covenanat, causing Jericho's mighty walls to collapse by the blowing of their war trumpets was, to put it simply, a romantic mirage.

A similar discrepancy between archaeology and the Bible was found at the site of ancient Ai, where, according to the Bible, Joshua carried out his clever ambush. Scholars identified the large mound of Khirbet et-Tell, located on the eastern flank of the hill country northeast of Jerulsalem, as the ancient site of Ai. Its geographical location, just to the east of Bethel, closely matched the biblical description. The site's modern Arabic name, et-Tell, means "the ruin," which is more or less equivalent to the meaning of the biblical Hebrew name Ai. And there was no alternative Late Bronze Age site anywhere in the vicinity. Between 1933 and 1935, the French-trained Jewish Palestinian archaeologist Judith Marquet-Krause carried out a large-scale excavation at et-Tell and found extensive remains of a huge Early Bronze Age city, dated over a millennium before the collapse of Late Bronze Cannaan. Not a single pottery sherd or any other indication of settlement there in the Late Bronze Age was recovered. Renewed excavations at the site in the 1960s produced the same picture. Like Jericho, there was no settlement at the time of its supposed conquest by the children of Israel.

Doug Shaver · 05-27-2008, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

Conclusion, does archeology disprove or prove the bible.and to what extent does it prove or disprove the bible?

What do you mean by proving "prove the Bible" or "disprove the Bible"?

If by "prove the Bible" you mean confirm that it is without error, then archeology has not done that and never will do that. The Bible contains many assertions for which no archeological evidence would have been possible.

If by "disprove the Bible" you mean confirm that it contains nothing but falsehoods, then archeology has certainly not done that. But then, no skeptic has ever denied that some of the Bible's assertions are true.

What skeptics deny is the claim that the Bible is without any error at all, and archeology has tended to support that position. It has given us good reason to doubt that the origin of the ancient Jewish nation happened the way the Bible says it happened.

mg01 · 05-27-2008, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jules?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

Jules, thank you for your contribution.

i stumbled upon this article which may strongly suggest that a United Kingdom existed.

The full article is here here and in reality it does not suggest a united kingdom. It does demonstrate that a very productive copper mine and foundry that was protected by a small fortress existed in Edomite territory from the 11-10th century. it suggests that the down turn or dark age impacted on Cyprus as a centre of copper production and an old mine that was operational several centuries earlier was redeveloped. The finds, particularly the pottery show the occupants traded with local cultures although 'Judian' finds are non-existent.

It seems the authors are cashing in on the controversy surrounding 'biblical' archaeology as the study and dig would not get the same coverage if just the facts were presented.

The Bible mentions Edom, but also Babylon, Assyria, Philistines, Egypt, we know they existed but mentioning them does not make it true.

I've yet to see anything that suggests anything other than the entire concept of a grand United Kingdom is nothing more than an post 722 BCE invention. If anyone knows of anything solid I may not be aware of I would be interested to see it.

While the northern/southern strands (J/E) of the text may indicate a common source, (the hill folk of the 13th-12th century), it strains all credulity to think that any sort of tradition other than campfire tales could have been accurately preserved and transmitted between the decline that followed the 13th century to the beginnings of the return of widespread literacy in the middle of the 9th.

The idea of a past United Kingdom provided the justification for Judah's fledgling attempt at land grabbing in the 7th century. An exercise that proved futile against the Egyptians and Assyrians and was silenced by the Babylonians.

Centuries later, prophets still preached of a desire for restoration of a mythical kingdom, and the upcomming "day of YHWH" where he would smite his enemies, restore the kingdom, and establish rule by a new messiah.

Interpretations clashed, one historical, one metaphysical, and even well past the destruction of Jerusalem both produced writings to make their case and undermine the other.

The historical camp eventually found greater favor (though not completely without some borrowing), and the myth of a returning messiah and glorious future kingdom still survives.

mg01 · 05-27-2008, 10:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

Jules, thank you for your contribution.

i stumbled upon this article which may strongly suggest that a United Kingdom existed.

Take that article and paste it into your favorite word processor.

Highlight the text with three colors.
- Use the first color for anything derived solely from biblical text.
- Use the second color for anything that represents an opinion.
- Use the third for anything that is an indisputable fact.
Review and edit any language in the factual text that suggests finality and replace with proper terminology as later findings may contradict older ones.
Delete everything in the article marked up with the first two colors.
Take a look at what is left.

In short...

Canadian archeologist Russell Adams's interest is in Bronze Age and Iron Age copper production. The team led by Prof. Adams, Thomas Levy of the University of California at San Diego and Mohammad Najjar of the Jordanian Department of Antiquities was investigating copper mining and smelting at a site called Khirbat en-Nahas. They applied high-precision radiocarbon-dating methods to some of their finds. [The results indicate] that occupation of the site began in the 11th century BC and a monumental fortress was built in the 10th century BC.

Everything else is conjecture.

sy2502 · 05-27-2008, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

Many atheists have often claimed that the Bible has contradictions.Christian scholars have often disagreed,saying that these "contradictions" are due to wrong interpretations of the bible.Most biblical archaeologists say that they have yet to find an archaeological discovery that has openly refuted the bible.

A quick google shows how hard it is to find a site that claims to have archeological evidence that disproves the bible.A certain Biblical scholar said," of the thousands of the scrolls,manuscipts,discovered cities,potteries,coins,cave paintings etc,no single archeological discovery has contradicted the bible."

My question is,is there any archeological evidence that disproves the bible outrightly.EG a city discovered thousands of kilometers from the actual place mentioned in the bible.Just some concrete evidence that disproves the bible.coins,pottery,weapons.anything that does not have to do with subjective interpretations.

EG:

According to the book of Joshua, when Joshua came to Jericho it was a formidable city, enclosed by a large wall and inhabited by Canaanites. Through a miracle, part of the wall of the city collapsed, which allowed the Israelite army to rush in, kill the people, and set the city on fire. Later, Jericho was rebuilt and inhabited. If the Bible is accurate, archaeologists should be able to dig into the tel, the dirt mound, at the site of Old Testament Jericho and find a large collapsed wall associated with a burn layer. Sure enough, archaeologists do find a large wall at Jericho, which is partially collapsed and associated with a deep burn layer indicating great destruction, not just a small fire.

Tomb of Caiaphas

In November, 1990, a tomb was discovered in Jerusalem that contains an ossuary with the name of Caiaphas carved into it. The burial cave is located in the Peace Forest, south of the Gehenna Valley, near the Government House where the United Nations was located. The high priest before whom Jesus appeared just before his death was named Caiaphas (see Matthew 26:3,57; Luke 3:2; John 11:49; 18:13,14,24,28). Later both Simon Peter and John appeared before him in Jerusalem (Acts 4:6). Archaeologists have identified the site as the burial cave of the family of Caiaphas.

etc

NOTE 1:Now thats the type of concrete examples i would give,not theories based on no available physical data.We are not discussing the religious or spiritual aspect.Just hard history.No matter what caused the walls to collapse we don't care,all we care is, are they the way way they were described in the bible,does the city exist.Are the dates correct.etc.

NOTE 2: Please avoid posts such as,"well the bible mentions such and such a king,town and there is no evidence of them,so they or it must have not existed.".I am looking for positive evidence against the bible,archaeologically.

Conclusion, does archeology disprove or prove the bible.and to what extent does it prove or disprove the bible?

There is no archaeological finding that disproves "Moby Dick" either.

Berthold · 05-27-2008, 11:11 AM

Well, I'll give it a try. It's, of course, certain stories that are at odds with archaeological findings.

The OT says that, during a certain time, humans usually lived for centuries, up to a millennium. Yet skeletons of this time show normal lifespans.

The Tower of Babel was the finished temple of the city god Marduk.

MortalWombat · 05-27-2008, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

My question is,is there any archeological evidence that disproves the bible outrightly.EG a city discovered thousands of kilometers from the actual place mentioned in the bible.

You mean like this?

jules? · 05-27-2008, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MortalWombat

Quote:

Originally Posted by ernestombayo

My question is,is there any archeological evidence that disproves the bible outrightly.EG a city discovered thousands of kilometers from the actual place mentioned in the bible.

You mean like this?

So are you saying mark never went to Palestine?

Toto · 05-27-2008, 12:10 PM

It is generally agreed that Mark was not familiar with the geography of Palestine.

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

05-26-2008, 06:01 PM	#11
firebug Regular Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Merryland, USA Posts: 244	Is there any Astronomical Find that disproves the celestial teapot? Is there are any Biological Find that disprove the existence of unicorns? If you treat bible as a source of (potentially distorted) historical accounts, fine. I think everyone agrees that some things in the book are based on historic events. Your mistake is that you fail to recognize that the most ridiculous claims there are not historical. The wall of Jericho was destroyed, but god has nothing to do with it.

05-26-2008, 06:18 PM	#12
Mythra Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: BFE Posts: 416	I'm not so sure that your info on Jericho is correct. Looks to be based on the (not unbiased) perceptions of William F. Albright around 1930. From "The Bible Unearthed" by Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, pg 81-82: In the midst of the euphoria - almost at the very moment when it seemed that the battle of the conquest was won for Joshua - some troubling contradictions emerged. Even as the world press was reporting that Joshua's conquest had been confirmed, many of the most important pieces of the archaeological puzzle simply did not fit. Jericho was among the most important. As we have noted, the cities of Canaan were unfortified and there were no walls that could have come tumbling down. In the case of Jericho, there was no trace of a settlement of any kind in the thirteenth century BCE, and the earlier Late Bronze settlement, dating to the fourteenth century BCE, was small and poor, almost insignificant, and unfortified. There was also no sign of a destruction. Thus the famous scene of the Israelite forces marching around the walled town with the Ark of the Covenanat, causing Jericho's mighty walls to collapse by the blowing of their war trumpets was, to put it simply, a romantic mirage. A similar discrepancy between archaeology and the Bible was found at the site of ancient Ai, where, according to the Bible, Joshua carried out his clever ambush. Scholars identified the large mound of Khirbet et-Tell, located on the eastern flank of the hill country northeast of Jerulsalem, as the ancient site of Ai. Its geographical location, just to the east of Bethel, closely matched the biblical description. The site's modern Arabic name, et-Tell, means "the ruin," which is more or less equivalent to the meaning of the biblical Hebrew name Ai. And there was no alternative Late Bronze Age site anywhere in the vicinity. Between 1933 and 1935, the French-trained Jewish Palestinian archaeologist Judith Marquet-Krause carried out a large-scale excavation at et-Tell and found extensive remains of a huge Early Bronze Age city, dated over a millennium before the collapse of Late Bronze Cannaan. Not a single pottery sherd or any other indication of settlement there in the Late Bronze Age was recovered. Renewed excavations at the site in the 1960s produced the same picture. Like Jericho, there was no settlement at the time of its supposed conquest by the children of Israel.

05-27-2008, 11:11 AM	#17
Berthold Veteran Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Vienna, AUSTRIA Posts: 6,147	Well, I'll give it a try. It's, of course, certain stories that are at odds with archaeological findings. The OT says that, during a certain time, humans usually lived for centuries, up to a millennium. Yet skeletons of this time show normal lifespans. The Tower of Babel was the finished temple of the city god Marduk.

05-27-2008, 12:10 PM	#20
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	It is generally agreed that Mark was not familiar with the geography of Palestine.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.