Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
04-29-2008, 12:27 PM | #11 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Virtually right here where you are
Posts: 11,138
|
<Edit> A little bit excessive don't you think, M.O.?
Also, have faith in people. |
04-29-2008, 12:45 PM | #12 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 1,962
|
|
04-29-2008, 01:07 PM | #13 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 396
|
There was an article in Archeology magazine in 2005 that discussed new findings that cast doubt on the town of Bethlehem being populated at the supposed time of Jesus' birth, making it unlikely that he was born there (if he was born at all. )
LL |
04-29-2008, 01:17 PM | #14 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sweden
Posts: 5,525
|
Isn't that usually said about Nazareth? Nazareth, the town that theology built.
|
04-29-2008, 02:47 PM | #15 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Vancouver BC Canada
Posts: 396
|
Quote:
LL |
|
04-29-2008, 10:37 PM | #16 |
Moderator - NAR
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Northern Japan
Posts: 2,312
|
Seems like this would be a better fit over in BC&H.
|
04-29-2008, 10:57 PM | #17 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
|
Quote:
Excuse me but the archaeological data shows that Jericho was destroyed in the Middle Bronze Age c 1550 BC (roughly when the pharaoh Ahmose I chased the Hyksos (who were Semites) out of Egypt and back into Canaan. Archaeology has nothing to indicate that "Joshua" ever 'arrived.' In fact, Israel Finkelstein of Tel Aviv University has made a pretty compelling argument that the whole story was concocted in the 7th century BC and that "Joshua" was a bit folklore that worked its way into the tale. The only thing that makes a claim about "Joshua" is the old testament itself and that is a book which has been trashed by modern archaeology. |
|
04-30-2008, 07:27 AM | #18 | ||
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 1,037
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
05-01-2008, 08:30 AM | #19 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
|
When Israeli archaeologists gained access to Sinai after the 1967 war they ran right out to the oasis of Kadesh Barnea, where these supposed 2+ million Israelites hung out for 38 years and began digging for artifacts. The result?
They found nothing from the Late Bronze Age and only a small Iron Age fort which obviously was built much later. |
05-01-2008, 08:55 AM | #20 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pale Blue Dot
Posts: 463
|
Let's also not forget that David and Solomon's Grand city of Jeruslaem was but a small insignificant village during their lifetimes (c. 1000 bce). There is absolutely no evidence of a united monarchy, nor of a vast and wealthy empire under Solomon. Any remarkable construction projects that were assumed to be from Solomon's era have been conclusively shown to be from King Omri of the northern kingdom.
The Bible is historically accurate? :rolling: Just because the writers set their stories in contemporary locations that the readers would be familiar with does not make it a historical document, any more than Godzilla is historically accurate because Tokyo exists. Plus, getting a few minor details right does not verify the supernatural aspects of the story, which I prophesy will NEVER be verified. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|