Lógos Sokratikós

<Edit> A little bit excessive don't you think, M.O.?
Also, have faith in people.

makerowner

Excessive? No, the Moon thread justifies that description IMO. And have about as much faith in people as I do in God. Well, a little bit more.

Lazarus Long

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

Tammuz

Isn't that usually said about Nazareth? Nazareth, the town that theology built.

Lazarus Long

Yes, there are historians who have concluded that Nazareth did not exist as a town until the 4th century, well after the supposed death of Jesus. They suspect that Jesus was referred to in some scripture as a Nazarite (a person who had taken a vow of holiness and was thus 'separated out' from the masses), and that it was later mistranslated to mean "a person from Nazareth", which became known as a Nazarene.

LL

William

Seems like this would be a better fit over in BC&H.

Minimalist

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.

John Kesler

It is interesting that in the story of the spies who surveyed Canaan before the Israelites were to take it (Numbers 13-14), even though both Caleb and Joshua urged the Israelites to not depair and to proceed with the invasion of Canaan (Numbers 14:6-9), and both were promised entrance into Canaan (14:30,38), other verses indicate that Caleb alone was faithful and would be allowed admission to the Promised Land.

It appears that Joshua was added to a narrative in which originally only Caleb was the "good spy." (See also Deuteronomy 1:36.)

Minimalist

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.

Darklighter

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.