Diogenes the Cynic

But why does even the hard news media always treat those myths as if they are established history? Is it that they are afraid to annoy believers or that they simply have no idea themselves where the scholarship actually is?

outhouse

Because the IAA spoon fed the media.

Most people are theistic following mythology as history. News has their targets and they want theistic news to their liking.

They are ignorant and or theist themselves.

Vorkosigan

Dio, I'll take B on that.

stephan huller

They also have only a few paragraphs available to them to 'get out the news.' Harder than you think.

credoconsolans

I was looking at the artifacts found and since some are of men's heads, the 'graven image' ban obviously was not in effect at this time. So likely it's a pre-monotheistic temple, maybe of the locals, maybe of invaders from the north. But you read the comments and some people think this proves the - Hebrew - bible true and thus, the Arabs have no claim to Israel.

spin

Incidentally, when they say "the western outskirts of Jerusalem", they mean the modern city and about seven kilometers outside the old city, ie nothing to do with Jerusalem of old at all.

outhouse

There were already known paintings of Yahweh Asherah and possibly Baal from this period.

Your talking about known redactions and addition after King Josiah

Gorit Maqueda

I think that, for the average American journalist, there are two eras in History: when people used swords and when people began to use guns. Trying to distinguish myth from history during the first era is too much for them.

Not that the average journalists from my country are better. For many of them, 'scholarship' is an unknown word.

:Cheeky:

Minimalist

There is no archaeological attestation of "Josiah," though. I find it the main weakness of Finkelstein's The Bible Unearthed that he consistently deals with archaeological evidence and then goes off the rails at the end by naming Josiah as a real character.

I once suggested to Niels Peter Lemche that I didn't see any harm in using the name "Josiah" since it seemed better than calling whoever the king was "Hey You." Lemche chopped my legs off for me by pointing out that accepting that name brought all sorts of biblical baggage which was also unattested.

I considered myself suitably chastised!

outhouse

I wouldnt consider myself chastised by Lemche, he's so far off he charts its not funny. I place him in the same boat as apologist maximalist due to his extreme minimalism.

Ill take Finkelstein's advise anyday over Lemche