It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Scholar: Archaeology rebuffs effort to erase biblical Israel

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 01:39 PM
link   
One thing to keep in mind, the atheist will always deny ANYTHING that projected the Bible as accurate, they cant admit it or their case (if you call it that) looses all merit. Time and Time again...they loose and yet they don't give up.....keep em coming guys!



Scholar: Archaeology rebuffs effort to erase biblical Israel
Mar 2, 2005
By Michael McCormack





NEW ORLEANS (BP)--Revisionist scholars in Europe are ignoring a wealth of archaeological evidence in seeking to discount and, ultimately, erase belief in the biblical Israel, noted archaeologist William Dever said at New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary.

Dever, professor emeritus of Near Eastern archaeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona, shared his research during the Manuel Family Lecture on Archaeology and the Bible in early February. The lecture is designed to present current archaeological research pointing to the reliability of Scripture.

Dever described the revisionists’ propositions as: “There is no history in the Hebrew Bible. It’s all written too late to be reliable. It is all a myth. There was no real ancient or biblical Israel. There was no exodus, no Sinai, no [Hebrew] faith, no conquest of Canaan, no Israelite ethnicity.”




Still, revisionists ignore such evidence, “They will demolish any facts that don’t suit their theories,”




posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Ok, instead of proving something doesn't exist, isn't it your duty to prove it exists? I still love that christian mentality, well, you can't prove it doesn't exist, so it must exist! Well, we can't prove it exists, but you can't prove it doesn't, so we right.

So, you can't prove my pebble people who live in death valley and explain why socks disapear in the laundry and the rocks in death valley move don't exist, so they must exist! I can prove they exist, the rocks in death valley move without signs of anyone/anything moving them, so I have more proof of pebble people then you do god.

[edit on 3-3-2005 by James the Lesser]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   
I think the rocks are abducted by aliens and moved 5 feet to the north along the right latitude boundary and always point to the nearest geological anomaly and then when in place a poltergeist farts while the wind blows to the east and the rock then moves EXACTLY 2 inches to the west.


Thats what I think......



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 07:00 PM
link   
What's the big deal about Israel anyway? Don't they practice white slavery over there? Don't they also kill lots of Palestinians?

Seems to me like a place that was so holy back in the day would be a shining example for the world to follow.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 07:34 PM
link   
Ed, I though you were a moony............ now about the Hebrew history well taking in consideration that most of their history was borrowed from other civilizations because they were a "nation with not land" well is nice to know that all their historical past was just put together so they could have one.


Occurs without the Hebrew past it will not be Israeli past and without Israeli past will not be links to the Messiah, without the messiah will not be links to christ, is that what's eating the Christian nation?


[edit on 3-3-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 07:48 PM
link   
A voice in the desert crying out for believers as he watches the scholarly crowd come to the conclusion they have been mislead. And amazing! he uses as proof a fort as though the Jews were the only ones capable of building forts.

I reiterate what I have stated before, from Moses forward the stories centre around real characters. But these real characters were Egyptians fleeing the region because their monotheistic beliefs were being persecuted. What we read about when we see Egypt in the good book refers to lower and upper individually. There is probably hoardes of proof of the biblical characters except we are either not told about them, or the connection that they are Egyptians is not being made. But the later suggests ignorant scholars and archaeologists, where the former is representative of political intercept, and the likely culprit. Yet little by little it leaks out for those who are not simple of mind to piece together.

They want Solomon? They can locate him and his wife between Thebes and the Nile delta, I would say close to Tell el-Amarna. Slinger, you read this nonsense and swallow it whole without ever wondering why on earth Solomon would marry a pharoah's daughter gievn the history, and why, after ravaging a Jewish stronghold, the pharoah would present the desecrated land to his Jewish son-in-law.

We have evidence of the characters all right, but not evidence they want you to know, or the 100+ year old finds from the Synagogue of Ben Ezra wouldn't be such a closely guarded secret, such as this Joshua fragment which is a letter to Shobach the Aramean king:


"[You will not be able to escape] to another place, but you will die here by the deadly sword, or by slaughter, or by the flame of fire, or by being wiped out. I do not boast to you as you have boasted [to me]. I do not say, as you have said: `Heroes will march with me.'

"The numbers are not imaginary: marching with me will be 600,000 men who destroyed Greater Egypt and ate the sacrifice of the Passover; who saw with their own eyes the ten plagues afflicting their enemies, and crossed the sea on the dry land; and travelled through the wilderness without a guide, the pillar of cloud sheltering them from the heat...''
Pity however that it does not match with Biblical record, nor with the several other extra-Hebraic accounts of this event, for the following is blatant:

Shobach was the general not the king.
This event is credited in the Bible to David, not Joshua.
A 600,000 man army more than 40 years after the Exodus, all of whom witnessed the event, would be old and decrepit.
The sea supposedly parted, it was not dried.
The Bible states God guided them day and night, contrary to Joshua's claim
The Biblical cloud was God's guidance, it was not for shelter from the heat.

Just goes to show you how embellished these stories were. Thy must have been the desperate attempts of displaced men trying to create some illusion of an illustrious past.




[edit on 3/3/05 by SomewhereinBetween]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043Occurs without the Hebrew past it will not be Israeli past and without Israeli past will not be links to the Messiah, without the messiah will not be links to christ, is that what's eating the Christian nation?
[edit on 3-3-2005 by marg6043]
OMG! now that was not just funny, but superlative commentary. I will be laughing for a while.

That was a solid retrospective, Marg. Well done!



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 08:14 PM
link   
The term comes to mind of 'turdflower', and what you speak of is just that. It is based on opinion and the opinion of a small minority I might add.

When the Bible is proven true your type just moves on or dismisses it out of hand, typical really...


And the idea of Moses and Solomon being Egyptian is a joke and a bad and misled one at that. Last I checked Canaan was not in Egypt.

As for Solomon marring an Egyptian? Not that odd at all, I mean he had a son with an Ethiopian. He was a powerful king with great wealth and wisdom.....


Keep grabbing and you might latch onto the truth one day, but you need to look in other places besides the "tunnelvision" ones you do presently.


The early Bible based on Egyptian Myth, geez what next, the Sumerian writings based on Irish folklore?




Originally posted by marg6043
Ed, I though you were a moony............ now about the Hebrew history well taking in consideration that most of their history was borrowed from other civilizations because they were a "nation with not land" well is nice to know that all their historical past was just put together so they could have one.


Marg as you well know that is the way you see it and thats fine, you can see it how you see fit but that does not make it fact, and its far from fact.

[edit on 3-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 08:23 PM
link   
I should note for you guys that he's painting things with a very broad brush. It's not "all archaeologists" but only "some archaeolgists." In fact, it's a very specific group.

These are known as "post-modernists" and he identifies them. Basically, a postmodernist will question EVERYTHING that can't be documented to within an inch of its life. We have them in anthropology as well. No, I'm not one of them. I'm a reluctant structural functionalist.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 08:50 PM
link   
Im sure Egypt and Rome didnt exhist because they were mentioned in the bible too


[edit on 3-3-2005 by Croatiansensation]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 08:54 PM
link   
Well, at one point Egypt conquered Canaan, later in their history...but close to the time that the Israelis emerge into history.

And don't forget that Egypt is right next to Ethiopia, which are both in Africa. There's no way that Egyptians had contact with Ethiopians...


Anyway, how can you prove that the Bible is real? Seriously? How do you prove that it's the Word of God??? Last I heard you needed faith to believe that.


And yes, the Bible is based on earlier religions. But of course, you don't know history, do you edsinger???



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
Well, at one point Egypt conquered Canaan, later in their history...but close to the time that the Israelis emerge into history.

And don't forget that Egypt is right next to Ethiopia, which are both in Africa. There's no way that Egyptians had contact with Ethiopians...


Anyway, how can you prove that the Bible is real? Seriously? How do you prove that it's the Word of God??? Last I heard you needed faith to believe that.


And yes, the Bible is based on earlier religions. But of course, you don't know history, do you edsinger???


Well actually I do somewhat and I know Geography also



Seems Egypt is near Ethiopia but not next to it, but Sudan didn't exist back then either.....

Contact is one thing but Ethiopia was its own nation , ever heard of Sheba?

BTW, did you know that there are and were BLACK Jews there?



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
The term comes to mind of 'turdflower', and what you speak of is just that. It is based on opinion and the opinion of a small minority I might add.
Reflection in the mirror perhaps slinger? Just enquiring.


When the Bible is proven true your type just moves on or dismisses it out of hand, typical really...
When the first time happens, be sure to let me know.


And the idea of Moses and Solomon being Egyptian is a joke and a bad and misled one at that. Last I checked Canaan was not in Egypt.

As for Solomon marring an Egyptian? Not that odd at all, I mean he had a son with an Ethiopian. He was a powerful king with great wealth and wisdom.....
Really now? Well, I don't think ole king Solomon would take kindly to you calling him a joke, he couldn't help being what he was after all. And I am sure, neither would his father-in-law who so kindly gave him a nice tract of conquered land compliments of Egypt. Last time you checked you were still looking to explain Beth-el being both south and north of Egypt, so your geographic skills are nothing to marvel about, or even ponder, Slinger. When you figure out Beth-el, you will understand that Egypt was where they were from the start. Trust me on this.


Keep grabbing and you might latch onto the truth one day, but you need to look in other places besides the "tunnelvision" ones you do presently.
The only grabbing I see is your constant endeavour to find something plausible to back whatever wayward case you try and present.


The early Bible based on Egyptian Myth, geez what next, the Sumerian writings based on Irish folklore?
Nope. there is only one account of The Bible, and it is told from an Egyptian perspective. Think of me as Galileo and you as the tunnel visioned pope and his curiae.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:31 AM
link   
edsinger, I would like to share one of my favorite quotes, "It is axiomatic that extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence" Lepper 1994.
This means you need to back up what you say, especially if what you say is extreme. In other words, where's the links? I have a bunch, but I'm saving them for a future thread. Though, you'll probably find most of them googling "biblical archaeology" or something similar.

Byrd, wow!!!

a "reluctant structural-functionalist"? Please enlighten me. I sense Durkheim in the room, and Radcliffe-Brown. Correct me if I'm wrong, is that the "organismic analogy" of the French anthropological theory? I can't remember, but I would love to hear your definition.

Wow, structural-functionalism on a biblical archaeology thread at ATS, I am in heaven. *wipes tear from eye*



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Again Ed, instead of us proving something doesn't exist, how about you prove it exists??? makes more sense to me you should have to prove it exists..... Like how I proved my pebble people exist. You can't disprove them 100%? Then they must be real. Dang, I like being a christian, I kill someone, satan made me do it, I rape a 8 year old boy, satan made me do it, I drown my 5 kids in a bathtub, satan made me do it, I don't have to prove anything, you have to disprove it, I'm right cause this book says so, how can I prove the book is right? cause the book says it is right.

Anyways, taking the ignorance hat off and the blinders from my eyes, I realize that one day god will come down and slap some sense into christians. "Hey, stop killing everyone, stop telling everyone you are right, you are not, the earth is round, it isn't the center, and it isn't 6,000 years old." Oh hey, we proved that is false. Earth is billions of years old, so bible wrong, again!



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 05:37 PM
link   
Well, Ed, you may geography (something I know little about), but you can't use a current map in your argument here.

Egypt conquered and re-conquered Sudan a number of times before Sudan was Sudan. Back then it was called Nubia.
The Egyptians used Nubia/Sudan as a source of gold and rock that was rare in Egypt.

Yes, I do know that there were black Jews. There still are black Jews. I also know that there were black Egyptians. There still are black Egyptians. My bad if I sound repetitive, but the establishment would have you believe that there were no black Egyptians (they give in on the black Jews thing though
).

Anyway, the Egyptians did have contact with the Ethiopians. Hell, they conquered part of the Near East at some point, including present-day Palestine and Israel. They took Jerusalem for a while (then again, a lot of people did
).

Well...just wanted to clear that up. BTW, I never said the Egyptians conquered Ethiopia. I said that there were a number of influences on Christianity, including Ethiopian religion.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by James the Lesser
Anyways, taking the ignorance hat off and the blinders from my eyes, I realize that one day god will come down and slap some sense into christians. "Hey, stop killing everyone, stop telling everyone you are right, you are not, the earth is round, it isn't the center, and it isn't 6,000 years old." Oh hey, we proved that is false. Earth is billions of years old, so bible wrong, again!


1st, the Bible does not say the universe is 6000 years old, it says the Universe was created in 6 'days'. Lets take a look shall we?

From the KJV,


5  And God called the light Day , and the darkness he called Night . And the evening and the morning were the first day .


H3117 - Strongs Numbers

yowm -- pronounced: yome

from an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figurative (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverb): KJV -- age, + always, + chronicals, continually(-ance), daily, ((birth-), each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever(-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (... live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X requ ired, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year(-ly), + younger.


From the Scofield Notes: Note #3 please....

[1] [day]

The word "day" is used in Scripture in three ways:

(1) that part of the solar day of twenty-four hours which is light \\Gen 1:5,14 Jn 9:4 11:9\\.

(2) such a day, set apart for some distinctive purpose, as, "day of atonement" (\\Lev 23.27\\); "day of judgment" \\Mt 10:15\\.

(3) a period of time, long or short, during which certain revealed purposes of God are to be accomplished, as "day of the Lord."



Genesis Chapter 1
א בְּרֵאשִׁית, בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים, אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ. 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
ב וְהָאָרֶץ, הָיְתָה תֹהוּ וָבֹהוּ, וְחֹשֶׁךְ, עַל-פְּנֵי תְהוֹם; וְרוּחַ אֱלֹהִים, מְרַחֶפֶת עַל-פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם. 2 Now the earth was unformed and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters.
ג וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, יְהִי אוֹר; וַיְהִי-אוֹר. 3 And God said: 'Let there be light.' And there was light.
ד וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים אֶת-הָאוֹר, כִּי-טוֹב; וַיַּבְדֵּל אֱלֹהִים, בֵּין הָאוֹר וּבֵין הַחֹשֶׁךְ. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.
ה וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לָאוֹר יוֹם, וְלַחֹשֶׁךְ קָרָא לָיְלָה; וַיְהִי-עֶרֶב וַיְהִי-בֹקֶר, יוֹם אֶחָד. [פ] 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. [P]

So hows your Hebrew?














Originally posted by truthseeka
Well, Ed, you may geography (something I know little about), but you can't use a current map in your argument here.



And note what I said.......But it was not 'next' to Egypt. It was 'near' Egypt.


Originally posted by truthseeka
Egypt conquered and re-conquered Sudan a number of times before Sudan was Sudan. Back then it was called Nubia.
The Egyptians used Nubia/Sudan as a source of gold and rock that was rare in Egypt.


How true, but it was never refered to as Upper Egypt.



Originally posted by truthseeka
Anyway, the Egyptians did have contact with the Ethiopians. Hell, they conquered part of the Near East at some point, including present-day Palestine and Israel. They took Jerusalem for a while (then again, a lot of people did
).


I never denied that!


Originally posted by truthseeka
Well...just wanted to clear that up. BTW, I never said the Egyptians conquered Ethiopia. I said that there were a number of influences on Christianity, including Ethiopian religion.


Ok cleared up then.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger1st, the Bible does not say the universe is 6000 years old, it says the Universe was created in 6 'days'. Lets take a look shall we?
You silly boy! on what day from he first time we hear mention of a day was the universe supposedly created, and how many days after that was man created, and how many years after that does the chronology of the Bible add to? Hint..The hebrew calendar.

If the answer is not 5,765 then you should not be trying to prove a book as true when you explicitly offer that it contains lies from genesis 1:1.



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 09:01 AM
link   
Silly? Not really, just rational...


If you take what the hebrew says it could very well mean "age" or in between the steps.......


Ah well so you dont believe in God nor His word, thats fine but keep one thing in mind, it doesnt make you right.......



posted on Mar, 5 2005 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
Silly? Not really, just rational...


If you take what the hebrew says it could very well mean "age" or in between the steps.......


Ah well so you dont believe in God nor His word, thats fine but keep one thing in mind, it doesnt make you right.......
I stand by my inital assessment, rationale is not one of your suits, and so I want to be very, very, kind and for now will leave it at ..silly. I reserve the right to change my description. and frankly I don't care what the Hebrew translation might be, all of it stems from Hieroglyphics anyway.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join