bleedblue22 Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 I would really love to read some books about archaeology and the Bible, but I simply do not have the time as I am approaching final exams. Is there any way someone can sum up for me what mainstream views of historians and archaeologists say about the historical reliability of the Exodus as well as the existence characters such as Abraham, Isaac, Moses, etc.? I have heard that the exodus as described in the Bible with like 600,000 people wandering around in the desert is impossible, but do historians find it unlikely that the Hebrews were ever enslaved at all by the Egyptians? Do historians find Moses to be a purely mythical character? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 The Cliff Notes version: The first seven books of the Bible are pure fiction. None of that happened. The Samuels, Kings and Chronicle series are a mix of propaganda, myth, legend and some half truths. Ezra, Nehemiah and the Maccabees are highly biased but are probably the closest thing to history found in the Bible (even counting the New Testament). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleedblue22 Posted November 29, 2014 Author Share Posted November 29, 2014 That seems to be what I have learned for the most part. Pretty much all of Genesis can be traced back to previous polytheistic legends. Then the rest of the Pentateuch is filled with stories that have been extremely embellished and turned into legends if not completely made up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 Here's a capsule intro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted November 29, 2014 Share Posted November 29, 2014 If you can find the UK/Euro version entitled "The Bible Unearthed," I think that is a longer version that isn't dumbed down for American audiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 I read somewhere that far from archeology proving exodus, it actually disproves it. That they dug all over the areas the bible lists and they couldn't find one single piece of evidence. One person on the internet tried to prove the red sea crossing by showing a pic of what looks like something the size of a bicycle wheel rusting under the water. I am not buying it though. -my two denarii Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarflungWanderer Posted December 11, 2014 Share Posted December 11, 2014 Hey, not all of us are Rednecks in the States... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 Hey, not all of us are Rednecks in the States... No, but just about all media is undertaken with that assumption. No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of Americans. A 100% truism, especially beloved by televangelists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 Found it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 So good to see John Van Seters in a Biblical documentary. I'm a huge admirer of his work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 My volume doesn't work. What is the difference between these old versions and what we have now? I would appreciate someone giving me the cliff notes of this video. Thank you so much. -peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 Really good video, Ravenstar, even though long - thanks for posting! I learned a lot. Wasn't crazy about the feel-good, spiritual-miracle talk at the end, but I see why they felt compelled to put it in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted December 13, 2014 Share Posted December 13, 2014 Is it real though? I mean have they really unearthed a new bible version? Oh it's "old" versions of the bible, we have those in facsimilies already Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted December 15, 2014 Share Posted December 15, 2014 I just saw the famous "bet David" inscription discussed in the video! It's on loan to the Met in NY from Israel. The relevant letters on the stone are whited in. The plaque on the wall says that the Tel Dan Stele was set up by the king of Aram-Damascus. It mentions his victory over two Israelite kings, one of whom is called the king of the "house of David." see article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Dan_Stele Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 Sooooo… basically it's a testament to Israel getting their butts kicked, hard. lol k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarflungWanderer Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 Isn't it funny that whenever you ask a fundie about why the Egyptians didn't record the Exodus (in short: They were embarrassed), they never stop to wonder why the Israelites recorded all of their losses, massacres, and evil kings? Quite a double standard there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 ^ ^ ^ As far as their evil kings, I think the compilers/redactors of the "historical" books of the OT are pushing the "Yahweh is the only God" agenda. Kings are defined as righteous or evil only by whether they adhere to the worship of Yahweh as the only god. So a story about a king whose religion is not sound AND who is defeated serves a later propaganda purpose, as an object lesson. It's interesting that on the plaque at the museum, the identities of the two defeated kings listed on the Tel Dan Stele are given in a form that does not match the names of kings in the OT. Since the stele is much closer to the events than the extant OT records, it is a superior historical source. Could be another Bible fail. The Wikepedia article I linked above, however, says that other scholars reconstruct the names to yield the biblical Joram (= Jehoram), son of Ahab, and Ahaziah son of Joram of house of David. Poor Joram/Jehoram worshiped Baal. What a loser. Ahaziah also worshiped other gods. What a loser. Following Yahweh rocks. Following other gods sucks. Various scholars point out that the stele does not provide evidence of the existence of the character, David. "betdavid" is written without word division and serves as a place name. Nothing about a man, David, on the stele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FarflungWanderer Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 Quite frankly, I find this quest for the archeological truth fascinating. I mean, *someone* did all this; built Jerusalem, wrote the Bible, and kept the secret that it is full of it for centuries. Barring the use of a time-machine, we may never know completely how, but I would still love to see more on this subject. I also saved this page so I can find the video quickly. Should I find myself drawn into a debate, this should pretty effectively broadside my opponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted December 16, 2014 Share Posted December 16, 2014 I would love to see a thread covering all the contradictions and mistakes of the old testament Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted December 17, 2014 Share Posted December 17, 2014 I just went and checked out the Tel Dan Stele again. The error the museum says the OT makes is that in 2 Kings 9:22-24, the rebel Israelite commander Jehu kills Jehoram and Ahaziah (see # 17 above). On the stele, Hazael of Damascus explicitly says he killed them. An inerrantist can wriggle out of this several ways, e.g. to say that Hazael takes credit for what Jehu did. The main thing, though, is that the stele is contemporary with the events, and it recounts a huge military campaign by Hazael to punish the kingdom of Israel for incursions into his territory. All that is changed in the account in 2 Kings. There, the Arameans are said to besiege Samaria but later to flee in terror. The fall of the two Hebrew kings, according to the stele, was Hazael's doing, but the OT gives credit for their overthrow to Jehu following prophecy. The Israelites took possession of Dan in subsequent decades, and they smashed the Hazael stele and used pieces of it in their own walls. So they rewrote history by eliding mention of the victorious conclusion of his campaign from 2 Kings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 Quite frankly, I find this quest for the archeological truth fascinating. I mean, *someone* did all this; built Jerusalem, wrote the Bible, and kept the secret that it is full of it for centuries. Barring the use of a time-machine, we may never know completely how, but I would still love to see more on this subject. I also saved this page so I can find the video quickly. Should I find myself drawn into a debate, this should pretty effectively broadside my opponent. The most fascinating aspect of the Bible, in my estimation, is this: its ability to repel even the most basic questions about when it was written. This is not a terribly difficult task for most ancient documents, give or take 100 years or so; but dates for Biblical authorship have ranged over a full thousand years, with plausible arguments made for every period from 1200 BCE right down to the post-Alexandrian Hellenistic period. It is truly astonishing that the authors wrote in styles that would confound modern interpreters and make it so difficult to determine who wrote when, and why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 I'm of the mind that the vast majority was at least compiled (Torah) during the captivity in Babylon. But it's possible that some of it could date to 800 B.C.E. or maybe earlier, probably some of the more lyrical aspects anyway. Oral tradition is impossible to date. Thing is no original texts date that early… and they don't seem to have inscribed stone as much as their neighbours. The Dead Sea Scrolls are actual ancient manuscripts, but they only date from 600 B.C.E. and are fragmentary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted December 18, 2014 Share Posted December 18, 2014 The Dead Sea Scrolls are actual ancient manuscripts, but they only date from 600 B.C.E. and are fragmentary. Wow! I thought most of them were 2nd cent. BCE to 1st CE, with a few maybe as early as 4th century BCE. At least to judge from the carbon 14 dates I've heard of: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating_the_Dead_Sea_Scrolls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted December 22, 2014 Share Posted December 22, 2014 I could have my dates wrong…I never was good with dates. LOL Guess I was being too generous. my bad I do know we have no original manuscripts from the time written about. Not even close. This is the problem with the Bible (and many ancient texts) they are written (way) after the fact, or we have texts from oral tradition. Even the Epic of Gilgamesh is known to be a much earlier story than the one we actually have original text for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted December 23, 2014 Share Posted December 23, 2014 I do know we have no original manuscripts from the time written about. Not even close. This is the problem with the Bible (and many ancient texts) they are written (way) after the fact, or we have texts from oral tradition. Even the Epic of Gilgamesh is known to be a much earlier story than the one we actually have original text for. Just more reasons to for me to continue not believing in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts