Current Biblical Archaeology

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 4:17 am

you don't even accept the facts i do present because you have decided to listen to finkelstein and dever, two unbelievers. i even presented a logical theory that demonstrates that the israelites could be in egypt without leaving behind any proof of their existence, yet you shun that as well hiding behind the mantra---there were no israelites---

until you come down from your ivory tower, i doubt anything i post here will satisfy you. i doubt that even if i came up with the king david's bones, you would change your mind. instead you would find some minute detail to dismiss it so you could continue in your present lifestyle.

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 8:34 am

it is easy to criticize something, especially when you do not want anything to do with it and take no time to understand its perspective. judging it from solely your point of view is robbing you of all value that science has and is totally wrong.

You do the same thing you accuse others of doing. You have a bias against Devers and Finklestein because they tell you what you don't want to hear. At least they have done some honest research on the subject, unlike biblical scholars who start with the bible and juggle the facts until they fit....sorta. If you rule out evolution and won't even listen to anything about it you have no chance of discovering the truth about it and finding that you are wrong. You're a bigot of the worst kind. Closed-minded.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:36 am

What FACTS?

Chanting "the bible says" over and over is not "facts." Clinging to outmoded theories which have been demolished by modern research is just silliness born of your desperation to hold on to your fairy tales.

As a matter of fact, the few times you have tried to post something dealing with archaeological FACT it has turned out to be stuff which is totally consistent with Finkelstein's findings.

You may just have to face the fact that Finkelstein is not only smarter than you but a hell of a lot smarter than those bible-thumping jackasses that you follow.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:44 am

Ya know Bob, Biblical archaeology is a great subject. The entire area is so rich in ancient history.

But here it's always about religion and ruins the whole subject. No point starting a new thread dedicated just to the archaeology 'cause it just wouldn't work.

Someday maybe.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:52 am

I know. I only keep this going to give Arch his daily ass-whupping.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:54 am

Yes - a necessary evil.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:06 am

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:23 am

We just keep arch around to give Bob something to do. You shoulda seen how he moped around here after JM was banned. It's a good thing arch showed up when he did. Bob, was suffering from some major withdrawals. He was even arguing with me, and you know how easy I am to get along with.

What do ya'll think, do we need to bring back Marduk? He did liven things up a bit. It seems that there haven't been any really good "flaming" arguments since he got booted. Just the same old shit with arch. All in favor of bringing him back say "aaarrgghhh". Those opposed say "bite me".

I kinda miss the old Sumerian god of the underworld. But then he liked me and we didn't argue too much.

Beagle · Post by **Beagle** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:40 am

Are you saying this is a democracy?

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:06 pm

I'd rather have Rokcet back.

Post by **Minimalist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 12:34 pm

Not exactly archaeology but this story was apparently suppressed by the American media.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Artic ... 83,00.html

A keynote research paper showing that Middle Eastern Jews and Palestinians are genetically almost identical has been pulled from a leading journal.

In common with earlier studies, the team found no data to support the idea that Jewish people were genetically distinct from other people in the region. In doing so, the team's research challenges claims that Jews are a special, chosen people and that Judaism can only be inherited.

Jews and Palestinians in the Middle East share a very similar gene pool and must be considered closely related and not genetically separate, the authors state. Rivalry between the two races is therefore based 'in cultural and religious, but not in genetic differences', they conclude.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:11 pm

We just keep arch around to give Bob something to do

so that is all i am good for?

What do ya'll think, do we need to bring back Marduk

bite me.

i don't like dever and finkelstein because they are wrong, not because they say things i do not want to hear. i haave posted quotes that show that they among others only go by their interpretation and not fact

But here it's always about religion and ruins the whole subject

that's theproblem... you want one without the other but when you are talking about the area that encmpasses the Bible, you are not going to be able to separate the two.

you can try but then you will be doing what everyone else does---elimnating data, eliminatimng contrary perspectives, and just getting what you want to hear accomplishing nothing.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 1:29 pm

another thing i noticed on this board...most of you do not want to discuss anything that challenges your chosen beliefs. you want nice, safe threads that do nothing but give you ice cream and cake.

as an example, minimalist won't ever discuss the israelites pre-finkelstein's dating because he has chosen to accept that timing. all he can say is 'there were no israelites in egypt...' and so on. not one hint of being willing to discuss another point of view.

i have laid out a theory that acccounts for the lack of evidence (which is archaeological) yet no one wants to even consider the possibilities, so why should i waste my time in presenting what evidence i have/

no one would want todiscuss it and when i do post quotes and sources, they get dismissed and not evn honestly debated. that is not discussion but a denial of contrarythinking and facts.

so the problem doesn't lie totally with me.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:26 pm

getting back to archaeology , i will place this quote here as it does have some relation to the thread but in a round about manner. taken from the book, 'voices of the rocks' pg. 45:

"it is clear that all evidence attributing tthe great sphynx pf Giza to Khafre is circumstantial. Curiously, other circumstantial evidence points, like the african face, toward an earlier origin.

The so-called Inventory Stela..., which dates from the 7th or 6th centuries b.c. and which purports to be a copy of an old kingdom text, states that the great sphynx was already in existence during the reign of Khufu, who preceeded Khafre. In fact, this stela credits Khufu with repairing the sphynx after it was struck by lightnin-- which is consistent with the obvious repair work done on the monument and the sphynx and the valley temples. Modern egptologists generally treat the inventory stela as a late period fabrication of an old kingdom text, and refuse to accept it as authentic."

(bold print mine) even in biblical archaeology are we getting all the facts that we need to judge that era of history? with the state of denial that exists concerning artifacts and evidence (or lack there of) will we be able to find the truth at all?

it is obvious and well known that politics plays a large part in archaeological digs but is it right to make conclusions like kenyon did or finkelstein does, without all the evidence scrutinized/?

what are we missing out on that would clarify the ancient events? this is why faith plays such an important role, despite the chagrine of those who do not want to believe in the Bible. faith circumvents the mitagating influences that are motivated to hinder investigation which are designed to provide the proof and the truth we all want to see. (well , at least me and other believers).

Frank Harrist · Post by **Frank Harrist** » Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:30 pm

Well, arch, if you don't like it here you could always leave. No one's got you by the nads. The reason I don't discuss much with you is because you stubbornly ignore recent research if it wasn't done by biblical archaeologists with an agenda to prove the bible to be true. You only post things from those people and we don't accept posts from people with such an obvious agenda. You also insult people on a regular basis saying we are closed-minded and ignorant. If we were closed-mided as you say we wouldn't even talk to you at all. The things you attribute to "evolutionists" are exactly the same things you yourself do, but you seem to think that because god is on your side you have the right to discard our statements and only accept the religious ones. What makes you qualified to say things like "i don't like dever and finkelstein because they are wrong"? How do you know they are wrong? Did god tell you? These guys have actually been there in the field on the ground and researched this stuff extensively, but you still know more than they do? You subscribe to theories which have long since been debunked. Your bank of knowledge is faith based so science doesn't enter into and if it does it's an intruder. You talk down to us. You run down science, not a good thing to do on a board full of scientists and people who look at things from a scientific point of view. You call people who disagree with you liars. (Shades of JM there) You ignore people when they say things you don't agree with. You insult our collective intelligence on a regular basis. Other than that you're ok.