archaeologists--the players

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 3:55 am

well that is dever and though he may make some contributions to archaeology, he is not that stellar figure people are ledto believe.

israel finkelstein is next up as he also is painted in a light that makes him larger than life while righting the wrongs of the archaeological field. in fact minimalist quotes from his book to start the current biblical archaeology thread yet we never get to see the weakness of his thinking.

but we are about too, this time i have a link and do not have to post so many parts which illustrates the other side of his thinking. I call it------ Finkelstein gets schooled:

http://www.denverseminary.edu/dj/articles2001/0100/0104

This book is written by a member of the "new generation" of Israeli archaeologists who holds a professorship at the University of Tel Aviv, and by a journalist who has published critical analyses of the history of archaeology of the Holy Land. Together, their stated purpose is to present how the new discoveries of the discipline of archaeology have overturned long held assumptions about the essential reliability of the Old Testament as a historical record. The book is arranged so as to move chronologically from what is traditionally regarded as earliest (the patriarchs) to what is the latest testimony of the biblical historical record (the post-exilic period).

For each chapter, the authors present a summary of the biblical account and then discuss the ways in which archaeology has controverted this traditional understanding. The authors always present their interpretation of the archaeological data but do not mention or interact with contemporary alternative approaches. Thus the book is ideologically driven and controlled

**bold printing mine, both times**

No one has ever proven the renowned Egyptologist Kenneth Kitchen wrong when he affirmed that the sale price for a slave such as Joseph was twenty shekels of silver according to Gen. 37:28. This amount for a slave was customary in the first half of the second millennium B.C. but unknown at later periods, including the era of the seventh century

oh and minimalist is invited to highlight any archaeologist he wants, this isn't just a trashing of his favorites, they were just a starting point.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 11:21 am

You should probably not pay too much attention to everything some bible thumper says....they tend to lie a lot.

http://fpnew.ccit.arizona.edu/neareast/ ... E_2002.htm

1966 Ph.D., Harvard University. Thesis: "The EV IV-MB I Period in Syria-Palestine, ca. 2150-1850 B.C." (awarded "Distinction"). Major in Syro-Palestinian Archaeology; minors in Northwest Semitic Languages and Literature, Hebrew Bible

(underlining added)

Further, I doubt that he taught at major Israeli universities without speaking Hebrew. They are touchy about that.

1971-75 Director, W. F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research,

Jerusalem (formerly the "American School of Oriental Research");

also Professor of Near Eastern History and Archeology

(1973-75)

1973-75 Associate Professor of Archaeology, Hebrew University, Jerusalem

(School for Overseas Students)

Of course, as Hebrew was a minor and unimportant language for most of the time period in question, I doubt it would be a significant hardship to a real archaeologist....whereas a lack of knowledge of Akkadian or Aramaic would be a blow.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:22 pm

Further, I doubt that he taught at major Israeli universities without speaking Hebrew. They are touchy about that.

you must be getting desparate; pposting someone else's resume. i don't know if the author was a bible thumper or not but your acceptance of surface items just because they are your favorites does it mean they know the language well. or can translate with outmaking mistakes.

i will go with the author of the article and not the resume, i believe he has first-hand experience with Dever and would know from experience not a piece of paper.

oh i was going to post a favorable blurb on finkelstein for you but i decided to let you do that yourself. i found the article quite interesting and supports what i have been saying all along concerning him.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:26 pm

Don't bother, I know you wouldn't mean it.

Of course you will go with "your author" that makes perfect sense for the likes of you.

I'm sure the University of Arizona engages in resume padding all the time as part of the grand conspiracy to undermine your fairy tales, huh?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:01 pm

did i say he padded his resume? no, i just said that just because he studied a language it doesn't mean he was any good or unable tomake mistakes.

by the way, falsifying resumes happens all the time, though i doubt dever could as he is in a field where such activities are easily verified. i am just not caught up in what is on a piece of paper, as it doesn't reflect ability.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:58 pm

to be fair is are some names and some quotes from other archaeologists that minimlaist can choose to publish credible dissents about their work.

taken from the following:

http://www.basictheology.com/forums/Pri ... 2[/quote]

i see it messed up , here is the link again:

http://www.basictheology.com/forums/Pri ... tID=137259

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:18 pm

It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical description has often led to amazing discoveries."

oh right
so the archaeological discovery of the flood story written 2000 years before the biblical one and containing different characters in the main roles doesn't count now
didn't find those links did ya Arch
guess that means you'd like to ignore it
you're the only one doing that you know

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:39 pm

by the way, falsifying resumes happens all the time

That how you got your job? Did they know they were hiring a non-scientific bible thumper?

One shudders to think of the level of education being delivered there.

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 6:54 pm

Once again, Arch, you prove that you are the biggest phony on these boards....and that takes some doing.

Nelson Glueck. Died. 1971

Joseph P. Free Died. 1974

Millar Burrows Died 1980

Sir William Ramsey Died 1939.

These four are innocent as they died before Finkelstein published the results of the archaeological surveys which consigned your precious bible to the dustbin of history. You, of course, should know better.

Then we have Jack Cottrell....who quotes Burrows as if he still has something credible to say and Bryant Wood whose own theories have been completely discredited by C14 dating.

You cling to the outdated theories of the past with the devotion of a true believer. Too bad you can't channel some of that energy into finding out what really happened.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:00 am

Once again, Arch, you prove that you are the biggest phony on these boards....and that takes some doing

obviously, you didn't read my post too well, since i was just giving you come names to bandy about. their deaths do not undermine what they said or believed and people like finkelstein have been around for a long time.

These four are innocent as they died before Finkelstein published the results of the archaeological surveys which consigned your precious bible to the dustbin of history

also obviously you did not read the review. finkelstein has done no such thing and as you can see in that review he fails to back up his claims. he is just another in a long line of unbelievers who think they know ,more than the Bible. they all do the same thing, they ignore or limit the data then they make sweeping conclusions expecting everyone to jump to their feet and applaud.

Bryant Wood whose own theories have been completely discredited by C14 dating.

actually that is not true. the suspicious circumstances upon which that refutation is supposedly based upon is too convenient to be taken seriously or scholarly. c-14 is too easily corruptible to solely rely on as evidence for a date.

You cling to the outdated theories of the past with the devotion of a true believer. Too bad you can't channel some of that energy into finding out what really happened

i already know what really happened, you just don't accept it. taken from:

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2020

These statements represent the conflicting messages that characterize the field of archaeology. In Albright’s era, archaeologists’ interpretations of field excavations ordinarily corroborated biblical information. It was common for prominent archaeologists such as Nelson Glueck to confidently affirm: “...no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference” (1959, p. 31).

Prior to the 1970s, interpretations of archaeological explorations generally heightened the Bible’s credibility (Davis, 1993, 19[2]:54-59). Since then, however, the amiable relationship between archaeology and the Bible has deteriorated dramatically. It is commonplace for the new generation of archaeologists to spurn the historical credibility of the biblical narrative (see Dever, 1990, 16[3]:52-62).

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:51 am

Arch, you're a fool trying to use superstition and dogma to retain a comfy world view which was never valid. As with every other issue you comment upon, you can try to do nothing except "kill the messenger."

I'm glad to see that humanity is finally growing up and casting this bible trash aside. It's about time. Hopefully within 100 years many churches can be converted to museums and the rest torn down for parking lots.

http://www.worldagesarchive.com/Referen ... rpers).htm

As the Archbishop of York told the newly created Palestine Exploration Fund in London in 1865,

This country of Palestine belongs to you and to me, it is essentially ours. It was given to the Father of Israel [i.e., Abraham] in the words: "Walk through the land in the length of it, and in the breadth of it, for I will give it unto thee." We mean to walk through Palestine in the length and in the breadth of it, because that land has been given unto us....
The first archaeologists were thus guilty of one of the most elementary of scientific blunders: rather than allowing the facts to speak for themselves, they had tried to fit them into a preconceived theoretical framework.

The result was a happy union of science, religion, and politics that by the 1950s would eventually bring together everyone from Christian fundamentalists in the American heartland to the Israeli military establishment.

But it was not to last....and that really is your problem, Arch. Bible-thumpers told you a pile of lies and now you fiercely wish to insist that the lies are still valid. Well....it won't work.

Resurrecting a theory first proposed in the 1920s, an Israeli named Yohanan Aharoni infuriated the Israeli archaeological establishment by arguing that evidence in support of an Israelite war of conquest in the thirteenth century B.C. was weak and unconvincing. Basing his argument on a redating of pottery shards found at a dig in the biblical city of Hazor, Aharoni proposed instead that the first Hebrew settlers had filtered into Palestine in a nonviolent fashion, peacefully settling among the Canaanites rather than putting them to the sword.

Hence, the irony of you trying to use Aharoni to substantiate biblical nonsense!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 10:59 am

Hey Min, Voltaire's house was converted into a church!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:17 pm

typical unbelieving point of view in that article and i am almost too tired to point out that it was written in a general viewpoint trying to give the idea that all archaeologists and all churches have jumped on the minimalist bandwagon.

but that is your type of argument, you refuse to list specifics and try to give the impression that the field of archaeology is one way when in reality it is just a small faction of unbelieving researchers who want to usurp israel's claim to the land they now possess.

jacobovici got one thing right in his documentery and that is the muslim world would do anything to discredit the ancient claims of israel. Pellegrino mentions in one of his books that he was allowed to enter a small tunnel underneath the temple mount. yet was not allowed to stay long or go far because the arabs had heard about it and were coming to do something about it.

it is no secret that there are those who undermine finding the truth and if you look at the one paragraph i quoted above, about the lkimitations of archaeology, you would see that we do not have access to all the facts except through the Biblical record.

finkelstein and the copenhagen school are all misleading the world by their false conclusions which are basedupon faulty data, information collection, poor theorizing and so on.

Post by **Minimalist** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:21 pm

Pellegrino

Just another fucking con man of a type that you fall for every time.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:26 pm

Just another fucking con man of a type that you fall for every time.

i wonder where you got your debating/discussion skills from? beagle's school of thuggery?

if you are going to denounce someone put up some links and prove it, your word means very little without some sort of evidence to back it up.

for those who don't know, pellegrino has a Phd., holds at last word, 8 scientific patents, his work on DNA gave Michael Crichton the scientific basis for Jurassic Park, and works in crustaceology, paleontology, marine archaeology among other fields.

despite minimalist's dismissal, the man is intelligent though at times his theories go against the grain of those who reject the biblical record. hence, minimalist's deep disproval.

anyways, with Dever dismantled, it is not tim eto addrwess Finkelstein and the honest review linked in a previous post. minimalist loves to quote this man despite the limited data and the rejection of traditional evidence. his conclusions are based upon a faulty process which leads him to conclude that the Israelites were nothing but canaanites or nomads taking advantage of an opportunity to dwell in a land that once belonged to pre-arabs.

i have seenthis type of person before, they are the ones who cannot accept tradition and must make waves or create controversy to feel like they have actually done their job, no matter how far they have to bend the evidence to fit their theories.

plus by rejecting commonly held facts, they tend to manipulate their conclusions and people's perspective so that they can gain some noteriety and lend credence to their heavily humanistic influenced opinions.

while they still may make interesting and sometimes accurate observations (but only after the time period in question) they fail to be objective or scientific in their quest to pursue and publish their agenda.

minimalist always posts the least he can, then hides behind generalities to avoid having to post more quotes to back up his claim that finkelstein is widely accepted when in reality he is just another shill for the copenhagen school and other researchers who disbelieve the biblical account.

finkestein does not represent modern archaeology, he just represents one perspective and should not be taken literally or seriously.