Excellent summary of Old testament debate

[E.P. Grondine]

While getting my caffeine and nicotine levels set for heavy duty work later today, I came across this summary, which I am sure min will enjoy:

http://asorblog.org/2015/04/07/the-retu ... d-solomon/

Key quote:

"So every historical reference in the Bible should be taken with the most caution unless it’s confirmed by parallel, extra-biblical sources."

My own view is that actually, every historical reference in the Bible should be ignored, unless it is examined in the light of contemporary ( an by that I mean anciently co-temporal) finds and documents.

It is amazing to me how many professionals do not know the extent of the modern states of Israel and Palestine.

The Palestinian recognition process and the boycott both are continuing and expanding, though you can't learn about them from US media.

PS - I'm hoping I can find copies of my notes on V. for uni.

[Minimalist]

Let's start here...

http://www.academia.edu/457421/Khirbet_ ... rpretation

Let's begin with Finkelstein's conclusion, first. I suspect he cuts to the heart of the problem.

We cannot close this article without a comment on the sensational way in which the finds of Khirbet Qeiyafa have been communicated to both the scholarly community and the public. The idea that a single, spectacular finding can reverse the course of modern research and save the literal reading of the biblical text regarding the history of ancient Israel from critical scholarship is an old one. Its roots can be found in W.F. Albright’s assault on the Wellhausen School in the early 20th century, an assault that biased archaeological, biblical and historical research for decades. This trend—in different guises—has resurfaced sporadically in recent years, with archaeology serving as a weapon to quell progress in critical scholarship. Khirbet Qeiyafa is the latest case in this genre of craving a cataclysmic defeat of critical modern scholarship by a miraculous archaeological discovery

[E.P. Grondine]

Hi min -

People seeking hard physical evidence for their beliefs is and has been the source of funding for archaeological work in the Levant. Anyone can easily compare the funding for "biblical archaeology" with the budgets for Bronze age archaeology in other areas.

In my view AI is the real heart of the problem, as if it is definitively located, then you may have evidence for a genocide conducted by Jewish ancestors. "God told us to" is not a sufficient excuse for me; it is being used by Moslem fanatics right now. For that matter, it was also used by both the Aztecs and the Conquistadors. Also by the colonists in North America.

While Finkelstein has proclaimed victory, the problems are still there. His opponents have a perfect right to make their case, and there is little doubt they have an avid audience.

As I have mentioned before, my interest is in the Bronze Age Aegean, and I would really prefer being at the University of Amnissos troweling through volcanic tsunami deposits and swimming during the days while while working on recovering my conversational language abilities and engaging in dance therapy in the evenings.

(I pulled a complete blank with my French when I met a visitor from Paris at the Natchez Powwow. )

That is where I had planned to be by his point in time. But it appears that the Great Spirit has other plans for me.

If I had any interest in this problem, I would try to find contemporary written records as close as possible to ancient Judah and ancient Israel.

As it is, I hope someone stumbles across them soon.

[Minimalist]

I quite agree about the funding issue, E.P. That's why every year or two some charlatan goes off looking for the friggin' "ark" and, of course, always finds it....or so they claim. Got to keep the investors happy.

But what is going on here is not about "religion." It's about Palestinian politics and the desire to demonstrate that the "jews" were there long ago. What that has to do with the price of beans is beyond me. We know they were there. We know they were kicked out. We know who ruled in the interim. The fact that the UN came along and stole the land from the rightful owners has not a fucking thing to do with archaeology or the OT.

This is representative of what Finkelstein is talking about.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ir_David_Foundation

In 2011, a leading Israeli specialist on the archeology of Jerusalem, Dr. Eilat Mazar, who in the past collaborated with the Elad foundation, wrote a letter protesting the foundation's lack commitment to "scientific archeological work".

I do recall watching a special where Dr. Mazar was interviewed while she was still excavating "David's Palace." She stated that she would not be comfortable calling it that until she found an inscription to that effect. No such inscription has ever turned up.

Anyway, Chris Rollston worked over the Khirbet Qeiyafa ostracon pretty well in 2010.

http://www.rollstonepigraphy.com/?p=56

The end result of this is that I am not at all certain that the dialect of this inscription can be determined with certitude. Obviously, some have argued that it is definitively Old Hebrew. However, an equally good case can probably be made that it is Phoenician (or at least a reasonable case can be made for that). Ultimately, we can conjecture, but the evidence that is present is fragmentary. Again, caution must be the modus operandi, not definitive statements.