Archaeologica.org

marduk wrote:

were known to pull a DeNiro, thump their chest and bellow "I love the smell of Punta Patilla in the morning".

really
where I come from they call that Pulling a Duvall

ROTFLMAO..right you are! (they all look alike to me )

Neither fundies nor moderates should be upset by the fact that relatively speaking Judah was just a blip on the map. I am not sure why that detracts from anyones belief. The bible never claimed they were earth shakers.

The bible claims that David ruled an Empire from the Euphrates to Sinai. To the Fundis (and Arch has expressed this in no uncertain terms) if every word in the bible is not literally TRUE then there is NO HOPE FOR MAN. His words which I believe I have quoted acurately. So, in spite of the fact that there is not a shred of evidence for anything in the bible relative to an enslavement in Egypt or a far-flung empire or even a sacking of Jerusalem by Sheshonq I. (The bible claims he:

"Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem, and took away the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king's house; he took all: he carried away also the shields of gold which Solomon had made." 2 Chronicles 12:9

However....this seems to be news to the Pharoah who, in spite of the megalomania usually attributed to Egyptian kings, did not bother to mention his allegedly profitable attack on Jerusalem.

The reconstructions of the campaign offered by these scholars leave a couple of questions unanswered. First, while the biblical account of the campaign only mentions Jerusalem as the focus of the Egyptian attack, few sites in Judah are found in the triumphal relief. Instead, the list comprises sites in Israel and the Negev.

http://www.bibleinterp.com/articles/Wil ... ragraph1-2

Finkelstein, in David and Solomon has a simple explanation for this. Jerusalem at the time was too insignificant to warrant the detour and it was the newly growing kingdom of Israel which was a threat to Egyptian control....not the goat herders of Jerusalem.

So...it looks like there is no hope for man, huh?

If you DIDN'T quote Arch exactly, you'll be hearing from him.

Maybe he said..."there's no soap for man." You know Arch when he gets excited.

Yep, but not as well as you do.

Lucky you.

Minimalist wrote:The bible claims that David ruled an Empire from the Euphrates to Sinai. To the Fundis (and Arch has expressed this in no uncertain terms) if every word in the bible is not literally TRUE then there is NO HOPE FOR MAN. His words which I believe I have quoted acurately. So, in spite of the fact that there is not a shred of evidence for anything in the bible relative to an enslavement in Egypt or a far-flung empire or even a sacking of Jerusalem by Sheshonq I.
...
However....this seems to be news to the Pharoah who, in spite of the megalomania usually attributed to Egyptian kings, did not bother to mention his allegedly profitable attack on Jerusalem.

Put into perspective, the high point of the Hebrew kingdom lasted somewhat less than 80 years (two kings according to the bibles own testimony). Hardly the stuff of empires. It is not outside the realm of possibility that the hebrews enjoyed a measure of success in conquering small kngdoms and other nomadic tribes and claimed a widespread kingdom. As I recall the Philistines were never really conquered although there may have been some years of peace. This eventually fell apart when the kingdom split upon the death of Solomon. Civil war raged off and on for the next several hundred years.

As for Shishak and his identity as Sheshonq I, this has been disputed for the very reason you mention. Surely the pharoah would have bragged of it. The orthodox view sets Sheshonq's ascension at about 945bce and marks his invasion of Palastine at about 925bce. The success of the campaign recorded on the Temple of Amun. So why no Jerusalem in the list?

You have pointed out one possible reason. But there are two others:
2. Depending on the dating chronology used, the collapse of Solomon's kingdom may have been coincident with another pharaoh at another time. Some revisonists have addressed the short chronological view and some a longer view which pushes the date of Exodus well into the 16th century.
3. The religious center of Israel was Jerusalem but the administrative center may have been in the Jezreel Valley of Mediggo and Mediggo is listed on Sheshonq's inscription. It is believed by some, Sheshonq was paid off by the temple gold and so never set his sights on Jerusalem.

Either point of view has validity, in my opinion. The answer may be lying in the back room of some museum right now, or is still buried in the rubble that propped up Herod the Great's building campaign.

Don't know 'Arch' or what he would say but this is my opinion.

Arch would say....(at the top of his lungs) THE BIBLE SAYS A GREAT EMPIRE SO A GREAT EMPIRE IT WAS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Perhaps with a few more exclamation points.


(Bible apologists make all sorts of excuses for the fact that archaeology can not confirm their stories. Occam's razor still makes the most sense:
It was an age when war had to pay for war and a long detour to capture an insignificant hill town is not a good investment. I'm sure Shishak's soldiers had plenty of sheep to hump right where they were!)

BTW....how long did the high point of the Athenian Empire last?

Or Babylon?

Or Alexander the Great's?

Being a local trivia champion, I won't muck it all up for others. Babylon could be debatable though.

Babylon is easy compared to Athens.

Bible apologists make all sorts of excuses for the fact that archaeology can not confirm their stories.

also
pseudoscientists and their ignorant fan club make up all sorts of excuses for the fact that archaeology can not confirm their stories

The high point of Athens? That can only be the Golden Age of Pericles, which ended with his death - all total roughly 15 yrs.

You are the historian here - is this a trick question?