Archaeologica.org

Had a revelation, Arch?

no, i realize that there are wingnuts on my side of the fence who twist archaeological discoveries into what they want and it is frustrating to say the least.

with people like minimalist ready to pounce upon the slightest error and blow it up out of proportion while ignoring the mistakes made on their own side, it does not make these discussions easy.

a lot of time people's desires get in the way of their common sense, that does not mean by believing the Biblical account, or their deductive reasoning, if they have any at all, and make a mess of it all.

yet to try and undermine a person's efforts by embellishing those errors isn't right either. i do not agree with feinstein or dever and they do make mistakes in their deductive process, not because they disagree with me but because they are trying to undermine the Bible which cannot be done.

it is that desire that the Bible be proven false which has corrupted their investigative process and are leading many astray from the truth. we have enough evidence in both the religious and non-religious research to know that the Bible is true. it is there and in plain site, what you believe is up to you and how you go about your research is up to you.

christianity is not like islam where you will be put to death for non-belief or for conversion away from it. we recognize that you have freedomof choice and that choice is your alone. we would like you to find the truth but if you don't that is your choice. we canonly present our side under the guidelines God has given us to follow; which means that you will never get 100% proof without faith.

It is the religious nuts who grasp at any straw they can find....usually citing things from scientific pre-history to prove their idiot claims of gods, devils and saints.

it is that desire that the Bible be proven false

It HAS been proven false....at least to anyone who is not emotionally invested in pretending that magic is still a reasonable explanation of science.

It is the religious nuts who grasp at any straw they can find....usually citing things from scientific pre-history to prove their idiot claims of gods, devils and saints

It HAS been proven false....at least to anyone who is not emotionally invested in pretending that magic is still a reasonable explanation of science

i have already proven how fallible and corruptible science really is and i have more quotes in which to use which further display the error prone field of 'scientific' research. which will come later.

so if anyone is hanging onto fairy tales it is you, who still believe in the ultimate definitiveness of science. science is not to be trusted as the people running the show are as human as the next person.

i have already proven how fallible and corruptible science

You have proven only your own desperation to believe in nonsense.

just wait for the next round of quotes

I'll stick with recounting the work of real archaeologists...not jerk off preachers and guys who want to sell books to the gullible.


Dever discusses the so-called Conquest model which early archaeologists grabbed onto because they were looking to use their finds to support the bible in a bit of circular reasoning by which everything that came out of the ground was related to some bible stupidity or other.

Following his survey:

The foregoing survey of archaeological data ( key word there, arch....archaeological data...not fairy tales) leaves one with little choice. We must confront the fact that the external material evidence supports almost nothing of the biblical account of a large-scale, concerted Israelite military invasion of Canaan, either that of Numbers east of the Jordan or of Joshua west of the Jordan. Of the more than forty sites that the biblical texts claim were conquered, no more than two or three of those that have been archaeologically investigated are even potential candidates for such an Israelite destruction in the entire period from ca.1250 - 1150 BC.

I'll stick with recounting the work of real archaeologists

are you sure you want to do that?

The foregoing survey of archaeological data ( key word there, arch....archaeological data...not fairy tales)

there lies the problem... archaeological data. most archaeologists like Dever and his fellow unbelievers rely on what data they have found. sparse as it is, they are drawing conclusions from unfinished work and making assumptions from what little evidence they have found.

we know that it takes awhile to publish discoveries from digs, we know that archaeologists have to piece together what little they find and that takes time and we know that they have not dug up every piece of data that is buried there.

thus any conclusion contrary to the Biblical record is pre-mature because they haven't dug up all the archaeological data. conclusive proof for the Biblical record may yet be found if it hasn't already. what dever and finklestein do , along with others, is they dig at one site find nothing, move to another dig, find nothing then conclude that since they haven't found any proof, it must not be true when they haven't found anything to prove it isn't true.

they go by the lack of evidence to support their case when in reality, the lack of evidence doesn't prove them right either. they jump and down shouting 'we haven't found anything, we haven't found anything' and they are right; they haven't found anything. there isnothing in their discoveries that proves their conclusion correct.

what they have found is an interpretation guided by their beliefs, their hopes or whatever. or since the dating system is quite arbitrary (dating at best is a guess because no dates are stamped on the pottery) it is again assumed that they are interpretating the evidence correctly. but in my experience, i have seen people forget extenuating circumstances or possibilities in their rush to date their find and become renowned.

there are things you just have to take by faith and we cannot dig up every square inch of the Holy land to please a minority of people.

archaeological data. most archaeologists like Dever and his fellow unbelievers rely on what data they have found

Yes, arch...NOW you understand. "Archaeologists" do in fact rely on "archaeological data." It is sort of inherent in the name "archaeologist" isn't it?

Your problem (and it is YOUR PROBLEM) is that the findings of real archaeologists contradict the silly fairy tales which constitute your belief system.

I have to tell you, arch. In a contest between the people who are doing the work and digging and a bunch of fools pointing to a book about talking snakes, and burning bushes, and stopping the sun, etc....I'm going to come down on the side of the scientists everytime.

Hey, arch.

How come your new hero's web site was taken down?

www.evidenceofgod.com

The page cannot be found
The page you are looking for might have been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please try the following:

If you typed the page address in the Address bar, make sure that it is spelled correctly.

Open the www.evidenceofgod.com home page, and then look for links to the information you want.
Click the Back button to try another link.
Click Search to look for information on the Internet.



HTTP 404 - File not found
Internet Explorer

I know that it was bullshit but that usually doesn't get something removed from the web!

How come your new hero's web site was taken down

1. he is not my hero
2. you asked for prrof, i gave you a place to find the list. a book not a web site.
3. i have never pursued information from that website soi have no knowledge of whatis happening
4. there could be a number of reasons why but your limitedness only allows you to pick one and mock prematurely.
5. i gave you two other books that provide the same information you requested.
6. i would give you non-religious books but their turning from the truth to fanciful theories undermines the objective.
7. your hatred for anything religious colors your perspective and influences your judgment. which means you are not scientific nor objective or rational. thus your opinions are undermined by the lack of scholary reason.

Now you must do penitence too, mini.
The lord hath spoken.

Religion deserves hatred, arch.

Your kind have shed too much blood in god's name throughout history for it to merit anything but scorn.

Latest feat:
untold millions of AIDS dead in Africa because the church disapproves of condoms. The holocaust was a picknick compared to that.
And it's going on right under our noses.
As we speak.
Religious terror never stops.

The Catholic church has always used poverty as a means of control. In the words of Napoleon Bonaparte...

"The purpose of religion is to stop the poor from killing the rich."