Current Biblical Archaeology

[Minimalist]

Christ's words donot believe the Bible but they cannot explain its popularity, longevity and its error free copying over the centuries.

Human gullibility explains the first two....and it also explains the 3'd.

[Minimalist]

Just pointing out, and I'm sure you know, that Paul never laid eyes on Jesus.

He also never referred to his so-called 'trial' and death in Jerusalem which he would have almost of necessity had to have heard about.

Odd.

As a matter of fact, a writer by the name of Earl Doherty has pointed out that Paul seems to be referring to a totally spiritual god rather than the later, gospel-version, of a man who actually walked the earth.

Doherty's book is called "The Jesus Puzzle."

[Guest]

Just pointing out, and I'm sure you know, that Paul never laid eyes on Jesus

depends on how you view his roadside encounter with Christ.

He also never referred to his so-called 'trial' and death in Jerusalem which he would have almost of necessity had to have heard about

actually that referal was in the book of romans or i cor. have to check which.

[Minimalist]

You do that and I'll dig out Doherty's book.....easier than reading that other stuff.

[Guest]

interesting, you would take doherty over the Bible. you think that fallible man is more correct than the infallible?

[Minimalist]

You continually mistate my position because you cannot bear the fact.

The bible was written by men with an agenda, just like Doherty's. They were neither divine themselves nor inspired by the divine. They were just hucksters looking to make a shekel.

[Guest]

the thread has been bogged down to the point where I am starting to believe that Mini and Arch are one in the same person suffering an extended schizophrenic break.

that is a first. i am not minimalist.

Can we please get back to discussing concretely some of the finds in Jerusalem (for example the mosaic found in the Israeli prison which is purported to be from one of the earliest Christian churches.

if confirmed what would the mosaic prove in regards to christianity and faith?

and have read the bible cover to cover. In other words I know what is in it and choose to not believe it as fact

how many times have you read it through? i have read it through over 20 times and choose to believe it is fact, so we are at odds here.

[Minimalist]

I have read an inordinate amount of the interplay between Minimalist and "archaeologist"...aside from the fact that this thread started with some interesting passages from the Finklestein and Dever books, the thread has been bogged down to the point where I am starting to believe that Mini and Arch are one in the same person suffering an extended schizophrenic break.

Heaven forbid


I respect the fact that you choose to confront ignorance rather than ignore it in turn, Minimalist, but the fact is you will never win. Can we please get back to discussing concretely some of the finds in Jerusalem (for example the mosaic found in the Israeli prison which is purported to be from one of the earliest Christian churches...I said purported - lest one of you chooses to attack me).

I know I'll never win...but I'm not going to let him win, either. That's how we ended up with GW in the White House.

By the way, I was raised Catholic and attended Catholic schools through high school (Jesuit) and have read the bible cover to cover. In other words I know what is in it and choose to not believe it as fact. It would be pointless to conflate faith and fact.

And you survived. Good.

Anyway, to answer your question, other than the pre-historic find noted today, there hasn't been a lot of recent archaeology in Israel. Aside from the church floor...which was discussed there was a report about shelters built in Galilee in preparation for the Great Revolt....which was kind of a ludicrous assertion. Archaeology does not work on a schedule. I follow both the Jerusalem Post and Haaretz.com as these pay a lot of attention to archaeological finds and are generally pretty fair in their coverage.

[Minimalist]

depends on how you view his roadside encounter with Christ.

Hallucination? Food-poisoning?? Too much wine???

Wishful thinking????

[Leona Conner]

[quote]. . .and its error free copying over the centuries.[/quote]

Where have you been? Until the invention of the printing press, Bibles were all hand copied by scribes sitting in a cell in some monestary. Many copies of these Bibles have been found and they have noticible differences. They show where words have been erased and replaced. Some didn't bother to replace the word but added something in the margin which was later added by a scribe thinking it belonged there. In one monestary they found two different Bibles where Mark had different endings (I believe one had several more verses than the other.)

Since none of the original writings are extant, no one knows for sure just how correct these translations really are. That not only applies to the Gospels but the numerous letters as well.

[Minimalist]

Well, by popular demand, let's get back to archaeology's demolition of the OT.

Finkelstein goes through a long (nearly 20 page) recap of all of the events and places from the 7th century BC which show up in the Exodus story...which if it had ever happened, would have had to precede the 14th century BC.

In the later half of the 7th century, as Assyrian influence was lessened by the Babylonian revolt, both Judah and Egypt cast ravenous eyes at the territory which Assyria abandoned. Egypt, under Pharoah Necho of the 26th Dynasty and Judah, under King Josiah, who the bible writers fawned over like he was King Arthur, personified this brewing conflict.

As Finkelstein puts it:

Now a young leader of Judah was prepared to confront the great pharoah, and ancient traditions from many sources were crafted in a single sweeping epic that bolstered Josiah's political aims.

New layers would be added to the Exodus story in subsequent centuries - during the exile in Babylonia and beyond. But we can now see how the astonishing composition came together under the pressure of a growing conflict with Egypt in the seventh century BC. The saga of Israel's Exodus from Egypt is neither historical truth nor literary fiction. It is a powerful expression of memory and hope born in a world in the midst of change. The confrontation between Moses and pharoah mirrored the momentous confrontation between the young king Josiah and the newly crowned Pharoah Necho.

Of course, when Necho summoned Josiah to a meeting he apparently did not like what he heard and had him executed....thus ending the story and causing another editing of the OT once the bible writers got over the shock of seeing their hero killed.

[Guest]

Where have you been

i should ask you that as i poosted an example using the silver scrolls to support that view.

and ancient traditions from many sources were crafted in a single sweeping epic that bolstered Josiah's political aims.

how does or canhe prove that staement? that is his guess not a fact.

by popular demand, let's get back to archaeology's demolition of the OT

i wouldn't say archaeology's demolition but an archaeologist's attempt to demolish the Bible. your continuing reliance upon finkelstein makes me wonder if you think of him as the definitive and final authority on what archaeology says. i know many who would disagree with that assessment and use of that person.

[Guest]

p.s. one book iordered has arrived and now i must finish hapgood before i start that one.

[Minimalist]

Read on.

You do understand that what Finkelstein (and Dever) are doing here is writing books designed to bring 20 years worth of archaeological studies to laymen. By no means is he claiming that this is all his own research or theory. His bibliography is immense. To a degree, I suppose, this makes it worse for you because it is far from one man...like your pal Pellegrino... writing a book based on his own wishful thinking. Finkelstein's desire is to make archaeological finds available to people like you to show you the error of your ways (okay...that's me editorializing)!

Since he actually bothers to list sources and (gasp) evidence he ranks much higher on the scale than some Billy Graham wannabe who says "Jesus told me to tell you that He hates faggots and illegal aliens....oh, and vote Republican.)

[Guest]

By no means is he claiming that this is all his own research or theory. His bibliography is immense

yet the weakness remains---the arbitrary dating that is used and accepted-- so i do not care if he has 100 authors in the bibliography. if they all use the same flawed process then the conclusions will be flawed but magnified 100 fold.

if i said that, you would find some minior detail to discredit what i said. i happen to pick on a major point which does discredit what these guys are saying. the Bible trumps human fallibility and frailities even for the simple reason, humans are manipulitable and dis-believe has no stake nor desire to prove the Bible true.