Current Biblical Archaeology

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 5:43 pm

I've told you before that "quotes" are worthless.

you certainly use a lot of themin your own argument, hope you apply that to your finkelsteins and devers when you quote them.

have my vote.

then you are voting in error and not objectivity as you claim. it is well known that conclusions based upon what is not found are faulty conclusions and that sentiment has been proven over and over again. something you know full well.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 5:45 pm

conclusions based upon what is not found are faulty conclusions and that sentiment has been proven over and over again

ah the old absense of evidence is not evidence of absense ploy
i wondered how long it would be before you tried that one
absense of evidence is in fact evidence of a completely fabricated theory Arch

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:18 pm

Posting a paragraph which Finkelstein has written in his book to prove a specific point is a far cry from taking one line out of a book, which may or may not be relevant to the point that the author is or is not trying to make.

Your average quote, after all your nonsense is subtracted, usually comes down to "science doesn't have all the answers."

The only reason that you find that compelling is because you think that your bible does have all the answers.

But it has very few that are worth a shit.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:28 pm

try to justify it all you want to but just make sure you apply the standard both ways instead of operating out of a double standard

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:37 pm

Let's be clear about something.

The bible is a collection of fairy tales. It does not deserve to be given serious treatment by scientists.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:50 pm

It does not deserve to be given serious treatment by scientists

now there is the core of the problem: elevating science and scientists above the Bible, that is what is called, if you include yourself--pride and if you don't include yourself--a haughty spirit.

humility goes a long ways, those involved in science would learn a lot more if they realized how little they really know and understand.

science will only take you so far then it will only be able to give you questions, theory, shrugs and so on...God has made all things that way,at some point you have to realize the limitation of science and its related fields and that the answers are where you most despise.

lack of evidence does not prove lack of activity or action.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:56 pm

lack of evidence does not prove lack of activity or action.

yes it does
god strike me down if i am wrong

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 7:56 pm

I'm still here

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:27 pm

I've told you a zillion times that your silly book was written for one purpose: To keep a bunch of goatherders in line and get them to fork over a few shekels to the corrupt priests lounging around in the temple chasing the Iron Age II equivalent of altar boys.

It is the height of folly for you to seek actual answers to actual questions from such a source.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:30 pm

i disagree
it was written to give a group of people a cosmology because they didn't have one of their own
groups that typically don't have their own cosmologies are those ones that have very recently formed and haven't figured out where they came from yet
they typically borrow heavily from an older culture that they know a lot about

it was when the christians got hold of it that it started to be used for nefarious and erroneous reasons
and for grabbing altar boys

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:38 pm

it was written to give a group of people a cosmology because they didn't have one of their own

When does the power structure ever care about anything except their own interests? The country functioned perfectly well while they were out there worshipping El and Asherah in addition to Yahweh. The Kingdom of Israel rose to local prominence under the Omrides without any particular interest in Yahweh.

There is a reason why worship was required at only one temple. Because the priests who ran the temple wanted a monopoly.

The cops know that in any crime one follows the money.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 8:51 pm

the bible wasn't compiled when they were out there worshipping El and Asherah in addition to Yahweh
it was compiled when they were released from slavery
because they needed it to keep them all together

imho

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:05 pm

I find Finkelstein's arguments more compelling.

Doubtless it was redacted several times (even Finkelstein says that) after it was pulled together (not the least reason being that Pharoah Necho killed their 'golden-boy' Josiah!) but Finkelstein makes a compelling case for the bible having been first written in the late 7th century BC.

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:10 pm

I have no doubt that most of it dates from then as that matches their date for access to the library of Nineveh
the book of job is far older and based on an akkadian text from 1700bce called Ludlul Bel Nimeqi, Tabu-utul-Bel
http://www.piney.com/BabTabuBel.html
but its the compilation date thats important
before they put it together it was just a collection of seperate stories
after they put it together it became the word of YHWH

Post by **Minimalist** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 9:45 pm

As Finkelstein (and, far more viciously, William Dever) point out, the true Minimalist School, as personified by the authors I mentioned, ignore the archaeology. You will note that Arch and the bible thumpers ignore it also, which gives them something in common, after all.