The point is, many ancient manuscripts are used to aid archeology...be them wholly true, wholly myth, or a little of both
thats kind of true
but there is a distinction
people using ancient texts (like schlieman) as a rough guide to finding archaeological sites often come up trumps because the text is contemporary with the site
this only works when the text being used was actually written at the time that the site existed
when it comes to biblical archaeology people aren't using the bible to aid archaeology
they are using archaeology to aid the bible
Last edited by marduk on Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
this was your original claim
as we have seen its totally erroneous
had you admitted that earlier we could have saved some time and you could have saved some face
I never brought my personal beliefs to the table
you don't think that comparing your evidence to passages from the Bible is bringing a personal belief to the table
so in that case you'll happily admit that the Bible is a work of fiction then won't you and that you have no personal beliefs based on what it says
ready when you are ?
Check into the story of Tubal-Cain, his brothers, and the flood that followed. One of Tubal-Cain's brothers, Jubal, is said to have been the father of all who play the harp and flute.
Note my personal beliefs weren't brought to the table. I only stated the intriguing parallels between the story and evidence being found here.
Then you blasted in with all your religous beliefs, and tried to twist my words into a religous statement. Tsk, tsk...play nice, Mar.
Then you blasted in with all your religous beliefs, and tried to twist my words into a religous statement.
lol
whatever you like Charlie
you think that anyone else reading this exchange is gonna side with your interpretation of it then you're more deluded than I thought
That's not entirely true, Marduk, Jim the "Arch"aeologist pointed out many cases in the past, where the Bible mentioned sites or facts that were deemed fantasy until someone excavated and discovered the Bible was correct. Now don't ask me to name them because I haven't researched it, I will just refer you to some of his old posts and that will upset Min because he'll start having flashbacks.
you don't think that comparing your evidence to passages from the Bible is bringing a personal belief to the table
so in that case you'll happily admit that the Bible is a work of fiction then won't you and that you have no personal beliefs based on what it says
ready when you are ?
So how is my statement any different from a scholar noting parallels in any other text, and persuing the lead to further his research. Not that the scholar buys into the whole story, necessarily, but clues to locations, technologies, etc...
State that you aren't a resurrected Babylonian.
The point is, everyone has their personal beliefs, but those should be left at home.
nope
he attempted to point out many examples which later turned out to be fabrications from bibical scholars and people of faith
these include
1) the walls of Jericho not existing
2) the ark not being on arrarat
3) sargon the great not getting a mention in the bible anywhere
4) the exodus
5) the location of Sodom and Gomorrah
6) the flood of Noah in the black sea
7) texts upon which the Noah story were based actually existing and not being derived from akkadian versions of the story (hey i'm still waiting for the links he said he had that proved this)
etc
etc
etc
lol
whatever you like Charlie
you think that anyone else reading this exchange is gonna side with your interpretation of it then you're more deluded than I thought
...like anyone here takes you seriously, Mar. Your a joke among us. Sorry..the truth hurts sometimes.
you don't think that comparing your evidence to passages from the Bible is bringing a personal belief to the table
so in that case you'll happily admit that the Bible is a work of fiction then won't you and that you have no personal beliefs based on what it says
ready when you are ?
So how is my statement any different from a scholar noting parallels in any other text, and persuing the lead to further his research. Not that the scholar buys into the whole story, necessarily, but clues to locations, technologies, etc...
State that you aren't a resurrected Babylonian.
The point is, everyone has their personal beliefs, but those should be left at home.
This might be a good place to insert the the story about the Illyad and the discovery of 12th century Troy but then everyone gets upset about how Schliemann tore up a bunch of history digging down to the 12th century.
uh ok
and the joke is not that you are just pulling up rocks from the ground and shrieking "hey look a handaxe" like has been renumerated to you by pretty much everyone in every forum you ever posted this crap at
This might be a good place to insert the the story about the Illyad
uh ok
and the joke is not that you are just pulling up rocks from the ground and shrieking "hey look a handaxe" like has been renumerated to you by pretty much everyone in every forum you ever posted this crap at
Like Warren Sharp, with Berkeley and Jim Bischoff with the USGS?
Fred with Calico, and Chris Hardaker.
Silly, silly boy.
You know not what you say.
I've actually been quite pleased with the response I've received from these highly regarded researchers.
Have you or wife ever made it this far up the chain? Didn't think so.
Last edited by Charlie Hatchett on Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
marduk wrote:nope
he attempted to point out many examples which later turned out to be fabrications from bibical scholars and people of faith
these include
1) the walls of Jericho not existing
2) the ark not being on arrarat
3) sargon the great not getting a mention in the bible anywhere
4) the exodus
5) the location of Sodom and Gomorrah
6) the flood of Noah in the black sea
7) texts upon which the Noah story were based actually existing and not being derived from akkadian versions of the story (hey i'm still waiting for the links he said he had that proved this)
etc
etc
etc
You mean he never mentioned things like Carchemesh, the site of Solomons palace, etc? I bet I could come up with a legitimate list after an hour of research. But I think you know it too. You're both arguing from two different frameworks.
Think so ?
you're claiming I'm a joke at this forum despite the fact that seven posters here post at my forum
the only reason you said that was to personally attack me
so really
resorting to personal attacks is aprt of your strategy to win a discussion
perhaps you should level with us all
what exactly did Warren Sharp and Jim Bischoff say about your method of excavation
praised you did they ? http://www.pef.org.uk/EarlySyriaPages/Carchemish.htm
In 1876 the Assyriologist George Smith first identified the immense site of Carchemish as the city mentioned in Egyptian, Assyrian, and biblical texts.
so you were saying
found it from the bible did they
Last edited by marduk on Fri Jan 26, 2007 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
...like anyone here takes you seriously, Mar. Your a joke among us. Sorry..the truth hurts sometimes.