• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

ARCHEOLOGY and THE BIBLE

tosca1

Member
Joshua was real. And so were....


SODOM AND GOMORRAH


The Evidence

General
Geological studies have shown that the level of the Dead Sea was at a low point during the Early Bronze Age (Neev and Emery 1995: 62) and thus the shallow basin, or "plain" south of the Dead Sea, would have been dry land and probably cultivated. (5) The location of the Early Bronze Age sites along the eastern edge of the plain fits the Biblical description of the cities as being of the plain.




Paleobotany
The first description of the Cities of the Plain in the Bible is in the account of Lot separating from Abraham in Genesis 13:10–13. There, the plain is described as being "well watered" as far as Zoar (Gn 13:10).
Paleo-botanical studies have shown that there was a rich diversity of crops grown at Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira. Most common were barley, wheat, grapes, figs, lentils and flax. Less common were chickpeas, peas, broad beans, dates and olives (McCreery 1980:52). Several of these crops could only have been grown with the use of irrigation




Fortifications
When the two angels came to Sodom to warn Lot of the impending doom, they found him sitting in the city gate (Gn 19:1). This indicates that Sodom was fortified. Bab edh-Dhra, which means "gate of the arm," had imposing fortifications. The city wall, enclosing an area of 9–10 acres, was a massive 7 m (23 ft) wide and made of stones and mud bricks (Schaub 1993: 134). Evidence for settlement was found outside the walls as well.



Two Destructions
The Bible tells of not one, but two, traumatic events that occurred in the final days of Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 14 describes an attack against the Cities of the Plain by a coalition of four Mesopotamian kings.

There is evidence at both Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira for two destructions. (6)





Evidence for Destruction at Bab edh-Dhra

Shortly thereafter, at the close of the Early Bronze III period, the fortified city at Bab edh-Dhra met a final fiery end.



Evidence for Destruction at Numeira
At Numeira, a better preserved site than Bab edh-Dhra, the evidence is even more dramatic



Means of the Destruction of the Cities of the Plain

The Biblical Description


Geological Investigations
After surveying the geology of the district, Clapp concluded that combustible materials from the earth destroyed the cities. He found bitumen and petroleum in the area. Natural gas and sulfur, which normally accompany bitumen and petroleum, are also present. These combustible materials could have been forced from the earth by subterranean pressure brought about by an earthquake resulting from the shifting of the bounding faults (Clapp 1936a: 906; 1936b: 40). Geologists who have studied the area in recent times agree with Clapp's reconstruction (Harris and Beardow 1995: 360; Neev and Emery 1995: 13–14; 33, 37). If lightning or surface fires ignited these combustibles as they came spewing forth from the ground, it would indeed result in a holocaust such as described in Genesis 19.

It is significant to note that both Bab edh-Dhra and Numeira lie at the edge of the plain, exactly on the eastern fault line!


Conclusion

When the archaeological, geographical and epigraphic evidence is reviewed in detail, it is clear that the infamous cities of Sodom and Gomorrah have now been found. What is more, this evidence demonstrates that the Bible provides an accurate eyewitness account of events that occurred southeast of the Dead Sea over
4,000 years ago.

Associates for Biblical Research - The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah



It's a very long, detailed article that explains the discoveries. Another evidence to support the historicity of the Bible.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member

sooda

Veteran Member
Joshua was real. And so were....


SODOM AND GOMORRAH



Associates for Biblical Research - The Discovery of the Sin ..

The hydrology of the Jordan Basin was not depleted . The water table was much higher and the Dead Sea was much larger. A half dozen universities have done studies since the 1950s. .. and no tels have been found for any of the cities of the plain.
Joshua was real. And so were....


SODOM AND GOMORRAH



Associates for Biblical Research - The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah




It's a very long, detailed article that explains the discoveries. Another evidence to support the historicity of the Bible.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
I GUESS.... if that is what you want to believe as an atheists... any reason will be a good enough reason for you.

I prefer history.

No, you prefer bare claims that happen to match what you want to believe.

You haven't given me the slightest hint that you looked any further into it then what Tacitus / Josephus claimed about it.

In fact, I bet that you don't even care why modern day historian / archeologists think they are lying and/or exaggerating.

You can prove me wrong by citing the prevailing ideas about this and explaining why they aren't correct.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Riiiight. It's real when you want it to be and not real when you don't want it to be... gotcha!

upload_2019-5-24_7-19-41.png
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
"prevailing ideas" speaks of fluctuations. I speak historically which is why your prevailing idea is incorrect.
So, you have no idea why the actual experts take this stance that you reject out of hand at face value.
You are just content sticking with the numbers that those who actually study it think are wrong, for apparantly no other reason then those numbers suiting your argument.

This is the only conclusion I can draw due to your reluctance of getting deeper into it and instead just repeat your same one-liner claims.

Again, you can prove me wrong by actually demonstrating that you
1. actually understand and know why the actual experts disagree
2. know better then the actual experts


Excuse me, random religiously biased internet guy, but I'll stick with what the actual experts on the matter have to say instead of going by the obviously biased ramblings of someone who has already made up his made due to a priori dogmatic religious beliefs.


:)

edit: (ok, that post sounded a bit harsh perhaps... I'm tired and annoyed by the stubborness and the going around in circles all the time... sorry)
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
So, you have no idea why the actual experts take this stance that you reject out of hand at face value.
You are just content sticking with the numbers that those who actually study it think are wrong, for apparantly no other reason then those numbers suiting your argument.

This is the only conclusion I can draw due to your reluctance of getting deeper into it and instead just repeat your same one-liner claims.

Again, you can prove me wrong by actually demonstrating that you
1. actually understand and know why the actual experts disagree
2. know better then the actual experts


Excuse me, random religiously biased internet guy, but I'll stick with what the actual experts on the matter have to say instead of going by the obviously biased ramblings of someone who has already made up his made due to a priori dogmatic religious beliefs.


:)

edit: (ok, that post sounded a bit harsh perhaps... I'm tired and annoyed by the stubborness and the going around in circles all the time... sorry)
You continue to talk... but you still have no real talking points. Tacitus and Josephus exaggerated because someone said so? No proof, no substance and an absence of reality... but you have every right to live your own created world.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
You continue to talk... but you still have no real talking points. Tacitus and Josephus exaggerated because someone said so?

:rolleyes:

Yeah, it sounds like you really read up on the studies that were conducted by the actual experts in those fields ...

Yes, I bet their paper has only that one line "population size was X, because I say so"


:rolleyes:

You just made my point for me. Thanks.

No proof, no substance and an absence of reality... but you have every right to live your own created world.

Says the guy who brushed of years worth of study with "because someone said so".

:rolleyes:

Sleep tight.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
:rolleyes:

Yeah, it sounds like you really read up on the studies that were conducted by the actual experts in those fields ...

Yes, I bet their paper has only that one line "population size was X, because I say so"


:rolleyes:

You just made my point for me. Thanks.



Says the guy who brushed of years worth of study with "because someone said so".

:rolleyes:

Sleep tight.
LOL - dream on, my friend.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
LOL - dream on, my friend.

Not sure what you are LOL-ing about, considering you just exposed that you didn't even bother to look up why historians and archeologists and what not don't consider Tacitus and Josephus credible on this particular point. In other words, you exposed that you don't actually care about what is actually true. You only care about what fits your a priori beliefs and holding on to them.

That's fine off course, but at least be honest about it.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Tacitus and Josephus exaggerated because someone said so? No proof, no substance and an absence of reality...

Also, this is quite hilarious. How did I miss that the first time, I wonder...


So, you say that "why should I believe tacitus is wong because someone said so".
That's actually fine reasoning. Indeed, you shouldn't ever believe anything simply "because someone says so".

But then you should ask yourself: why do you then believe what Tacitus says? Simply because he says so???

See, it's a two way street....

If Tacitus isn't wrong just because someone says so...
Then Tacitus likewise also isn't correct, just because someone (Tacitus himself in this case) says so.


Your double standard is showing (and that's on top of your self-acknowledged ignorance on the topic).
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Also, this is quite hilarious. How did I miss that the first time, I wonder...


So, you say that "why should I believe tacitus is wong because someone said so".
That's actually fine reasoning. Indeed, you shouldn't ever believe anything simply "because someone says so".

But then you should ask yourself: why do you then believe what Tacitus says? Simply because he says so???

See, it's a two way street....

If Tacitus isn't wrong just because someone says so...
Then Tacitus likewise also isn't correct, just because someone (Tacitus himself in this case) says so.


Your double standard is showing (and that's on top of your self-acknowledged ignorance on the topic).
let everything be established by the WITNESS of two (Josephus and Tacitus)... not what people think, who were never there, 2000 years later. PHD - Post Hole Diggers seeking today's fame. :D
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
That's the thing with the Bible. Crumbs here and there - but, they are cumulative!
You have a few crumbs and are claiming it proves a certain baker in a certain neighborhood had an argument with his girlfriend on a Tuesday right after eating lamb chops for dinner.

Compare these tiny bits of evidence for the Bible to the evidence that we have for Egyptian history. It bears no comparison.
Egyptian history almost certainly proves Moses never happened.

A good number of circumstantial evidences that corroborate each other (crime).....can lead to conviction!
How does showing a reference to one person's name lead to the conviction that something entirely unrelated happened centuries before or after?

If I arrest a guy named John Smith today, that doesn't mean he jumped off a cliff while Pocahontas was singing about colors in the wind.

Spiderman lives in New York City.
And King's Cross Station is proof of Harry Potter. I even can show physical evidence:
Platform-harry-potter.jpg

I mean, the evidence is right there! Soon, the people who made Pokemon Go will let us go around dispelling magical creatures and such with our cell phones. If that's not proof, I don't know what is.

If something was an act of miracle - can science prove it? I doubt it.
There are plenty of plot holes and medical wonders that can explain how a man taken down prior to the time most people died on the cross survived.

The Bible is indeed stories set in history, and it was common to glorify, and amplify the lives of famous figures in the stories of people in history, and add supernatural attributes and miracles.
It is like what we do with the founding fathers. We even capitalize the term, as though they are gods.

On the contrary, they prove a lot: that the Scriptures we have today, though copies and copies have been made of unknown numbers of copies....the context is almost unchanged from the Qumran manuscripts!
All the copies of Harry Potter agree with each other. Therefore, it really happened.

The Israelite slaves that farmed the Reed beds for fish, papyruse, etc etc knew the wades and channels intimately, and so a mass emigration across and out of Egypt was easily possible. The Egyptians would not have had intimate knowledge of the channels and wades because they would never have set foot in the disease ridden places.
The problem is that if the Exodus occurred somewhere in the 2nd millennium BCE, Egypt owned the land they were supposedly going to.
4196

It's like saying they left the US by moving from Alabama to Ohio.

Now, I'm not going to debate whether the red sea happened or not. Archeology has found nothing on that - so it's irrelevant in this thread.
It's not going to because it never happened.

There are probably far more crumbs available for the Mahabharata, but I doubt you'll think that's real.

Yes, the direct evidence of Pilate stone can only show that Pilate was the prefect of that region (as described in the Bible). HOWEVER, that is only one evidence for the historicity of the Bible regarding that one particular information (Pontius Pilate).
I sincerely doubt that Romans wouldn't have written down legal proceedings, and Jesus supposedly went to trial, both with Pilate and with the Sanhedrin, and yet funnily enough we don't have a single court docket or anything to show it.

Archeology may have discovered the first extra-biblical evidence for the prophet Isaiah!
There is evidence for Jason Segal being a real person, therefore he really helped Muppets?
The Muppets (2011) - IMDb

Surely, anyone who dug up Spiderman comics would eventually realize what Spiderman was to us! Lol.
Sure, in a couple of thousand years, they might conclude Peter Parker was an incarnation of Iktomi, a Spider God.

Even today - some of them still talk in very "dramatic" way (for lack of better word).
But the fact it's a cultural hang-up to tell whoppers doesn't make it true. I'm from the US and there are plenty of tall tales in our collective mythology, such as Pecos Bill and Paul Bunyan and John Henry. Doesn't make them historically accurate.

The Cinderella story dates back to ancient Egypt.
The biblical Book of Esther is also basically a Cinderella story.

This is about archeology and the BIBLE - archeological findings reaffirming what's written in the Bible.
Persian records don't prove Esther happened because it was a fairy tale.

Joshua was real
How do you figure? Neither of your sources in your post are talking about Joshua at all. It's like you're saying CNN had live coverage of the founding of the Iroquois League.

But, is the person the expert or is Josephus and Tacitus more of an expert
They are incredibly stupid if they think Joshua happened during Roman times.

Of course, we don't want first hand witnesses
They didn't witness Joshua.

Why not?

If someone claims a certain city had 1 million citizens while everything about the city points of it having a capacity of only a good 50.000, then surely the claim should be treated as an exaggeration, right?
Especially when dealing with a culture with a fetish for numerology, where mystical meanings for numbers are more important than actual numbers.

This is why we have four gospels even though there were 12 apostles (also unlikely) and many more disciples: some guy felt the number 4 was magic and thus there should only be four even though that makes not a single ounce of sense. There are 12 apostles despite the clear mentions of other people because some author felt 12 was a magically significant number.
 
Last edited:

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
How do you figure? Neither of your sources in your post are talking about Joshua at all. It's like you're saying CNN had live coverage of the founding of the Iroquois League.


They are incredibly stupid if they think Joshua happened during Roman times.

All of that is because you came in the conversation late. Joshua was their statement and I was equally dumbfounded how they mixed the two stories. :D

And certainly it would be stupid that the two were at the same time... so happy you figured that out! :)
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
The problem is that if the Exodus occurred somewhere in the 2nd millennium BCE, Egypt owned the land they were supposedly going to..

Sure...... if.
I don't think that anybody is sure about many details at all....... but translations of reports suggest that there could have been a storm at the time of the flight, and tradition has it that this happened shortly after a spring Full Moon, that date being linked to a Full Moon ever since.

I don't think that the size of the evacuation/flight was as great as reported in the bible, I wonder how many people could cross a large marsh through a very few wades in, say, four hours?

I just think that a flight of slave refugees did run away through a vast marsh (or Reed sea) at the very best time possible, having waited for a perfect 2-3 day storm which caused a storm surge, linked to a Spring tide.

I am just intimately acquainted with the results of storm surges which coincide with very high equinoctial low-lows and high-spring tides.

Because of this the bible report does not look like total BS to me.

For me it does not matter, one way or t'other, because I don't stitch my future on such a story, it just rings bells for me.
:)
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
All the copies of Harry Potter agree with each other. Therefore, it really happened.
It's veracity wasn't the point. But since you brought it up...

One difference is, Harry Potter was written to make money; the Bible wasn't. Another difference: the Bible's copies were hand-written for thousands of years. Makes the integrity of the copies, even more remarkable!

The U.S. Declaration of Independence wasn't written to make money, either. The importance of the document in relation to the U.S., ensures it's existence....let's see in 3,000 years, ok?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
It's veracity wasn't the point. But since you brought it up...

One difference is, Harry Potter was written to make money; the Bible wasn't. Another difference: the Bible's copies were hand-written for thousands of years. Makes the integrity of the copies, even more remarkable!

The U.S. Declaration of Independence wasn't written to make money, either. The importance of the document in relation to the U.S., ensures it's existence....let's see in 3,000 years, ok?

What makes you think that the there is "integrity" to them? And you do not appear to even know how old the Bible is. Most of the Old Testament, including Genesis and Exodus, are dated to mid first millennium BC. Moses was a mythical man, just like Harry Potter. The Bible as we know it was written over a period of less than a thousand years.
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
What makes you think that the there is "integrity" to them?

Integrity as they relate to the ancient copies, like the DSS and ancient papyri. I thought that my meaning was obvious.

And you do not appear to even know how old the Bible is. Most of the Old Testament, including Genesis and Exodus, are dated to mid first millennium BC.

Lol. The Silver Scrolls are dated to c. 600 BCE, and they were just copies!

The originals have not been discovered, probably don't exist anymore. Interesting that you can date something that hasn't been discovered \ doesn't exist!

Moses was a mythical man...


Not according to Josephus....
And absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

The Bible as we know it was written over a period of less than a thousand years.

I disagree. Again, we can't know exactly when it began.
But really, that has no bearing: I was talking about the copies of it.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Integrity as they relate to the ancient copies, like the DSS and ancient papyri. I thought that my meaning was obvious.

How long do you think they were there before Christianity as we know it today was begun?


Lol. The Silver Scrolls are dated to c. 600 BCE, and they were just copies!

The originals have not been discovered, probably don't exist anymore. Interesting that you can date something that hasn't been discovered \ doesn't exist!

The Silver Scrolls were only fragments of the book of Numbers. How do you think that changes anything?

Not according to Josephus....
And absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

So what? Josephus was a Jew that bought the myth. How could he write about Moses in any meaningful way? And you are quite wrong about absence of evidence. If evidence is expected by an event, and over two million people traipsing through the desert for forty years would definitely leave evidence. The absence of such evidence is evidence against the event.

I disagree. Again, we can't know exactly when it began.
But really, that has no bearing: I was talking about the copies of it.

Not exactly, but language and other evidence gives a reasonably accurate estimate. You should look into why and how the historians know what they know.
 
Top