-
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!
New Evidence Confirms The Burning Of Jerusalem By Babylonians Described In The Bible
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Close enough for me. I think would be irrelevant to tack on "but left a few small houses on the outskirts of town" The major point is he didn't spare even the great expensive homes, he just burned them to the ground.
"Now on the seventh day of the fifth month, which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. He burned the house of the Lord, the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; even every great house he burned with fire." But left a few small houses on the outskirts of town.
"Now on the seventh day of the fifth month, which was the nineteenth year of King Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, came to Jerusalem. He burned the house of the Lord, the king's house, and all the houses of Jerusalem; even every great house he burned with fire." But left a few small houses on the outskirts of town.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
But.. but... I thought that the Bible was just a mythological book with no truth in it whatsoever... isn't it?
Altfish
Veteran Member
The Bible had to have some of its content based on historical events, they couldn't make it all up.
Augustus
…
Your comment would make a lot more sense if it related to an actual argument that people actually make in the real world.
Denying the historicity of David is typically an act of sophomoric obstinacy, as insistent as it is stupid.
See here.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
I was arguing with a guy just yesterday who had said that the Bible is a fairy tale book. Fairy tales usually are not confirmed in the least by archaeological evidence.
Magus
Active Member
There is no evidence for King David or his united empire of non Canaanites in Canaan, that make no historical sense at all.
The Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle writes 'Land of Hatti ' (below in pink)
There was in fact a 'Judea' in Hatti-Land, known in Hittite 'Yadiya' (Ieude ) .
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
There is no evidence for King David or his united empire of non Canaanites in Canaan, that make no historical sense at all.
The Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle writes 'Land of Hatti ' (below in pink)
There was in fact a 'Judea' in Hatti-Land, known in Hittite 'Yadiya' (Ieude ) .
There is evidence of King David, though most of this evidence isn't 100% conclusive, it is evidence for his existence nevertheless.
The Tel Dan Inscription: The First Historical Evidence of King David from the Bible - Biblical Archaeology Society
Did I Find King David's Palace? - Biblical Archaeology Society
Myth and Reality of King David's Jerusalem
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/12/141216100433.htm
So Was King David Real? - The Great Adventure Catholic Bible Study
There is no evidence that you acknowledge. Even Israel Finkelstein acknowledges David. So, for example, ...
Your denial is a pathetic joke.
Siege of Jerusalem
Augustus
…
What people mean is there are mythical aspects to the Bible, not 100% of everything is completely fictitious. That you don't believe in genesis creation doesn't mean you need to believe that Cyrus the Great wasn't a real person for example.
It has some historical facts in it. Mostly after about 900BC and centered on the eastern Mediterranean. And from the point of view of a couple of small kingdoms on the edge of real history.
The Iliad and the Odyssey are confirmed by archaeological evidence. That doesn't mean that the Trojan war was really caused by a conflict between the different goddesses over who was most beautiful. The myths of the gods are fairy tales. But the story is told from in a historical background.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
I believe the events in Exodus date before 900 BC, if I'm not mistaken. Many of the places mentioned in Exodus have been confirmed to have existed by archaeologists.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
Those are epic poems, not fairy tales. A fairy tale is Peter Pan or Mother Goose.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
A fairy tale is Peter Pan or Mother Goose. Let's see if you can confirm one of them with archaeological evidence. To say the Bible is a fairy tale is similar to saying it is complete fiction. Cyrus the Great is not a fairy tale. Jack in the Beanstalk is a fairy tale.
Augustus
…
If you choose to purposely misunderstand the nuances of other people's language then there isn't a great deal anyone can do to stop you. It's not the most constructive endeavour though.
You might have been arguing with an idiot. Or just someone who was overplaying a metaphor.