• 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!

Historical Accuracy of the Bible

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
It amazes me that so many Christians hold to the axiom that the scriptures are infallible and without error, since the scriptures never declare this at all.
 

sandy whitelinger

Veteran Member
1) There is no archeological evidence showing any kind of military invasion of some culture outside of Canaan during the time the Bible says that the returning Israel took Canaan by force.
2) Even the Bible does not agree as to whether Jerusalem was a)completely annihilated, b) taken and the locals subjugated, c) partially annihilated.
3) Egypt has no record of a large number of foreigners living as slaves during that time.
4) There is no evidence to show that the United Kingdom under David was able to support or fund an army as large or as strong as the Bible says it was.
This reminds me of a joke;
What kind of sound does a giraffe make?
None?
So how do you know if a giraffe is following you?
You don't hear anything.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
This reminds me of a joke;
What kind of sound does a giraffe make?
None?
So how do you know if a giraffe is following you?
You don't hear anything.

Maybe some expansion on sojourner's points will make things more clear:

1) The archaeological evidence shows a continuous culture in Canaan all through the era when the returning Israel would have taken Canaan by force. The change in culture that should have happened is shown to not have taken place; there is positive evidence that the culture that was there before the "invasion" is the same as the one that was there after.

3) Egyptians, who were generally meticulous record-keepers, did not seem to record any mention of a large number of Jewish slaves. If the Egyptians had kept large numbers of Jewish slaves, this behaviour would have been out-of-keeping with their usual modus operandi.

4) The evidence that would be present had the United Kingdom under David had as large or as strong as the Bible said it had, is not present.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Maybe some expansion on sojourner's points will make things more clear:

1) The archaeological evidence shows a continuous culture in Canaan all through the era when the returning Israel would have taken Canaan by force. The change in culture that should have happened is shown to not have taken place; there is positive evidence that the culture that was there before the "invasion" is the same as the one that was there after.

3) Egyptians, who were generally meticulous record-keepers, did not seem to record any mention of a large number of Jewish slaves. If the Egyptians had kept large numbers of Jewish slaves, this behaviour would have been out-of-keeping with their usual modus operandi.

4) The evidence that would be present had the United Kingdom under David had as large or as strong as the Bible said it had, is not present.
Thank you.
 

d.n.irvin

Active Member
Thank you.


Have any of you ever heard of the Christian Archaeologist -by the name of David Down?

I encourage you to investigate his findings. He has a set of video presentations that are quite fascinating. I personally saw one of His videos on the record of Hebrews in Egypt, and in the video he shows hieroglyphs -not painted -but etched in stone, of the sacred items of the Sanctuary. The Ark of the Covenant, Table of Shewbread, The Seven Candle Sticks etc.

As soon as I find his videos online I'll post a link. But for now here is some info on the subject. FINDING MOSES
 

gnostic

The Lost One
So you are saying that Moses' Exodus out of Egypt happened in 1446 BC?

Is that the date you are sticking to David Down's estimate and explanation?

And do you really agreed that 12th dynasty should have been move to 1446 BC?

I won't say anything until I am sure.
 
Top