Concerning the discipline of biblical archaeology...If anyone actually wants some evidence...

[JacquelineDeane55]

I know that not a lot of you know about the evidences concerning the Bible, but I guess I will let you know.

Did you know that there are archaeological evidences revealing that many of the places mentioned in the Bible are actually true?

I can prove that ancient Bible places existed at one time in past history, yes. Archaeology has uncovered them, yes, but when you uncover something REALLY OLD and ancient it gets really dusty....eeewwww....(Please wear a cloth over your nose, it can get really gross if you still want to breathe, lol).

I will provide some links to anyone who wants to educate themselves about this manner:

Biblical archaeology

Archaeologists say they found town where future King David took refuge from Saul

Biblical site tied to Ark of the Covenant unearthed at convent in central Israel

Biblical Archaeology’s Top 10 Discoveries of 2018

Biblical Archaeology News 2019 (Bible History Online)

High-tech study of ancient stone suggests new proof of King David’s dynasty

Ancient city gate uncovered in the Galilee may have tie to biblical King David

ToI asks the experts: What are the most important finds of Israeli archaeology?

In find of biblical proportions, seal of Prophet Isaiah said found in Jerusalem

2,700-year-old seal impression cements existence of biblical Jerusalem governor

Massive section of Western Wall and Roman theater uncovered after 1,700 years

Evidence of Sodom? Meteor blast cause of biblical destruction, say scientists <----- Sodom was actually destroyed by a meteor blast? Scientists say.

My hope is that those of you who require some hardcore evidences to prove the Bible shall look to the archeological evidences and thus ignite your faith in the Bible. I posted this to your benefit, to absolve doubts in the validity of Scripture. Amen.

 

[SkyWriting]

Jesus in 2017: Biblical Archaeologists Had a Big Year
Biblical Archaeology's Top 10 Discoveries of 2016
Adventist 2015 digs included in top 10 biblical archaeology
Biblical Archaeology's Top Ten Discoveries of 2014

#8. Tablet that said the ark was round
The world’s potentially oldest clay tablet containing a flood story was found in the British Museum archives and put on display last January. Discovered by the museum’s cuneiform curator, Irving Finkel, the tablet makes note of a round ark and is one of several versions of the flood story that have been found in Mesopotamian excavations. Although this tablet from ancient Babylon, dated around 1750 BC, may be the oldest found containing the flood story, it’s not necessarily the earliest version of the story.

 

[createdtoworship]

subscribing, thanks for the post.

 

[JackRT]

There are a number of theories regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

I believe that the Noah Flood story is loosely based on the "tribal memory" of a disastrous local flood somewhere in the Middle East. I think that the Sodom and Gomorrah story may also be based on a similar memory of a natural disaster. It is known biblically that the two towns were located near the Dead Sea and they made a prosperous living mining bitumen (pitch). This same area is also known to have near surface pockets of natural gas which will occasionally vent to the surface when triggered by earth tremors. My suspicion is that this is what happened. Cooking fires ignited the venting gas. The resulting conflagration would certainly appear to the credulous mind to be some sort of fiery divine retribution. This same area is also known for naturally formed pillars of salt. We now have all the ingredients for a dramatic morality tale.

 

[createdtoworship]

There are a number of theories regarding the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

I believe that the Noah Flood story is loosely based on the "tribal memory" of a disastrous local flood somewhere in the Middle East. I think that the Sodom and Gomorrah story may also be based on a similar memory of a natural disaster. It is known biblically that the two towns were located near the Dead Sea and they made a prosperous living mining bitumen (pitch). This same area is also known to have near surface pockets of natural gas which will occasionally vent to the surface when triggered by earth tremors. My suspicion is that this is what happened. Cooking fires ignited the venting gas. The resulting conflagration would certainly appear to the credulous mind to be some sort of fiery divine retribution. This same area is also known for naturally formed pillars of salt. We now have all the ingredients for a dramatic morality tale.

Here is a section out of norman geislers book on archaology: (minus the pictures)

"
Ancient Sodom

Discovery

The famed biblical "cities of the plain" (Genesis 10; 13:10-13; 19) were once thought by critical scholars to be merely legendary places used by biblical authors to explain a moral metaphor. In 1924, William E Albright set out to explore the southern end of the Dead Sea, looking for the city of Sodom. As a result, he posited that the city lay beneath the Dead Sea waters, since the water level must have risen over the centuries. Later investigations of the southern sea floor revealed that the waterline had indeed risen as Albright suspected; however, no ancient structures were found. Albright began to survey an area near the southeast shores of the Dead Sea in modern Jordan, the city of Bab edh-Dhra pictured here, which he dated to the Early Bronze Age (3150-2200 BC).

The stone and mud-brick ruins of Bab edh-Dhra located southeast of the Dead Sea.

Bab edh-Dhra was later excavated, in the mid-1960s, by Paul Lapp and again in 1973 by Walter Rast and Thomas Schaub. Evidence shows this well-settled and fortified city was equipped with a massive cemetery, homes, building structures, monoliths, cultic structures-enough infrastructure to house a large number of inhabitants. The examination of the cumulative data has revealed that the city was destroyed by an enormous fire, which is confirmed by an extremely thick layer of ash present at the site. In view of these facts, many scholars (including Bryant Wood) have identified Bab edh-Dhra as the biblical city of Sodom.

However, more recent ongoing research conducted by Dr. Steven Collins at the northeastern end of the Dead Sea region (in Jordan) has offered promising evidence supporting the northern location of Tall el-Hammam as the city of Sodom.'


Tall el-Hammam, southwest view of the upper tell surface.

Background and Setting

Sodom and the other "cities of the plain" are referenced early within the table of nations (Genesis 10) and extend to the period of Abraham (Genesis 13; 19). Genesis 19:28 describes Sodom at the time of its destruction as existing in the "land of the valley ." Collins argues for the location of Sodom based on 40 salient points about the geography of the cities of the southern Jordan valley. When referencing the biblical data, Collins noticed the word used for "plain," or in some translations "valley," is the Hebrew kikkar, which means "disk" or "circle." The word is used in Old Testament Hebrew over 50 times to refer to "a talent of metal" or a "circular flat loaf of bread," but none of these usages employ the definite article to convey a sense of location (geography).

However, there are 13 rare geographical usages of kikkar (found only in the Old Testament); 10 of these are found in the context of the Sodom story, which places the location of Sodom in the eastern disk of the southern Jordan valley (Genesis 13:1-12; immediately north of the Dead Sea).

Collins notes that there are many other standard Hebrew terms for "plain' and "valley," but these are always avoided when the Bible speaks of the kikkar of the Jordan or the "cities of the kikkar." From an aerial map looking down on the kikkar it reveals that Jericho resides at the western edge of the disk, southeast of Bethel/Ai, where Abraham was positioned when he saw the smoke rising from Sodom after its destruction (Genesis 13:3-4). Genesis tells of Lot separating from Abraham; Lot saw that the Jordan kikkar (valley) was well-watered, like the Lord's garden and the land of Egypt (Genesis 13:10), so he travelled east and lived in the cities of the valley and pitched his tent near Sodom (Genesis 13:12). The Scriptures say that Lot viewed the entire Jordan disk with his naked eye, something that would be impossible when looking south toward Bab edhDhra. Moreover, Sodom was considered one of the cities of the plain, and no city south of the "mouth of the Jordan" (hayarden), like Bab edh-Dhra, would be considered as belonging to the cities of the kikkar. To include Bab edh-Dhra in the cities of the disk would force an unnatural meaning on the term kikkar. The "kikkar of the Jordan" appears to refer only to the disk-shaped alluvial plain directly east of Bethel/Ai and north of the Dead Sea; thus Sodom must be located on the eastern side of the Jordan disk. This conclusion is confirmed by Genesis 10:19, which describes the cities of the plain as the eastern extent of the Canaanite clans.

Tall e1-Hammam is the largest tell in the southern Levant, with the upper tell alone measuring over 80 acres. (Photo courtesy of Tall el-Hammam Excavation Project [TeHeP].)

Collins has identified Sodom's location as Tall el-Hammam, which is situated on the eastern edge of the Jordan disk, eight miles northeast of the mouth of the Jordan (hayarden). It is the largest tell in the southern Levant, measuring 1,000 meters long and containing within its walls 85 acres, a much smaller area than the general occupational spread beyond the walls of 240 acres. The tell itself is comprised of a massive upper and lower area that most likely dates to the Early Bronze Age. The enormous size of the area was anticipated since 1) it is represented by the Bible to be the largest Bronze Age urban center in the eastern kikkar, much larger than Jericho, Jerusalem, and any other city in the southern Jordan valley; 2) it is the only kikkar city mentioned by itself; 3) King Bera of Sodom is the only spokesperson within the military coalition formed by the cities of the plain (Genesis 14:17-24); 4) Lot was accustomed to sitting in the gates of the city (Genesis 19:1), thus implying defensive fortification; 5) it was situated in close proximity to a major east-west trade route; 6) it had access to abundant fresh water and rich agricultural soil; 7) it had excellent sight lines into the Jordan valley, and 8) it is always mentioned first when speaking of the eastern cities of the plain.


anyway there is alot more in the book itself.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

It would certainly be suprising if the bible did not contain some valid history or geography. That doesn't mean the accounts it gives are all valid, accurate, and literal.

 

[pitabread]

It would certainly be suprising if the bible did not contain some valid history or geography. That doesn't mean the accounts it gives are all valid, accurate, and literal.

^ This. It's quite common in human story-telling to refer to real people, places or events. In and of themselves, those elements do not lend veracity to details of the stories being told.

 

[JackRT]

One of my favourite literary genres is what is called "historical fiction". Fictional characters in a story line are fit into a historical event with real historical figures, places and events. When done well you can feel like you have stepped into history. I suspect that at least some of the Bible was written in this fashion.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

One of my favourite literary genres is what is called "historical fiction". Fictional characters in a story line are fit into a historical event with real historical figures, places and events. When done well you can feel like you have stepped into history. I suspect that at least some of the Bible was written in this fashion.

Yes. It's occurred to me more than once that, for the culture of those times, with an almost exclusively oral tradition and a relatively restricted worldview, the distinction between fact and fiction would not have been as important as it has been in recent times, and in most stories the details might well be far less significant and of less interest than the underlying lesson.

Having said that, I note that, recently, the distinction between fact and fiction seems to be becoming seen as less important in public discourse than it has been... old habits die hard?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Even now, pilgrims can visit the very streets that Spider-Man walked. Or swung over, anyway.

By which I mean to say, not many people deny the existence of everything in the Bible. As an ancient text, it is not surprising that it has references to ancient locations.

 

[ruthiesea]

It would certainly be suprising if the bible did not contain some valid history or geography. That doesn't mean the accounts it gives are all valid, accurate, and literal.

Dude, wait a minute! Do you mean that Well’s War of the Worlds, which accurately describes places and geographic features of England, might not be true?

Say it ain’t true, Joe!!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Dude, wait a minute! Do you mean that Well’s War of the Worlds, which accurately describes places and geographic features of England, might not be true?

Say it ain’t true, Joe!!

Sorry to disappoint you

 

[hedrick]

Anywhere you dig in Israel you find ancient stuff. If you like you can say that you've just verified some OT story. But actual archaeologists don't say that. They say things like, Israel was formed by a largely peaceful influx of people from highlands into the cities, and the Exodus didn't happen. Indeed one of the big debates among archaeologists is whether David even existed.

 

[createdtoworship]

It would certainly be suprising if the bible did not contain some valid history or geography. That doesn't mean the accounts it gives are all valid, accurate, and literal.

Well I just heard a lesson from a bible scholar and he said that among archaeologists in the middle east you can rarely find one that does not have respect for the Bible. If they find an unknown people group or city, the bible is the first place they look. It does not prove the Bible persay, it just provides historical evidence of its accuracy. In fact we have fairly little evidence for Alexander the great and we have more actual evodense of Jesus Christ from non partisan sources than even Alexander the great.

 

[Ophiolite]

In fact we have fairly little evidence for Alexander the great and we have more actual evodense of Jesus Christ from non partisan sources than even Alexander the great.

Then you will have no difficulty providing links to these numerous non partisan sources. I look forward to studying them.

 

[Speedwell]

Well I just heard a lesson from a bible scholar and he said that among archaeologists in the middle east you can rarely find one that does not have respect for the Bible. If they find an unknown people group or city, the bible is the first place they look. It does not prove the Bible persay, it just provides historical evidence of its accuracy. In fact we have fairly little evidence for Alexander the great and we have more actual evodense of Jesus Christ from non partisan sources than even Alexander the great.

That's all very fine, but it's pretty much wasted effort. Nobody, not even atheists, denies that many of the events, locations and individuals mentioned in the Bible can be confirmed with archaeological evidence. But it's beside the point. The fundamentalist Evangelical position on the Bible is about the nature of the text which describes those events, locations and individuals. No amount of archaeological confirmation is going to help you.

 

[essentialsaltes]

In fact we have fairly little evidence for Alexander the great

Yeah, no.

 

[sjastro]

In fact we have fairly little evidence for Alexander the great and we have more actual evodense of Jesus Christ from non partisan sources than even Alexander the great.

?????????????
There are quite a few contemporary sources.
Historiography of Alexander the Great - Wikipedia

One of which was definitely not partisan.
Callisthenes - Wikipedia

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

In fact we have fairly little evidence for Alexander the great and we have more actual evodense of Jesus Christ from non partisan sources than even Alexander the great.

Interesting, do you have a list of references?

 

[createdtoworship]

That's all very fine, but it's pretty much wasted effort. Nobody, not even atheists, denies that many of the events, locations and individuals mentioned in the Bible can be confirmed with archaeological evidence. But it's beside the point. The fundamentalist Evangelical position on the Bible is about the nature of the text which describes those events, locations and individuals. No amount of archaeological confirmation is going to help you.

So you believe Jesus existed despite Bart ehrman?