Reliable history in the Bible

I think it is time that certain people began to support their assertions about how reliable the history in the Bible actually is.For example, we have jugs claiming that:The bible is a historical document that's proven itself reliable for its historical valueYet he has never once given an example of this alleged reliability!Now don't get me wrong, I would argue that there is some real history in the Bible, but I would never claim that it proven itself reliable for its historical value when the fact of the matter is that almost every archaeological discovery has undermined the 'historical' narratives of the Bible.Here's a wee challenge to anyone who maintains that the Bible is a reliable historical document, start at the begining of Genesis and work your way through the Bible and tick off just how many 'historical' events mentioned are supported (or even plausible) in an historical context.Time to put up or shut up guys.Brian.Accuracy and inerrancy please mods.

As much as you can give me thanks.however, I expect evidence of a far better quality that what you have posted.You haven't actually supported a single thing you have claimed.For example, what is the evidence for Judas' suicide?Also, the ossuary of James has been proven to be a fake.try picking one issue at a time and we can analyse it and then move on to another one.Thanks.Brian.

Where?Brian.

Did anyone doubt the ”traditional cross’? How do you know it was drawn by a Roman? I thought it was the Jews that wanted Jesus crucified, apparently Pilate could find nothing to crucify him for. You are doing a good job of discrediting the Bible all by yourself.The thread is about evidence to SUPPORT the Bible as a reliable historical source, your link says that no one ever carried their cross to their place of crucifixion, yet the Bible claims:John 19:17
So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha).Of course this is contradicted in the Synoptics who have Simon carrying the cross, which further undermines the reliability of the Bible!Luke 23:26
As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and made him carry it behind Jesus.Mark 15:21
A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross.Matthew 27:32
As they were going out, they met a man from Cyrene, named Simon, and they forced him to carry the cross.Well done, you have shown how UNreliable the Bible is! Jesus was a very common name, the chances of there only being one person named Jesus (Joshua/Jeshua) being crucified in first century Palestine must be astronomical. This is very flimsy evidence of anything, the source itself claims that its interpretation isn’t certain. Even if it was, what does is it in the Bible that it supports? Well, it doesn’t mean that the inscriptions fall within two decades at all.Tell me, how does dating pottery possibly place the limit on the tomb to two decades after the crucifixion? Did this type of pottery just cease to exist or something? If I get buried with a piece of antique pottery does that mean I died before I was born?The same with ”lamps’, they can be used, or preserved and placed in a tomb long after someone had died. What if the owner of the tomb had kept these lamps safe for 40 years then had them buried with him?It is the same with the character of lettering, it doesn’t just stop overnight, and your source doesn’t even say what the ”character’ of the letters is!How can anyone take such drivel seriously?I have to wonder just what qualifications many Christian website owners have because most of what is posted at this forum from these sites wounded pass high school requirements.http://www.freeminds.org/doctrine/cross.htmThe address is hilarious, the only thing that the owner’s mind is free from is any grounding in reality.Brian.

Hi,I meant to reply sooner.When you say the Greek word means 'stake or pole' the link says that stauros can also mean cross, do you know if that is true or not?I dont know how reliable the link is because when it says:It took the form either of a T (Lat. crux commissa) or of a + (crux immissa). (Vol. 1, page 391) the author is incorrect. It took three forms, the two mentioned plus another called crux decussata which was an 'X' shape. This would depend what the authors meant, and we will never know.I wonder why John never mentioned Simon carrying Jesus' cross for Him?Brian.

Hi archie, I have heard this argument many times, usually from Christians, but it is incorrect.Pilate is mentioned by Josephus, Philo, and possibly even Tacitus, so there has always been evidence supporting an historical Pilate.Philo was even a contemporary source, so it is strong evidence.Also, no one has ever been able to tell me the name of one of these people who suggested that Pilate was a fiction.Brian.

What date would you assign to the Israelite Conquest of Canaan?I know you said MBA/LBA, but the dates for these are not universal.So, before I comment on the rest of your post and the alleged 'clear archaeological evidence', could you supply me with a date of the destruction of Jericho by the Israelites?Cheers.Brian.

But they are extremely important to any historian or archaeologist. Chronology is the backbone of history, as Theile informs us in The Chronology Of the Kings of Judah and Israel. Yes, 1550 is not a problem. What does the Hyksos expulsion have to do with Joshua’s ”conquest’ of Canaan? David Rohl is in this for the money, his ’New Chronology’ has been trashed by everyone, including Kitchen. I think the only reasonable date (if I was to be pressed) for a conquest is around 1200 BCE, however, I think the Conquest is completely fictional. But, there’s a few problems here. For a start the Bible claims that the Exodus was in 1446 BCE, thus the ”Conquest’ would be around 1400 BCE, when, of course, Jericho was not occupied. Another problem would be the inability of any scholar to produce a single shred of evidence that there was such a thing as an Israelite running around the Ancient Near East in 1550 BCE. Populations vanishing could be as a result of the seismic activity in the region. I don’t have to show you anything, you are the one claiming that the Israelites under Joshua swept all before them from 1550-1545 BCE. So, in 1545 BCE we should see the whole of Palestine under Israelite control, either that or the Book of Joshua is mistaken.So, do you have ANY evidence of Israelites in Palestine around 1550 BCE? I have no wish to move any dates. Why? Your are second guessing me, and way off target.I do not think that there was an enslavement, an Exodus, a Conquest, a period of the Judges, or a united monarchy, I believe that they are all fictional, so I don’t need to move anything, or juggle the evidence. Well, Bryant Wood is just a brain dead fundy who interpreted the evidence through the Bible first and his revision of Kenyon’s work was shown to be extremely amateur and poorly constructed. No it isn’t clear at all!We have mountains of evidence that there were Egyptians in the ANE, yet you haven’t provided a single shred of evidence that there were Israelites in existence to destroy anything! Please don’t feel bad about this because not a single scholar has been able to provide any evidence of an Israelite during this period.You also seem to ignore the plethora of evidence for earthquakes in this region, thi sis one reason that Kenyon gave for the destruction of city walls. From which you omitted seismic activity. Okay let’s do that.We will take it one city at a time, and let’s do it in the order that the Bible gives.So, according to the Book of Joshua, right after the destruction of Jericho the Israelites went on to the next town:Joshua 7:2-5 Now Joshua sent men from Jericho to Ai, which is near Beth Aven to the east of Bethel, and told them, "Go up and spy out the region." So the men went up and spied out Ai. When they returned to Joshua, they said, "Not all the people will have to go up against Ai. Send two or three thousand men to take it and do not weary all the people, for only a few men are there." So about three thousand men went up; but they were routed by the men of Ai, who killed about thirty-six of them. They chased the Israelites from the city gate as far as the stone quarries and struck them down on the slopes. At this the hearts of the people melted and became like water. The Israelites had a minor set back here, and we are told it was because of Achan that God allowed Israel to lose the battle. But, after stoning Achan and his family to death (what his family had done wrong we are not told), we are told in chapter 8 that Joshua and his army:When Israel had finished killing all the men of Ai in the fields and in the desert where they had chased them, and when every one of them had been put to the sword, all the Israelites returned to Ai and killed those who were in it. Twelve thousand men and women fell that day”all the people of Ai. For Joshua did not draw back the hand that held out his javelin until he had destroyed all who lived in Ai. But Israel did carry off for themselves the livestock and plunder of this city, as the LORD had instructed Joshua.
So Joshua burned Ai and made it a permanent heap of ruins, a desolate place to this day. He hung the king of Ai on a tree and left him there until evening. At sunset, Joshua ordered them to take his body from the tree and throw it down at the entrance of the city gate. And they raised a large pile of rocks over it, which remains to this day.So, there is no doubt that after conquering Jericho, the Israelites then destroyed Ai.Does this fit in with your clear archaeological evidence?It doesn’t fit in with the evidence that the archaeologists that have excavated there report. For example, Judith Marquet Krause excavated Ai from 1933-35 and concluded that it was unoccupied from 2400 BCE until 1200 BCE, this is reinforced by the excavations of Joseph Calloway, who excavated the site from 1964-76 and he came to the same conclusion. There was no walled city at Ai after 2400 BCE, and the only sing of occupation was a small hut dated to about 1200 BCE.So, how can Joshua and his armies have conquered Ai, killed 12 000 men and women, hung its king on a tree, and plundered the city when there was nothing at Ai in 1550 BCE?Another problem you may be able to solve is the reference in Exodus 1:11, namely the building of the cities of Pithom and Rameses. I do not see any Pharaoh named Rameses on your list there, so how can the Israelites have helped to build the city of Rameses II if he wasn’t born until a few hundred years after you have your conquest?There are many more problems with your scenario, but I think there’s enough to be going on with.Brian.

Hi,Are you finished posting reams?If you are then I'd like to start posting some replies, but I am worried that each issue would be diluted by the number of issues raised. Also, there seems to be a lot of corrections and contradictions in your posts.Can I suggest that, if you have finished posting evidence, we concentrate on one or two issues at a time, beginning with your first post on this subject.My time is tight so I don't want to be bogged down by jumping from issue to issue without some resolution of your claims.Please let me know so I can get the ball rolling.Brian

Hi,Thanks for the prompt reply.The first issue I'd like to raise is this one from post 90:MPN writes "Im quite fine with all the Palestinian cities being destroyed in a single year though, which mainstream archaeology assigns Are you aware that this contradicts the Book of Joshua that provides information that informs us that the Conquest took five years? Josephus also states this but may just be working from the information in the OT.Joshua 14:7 was forty years old when Moses the servant of the LORD sent me from Kadesh Barnea to explore the land. And I brought him back a report according to my convictions And:14:10"Now then, just as the LORD promised, he has kept me alive for forty-five years since the time he said this to Moses, while Israel moved about in the desert. So here I am today, eighty-five years old!The sending of the spies was during the first year of the 40 year wanderings, thus the Conquest took 5 years.The single year destruction of "all the Palestinian cities" would appear to contradict the Bible account.Brian.

My point was along those lines, but more of a technical point, i.e. it is beyond the realm of archaeology to prove that all the towns mentioned in Joshua were destroyed in a single year, the available evidence makes it impossible to make this claim. (This is what CA was pointing out)But the thing is Nim, these small details are far more important than you appear to realise, small, what you call ”minor issues’ can falsify an entire theory. For example, the hypothesis that the Israelite conquest took 5 years is falsified by your claim that the cities were all destroyed in one year, now this is incompatible, the claims contradict each other. So something has to be changed to maintain biblical accuracy, and I have a problem with you (or anyone doing this), what you are doing is changing the text to fit the evidence. This harkens back to the dark years of the original biblical archaeology where every find was interpreted through the Bible. You need to look at the archaeological evidence and the bible texts on their own, you cannot change the text to fit the evidence, if the evidence says ”x’ you cannot change your text from ”y’ to ”x’!This is exactly what conservative Christian archaeologists and historians have been doing for decades, and only a few of them have had the integrity to proclaim that the text is inaccurate. What we seldom see is a bit of honesty from these guys. What we should see are declarations of how unreliable the biblical text actually is, and not these contortions of the text and archaeological evidence into something that allegedly proves historical events in the Bible.If the Conquest did not happen as outlined in the Book of Joshua, and I am sure you are aware that the Book of Judges essentially contradicts the military conquest of Canaan, then we need conservative scholars to be honest and tell their readers that the Book of Joshua is inaccurate, that it has been falsified by archaeological evidence, but we may be able to find another account by filtering the biblical text and then comparing that to the external evidence to test its veracity.What is wrong with a dose of honesty? Now, every single scholar involved in the debate over the origins of Ancient Israel, and I mean every scholar since IMO the 1930’s (perhaps earlier), knows that the military conquest of Canaan, as outlined in Joshua, is incompatible with the archaeological evidence, the narratives do not harmonise with the evidence. Why else have we had so many different proposals over the last 70 years or so? If the evidence fitted the biblical text so well, then why is it that no mainstream scholar in the last 70 years takes the conquest in the Book of Joshua at face value? Well, I think to claim that there’s no redaction in the Bible simply means that the individual either hasn’t studied the Bible, or they have some sort of mental illness. Having said that, I do know some people who take this stance, and at least one member here has said there are no anachronisms (a sure sign of redaction) at all in the Bible. Undoubtedly the mention of ”forty’ years is artificial in many instances. Moses’ life, for example, is divided into 3 periods of 40 years, and many of the Judges ruled for artificial periods of time. But, since we know that ”40’ years doesn’t necessarily signify a literal 40 years would lead me to believe that the 5 years for the conquest is to be taken at face value as it would make more sense to round down the 45 years to 40 years, the 85 years of Caleb would likely be rounded down if it wasn’t a literal time period. (IMO) I’d say the United Monarchy and everything before that is unhistorical. Yes but there are usually clues as to their location, some settlements, such as Ai, can only be in that area. Other settlements can be argued over, such as Pithom, but sometimes the name has continued. Well, I wouldn’t say that the Wanderings were nomadic, the Israelites spent 38 years at Kadesh-Barnea, yet there’s no evidence of any population there before the 11th century BCE. Well we don’t know if they happened or not but it is highly unlikely as this was the period of the Hyksos. But other factors could be responsible, as I said the whole valley is in a rift, an earthquake hotspot. Then we have to deal with famine, disease, and drought, not to mention other peoples. But no one knows who or what destroyed Jericho in 1550. As Bill Dever said, “No one left calling cards”, so we just don’t know. Yet, this does not stop people awarding some great victory to the Israelites, a people that no one has provided a single shred of evidence for existing at that time! Could the Egyptians have destroyed Jericho? Perhaps, we just don’t know. What we do know is that is a possibility as we know that there were Egyptians at that time. Did the Israelites destroy Jericho? All we really need to do is ask the question: what Israelites? As I said, archaeology cannot produce a tight picture, given the ambiguity and nature of the evidence. This is the thing, what period are you speaking of here, c .1200? Also, you have again just mentioned Israelite nomads without a single shred of evidence for the existence of ”Israelites’. The Amarna Letters essentially negate the Book of Joshua as well, as Kitchen said has frequently pointed out. The Hapiru? Well that’s one huge leap in logic mate, to link the ”Israel’ of the Merneptah Stele to the Hapiru of the Amarna Letters (if that is what you are proposing), how on earth do you propose to go about doing that? The Book of Judges doesn’t allocate a date to the Philistines, so how can you make this statement? Again though, all this is completely invisible in textual and archaeological sources. Sorry, I am afraid it cannot, the Bible version of Israel’s settlement in Canaan has no support in the archaeological record, it doesn’t matter how many contortions ”scholars’ perform, the fact is, the Israel of the so-called Wanderings-Conquest-Judges period have never been shown to exist. Except that the Joshua myth isn’t about such a small difference in time, as you have said the dispute over the dates span a period of over 500 years!So, to continue, do you wish to reject the historicity of the Book of Joshua and take the version of Israel’s settlement as portrayed in the Book of Judges, or a little mixture of both?Finally, since the topic is accurate history in the Bible, how accurate do you think the Book of Joshua's military conquest is?Brian.

Judges 1:27 also says that Canaanites lived in Taanach, Megiddo and Dor, despite Joshua routing these cities in Josh 12:7-14.amazingly accurate and no conflicting narratives! Brian

Surely this is contrary to the biblical account? (apart from being an illogical claim)Twelve thousand men and women fell that day”all the people of Ai.12 000, not counting children, would be a very significant city in the mid 2nd millenium bce.Brian.Edited by Brian, : removed text covered by next post

You also said that you are happy with all the cities being destroyed in a single year! So, what I am pointing out (and CA told you) it is impossible to arrive at this conclusion from the archaeological evidence.So, just to round off this particular issue, are you still happy with all the cities being destroyed in a single year? And you have no idea what or who caused this destruction, there is nothing available at these sites to identify if there was a human agent at work or not. Also. The Book of Joshua informs us that destroying cities was not the normal practice of the Israelites. Jericho destruction has been carbon dated to 1550 + - 40 years I don’t use the 480 literally at all, I asked for your explanation of it that’s all. You keep forgetting that I think the united monarchy and before is fictional.Also, I have explained the 480 years quite a few times in other discussions, but you weren’t to know that. What you have remembered though is that I said IF I was to assign a date to the conquest, then I think the most likely date would be the end of the 13th century BCE, so you should have been aware that I don’t take the 480 years literally. How I deal with it is like this. The 480 years is a combination of 2 ideal numbers, 12 and 40, we are told that there were 12 generations from the beginning of Solomon’s Temple to the Exodus, 40 years is frequently said to be a generation, thus 12 x 40 = 480. The artificiality of this number is supported by the claim in the Bible that it was yet another 12 generations from the building of Solomon’s Temple to the return from exile, thus we have another 12 x 40 = 480. This means that it was the intention of the authors to place the building of the Temple at the center of early Israel’s history. So I don’t take the 480 literally, but I don’t think you were a member here when Ray and I had a wee argument over the 480 years, he takes it literally and I don’t as it is clearly artificial.I can easily fit the 480 years into a 1200 BCE context, by using a more realistic 25 year period for a generation and multiplying that by 12 to get 300, this gives a date for the Exodus of around the mid 13th century, thus we have a late 13th century Conquest, which fist in perfectly with the most likely date for the Conquest (IF it happened). I was enquiring about YOUR explanation for the 1 Kings 6:1 text. As the title of the thread is the reliability of the biblical text as history, I was attempting to determine how accurate you think 1 Kings 6:1 is, but you have answered this, and stated that this biblical reference is unreliable. The Bible claims (literal reading) that the Conquest would be around 1400 BCE, and there wasn’t a walled city at Jericho then, there was no occupation there c . 1400 BCE. LOL, you have a wonderful knack of completely misunderstanding me, I am sure everyone here would have chuckled at that.I appear to have to keep informing you that I think the origins of Israel as described in the Bible is fictional. I wasn’t slamming you at all, I was asking for an explanation, how do you deal with that information? But you know we cannot do this as the same reasons why you do not take the 480 years literally also apply to some of the periods allotted to the Judges! Do you think we should take the 40 years of Othniel at face value, or the 80 years of Ehud, what about the 40 years at the end of the Song of Deborah, and there is nothing to suggest that the Judges all ruled consecutively! Great, and you have evidence of Israelites in Egypt during this period? Of course you do, you reject the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1, you also say that the reference to the City of Rameses is an anachronism. How on earth can you say that you don’t change the text? So this 90% drop was replaced by an invisible invading force? Surely it would take a great army to reduce the population by 90%, and where is the evidence of this great army? Well everything in the debate, in fact, every theory in history writing is speculation. But the scholars involved in the debate do consider earthquakes, drought, famine, disease, and even rogue groups of Egyptians as possible factors. You sure can speculate about this but the evidence cannot be as supportive as you believe. Sorry, if I followed you methodology I’d have been laughed out of university for being too gullible and sloppy in my research. The dark years were caused by Albright, Wright, Garstang, and their disciples, I would venture that there was no secular (or very few) archaeologists working in Palestine in the 1930’s. Most digs were funded by Christian organizations, and Albright was the figure that towered over the discipline. Albright HAD to change his opinion about the date of the Conquest because the overwhelming evidence pointed to the end of the 13th century BCE. He also favoured the Book of Judges over the Book of Joshua as being the more likely scenario. Bollux. It is still stronger evidence than any other suggested date. Still very weak though, but then all the proposed dates are. Albright didn't, Wright didn't, Callaway didn't, and Glueck didn't. Except that Jericho was unoccupied.I think it is more probable that Jericho, just like Ai, is an etiological tale. I wasn't quibbling over 5 years here or there, I was stating the fact that the Bible says it was a 5 year conquest, you say that all cities were destroyed in a single year and that you are happy with that. I pointed out that the one year deal contradicts the Bible, but somehow the Bible is still accurate? And how can it be tested against an invisible people? These are the kings of the land that Joshua and the Israelites conquered on the west side of the Jordan, from Baal Gad in the Valley of Lebanon to Mount Halak, which rises toward Seir (their lands Joshua gave as an inheritance to the tribes of Israel according to their tribal divisions- 8 the hill country, the western foothills, the Arabah, the mountain slopes, the desert and the Negev”the lands of the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites):

​

9 the king of Jericho one
the king of Ai (near Bethel) one
the king of Jerusalem one
the king of Hebron one So, Joshua defeats the King of Jerusalem and his troops, kills the king, and doesn't take Jerusalem, and Jerusalem isn't then given to the Benjaminites? Well apparently Joshua defeated, as well as Jerusalem, Gezer, Taanach, Meggido and Dor, yet as we read Judges 1 these cities are mysteriously occupied again. They read as two entirely different histories. It certainly falsified Jericho and Ai being inhabited at the same time. It falsified the face value Joshua account of the Conquest regardless of which date is proposed.Also, archaeology does not even show that there was anything Israelite around at the time you are proposing. I wasn’t lecturing you, I was pointing out that it is an abuse of archaeology to claim that it supports a single year destruction of all the cities, archaeology simply cannot do that. /But does the Biblical text actually do this?To get to the 600 years you have to accept the artificial chronologies of the early Judges. Remember when you said that the forty years and similar numbers were not to be taken literally? How come, all of a sudden, you are happy to take the 40 and 80 years allocated ot some judges as being literal time spans? How do you know that no Judges ruled at the same time? This looks a bit muddled, and I am probably reading it incorrectly, but this looks as if you are saying that Joshua conquered Jericho in 1550, and some other Israelites arrived 350 years later with Moses? This makes Moses and Joshua about 500 years old. I take it I am misreading it? There are other dates proposed. Only if your hand has been caught in a threshing machine. Yes I mean et-Tell (the Ruin) when I say Ai (the ruin), bit of a coincidence that name isnt it? Indeed it can, and indeed it is, no other site in the area is possible, even fundy John Bright has to admit that Ai is a problem, he knows that there is no other possible site in the region that can be Ai.I’ll ask you the same question that Callaway silenced his critics with: If et-tell isn’t Ai then what city did Callaway (and marquet-Krause) excavate? LOL, I don’t swallow anything, the Bible's version of the origins of Ancient Israel is frankly laughable if taken as historical.It is great literature though, but that is all it is.
It amuses me to see people, and you are doing exactly the same, start of their historical investigation with a conclusion and then go looking for evidence, and ignore the contrary archaeological evidence, change the biblical text, and some how think they have proven the Bible reliable. Except that 38 out of the 40 wasn’t spent wandering, it was spent at Kadesh-Barnea. No. No historian worth his salt can invoke a supernatural element for anything. and no bones, and no fires, not drinking utensils, no sandals or personal belongings, no animal carcases....... Why not just say that it wasn’t Kadesh-Barnea that the Israelites stayed at, after all you have no problem unashamedly doing this for Ai. IF they were, and this has never been demonstrated. There was 3 million in the Israelite camp, or do you wish to alter that text as well? No it doesn't, it suggests it, that is all. It is no certainty that the 'Israel' of the Merneptah Stele and the Israel of the Bible are one and the same. In this case it makes 5!The term in the Stele apparently mentions an ethnic group, the hapiru or ”apiru, were NOT an ethnic group, it is a term for a social strata.I'll reply to the rest of the post during the week when I have some free time.Brian.

It seems both of us are really busy right now, which is fine given that this is a discussion board, can I assume that it is just that you are so busy that you have made what looks like a contradictory claim?You begin your reply by claiming that: The book of Joshua informs us that burning cities was rare IN THE NORTHERN CAMPAIGNS. So rare in fact that the Bible says: Yet Israel did not burn any of the cities built on their mounds”except Hazor, which Joshua burned. (11:13)But, later on in your post you state: 2 northern cities burnt at about the same time. And ONLY TWO BURNT. “Only two burnt” contradicts the claim that the Israel ONLY burned Hazor.This post is also a great example of the ”sloppy research’ I was talking about.You quote Judges 18 as referring to the same period of time as Joshua 19, yet Judges 18 takes place long after the death if Joshua.Judges 2:8 tells of Joshua’s death, and after that we go through almost all of the Judges, before Judges 18 and: 1 In those days Israel had no king.
And in those days the tribe of the Danites was seeking a place of their own where they might settle, because they had not yet come into an inheritance among the tribes of Israel. The Danites had no territory of their own in Judges 18:1, and to wait a long time from Joshua 19 to come into their FULL inheritance.In Judges 1:34 we are told that the Amorites restricted the Danites to the plain:Joshua 19:47 is an obvious insertion. Yes your study is critical, so ”critical’ that it needs a life support machine.Brian