Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,901 Year: 4,158/9,624 Month: 1,029/974 Week: 356/286 Day: 12/65 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Your favourite Bible absurdity
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 14 of 159 (37227)
04-17-2003 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Brian
04-17-2003 7:23 AM


What is your favourite bible absurdity?
I'm torn between the Flood and Joshua's Long Day, where the sun and moon had to stand over two battles ten miles apart.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Brian, posted 04-17-2003 7:23 AM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by sagg, posted 04-17-2003 4:21 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 44 of 159 (37292)
04-18-2003 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Paul
04-18-2003 2:28 PM


The only place His presence isn't is in the hearts of people who reject him.
How very odd! My heart is made up, ultimately, of quarks indistinguishable from your average found-in-gaseous-nebula quark, but mine aren't inhabited my this guy? And my pancreatic quarks are? Puzzling!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Paul, posted 04-18-2003 2:28 PM Paul has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by joz, posted 04-18-2003 4:29 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 46 of 159 (37302)
04-18-2003 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Celsus
04-18-2003 1:15 PM


Actually, it is assumed that this Egyptian Shoshenq I refers to Shishak of Kings, and embarassingly the Israelites got spanked badly didn't they?
Completely out of my field, but the 11 April 2003 issue of the journal Science has an article on Shoshenq's leavings at Tel Rehov, with bunches of 14C dates around 920 BC. The authors say their findings argue strongly for the historicity of Solomon. Email me if you can't find a copy and want to read it.
[This message has been edited by Coragyps, 04-18-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Celsus, posted 04-18-2003 1:15 PM Celsus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Brian, posted 04-19-2003 8:50 AM Coragyps has replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 763 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 49 of 159 (37323)
04-19-2003 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Brian
04-19-2003 8:50 AM


I'll let the authors do that; a news article in the same issue led me to believe that they are not "low chronology" fans - that term is apparently Finkelstein's.
The cite is H.J.Bruins et al, Science, vol 300, pp 315-318, (2003)
Abstract:
Stratified radiocarbon dates provide an independent chronological link between archaeological layers and historical data. The invasion by Pharaoh Shoshenq I (Shishak) is a key historical synchronism, ~925 B.C.E., mentioned in both Egyptian inscriptions and the Hebrew Bible. The list of places raided by Shoshenq, mentioned at Karnak (Egypt), includes Rehov (Israel). The site yielded a consistent series of radiocarbon dates from the 12th to 9th century B.C.E. Our results (i) suggest a revised Iron-Age chronology; (ii) date an archaeological stratum to Shoshenq's campaign; (iii) indicate the similarity of "Solomonic" and "Omride" pottery; and (iv) provide correlation with Greece and Cyprus.
and an excerpt:
There is only one known historical candidate that fits the destruction date of Tel Rehov Stratum V, 940 to 900 B.C.E., based on 12 high-quality 14C dates: the invasion of Pharaoh Shoshenq I.
Our research negates an important argument of the low chronology theory, namely, that Iron Age IIA ceramic assemblages should be confined exclusively to the 9th century B.C.E. The 14C dating results imply that it is difficult to distinguish between "Solomonic" and "Omride" pottery. The site of Ta'anach (27), about 8 km southeast of Megiddo (Fig. 1), is also mentioned on the Karnak list of places destroyed by Shoshenq. Period II-B pottery at Ta'anach, assigned to 960 to 918 B.C.E. (27) and to the 9th century in the low chronology (28), is identical to that found in Tel Rehov Stratum V. Period II-B ended in a fierce destruction, which can be related to Shoshenq's campaign in view of our results.
Because Shishak (Shoshenq I) is mentioned as a contemporary of Solomon in biblical texts, we find it plausible to retain the linkage of specified archaeological assemblages (Rehov Stratum V, Ta'anach II-B, Hazor X, Megiddo VB, and perhaps also VA-IVB, etc.) to the United Hebrew Monarchy.
The ruin at Tel Rehov is of a fairly impressive city, 10 ha in area. But like I said, this is way outside my areas of expertise.....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Brian, posted 04-19-2003 8:50 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by Brian, posted 04-20-2003 4:37 AM Coragyps has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024