English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-03-22 04:54:04 · 12 answers · asked by Hatikvah 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Silly me: You forgot to mention that Jerico had indeed been destroyed and burned in a huge fire; however it happened several centuries before Joshua arrived!

2007-03-22 07:08:09 · update #1

12 answers

"All hell broke loose in Israel in November of that year when Prof. Ze'ev Herzog of Tel Aviv University announced: "the Israelites were never in Egypt, did not wander the desert, did not conquer the land, and did not pass it on to the twelve tribes". Moreover, the Jewish God YHWH had a female consort - the goddess Asherah!

"His conclusion that the kingdom of David and Solomon was at best a small tribal monarchy, at worst total myth, has made enemies for him in the camps of traditional Jewish and Christian belief systems. He asserts: all evidence demonstrates that the Jews did not adopt monotheism until the 7th Century BCE - a heresy according to the Biblical tradition dating it to Moses at Mount Sinai.

"Tel Aviv University's archaeological investigation at Megiddo and examination of the six-sided gate there dates it to the 9th Century BCE, not the 10th Century BCE claimed by the 1960's investigator Yigael Yadin who attributed it to Solomon. Herzog, moreover, states that Solomon and David are "entirely absent in the archaeological record".

2007-03-22 04:59:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

In reference to your statement about Jericho, it had been conquered and burned many times, including around 1440 B.C, a plausible time frame for Joshua and the Israelites to have done it.

In no particular order:

--Discovery of the Hittites in 1876 (Until then, there was no source outside the Bible that mentioned them).

---Ruins of Sodom and Gomorrah (1924-1973)

---House of David inscription (1993) Critics argued that he was a mythical character.

---Pontius Pilate inscription (1961) ditto

---Dead Sea Scrolls (1948)

---Ketef Hinnom Amulets (1979) Quotes a prayer from the Law of Moses. Refutes liberal scholars that claim that the Mosaic Law was written after the exile, since one cannot quote from a book that hasn't been written yet. This establishes an early date for the authorship of the Torah.

---John Rylands Papyrus (1920) Sets an early date for the writing of the New Testament (AD 125)

---Discovery of a large theater in Ephesus. Confirms Luke's account in Acts that there was a theater large enough to hold an assembly of almost all of the city's population durning the riot of the silversmiths.

And many others. But rather than copy & paste them all, you can read them for yourself:

2007-03-24 01:20:09 · answer #2 · answered by Randy G 7 · 0 0

Prove- Solomon's stables,a stone with the phrase 'House of David' inscribe on it.A paving stone proclaiming the name Pontius Pilate,an osuary inscribed with the name Caiaphas(the one who tried Jesus) on it.The Behistan rock found by Hendrick Schleiman naming all the supposed "mythical" kings of Assyria.The finding of Troy(called Troas in the New Test.)Evidence of the also "mythical " Hittites.Writings by the Jewish historian Josephus from the 1rst century mentioning Jesus and his followers.Tacitus a Roman writing from Jerusalem about one called "Chrestus"(Christ) causing trouble in Jerusalem.I could go on and on.But nothing disproving.

2007-03-22 05:05:27 · answer #3 · answered by AngelsFan 6 · 1 0

Archaeological finds just proof that particular history existed. It does not prove or disprove the bible.

2007-03-22 05:12:34 · answer #4 · answered by halo 3 · 0 0

Archeologists recently found the villages that are believed to be Soddom and Gamorrah. This is a plus for the Bible.

These villages were destroyed by a volcanic pyroclastic flow. The Bible says that they were destroyed by 'fire from the sky'. This is a plus for a metaphorical interpretation of the Bible. This is proof against a literal interpretation of the Bible.

2007-03-22 05:01:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

The destruction of the ancient city of Jericho, located on the west side of the great Rift Valley is mentioned in Joshua 6:20, 24, showing the miraculous fall of the walls of Jericho and that city’s overthrow by the Hebrews under Joshua. When no archaeological confirmation of the Bible’s account was available, the truthfulness of it was glibly disputed. This is no longer possible. Archaeology confirms the Bible account of the destruction of the city. Excavations began at Jericho in 1930. Excavators found that the double walls surrounding the city had fallen down the slope as if toppled by an earthquake or some other unseen force. Houses had been built on rafters that bridged the tops of the two walls and in one section part of the wall stood and could have been where Rahab’s house had been preserved in the Biblical catastrophe. The excavators found evidence of intense fire. The city had been burned. This was no ordinary burning, because the layer of ashes was unusually thick and it appeared that all available fuel had been gathered to accomplish a thorough destruction. The city had not been looted, neither had there been any substantial rebuilding of the city until hundreds of years thereafter, about the time of King Ahab, when the Bible tells us that it was rebuilt. Today you can go to the Rift Valley, to the site of the excavations of the ruins of that ancient city of Jericho and see this archaeological support of the Bible account.


Sargon is mentioned by name but once in the Bible record. (Isa 20:1) In the early 1800’s the Biblical reference to him was often discounted by critics as of no historical value. However, from 1843 onward archaeological excavations uncovered the ruins of his palace at Khorsabad and the inscribed records of his royal annals.



In 1993 a team of archaeologists, led by Professor Avraham Biran, made an astounding discovery, which was reported in Israel Exploration Journal. At the site of an ancient mound called Tel Dan, in the northern part of Israel, they uncovered a basalt stone. Carved into the stone are the words “House of David” and “King of Israel.”2 The inscription, dated to the ninth century B.C.E., is said to be part of a victory monument erected by Aramaeans—enemies of Israel who lived to the east. Why is this ancient inscription so significant?

Based on a report by Professor Biran and his colleague, Professor Joseph Naveh, an article in Biblical Archaeology Review stated: “This is the first time that the name David has been found in any ancient inscription outside the Bible.”3 Something else is noteworthy about the inscription. The expression “House of David” is written as one word. Language expert Professor Anson Rainey explains: “A word divider . . . is often omitted, especially if the combination is a well-established proper name. ‘The House of David’ was certainly such a proper political and geographic name in the mid-ninth century B.C.E.”5 So King David and his dynasty evidently were well-known in the ancient world.

Did Nineveh—the great city of Assyria mentioned in the Bible—really exist? As recently as the early 19th century, some Bible critics refused to believe so. But in 1849, Sir Austen Henry Layard unearthed ruins of King Sennacherib’s palace at Kuyunjik, a site that proved to be part of ancient Nineveh. The critics were thus silenced on that score. But these ruins had more to tell. On the walls of one well-preserved chamber was a display showing the capture of a well-fortified city, with captives being marched before the invading king. Above the king is this inscription: “Sennacherib, king of the world, king of Assyria, sat upon a nîmedu -throne and passed in review the booty (taken) from Lachish (La-ki-su).”6

This display and inscription, which can be viewed in the British Museum, agree with the Bible’s account of the capture of the Judean city of Lachish by Sennacherib, recorded at 2 Kings 18:13, 14. Commenting on the significance of the find, Layard wrote: “Who would have believed it probable or possible, before these discoveries were made, that beneath the heap of earth and rubbish which marked the site of Nineveh, there would be found the history of the wars between Hezekiah [king of Judah] and Sennacherib, written at the very time when they took place by Sennacherib himself, and confirming even in minute details the Biblical record?”7

Archaeologists have dug up many other artifacts—pottery, ruins of buildings, clay tablets, coins, documents, monuments, and inscriptions—that confirm the accuracy of the Bible. Excavators have uncovered the Chaldean city of Ur, the commercial and religious center where Abraham lived.8 (Genesis 11:27-31) The Nabonidus Chronicle, unearthed in the 19th century, describes Babylon’s fall to Cyrus the Great in 539 B.C.E., an event narrated in Daniel chapter 5.9 An inscription (fragments of which are preserved in the British Museum) found on an archway in ancient Thessalonica contains the names of city rulers described as “politarchs,” a word unknown in classical Greek literature but used by the Bible writer Luke.10 (Acts 17:6, footnote) Luke’s accuracy was thus vindicated in this—as it had already been in other details.—Compare Luke 1:3.

“Lachish Letters.”

"The Moabite Stone "

The list of archaelogical findings that confirm the accuracy of the bible's account go on and on!

Archaeologists, however, do not always agree with one another, let alone with the Bible. Even so, the Bible contains within itself strong evidence that it is a book that can be trusted.

2007-03-22 06:41:44 · answer #6 · answered by silly me 2 · 0 0

Well I guess every archaeological find that is older than 6000 years old pretty much disproves the thought that the earth is only 6000 years old.

2007-03-22 05:02:46 · answer #7 · answered by photogrl262000 5 · 1 1

Nothing has disproved the Bible. True, there are things that have not been found that cause people to question the Bible, but nothing nothing has been found that disproves it.

2007-03-22 05:10:58 · answer #8 · answered by blaze 2 · 0 1

Well one that comes to mind is about Pontias Pilate.

For ages and ages critics disputed his very existence and yet they have found achaeological evidence that he did... sort of recently too. To be truthful I can't recall details at all, but I'll do a little digging and edit my response for ya. :)

2007-03-22 04:56:57 · answer #9 · answered by Q&A Queen 7 · 0 2

The Lost Tomb of Jesus...was an interesting find.

2007-03-22 05:01:59 · answer #10 · answered by Ivyvine 6 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers