Creationism is a mental illness (Page 145) (Post deleted by zeffur ) (Post deleted by zeffur )  ghostgeek: One problem with the Hebrew history is the dearth of good archaeological evidence to support the Abraham story, and the richness of contradicting archaeological evidence. As Gary Greenburg notes, "while it used to be almost universally taken for granted that the Patriarchs and the sons of Israel were historical figures and that Genesis mixed some basic historical truths with a variety of legends, a growing segment of the scholarly community accepts that the patriarchal stories may have no historical core at all." (Greenburg p. 112) Among the problems with the stories are the following: Abraham could not have visited the city of Ur when it was the land of the Chaldees since the Chaldeans did not control the area until about the 8th century B.C.E.. Additionally, the passage was mistranslated for the King James version of the Bible from the Greek translation of the Bible. The actual language of the passage as well as other textual and historical considerations suggest that the stories were not written until about the 5th century B.C.E.. Most academics date the writing of the texts between the 10th and 6th century B.C.E.. The southern highlands of Palestine (from Jerusalem south the the Valley of Beersheba), where Abraham supposedly settled, is very sparse in archaeological evidence from this period, indicating only a few hundred nomadic pastoralists. Moreover, the Philistines never entered the region until the 12th century B.C.E.. The "city of Gerar" in which Abraham's son Isaac encounters Abimelech, the "king of the Philistines" (Genesis 26:1) was a tiny, insignificant rural village up until the 8th century B.C.E. It couldn't have been the capital of the regional king of a people who didn't yet exist. [ https://web.csulb.edu/~cwallis/100/worldreligions/history.html ] ghostgeek: Also, Jacob marries Leah and Rachel, and has an uncle, Laban, all of whom are Arameans. Arameans do not appear in the archeological record at all prior to 1100 B.C.E., and have no significant numbers until the 9th century B.C.E. [ https://web.csulb.edu/~cwallis/100/worldreligions/history.html ] (Post deleted by zeffur ) (Post deleted by zeffur ) ghostgeek: When even the Catholic Church has advanced beyond the stone age, I'm minded to ask what it is that makes Zeffur so impervious to any mode of thought that isn't hoary with age? (Post deleted by zeffur ) ghostgeek: Fair enough, Zeff lad. Henceforth I'd consider you a fossil encased in stone and buried in the bowels of the earth. ghostgeek: If, by some freak of nature, you ever escape your self-imposed prison and do a little reading, you'll find that my views aren't so different from minds far more scholarly than mine.  TheloniousSphereMonk: Amen, zefturd....God never changes indeed....he isn't real today just as he wasn't real 2000 years ago and won't be real tomorrow.  (Post deleted by zeffur )  kittybobo34: Just think Zeff,,, if they seal your fossilized body well enough, you will still be gooey after several million years. (Edited by kittybobo34) (Post deleted by zeffur ) (Post deleted by zeffur ) (Post deleted by zeffur )
(Post deleted by zeffur ) (Post deleted by zeffur ) | Science Chat Room Similar Conversations |
