faith or evidence

[archaeologist]

the book being reveiwed in this article is a classic example why those who do not believe the Bible get it wrong and feel that the Bible is in error:

Biblical Archaeology Society

it is probably fair to say that for the specific “mysteries” considered, Cline has assembled the most comprehensive and up-to-date survey of claimed discoveries, together with a balanced and thorough review of the literary and archaeological evidence.

there is an assumption by the unbelieving world that they have the right to determine the criteria, analyze the 'evidence' and then get to pass judgment whether or not God did what He said He did.

talk about a one-sided  investigation with no hopes of honesty and integrity while manipulating the process to achieve a pre-conceived conclusion.  non-believers assume that they can draw these conclusions based upon incomplete data as evidence is not incorruptible but subject to time and its partners (weather, erosions, wars etc.) it takes highly arrogant men to think they possess the power to read the past when the past does not reveal all its secrets. 

it also takes very conceited men to think they have the answers that run contrary to the Bible when they know that their theories are based upon futile attempts to 'interpret' what they have found (without the benefit of knowing all the reasons why their discovery was placed in that position) and at the same time ignoring the realities of life or dismissing them because they want to paint a picture of what they WANT the past to be and not expose the past as it really was.

this is exampled by their idea that the humans of the past were not the same as humans of today, which is just pure fallacy and by their continualattempt to label every structure or artifact as a religious icon or temple when in reality that is not the case.

then the unbeliever really shows their audacity and double standard when they create special , strict criteria for the Biblical evidence to meet while at the same time moving evidence, which would support the Bible, subjectively and without proper proof to different time periods.  along with dismissing evidence because it was found by those whom the professional archaeologist despises or disagrees.

Sorry but given this partial picture there is no way the unbeliever, the self-appointed judge, jury and prosecutor, can determine with any degree of accuracy, legitimacy or confidence that they are right and the Bible is wrong.  The Bible demands the use of faith and their is no escaping that clause, no matter how hard the unbeliever whines.

to solely insist upon having physical evidence displays an unrealistic attitude and demonstrates that the unbeliever is unwilling to be honest for it means that they are no longer in control but are subject to God and His message.  the unbeliever must realize that they will not get all the physical evidence they desire, it is gone or it is hidden because God's criteria of faith over-rules the unbeliever's demand for proof.

to know and learn of God one must do it God's way or they lose.

[turanclancath]

Sorry i can not open the link could you post it please again.

Biblical Archaeology Society Online Archive Search

I thought the Forum was a mirror of the BAs itself ? Are we  stricter different or so  in the Forum  under BAS i understand its a kind of mirror of BAS

[turanclancath]

Publishing Excellence

BAS's flagship publication is Biblical Archaeology Review. BAR is the only magazine that connects the academic study of archaeology to a broad general audience eager to understand the world of the Bible. Covering both the Old and New Testaments, BAR presents the latest discoveries and controversies in archaeology with breathtaking photography and informative maps and diagrams. BAR's writers are the top scholars, the leading researchers, the world-renowned experts. BAR is the only nonsectarian forum for the discussion of Biblical archaeology

So I dnt understand why  Professor  Cline isnt  acceptable  see the last 2 mails

turanclancath

[Admin1]

I fixed the link in the opening post:

Biblical Archaeology Society

[stilgar]

apparently for "archaeologist," it is questioning the Bible in the first place that is unacceptable.

[archaeologist]

apparently for "archaeologist," it is questioning the Bible in the first place that is unacceptable

not at all, it is the reliance on the physical evidence, knowing how little there is, when drawing conclusions about a book which requires faith. 

it is called making up your own rules to fit what you want and not being humble enough to accept the criteria given by God.

we all know that K.A.Kitchen has outlined the miniscule amountof evidence recovered by archaeologists in his book 'The Bible in its World' and it would be presumptuous for any secular person to think they will be able to recover even one artifact for anyof the events listed in Cline's book.

given the fact that we have more mss. for the new testament than any other ancient book kindof dispells the arguments against it.  (the case for Christ by Lee Strobel interviews ith Drs. Metzger and Yamauchi, pgs. 60-66 & 77-91).

we have plenty of physical evidence for the Bible, it all depends if you accept it and realize that it evidence speaks to the authenticity of the rest of the Bible as well

[Michael]

Nobody doubts God, just the men who wrote about him in the Bible.

There is plenty of evidence for any historical fiction, however just because one thing in a book is true doesn't make everything in a book true.

I have found the archaeological evidence needed to prove the Bible is in any way connected to God is lacking. And that is a good thing, because the god of the Bible, being a bit jealous and subject to rage should not be in charge of this world or any other.

[archaeologist]

Nobody doubts God, just the men who wrote about him in the Bible.

then you are doubting God as both paul and peter tells us that God inspired the writings and were given by HIM.  so if you doubt the men then you doubt God.

There is plenty of evidence for any historical fiction, however just because one thing in a book is true doesn't make everything in a book true

except for the Bible, if one thing is found false then it is gone and God is not God.  there are big ramifications involved here and we know that through all archaeological discovery that not one has shown the Bible to be untrue.

we have lots of interpretation that claim the Bible to be false but not one actual discovery.  big difference between interpretation and fact.

I have found the archaeological evidence needed to prove the Bible is in any way connected to God is lacking. And that is a good thing, because the god of the Bible, being a bit jealous and subject to rage should not be in charge of this world or any other.

the former:  makes no sense at all
the latter:  and you are qualified to make that determination?

[Michael]

Nobody doubts God, just the men who wrote about him in the Bible.

then you are doubting God as both paul and peter tells us that God inspired the writings and were given by HIM.  so if you doubt the men then you doubt God.

There is plenty of evidence for any historical fiction, however just because one thing in a book is true doesn't make everything in a book true

except for the Bible, if one thing is found false then it is gone and God is not God.  there are big ramifications involved here and we know that through all archaeological discovery that not one has shown the Bible to be untrue.

we have lots of interpretation that claim the Bible to be false but not one actual discovery.  big difference between interpretation and fact.

I have found the archaeological evidence needed to prove the Bible is in any way connected to God is lacking. And that is a good thing, because the god of the Bible, being a bit jealous and subject to rage should not be in charge of this world or any other.

the former:  makes no sense at all
the latter:  and you are qualified to make that determination?

There is nothing in Peter and Paul's wrirings to convince me it has anything to do with God, just their version of what they want God to be. The Bible is cosmic myth, historical fiction, religious philosophy, and some history. Apparently it is just enough history to make people read the book in awe and jump through hoops over it. There are many false claims in the Bible. All miracles are false. It is impossible to date the Exodus as not all the cities conquered by Moses and Joshua existed in one single era. This is part of the archaeological record. I would imagine anyone who wouldd dare use the handle of Archaeologist would be aware of such findings unless they are just blowing smoke.

[archaeologist]

The Bible is cosmic myth, historical fiction, religious philosophy, and some history. Apparently it is just enough history to make people read the book in awe and jump through hoops over it. There are many false claims in the Bible

please prove this true.  considering you were not there at the time, i highly doubt you can.

still wouldn't explain why people have lives changed, go off to the mission field and preach from it and then die for the persons it describes.  there is more to the Bible than you are willing to admit.

This is part of the archaeological record

a few things you need to learn about the archaeological record is that:  1.  it is incomplete; 2. not all the evidence is interpretated correctly; 3. it is subject to sinful man who do not want to prove the Bible true.

ONE thing you need to learn about God and the Bible.  God made therequirement that faith is what pleases Him not finding and accepting physical evidence.  WE will only get enough evidence to support and strengthen that faith NOT ruin that requirement.

so if you are relying on physical evidence along to convince you then youare out of luck because you will never find  all that you want.  AT some point you will come to a crossroads and be forced to make a choice:  use faith or physical evidence.

[RamboPreacher]

The Bible is cosmic myth, historical fiction, religious philosophy, and some history. Apparently it is just enough history to make people read the book in awe and jump through hoops over it. There are many false claims in the Bible

please prove this true.  considering you were not there at the time, i highly doubt you can.
...

I have asked as well.  but gee - don't you know, he wrote a book, so it must be true. 

with that said, I do read his viewpoints as opinion (though will probably not be replying to them for now, anyway).  He presents them as fact though, for some reason.  and his opinion is as valid as anyones. I may not agree with him with those opinions (not facts), but I try to be as open minds as possible when reading all points of view.  The challenge for me is that For posts like that, I tend to just skim them over, as there is no real evidences provided, only the opinion (presented as a fact) and a book, that he says i/we should read.  That apparent kind of "objectivity" (read as condescending attitude, or at least what appears to be in these forums) makes it really difficult for me to justify even taking the time to read his presentation in these posts (let alone a whole book).

I just want to learn, and draw my own conclusions.

[Michael]

The Bible is cosmic myth, historical fiction, religious philosophy, and some history. Apparently it is just enough history to make people read the book in awe and jump through hoops over it. There are many false claims in the Bible

please prove this true.  considering you were not there at the time, i highly doubt you can.
...

I have asked as well.  but gee - don't you know, he wrote a book, so it must be true. 

with that said, I do read his viewpoints as opinion (though will probably not be replying to them for now, anyway).  He presents them as fact though, for some reason.  and his opinion is as valid as anyones. I may not agree with him with those opinions (not facts), but I try to be as open minds as possible when reading all points of view.  The challenge for me is that For posts like that, I tend to just skim them over, as there is no real evidences provided, only the opinion (presented as a fact) and a book, that he says i/we should read.  That apparent kind of "objectivity" (read as condescending attitude, or at least what appears to be in these forums) makes it really difficult for me to justify even taking the time to read his presentation in these posts (let alone a whole book).

I just want to learn, and draw my own conclusions.

I agree with you Rambo, but the problem is I can't prove this with a soundbite in a forum. I realize the burden of proof is on me to demonstrate my thesis. However, I must detail every story in the Bible to every star and constellation and site references why that event goes to that star by comparing the meaning of the Hebrew name to various known cosmic myths by other civilizations. I also have to document the changes and additions the writers did to the text due to procession, history , and evolving cultural myths about the constellations themselves, including a late Greek influence. I then have to show that the story is not just haphazard thoughout the constellations, but is a continous and connected story.  I must also supply some smoking guns at the cardinal points. I must also tie this story into the prevailing myths and beliefs of that era, and also tie into the history of that era to match the background in the Bible. This also lead to a reinterpretation of some Biblical words, more closer to their original Hebrew meaning then a later Septuigent translation.

I have done all or that and more. I have been able to explain difficult Bible passages as well as midrashim. This also explains why the earliest Christian church known to man has a zodiac symbol on its floor.

[archaeologist]

However, I must detail every story in the Bible to every star and constellation and site references why that event goes to that star by comparing the meaning of the Hebrew name to various known cosmic myths by other civilizations. I also have to document the changes and additions the writers did to the text due to procession, history , and evolving cultural myths about the constellations themselves, including a late Greek influence.

you seem to agree with kent hovind (a.k.a. dr.dino) as he has stated something similar in his seminar on creation and evolution.  where you differ is thathe does not attribute the actual events to a star but that the stars just tell the story of the the Bible.

but ithink your versionis corrupted andi am not all that sure hovind is evenclose tothe truth.  although since astronomers were present throughout ancient history, there is a possibility of either it is true or just a fabrication of unbelievers to distort the truth.

upon further investigation i willgo withthe latter. 

now if you have credible sources which proved information about the ancient astronomers then please post it sowe can do our own research.

[RamboPreacher]

The Bible is cosmic myth, historical fiction, religious philosophy, and some history. Apparently it is just enough history to make people read the book in awe and jump through hoops over it. There are many false claims in the Bible

please prove this true.  considering you were not there at the time, i highly doubt you can.
...

I have asked as well.  but gee - don't you know, he wrote a book, so it must be true. 

with that said, I do read his viewpoints as opinion (though will probably not be replying to them for now, anyway).  He presents them as fact though, for some reason.  and his opinion is as valid as anyones. I may not agree with him with those opinions (not facts), but I try to be as open minds as possible when reading all points of view.  The challenge for me is that For posts like that, I tend to just skim them over, as there is no real evidences provided, only the opinion (presented as a fact) and a book, that he says i/we should read.  That apparent kind of "objectivity" (read as condescending attitude, or at least what appears to be in these forums) makes it really difficult for me to justify even taking the time to read his presentation in these posts (let alone a whole book).

I just want to learn, and draw my own conclusions.

I agree with you Rambo, but the problem is I can't prove this with a soundbite in a forum. I realize the burden of proof is on me to demonstrate my thesis. However, I must detail every story in the Bible to every star and constellation and site references why that event goes to that star by comparing the meaning of the Hebrew name to various known cosmic myths by other civilizations. I also have to document the changes and additions the writers did to the text due to procession, history , and evolving cultural myths about the constellations themselves, including a late Greek influence. I then have to show that the story is not just haphazard thoughout the constellations, but is a continous and connected story.  I must also supply some smoking guns at the cardinal points. I must also tie this story into the prevailing myths and beliefs of that era, and also tie into the history of that era to match the background in the Bible. This also lead to a reinterpretation of some Biblical words, more closer to their original Hebrew meaning then a later Septuigent translation.

I have done all or that and more. I have been able to explain difficult Bible passages as well as midrashim. This also explains why the earliest Christian church known to man has a zodiac symbol on its floor.

I understand, but perhaps, you are trying to convey more information that is digestible in a post on a forum.  maybe take smaller points at a time, then after a time, you can reference the posts you have made already in this forum, if you don't have external links.  and if you are in a hurry to present an information byte - just phrase it appropriately - I believe..., or I have found in my research that..., or my assumptions are...then conclusion.

I don't know you.  even if you are a "big gun" in the industry (another topic, probably is defining that industry - hehehehehe) - that doesn't mean I know you outside of this forum anyway.  and I know others are like me in this area.

BAR/BAS is my introduction to Biblical Archaeology.  it is my teeth-cutting.  I realize that is not very objective, but it is all I have for now, outside of my theological and religious studies.

so, for example, I have read and heard enough of Dr. Bart Ehrman enough to know some of the context of what he believes (or not, as the case may be), but if he happened to post on this forum, I would ask the very same thing of him when making a post, even if I did "get" what he was saying, if it was presented as "fact" (which I do not believe he would, by the way).  same goes for Dr. Luke Timothy Johnson, or Dr. Amy Levine (as examples).  in fact, I don't even assume that you know who those people are.

hope that helps. though really off-topic here; and for that - my apologies.

[Michael]

However, I must detail every story in the Bible to every star and constellation and site references why that event goes to that star by comparing the meaning of the Hebrew name to various known cosmic myths by other civilizations. I also have to document the changes and additions the writers did to the text due to procession, history , and evolving cultural myths about the constellations themselves, including a late Greek influence.

you seem to agree with kent hovind (a.k.a. dr.dino) as he has stated something similar in his seminar on creation and evolution.  where you differ is thathe does not attribute the actual events to a star but that the stars just tell the story of the the Bible.

but ithink your versionis corrupted andi am not all that sure hovind is evenclose tothe truth.  although since astronomers were present throughout ancient history, there is a possibility of either it is true or just a fabrication of unbelievers to distort the truth.

upon further investigation i willgo withthe latter. 

now if you have credible sources which proved information about the ancient astronomers then please post it sowe can do our own research.

Most current Christian Bible astrology people use the work of Bullinger as their basis. About a century ago E. W. Bullinger documented the New Testament is the stars. What Bullinger did was take the ancient Arabic name of the star and found the closest word that looked like it in Hebrew, even though the meaning was different. While this is not the best scholarship, I have found in many cases, Bullinger's interpretations fit Old Testament stories to a tee. I bought his book from a Christian organization.

I had originally planned to write a book combining his work with that of Gerald Massey. When I got into the details I had discovered neither one was correct in their assumptions. I had also stumbled on to an ancient secret of the cosmic myth origin or religion in general. Beowulf, the works of Homer, and the myths of all of Europe, Babylon, Egypt, and Indian are cosmic myths. I suspect it is that way world wide, I don't know. Once I cracked the Bible cosmic myth code, I hit brick walls, dozens of them. I had stars that could have only been in certain positions from  2000 BCE. This was like a date set in stone. It could not be altered.

I had to rewrite the origin of the Bible and do it to fit known scholarship. I studied the history of the Early Bronze Age and discovered it matched the Bible very well, except for the anachronisms that would pop up. Those anachronism, I discovered were added later to the text.

There is a book and web site by Dr. Aardsma. he believes in an Early Bronze Age chronology, although his work is written as if the Bible was actual history. He also claims there is a 1000 years between Joshua and David, which I don't do.  David and Gilgamesh were the same cosmic representations of Akkadian king Naram Sin, as best as I can tell.

Rambo I am not a heavy at all, just a wannabe. However, I am convinced of my theory because it answers so many questions and eliminates anomalies. This weekend, if time permits I will start a new thread on the topic and make a large overview presentation.  I have discussed my theory with four of BAR scholars who are not keen on the idea, but have admitted there are those amongst them that believe Judeo-Christianity was an astro-religion based on zodiac finds in synagogues.

What I have done was to work out the details.