this has to be ...

[archaeologist]

one of the deadest forums going.  i have been gone for awhile so it cannot be my fault.

[notalent]

one of the deadest forums going.  i have been gone for awhile so it cannot be my fault.

OK.  Probably not the most helpful or informative post. 

Besides which I disagree with your opinion.  The Tall el Hammam thread has been enormously exciting to read because it contains information not yet published.  We are getting the first information from this dig before the world at large knows anything about it.  You can't get this kind of inside scoop anywhere else. 

That one thread alone has more life in it than all the rest combined, IMO, if for no other reason than real archaeologists have provided first-hand, learned illumination on what has to be one of the hottest digs in the region.  It's gold, baby.

[archaeologist]

well i will disagree with your position as 1 thread does not a forum make.  i also do not share your enthusiasm as that one thread ignores the truth and provides no real answers nor real site for sodom.

anyone willing to manipulate scripture to fit their theory is not worth reading.

[notalent]

well i will disagree with your position as 1 thread does not a forum make.

It sure made this forum.  Because before then, it was only the well-meant wranglings of uninformed (though enthusiastic), unschooled amateurs.  We should be thanking our lucky stars that real archaeologists would even bother to come here and turn on the lights.

  i also do not share your enthusiasm as that one thread ignores the truth and provides no real answers nor real site for sodom.

Actually, it has provided the best fit for Sodom and it's satellite cities.  What's so amazing is that such a huge Bronze Age city (on the same spectacular scale as Hazor) should be found that has been heretofore unidentified in that time period.  It's a major coup.

anyone willing to manipulate scripture to fit their theory is not worth reading.

On the contrary, it's the first theory that actually pays scrupulous attention to scripture. It has put the Bible back into Biblical Archaeology.  Such cutting-edge, first-hand information from real archaeologists and scholars in this place is a wonderful breath of fresh air!

[Brianroy]

Arch,
     I want to be inclusive, but your unconstructive participation and continuous emotionalism isn't helpful.  You need to saccharify and then justify your points.

Look.   You demand OTHERS provide links and back up what they say.  You also know that I will usually do such by utilizing those very means, rather than quote a book or work most aren't able to get their "hands on" readily  in the general public.   I don't readily call my opponents in a discussion as foudroyant vacuates, because it it the argument or idea I wish to address or attack...NOT the person.  You have done the opposite of late....  You attack the people, and the argument is gradually becoming more as background to justify your emotionalism.

You work alot, and are too busy?  So....  You can then exercise time management a little better, participate less daily, but when you do participate...you do so more constructively, better prepared, and more informed.

So let's cut to the chase.   

You want to make things interesting?   YOU open up with some creativity and provide links and sources to back your ideas / hypotheses up.  

Don't be calling Dr. Collins or others labelings indehiscent ("not opening at maturity") and not conducive to conversation adipsia ('without thirst), or the "deadness" which you articulate. 

  Don't be demeaning the joy of someone who came back from a trip to Israel, and puff your Freudian "id" in the process. Those that live in this kind of isolation and pride will sometimes have an unflattering suffix of two vowels and a consonant attached to it. 

 I am hoping that you will perceive an errant path upon which you are now trodding,  amend your way, find personal inquisitive and philosophical fulfillment, while being appreciated (rather than loathed via the unconstructive negativity you are bringing) by the community of readers.

Thanks. 

 

[archaeologist]

Because before then, it was only the well-meant wranglings of uninformed (though enthusiastic), unschooled amateurs.  We should be thanking our lucky stars that real archaeologists would even bother to come here and turn on the lights.

first off, i am not uneducated nor uninformed.  second, just because a person or persons are 'professional' archaeologists does it mean they are right and we put our critical thinking along with our brains in neutral and blindly accept everything they say.

Actually, it has provided the best fit for Sodom and it's satellite cities.  What's so amazing is that such a huge Bronze Age city (on the same spectacular scale as Hazor) should be found that has been heretofore unidentified in that time period.  It's a major coup.

actually you and they are wrong and their misuse of scripture does not justify their claims.  go back abnd re-read brianroy's and my new threads and compare with what is being said.  you are accepting without question the claims of those who want Tell H to be sodom when not only dr. wood disagrees but scripture and the evidence also disagree.

the proponents of thenorthern theory have yet to produce one shred of evidence that Tell H. is actually solomon.  they have fydged scripture to make it look like it but upon close scuritny their claims fall apart.\

On the contrary, it's the first theory that actually pays scrupulous attention to scripture. It has put the Bible back into Biblical Archaeology.  Such cutting-edge, first-hand information from real archaeologists and scholars in this place is a wonderful breath of fresh air!

you are wrong again, they have NOT put the Bible back into archaeology but have abused scriptures to fit what they want the mound to be.  they ignore too many other passages and the reality of physical geography plus factors like the modern valley may not be the extent of the ancient valley'. 

these are glaring errors and show that those involves want fame and glory while re-writing history.  if you are so gun-hho and if the northern proponents are correct, why haven't they been able to refute my points in another thread but avoid them like the plague, while limiting their participation to softball and set-up questions which avoid close investigation of their work?

if they were right they would not be so afraid to address what i have raised up and pointed out.

[archaeologist]

I want to be inclusive, but your unconstructive participation and continuous emotionalism isn't helpful.  You need to saccharify and then justify your points.

brianroy, i have supported your efforts in opposing the northern theory even when you go way off into tangents and areas that make no sense and have nothing to do with the city of sodom.  be careful what you say for your posts rarely make a clear point but are just ramblings of an inquisitive mind.

You demand OTHERS provide links and back up what they say

if you noticed, i usually do provide links and YOU have complimented me on them.  just because i am able to comment without a link does it mean i am not qualified.

You attack the people, and the argument is gradually becoming more as background to justify your emotionalism.

who is attacking people?  you may think that is what i am doing wbecause i mention names but guess what,if they are involved and they are claiming something, i get to mention their names.  if they are wrong, then i get to say they are wrong.

if i wanted to 'attack' someone i would be far more insulting and do far more name-calling.  if dr. collins says soemthing i disagree with, guess what--i get to use his name when i disagree and that is not name calling but pinpointing the source.

You work alot, and are too busy?  So....  You can then exercise time management a little better, participate less daily, but when you do participate...you do so more constructively, better prepared, and more informed.

i am very busy and time management is already employed.  some of us do not have the luxuries others have.   most of the time you put TOO MUCH in your posts and rarely make a concise or clear point and the rest of us are wondering what you are trying to say in your ramblings.

Don't be calling Dr. Collins or others labelings indehiscent ("not opening at maturity") and not conducive to conversation adipsia ('without thirst), or the "deadness" which you articulate.

guess what--if dr. collins says it  or his 'buddies' then i get to cite them and i get to state my opinion.  that is what discussion is all about.  if they are wrong then i will state they are wrong.  you do not like it, i do not care.

they can refute me if they want to but so far they have hidden and not been able to refute one thing with evidence or facts. they donot even use proof to back up what they aresayng and rely on their assumptions to backup their assumptions and that isn't good archaeology.

I am hoping that you will perceive an errant path upon which you are now trodding,  amend your way, find personal inquisitive and philosophical fulfillment, while being appreciated (rather than loathed via the unconstructive negativity you are bringing) by the community of readers

i amnot walking any errant path, onlythose who do not use the Bible correctly or speak the truth do that.  AND IF YOU HAD READ my original post you would have seen that i was addressing the lack of traffic NOT the topics.

[notalent]

...if you are so gun-hho and if the northern proponents are correct, why haven't they been able to refute my points in another thread...?

They addressed yours and Brianroy's points early on.  But you dismissed those addresses with a wave of the hand and re-posted the essential elements of your refuted points -- argumentum ad nauseum.  As far as I can determine, you've basically rejected hermeneutics 101.  So there's probably not much point in the academically trained trying to engage you further.

[archaeologist]

They addressed yours and Brianroy's points early on.  But you dismissed those addresses with a wave of the hand and re-posted the essential elements of your refuted points -- argumentum ad nauseum.  As far as I can determine, you've basically rejected hermeneutics 101.  So there's probably not much point in the academically trained trying to engage you further

that is your opinion and they did not refute any point.  in fact dr. collins went to great pains to avoid answering any challenge to his theory and the points remain to haunt him and those who support the northern location.

you say i reject hermaneutics yet you fail to cite one point where i have.  my points have used scripture to show that dr. collins and firends have wrongly restricted the use of scripture to locate sodom and they have rejected ALL other scriptures which show them to be wrong.

i posted the 48 verses in another thread so they and you could refute me, yet none of you have.  one glaring point which has gone unaddressed--they say they have found 1 destruction layer--well there are 2 at sodom and they are not within 10 years of each other.  1 layer does not make the site sodom. 

plus the assume sodom was a great city--yet no scripture states that so they again are wrong.  the errors are not with my use of hermeneutics but with their ignorance of scripture.

[notalent]

They addressed yours and Brianroy's points early on.  But you dismissed those addresses with a wave of the hand and re-posted the essential elements of your refuted points -- argumentum ad nauseum.  As far as I can determine, you've basically rejected hermeneutics 101.  So there's probably not much point in the academically trained trying to engage you further

... the points remain to haunt him and those who support the northern location.

If anyone is haunted, it would seem that it's not the real archaeologist.

you say i reject hermaneutics yet you fail to cite one point where i have.  my points have used scripture to show that dr. collins and firends have wrongly restricted the use of scripture

I already cited one, but you just waved if off with a flat denial.  Remember the discussion about distichs?  You were impervious to the revelation.

The careful scholar is more interested in such hyperbolic passages for their intended meaning rather than mis-using them as proof-texts for non-doctrinally critical notions of geography.

to locate sodom and they have rejected ALL other scriptures which show them to be wrong.

i posted the 48 verses in another thread so they and you could refute me, yet none of you have.  one glaring point which has gone unaddressed--they say they have found 1 destruction layer--well there are 2 at sodom and they are not within 10 years of each other.  1 layer does not make the site sodom.

No, there's just one massively burnt layer.  The city of Sodom was massively burnt only once that we can be certain of.

plus the assume sodom was a great city--yet no scripture states that so they again are wrong.  the errors are not with my use of hermeneutics but with their ignorance of scripture.

No one is assuming anything except you.  Instead, they are just reporting what they've found, and how it agrees with what scripture actually says.  If scripture is silent about the size of the city, then they are free to find it as it was, be it large or small.  So they don't have to assume anything about size.  They just have to follow the plain directional indicators given in scripture and find it as it was.

[Brianroy]

Arch,
   I think your pejorative reply to a new guy simply sharing his joyful testimony of a BAS tour of Israel, is the tone you need to make yourself aware of, and I think was more than just impolite.

Jun 05, 2008

/ Archaeologists, Scholars & Other Personalities / Re: "Israel at 60" - May tour by BAS

you make it sound like the tour was worth the time and money.

i for one do not like taking group tours as one is too restricted in their local exploration and the tour guides are usually brain dead morons who just requrgitate what they have been told.

both of which makes the trip unenjoyable and like a trip to the dentist for a tooth pulling without anesthesia.

The underlined is the essence of your opinion.

 You have never been to Israel, according to your own testimony...and you envy others who can experience the joy of a  vacation and the experience of being in Israel on a tour.  Therefore, you want to ruin their hapiness other might have in sharing that joy, or starting a forum of happy experiences in touring Israel.  Why?

And then you wrote in:

Feedback / this has to be ...
on: Jun 05, 2008
 
one of the deadest forums going. i have been gone for awhile so it cannot be my fault

Excuse me, but we did have some interesting data pass between us at this BAS Forum in your absence...between all of our conflicting work schedules and all.   The TeH 2 forum has passed 4500 views...so I think various other people are also reading, even if not participating in the discussion.

In regard to me...I know I often go off  on a tangent sometimes, and  provide too much data.  If there are those who wish to keep up with me via speed reading or time investment, they will see that I am not as eccentric as others might wish me to be, that they may feel more secure in what they have learned or not learned.  Many times, everyone here gets my rough copy version...and, that is a bad habit I still haven't broken.   Other times, I have 3-5 times more data, and 12-23 more links of relevance, but I have to shorten it up.   If it ran long...perhaps it would make a better educational experience. 

 Perhaps the process of thinking is too much hard work for most, as Thomas Edison once complained.  For me, conversation with the right people -- either professionally or socially, as we do here -- can be an extension of the correct thought process, elevate intelligence, and often arrive to a correct conclusion.  But it has to be a "Together Everyone Achieves More" ...T.E.A.M. effort.

 Anyone at anytime, can reach out and grab for a discussion from NASA, Harvard, the Los Alamos Nuclear Lab, PACE, or any other links I provide, and run with a counterpoint, or what have you.  I only like to short-cut advanced formulas in math, but like the philosophical art of exploration of ideas via talking it out. 

As I remarked to someone else, my style is after the means of an informal dinner conversation...but in a forum, for the sake of expediting, we basically engage in types of soliloquys from time to time, expresing our views, awaiting answers and questions and counters.  A good deal of progress was made in regard to TeH and Sodom.   However, Dr. Collins brought up how he was lecturing on the Hittites, so I opened up a Hittite thread, because he alluded that such was relevant to the TeH topic.  I concur...but thus far, very little interest. 

I have said all this -- in a way, as an example -- without calling or referring to anyone being an idiot, moron, elitest, snob, or what have you. 

And I think also, you owe a brief apology to George M. for your remarks...because it is just as easily taken as calling him what you called the tour guides.

If I've been a little heavy handed in my reply this morning (my time)...it is only because I wish the conversation to be fair on all sides, without respect of persons in judgment...as the Bible teaches.

I hope we can all forgive, forget, and move on...and re-enter a new phase of creative, fun, and inter-active intelligent conversation...and that others among us looking in, will participate as well.

Peace.
 

[archaeologist]

No, there's just one massively burnt layer.  The city of Sodom was massively burnt only once that we can be certain of.

how can you be sure? the scriptures did not speak of the first destruction in too much detail.  usually when someone pillages a town , they burn it at the same time, usually but we can't be sure now can we But5 i went back and re-read my post and i said '2 destructive layers' NOT '2 burn layers'.  there is a difference.  read the article i posted from aish

No one is assuming anything except you

sory but i am not assuming anything.  scriptures DOES NOT say it was a great city butit does speak of its inhospitality.

If scripture is silent about the size of the city, then they are free to find it as it was, be it large or small.

how will they know if they found it if scripture doesn't speak of its size?  they can't.

So they don't have to assume anything about size.  They just have to follow the plain directional indicators given in scripture and find it as it was.

there are no indicators in scripture and i have pointed this out.  just because there was a gate does it  mean the fortifications were massive.  also, there is no indicator where sodom was or how big the jordon valley was at the itme.   

everything the northern theorists are basing their cliams on is assumption without proof or evidence nor verification from scripture.  read thepassage in 13:12 : '...and ptiched his tents near sodom.'  as i pointed out in theother thread, the dead sea could be considered part of the jordon valley and you have no idea where sodom is.

by the way if you looked at 14:14 abraham only used 318 men to pursue the victors, what does that tell you, the armed force which defeated the 4 kings was not large thus the 4 kings forces could not be large which then means those cities weren't that large.

you cannot limit a location like sodom's to one passage of scripture, you need to address all the issues and clues.

By the way, hermeneutics is not infallible nor does it over-rule scripture, God or the Holy Spirit. i can dismiss the 'rules' of hermeneutics if i want to especially whenthey interfere with arriving at the truth.

[archaeologist]

I think your pejorative reply to a new guy simply sharing his joyful testimony of a BAS tour of Israel, is the tone you need to make yourself aware of, and I think was more than just impolite.

you obviously have no comprehension on how i was writing it and obviously missed some key words to set the tone. 

You have never been to Israel, according to your own testimony...and you envy others who can experience the joy of a  vacation and the experience of being in Israel on a tour.  Therefore, you want to ruin their hapiness other might have in sharing that joy, or starting a forum of happy experiences in touring Israel.  Why?

i am tired of people who think they can read my mind or tell me how i feel or where i have or haven't been.  you do not know anything about me so don't even try.

most things spread around th web about me are nothing but lies, misrepresentations and no where near the truth as i do not put personal information on the web nor do i verify anything.  no one has a clue.

and if i think this forum is lacking in traffic then i will say so

Excuse me, but we did have some interesting data pass between us at this BAS Forum in your absence...between all of our conflicting work schedules and all.   The TeH 2 forum has passed 4500 views...so I think various other people are also reading, even if not participating in the discussion

wow!!!   oh and the rest of your post is ignored.  try practicing what you preach.

i have shown where the northern theory is impossible, let's have some honest refutation with some real evidence instead of attacking the messenger (or ignoring him) and provide credible links.

[notalent]

No, there's just one massively burnt layer.  The city of Sodom was massively burnt only once that we can be certain of.

how can you be sure? the scriptures did not speak of the first destruction in too much detail.  usually when someone pillages a town , they burn it at the same time

You are making assumptions.    The Bible doesn't say they burned it the first time, so you are wrong.   

[archaeologist]

how could i be wrong? my original mentioning of the issue said --2 destructions, not 2 burn layers.  and yes i was alluding to a possibility but no one knows if the FIRST destruction contained burning or not.  the article said, the first layer was in line with what was described in the Bible.

which still doesn't allow for T.H. to be considered sodom.  there is only 1 destructive layer which could have taken place when the israelite tribes of reuban, Gad and manessah occupied the land.

one cannot rely on the dating techniques of man because there are too many possibilities which undermine any hope of accuracy and the same goes for the 'ages' as the article pointed out so well.

in this country, you could ot get an accurate reading of the dating because ancienthomes as well as modern exist side by side and if you dug in the wrong spot you would get a very wrong idea of which 'age' the structures existed.

one has to be honest if they are going to get tothe truth, not manipulative nor fudging when fudging is in one's favor.