Science Versus Faith and the Use of Archaeology in Israel

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
Post Reply
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Science Versus Faith and the Use of Archaeology in Israel

Post by Secret Alias »

“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote
nili
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: Science Versus Faith and the Use of Archaeology in Israel

Post by nili »

OK, although I see nothing wrong with a faith informed by science. Any reading of something akin to the Plaut Commentary or the works of Nahum Sarna should suffice in making this clear.
semiopen
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Science Versus Faith and the Use of Archaeology in Israel

Post by semiopen »

Always nice to see some rationality from religious folks.

Apparently, if the tower was built 800 years or so after they think it was, that is evidence of a mighty kingdom.

If gentiles built the tower, they must have been a bunch of shmucks who didn't want their neighbors fucking with their water supply.
nili
Posts: 116
Joined: Thu May 22, 2014 1:02 pm

Re: Science Versus Faith and the Use of Archaeology in Israel

Post by nili »

semiopen wrote: Sat Feb 03, 2018 9:28 am Always nice to see some rationality from religious folks.
It's rarely nice to see it met with petty sarcasm.
semiopen
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Science Versus Faith and the Use of Archaeology in Israel

Post by semiopen »

I think my problem was that your post inspired me to look at the article.
Already, preliminary results on a massive tower that defended the city’s main water source – which was thought to have been built in the Middle Bronze Age, nearly 4,000 years ago – have shown the structure likely dates back only to the ninth century B.C.E. (i.e., about a thousand years later). That discovery alone reignited the heated debate on when Jerusalem became a major city.
Making the very generous assumption that the 9th century BCE is correct, that misses the United Kingdom by a few hundred years in the other direction.

It's never nice to criticize without looking at the details. But at least our religious friends apparently have four years of funding to figure out an inspiring story.
Post Reply