The maximalists, on the other hand, believe the Biblical accounts have solid historical and archaeological backing. Long a minority among archaeologists, their numbers are growing, since it seems that every year discoveries are found that support, rather than refute, the Biblical narrative.
Archaeologist Bryant Wood is an example of a Biblical maximalist who is slowly turning the tide in favor of the Biblical evidence. He argues that the archaeological data for the Exodus fall into place if the event is dated back to 1450 BC, the approximate date the Bible indicates for the Exodus. He mentions that the documented evidence of foreign slaves at that time in Egypt could well include the Israelites. He also adds that archaeological indications of the destruction of Canaanite cities some 40 years afterward support the account of Joshua’s conquests.
But Dr. Wood goes against the current. Although he sits in the forefront of archaeological digs and is excavating what he believes is the Biblical city of Ai, he notes that he can’t get his research published in serious archaeological journals because of an ingrained anti-Bible bias.
The tide of scholarly opinion on the Bible has shifted several times in the past centuries. During the later part of the 19th century there was much skepticism of the Bible, but in the 20th century, thanks to astonishing archaeological discoveries supporting the Scriptures, the tide turned somewhat in its favor.
38 comments
We found the shroud of Christ!
Wait...no we didn't.
We found the tomb of Christ!
Wait...no we didn't.
There's plenty of archeological evidence of a worldwide flood!
Wait...no there isn't.
Well, the bible is still infallible!
:: buzzer sounds ::
Oh, sorry - time's up. Thank you for playing 'The Same Boring (and Erroneous) Shit Fundies Vomit Out Every Fucking Day'! Remember to pick up your complimentary copy of our home game on your way out.
Long a minority among archaeologists, their numbers are growing, since it seems that every year discoveries are found that support, rather than refute, the Biblical narrative.
Yeah, and the support for ID/creationism is always "growing amongst scientists", yet the actual figures have always staid pretty much the same...
Lying for Jesus is still lying...
Here's how I've previously explained the problem with "Biblical Archaeology:"
If I tell you that were to tell you that on the morning of September 11th, 2001, I was at the Sears Tower in Milwaukee watching a speech by President Gore, you'd know I was full of crap, because I got some very important facts wrong.
If I were to tell you that yesterday, I got off the Red Line at the Park Street Station in Boston Common, and saw the resurrected Ted Kennedy healing people by the edge of the Frog Pond, my knowledge of local geography does not mean that the everything in my story is true.
When archaeology finds things that are clearly at odds with a fundamentalist hermeneutic of the Bible, (e.g. strong evidence that Daniel was not written during the Babylonian captivity, or no evidence of the Exodus, or even that some towns in New Testament accounts may not have existed,) that is sufficient to torpedo notions of "inerrancy" or "perfection."
On the other hand, the handful of times where consensus about a specific historical fact has been wrong and the Bible been right are not nearly sufficient to prove the supernatural elements of the stories.
As Hitch so astutely pointed out, this is what 'seek and ye shall find' really means. Doesn't matter what you find, or whether you find anything at all when you start with the conclusion and then attempt to work your way towards it by evidence, rather than going the other way around.
Um, yeah, what archaeological evidence proving the bible would that be then?
You do know there's no evidence of millions of people wandering in the Sinai Desert for 40 years, don't you? And for some strange reason, the ancient Egyptians never recorded any instance of firstborn male children dying all at the same time or any mass exodus of slaves from the country. Not to mention that the ancient Chinese and Sumerians have histories spanning across the time the global flood supposedly happened.
This is almost as funny as the people who claim they found Noah's ark.
I went to the link and read the whole mess.
Accusations of cover-up and (get this) a determined mindset to ignore and destroy any evidence in favor of the Bible/ Torah even 70-80 years ago!
You know, back then when people made even MORE claims of such "evidence" that sometimes took decades to disprove as fraud or misinterpretations.
That's all they have, unwarranted and unsubstantuated accusations on the sciences conclusions after a century of search and evaluation.
Here how it stands today: Archeology, History, Biblical and Hebrew Scholars have all determined the story of Exodus never happened.
"but in the 20th century, thanks to astonishing archaeological discoveries supporting the Scriptures"
This is a straight out lie.
(from link)
He even attempts to claim the Egyptians defaced carvings to destroy the previous rulers reigns (and of course Exodus evidence)when this defacing in fact began during late Roman rule and until modern times. They often involved Crude crosses chiseled over the origionals.
Think about it, if a Pharoh ordered that you'd chisel it smooth and/or redo the origional work.
Why lie? A lie is always sinful, and nothing can excuse it.
Only idiots insist that there is archaeological evidence for the Exodus. Granted Cecil B. de Mille made it look sooooo realistic back in 1956. But that was not archaeology. I think Bryant is feeling a tad lonely sitting outside the archaeological tent while the others are sniggering at him, inside.
The wonder is he is excavating at all as the Israelis freely admit there is no evidence for the Exodus.
"The maximalists, on the other hand, believe the Biblical accounts have solid historical and archaeological backing."
I'd like to introduce you to a maximalist who thinks the Loranic accounts have solid historical and archaeological backing.
Have fun with your holy war.
The maximalists, on the other hand, believe the Biblical accounts have solid historical and archaeological backing
There were some peoples and places that were found that were mentioned in the Bible. That doesn't mean that the Biblical accounts were historical. I've lived in Chicago and can verify that it exists. Doesn't mean that the Blues Brothers movie is a documentary.
he notes that he can’t get his research published in serious archaeological journals because of an ingrained anti-Bible bias
Or, you know, because his "research" is pure bunk on the level of the 40-some different Noah's Arks found around the middle east.
"maximalists"
image
...and Predaconians?
So even your 'Intelligent Designer' was as a result of the power of the Allspark?! [/hyper-sarcasm] [/Fantasy Technology]
...oh, and speaking of Cubes, I've just discovered something that'll completely fuck up Gene Ray:
image
You only think in two dimensions, Gene. What about four dimensions?! >:D
"The maximalists, on the other hand, believe the Biblical accounts have solid historical and archaeological backing."
They found Troy... I guess all the Greek Gods and the various stories about them are all true then.
No? Guess you worked out why poor old Byrant ain't getting published.
"Long a minority among archaeologists, their numbers are growing, since it seems that every year discoveries are found that support, rather than refute, the Biblical narrative."
You have to be amazingly blinded by ideology to think that this statement even approaches reality.
The Canaanite cities were destroyed by the 'Sea Peoples' over a long period of time, not in one quick seige and attack like the Bible claims. The Sea People attacked areas all over the Eastern Mediterranean. So unless you are suggesting that Joshua also sacked parts of Greece, then you're delusional or a fucking liar. By the way, those Canaanite cities were allied with Egypt so what you are suggesting is that the Hebrews first beat Egypt with plagues, freed themselves from slavery (for which there is zero evidence of that even being the case) then after fucking about in the desert for 40 years (or 'a long time', whatever) they then went and destroyed an Egyptian ally. So basically a ragtag bunch of slaves, lead by a magician, were able to easily kick the shit out of one of the most powerful empires in the world. RIGHT.
Oh and by the way, what you are actually arguing for is that the fictional stories of your heroes committing genocide is a historical fact. That's some loving god you have there.
Although he sits in the forefront of archaeological digs and is excavating what he believes is the Biblical city of Ai, he notes that he can’t get his research published in serious archaeological journals because of an ingrained anti-Bible bias.
What evidence does he have that it is Ai?
And I think I'd like to hear what the archaeological journals have to say about this.
"He mentions that the documented evidence of foreign slaves at that time in Egypt could well include the Israelites."
Clearly, the fact that the Egyptians owned foreign slaves proves -- beyond a shadow of a doubt -- that 600,000 of those foreign slaves were Israelites, and that they all left in one great big mass migration.
The fact that these 600,000 people, wandering in the desert for 40 years, left no clues that they had ever been through there at all -- not even a single pottery shard or campfire -- is probably just Satan's handiwork.
Well, sure, if Dr. Wood convinces one student that he's correct, you could say their numbers are growing. Until the student graduates, of course.
'{Dr Wood}...notes that he can’t get his research published in serious archaeological journals...'
I don't imagine being feted as a 'creationist archaeologist' by the likes of Creation Ministries International does much for your professional reputation...
England exists, thus Harry Potter is real.
Bryant, buddy, you are so out of touch with reality I'm surprised you haven't flown off into deep space. The "ingrained anti- Bible bias" exists for a good reason - the Bible is bullshit.
Maximalists? If you are somehow dragging Beast Wars into this, you might want to rethink your angle because Beast Wars went with the scientific explaination for life on earth and evolution. Unless you are strictly focusing on Exodus, you're harming your own fundamentalist arguement here.
"Maximalist"?
So I guess Godzilla's real because Tokyo exists, huh?
...MAXIMALISTS?
...MAXIMALISTS?
What are "Minimalists", then?
If their numbers are growing it's only because they want to be one of those jackasses on television claiming to have found Noah's Ark for the umpteenth time.
Also there is absolutely no archaeological or historical evidence for Exodus having even taken place.
"Egypt had some foreign slaves" is not good enough.
Discovery of a city that the bible mentioned is not good enough unless you think Spider-Man is real because he lives in New York.
Also... Maximals, MAXIMIZE! Sorry I had to.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.