Archeological physical evidence corroborating a blbical story

[Omega Man]

Biblical War Revealed on 2,800-Year-Old Stone Altar | Live Science

More specifically, Mesha's Moabite kingdom as outlined in 2 Kings chapter 3. It's understood that many biblical tales were based upon earlier oral tales and traditions; but much of it is purely mythical and legendary. I find myself rather intrigued, and somewhat excited when hard science can shine a light on the distinctions between biblical lore and historicity. Similar to the discovery of the Moabite Stone, I'm encouraged that more discoveries are being made which document this period of history renowned for its henotheism.

All hail Chemosh!


OM

 

[Exquisitor]

Biblical War Revealed on 2,800-Year-Old Stone Altar | Live Science

More specifically, Mesha's Moabite kingdom as outlined in 2 Kings chapter 3. It's understood that many biblical tales were based upon earlier oral tales and traditions; but much of it is purely mythical and legendary. I find myself rather intrigued, and somewhat excited when hard science can shine a light on the distinctions between biblical lore and historicity. Similar to the discovery of the Moabite Stone, I'm encouraged that more discoveries are being made which document this period of history renowned for its henotheism.

All hail Chemosh!

OM

There was a stone engraving with reference to King David.

Here's a proper time line, the Garden of Eden is the vision of the three worlds constantly repeating. Serpent tempts Eve, that world falls to this one, eventually the material coverings are devoured by causal worms hoping to make it back to Paradise and repeat the cycle.

A flood and Ark are a common theme across the universe and lo and behold a comet did strike then I think about twenty-eight-o-seven BC.

Hitting the Indian Ocean this three mile wide comet would have caused torrential flooding across the Earth.

Clever Priests from India knew when and where the Lord would appear and knew he needed a people so they preached to the remnants of the failed cities of Jericho etc and like Nineveh they repented and anyone who told the truth to their children were stoned as blasphemers.

In Judges it says, "Behold I have given the land unto Judah's hand."

Sure they were living in the hills.

I've gotten this far, but can't tell if Daniel is a first hand account or a fabrication.

Fabrication.

There was no one like Daniel and in shame they groveled and came up with a story to save their posterity.

Hmm?

You tell me.

 

[PoS]

Well James Cameron already discovered Jesus' tomb, so I'm sure more of this stuff will come out...

 

[Exquisitor]

Well James Cameron already discovered Jesus' tomb, so I'm sure more of this stuff will come out...

And that's the Gospel Truth.

 

[Rich2018]

Biblical War Revealed on 2,800-Year-Old Stone Altar | Live Science

More specifically, Mesha's Moabite kingdom as outlined in 2 Kings chapter 3. It's understood that many biblical tales were based upon earlier oral tales and traditions; but much of it is purely mythical and legendary. I find myself rather intrigued, and somewhat excited when hard science can shine a light on the distinctions between biblical lore and historicity. Similar to the discovery of the Moabite Stone, I'm encouraged that more discoveries are being made which document this period of history renowned for its henotheism.

All hail Chemosh!


OM

History in the Bible.

 

[soylentgreen]

Biblical War Revealed on 2,800-Year-Old Stone Altar | Live Science

More specifically, Mesha's Moabite kingdom as outlined in 2 Kings chapter 3. It's understood that many biblical tales were based upon earlier oral tales and traditions; but much of it is purely mythical and legendary. I find myself rather intrigued, and somewhat excited when hard science can shine a light on the distinctions between biblical lore and historicity. Similar to the discovery of the Moabite Stone, I'm encouraged that more discoveries are being made which document this period of history renowned for its henotheism.

All hail Chemosh!


OM

What an absolute joke of an argument.

Based on what can laughably be called your style of evidence then the fact that there is a london is proof of the existence of sherlock holmes.

 

[DarkWizard12]

What an absolute joke of an argument.

Based on what can laughably be called your style of evidence then the fact that there is a london is proof of the existence of sherlock holmes.

methinks you confuse corroborating evidence with confirmation. It's not the same. Maybe King David never existed, but we have these lost kingdoms being discovered that match descriptions in the biblical story. That's not a bad thing, that's a great thing! And I hope it whets your curiousity to see more!

 

[Omega Man]

What an absolute joke of an argument.

Based on what can laughably be called your style of evidence then the fact that there is a london is proof of the existence of sherlock holmes.

What argument are you referring to? That the Bible - though not a history book by any means - contains actual snippets of history here and there? And what does a literary character such as Sherlock Holmes have to do with any of this? I didn't refer to any literary characters; unless of course you're in the mistaken belief that the historical Mesha of Moab wasn't a real king.


OM

 

[Omega Man]

And I hope it whets your curiousity to see more!

Well put. Anyone that knows me knows that I am very much the biblical skeptic when it comes to matters of legends and dogma; so imagine my delight when little snippets such as this arise. Anybody that claims that the Bible is "100% fiction" needs to reassess. Though the Bible does indeed contain outright myths reduced to writing from ancient oral traditions, many of the books still contain highly fictionalized stories based upon actual historical people and events. Some even document history as it was occurring (example: Duetero-Isaiah's less-than-prophetic prediction that Nebuchadnezzar would fall at the hands of an already-advancing Cyrus).


OM

 

[Omega Man]

Well James Cameron already discovered Jesus' tomb, so I'm sure more of this stuff will come out...

Yes, but did Cameron find an engraving documenting Joseph of Arimethea's ownership? Bit of a difference between discovering an ancient tomb, and making that kind of claim, vs. unearthing an Iron Age altar documenting an actual king and an actual battle.


OM

 

[Rich2018]

Yes, but did Cameron find an engraving documenting Joseph of Arimethea's ownership? Bit of a difference between discovering an ancient tomb, and making that kind of claim, vs. unearthing an Iron Age altar documenting an actual king and an actual battle.


OM

Yeah, every expedition the find Noah's Ark has found it.

 

[Omega Man]

Yeah, every expedition the find Noah's Ark has found it.

I've read many of the claims to that effect throughout the years, each and every one of them debunked and/or easily otherwise explained.


OM

 

[PoS]

Yes, but did Cameron find an engraving documenting Joseph of Arimethea's ownership? Bit of a difference between discovering an ancient tomb, and making that kind of claim, vs. unearthing an Iron Age altar documenting an actual king and an actual battle.


OM

Well there seemed to be an inscription written in the ossuary that said "Yeshua bar Yosef," which is Aramaic for Jesus, son of Joseph.

 

[Omega Man]

Well there seemed to be an inscription written in the ossuary that said "Yeshua bar Yosef," which is Aramaic for Jesus, son of Joseph.

In 1st century Judea, that's kind of like saying "John, son of Robert". Lol.


OM

 

[Rich2018]

In 1st century Judea, that's kind of like saying "John, son of Robert". Lol.


OM

I heard a guy today say that Matthew the tax collector was the same guy as the Gospel of Matthew.

 

[Omega Man]

I heard a guy today say that Matthew the tax collector was the same guy as the Gospel of Matthew.

That is dogmatic tradition. The truth is, nobody knows for certain who wrote it, other than it was obviously a pro-Jew with an anti-Gentile perspective. Pseudepigrapha was a very common practice in that era and region.


OM

 

[soylentgreen]

methinks you confuse corroborating evidence with confirmation. It's not the same. Maybe King David never existed, but we have these lost kingdoms being discovered that match descriptions in the biblical story. That's not a bad thing, that's a great thing! And I hope it whets your curiousity to see more!

Not at all. What was said is no more corroborating than pointing out london exists as proof of sherlock holmes.

Pointing to the many landmarks existing in greece does not give any corroboration or evidence that any of the greek mythology is true.

Pointing out that a character in the bible has accurately described a landmark that exist in reality does not give any more credibility to the story being told in the bible.

 

[soylentgreen]

What argument are you referring to? That the Bible - though not a history book by any means - contains actual snippets of history here and there? And what does a literary character such as Sherlock Holmes have to do with any of this? I didn't refer to any literary characters; unless of course you're in the mistaken belief that the historical Mesha of Moab wasn't a real king.


OM

True, yours was not an argument just a very lame bit of meaningless association.

The analogy i gave should have been quite obvious, even to you. But lets see if i can make it clearer. If i wrote a fictional account of an historical figure from the past the story still remains fictional despite the use of people who might have actually existed. Pointing out that mesha may have actually existed does not in any shape or form make the story told in a fictional book such as the bible any more real.

 

[Omega Man]

True, yours was not an argument just a very lame bit of meaningless association.

The analogy i gave should have been quite obvious, even to you. But lets see if i can make it clearer. If i wrote a fictional account of an historical figure from the past the story still remains fictional despite the use of people who might have actually existed. Pointing out that mesha may have actually existed does not in any shape or form make the story told in a fictional book such as the bible any more real.

And what does any of that have to do with the Moabites documenting kings and battles on their own altars? They didn't write or edit the Bible. My point was that a SECULAR source arose to corroborate a single story line as outlined in the Bible. Certainly you're not suggesting that the Bible is 100% fairy tale, are you? Not even the most distinguished of academics think that.


OM

 

[Sampson Simpson]

Proviing that the bible has some historical facts in it does not prove the bible. There are tons of historical fiction, does not prove all the ridicuclous magic in the bible.

Wow, humans who wrote and believed these stories incorporated history into it and real places, that means all the magic and ridiculousness is true? That's completely absurd

 

[Omega Man]

Pointing out that a character in the bible has accurately described a landmark that exist in reality does not give any more credibility to the story being told in the bible.

And yet the Moabites documenting their own king by name corroborates the biblical claim that that very king existed, as did the battles they both documented.


OM

 

[Omega Man]

Proviing that the bible has some historical facts in it does not prove the bible.

Wow, humans who wrote and believed these stories incorporated history into it and real places, that means all the magic and ridiculousness is true? That's completely absurd

Of course it doesn't, nor was that the premise (stated, inferred, or otherwise) of the OP. Quite the opposite really; the OP specifically outlined and emphasized that the bible is largely mythical.


OM

 

[Rich2018]

That is dogmatic tradition. The truth is, nobody knows for certain who wrote it, other than it was obviously a pro-Jew with an anti-Gentile perspective. Pseudepigrapha was a very common practice in that era and region.


OM

Watch this Atheist Experience YT clip, the special guest utterly destroys a Theist's perceived knowledge of scripture:

YouTube

 

[soylentgreen]

And what does any of that have to do with the Moabites documenting kings and battles on their own altars? They didn't write or edit the Bible. My point was that a SECULAR source arose to corroborate a single story line as outlined in the Bible. Certainly you're not suggesting that the Bible is 100% fairy tale, are you? Not even the most distinguished of academics think that.


OM

Yes i am suggesting the bible is 100% fairy tales, badly written ones at that. It has no more credibility than grimms fairy tales.

I doubt any academic would treat the bible as anything but a bunch of fairy tales unless they are relying more on their own bias than any credible argument. That it uses historical places or people gives the bible no more credibility than any other fictional story using the same.

I

 

[soylentgreen]

And yet the Moabites documenting their own king by name corroborates the biblical claim that that very king existed, as did the battles they both documented.


OM

Which does nothing to give any credibility to the stories written in the bible. Again using your thinking the illiad is an accurate description of how the gods influenced the sacking of troy.