Bible Places and Bible individuals confirmed or tentatively confirmed so far .....

[kendemyer]

I read an interesting site which discusses which Bible places and individuals have been confirmed out of the possible totals. The author also gives his editorial opinions.

1) Bible places confirmed

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BNamesGeographicInOT50.htm

2) Here is lists of Bible individuals who have been confirmed:

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BHistoricityOfCharacters.htm

3) I also realize that archaeology only offers a very fragmentary history as can be seen here: http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=185


Questions:

1) Have any more Bible places/people been confirmed since these articles were authored?

2) How many new Bible places/people are being discovered each year (approximately)?

3) Is the pace of new archaeological finds going much faster now or has the Middle East turmoil slowed things down somewhat? In short, what is the pace of new archaeological finds historically?

Sincerely,

Ken

[cbro]

[QUOTE=kendemyer]I read an interesting site which discusses which Bible places and individuals have been confirmed out of the possible totals. The author also gives his editorial opinions.

1) Bible places confirmed

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BNamesGeographicInOT50.htm

2) Here is lists of Bible individuals who have been confirmed:

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BHistoricityOfCharacters.htm

3) I also realize that archaeology only offers a very fragmentary history as can be seen here: http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=185


Questions:

1) Have any more Bible places/people been confirmed since these articles were authored?

2) How many new Bible places/people are being discovered each year (approximately)?

3) Is the pace of new archaeological finds going much faster now or has the Middle East turmoil slowed things down somewhat? In short, what is the pace of new archaeological finds historically?

Sincerely, Ken

quote=cbro not one comment?

[rogero]

[QUOTE=kendemyer]I read an interesting site which discusses which Bible places and individuals have been confirmed out of the possible totals. The author also gives his editorial opinions.

1) Bible places confirmed

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BNamesGeographicInOT50.htm

2) Here is lists of Bible individuals who have been confirmed:

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BHistoricityOfCharacters.htm

3) I also realize that archaeology only offers a very fragmentary history as can be seen here: http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=185


Questions:

1) Have any more Bible places/people been confirmed since these articles were authored?

2) How many new Bible places/people are being discovered each year (approximately)?

3) Is the pace of new archaeological finds going much faster now or has the Middle East turmoil slowed things down somewhat? In short, what is the pace of new archaeological finds historically?

Sincerely, Ken

quote=cbro not one comment?

Yes, I have one comment -- why, after two years on TWeb, have you been unable to figure out the QUOTE feature? Do you need another explanation?

R

P.S. Kendemeyer's self-imposed one-year hiatus is almost up. How many of y'all are ready for Kendyfest 2006?

[cbro]

[QUOTE=cbro]

Yes, I have one comment -- why, after two years on TWeb, have you been unable to figure out the QUOTE feature? Do you need another explanation?

R

P.S. Kendemeyer's self-imposed one-year hiatus is almost up. How many of y'all are ready for Kendyfest 2006?I hope you are just unwilling to see what is the topic and stay with it, and not unable to see anything but the quote function. So I use it now to see what is your problem.

[shunyadragon]

I read an interesting site which discusses which Bible places and individuals have been confirmed out of the possible totals. The author also gives his editorial opinions.

1) Bible places confirmed

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BNamesGeographicInOT50.htm

2) Here is lists of Bible individuals who have been confirmed:

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BHistoricityOfCharacters.htm

3) I also realize that archaeology only offers a very fragmentary history as can be seen here: http://www.christian-forum.net/index.php?showtopic=185


Questions:

1) Have any more Bible places/people been confirmed since these articles were authored?

2) How many new Bible places/people are being discovered each year (approximately)?

3) Is the pace of new archaeological finds going much faster now or has the Middle East turmoil slowed things down somewhat? In short, what is the pace of new archaeological finds historically?

Sincerely,

Ken

I find the list interesting, but a bit long and difficult to get a handle on everything. The main problem with the author's assertion is a mirepresentation of the 'skeptics' view of the Bible. This warn out cry, 'The skeptics are wrong! So there! The Bible is true.' does no reflect the reality of Biblical scholarship today, nor the real view of the more skeptical scholars.

A recent discovery of a piece of pottery with the name 'Goliath' on it indicates that the name is a legitamate name used at the time of the 'David and Goliath' story, but does not confirm the existence of the huge warrior in the story.

The existence of real places and names in history in the Bible, like all ancient writings, does not go very far to confirm the accuracy or literal historical records of the 'whole Bible'. It only confirms that the authors wrote the books in the context of the real world as they knew it at the time, which most of the more skeptical scholars today would have no problem agreeing with.

[rogero]

[QUOTE=rogero]I hope you are just unwilling to see what is the topic and stay with it, and not unable to see anything but the quote function. So I use it now to see what is your problem.

Wow, you figured it out (Well mostly...) :lol:

Now, are you prepared to make an articulate and reasoned contribution to this thread? Do you even know what this thread is about?

R

[cbro]

[QUOTE=cbro]

Wow, you figured it out (Well mostly...) :lol:

Now, are you prepared to make an articulate and reasoned contribution to this thread? Do you even know what this thread is about?

RI have also figured out that anyone who blames me for a computer problem, is a needy person of my sig.
Since you are as smart as a tack, I wait to see if you have any worthwhile reply.

[rogero]

[QUOTE=rogero]I have also figured out that anyone who blames me for a computer problem, is a needy person of my sig.
Since you are as smart as a tack, I wait to see if you have any worthwhile reply.
What "computer problem" would that be? Does your computer not have a "[" key and a "]" key?

BTW, "smart as a tack" is not a compliment. You are either doing this as an intentional wry insult, or you are manifesting ignorance of parochial similes.

Conflated similes are amusing, I will admit.

R

P.S.

Sorry -- I guess according to your sig, I'm burning in H-E-double hockey sticks right now anyway. So, go on about your earthly business....

[cbro]

[QUOTE=cbro]
What "computer problem" would that be? Does your computer not have a "[" key and a "]" key?

BTW, "smart as a tack" is not a compliment. You are either doing this as an intentional wry insult, or you are manifesting ignorance of parochial similes.

Conflated similes are amusing, I will admit.
R
P.S.Sorry -- I guess according to your sig, I'm burning in H-E-double hockey sticks right now anyway. So, go on about your earthly business....
The [] I did not add is the problem I mean. Do you also need an explanation of how to get to the thread about my sig or do you really have a problem staying on topic and/or saying anything worthwhile about it.

[rogero]

[QUOTE=rogero]
The [] I did not add is the problem I mean. Do you also need an explanation of how to get to the thread about my sig or do you really have a problem staying on topic and/or saying anything worthwhile about it.

Your post does not make a lick of sense. But, then I would not expect anything more from you.

The Man of Your Signature, R ~~smooches~~

[cbro]

[QUOTE=cbro]

Your post does not make a lick of sense. But, then I would not expect anything more from you.

The Man of Your Signature, R ~~smooches~~To reply to me with that expectation and be proud of not only not saying anything on topic, but also being the bad example being a person of my sig, shows you truly are "smart as a tack"

[norwegen]

This thread is a riot.

:popcorn:

[cbro]

I find the list interesting, but a bit long and difficult to get a handle on everything. The main problem with the author's assertion is a mirepresentation of the 'skeptics' view of the Bible. This warn out cry, 'The skeptics are wrong! So there! The Bible is true.' does no reflect the reality of Biblical scholarship today, nor the real view of the more skeptical scholars.

A recent discovery of a piece of pottery with the name 'Goliath' on it indicates that the name is a legitamate name used at the time of the 'David and Goliath' story, but does not confirm the existence of the huge warrior in the story.

The existence of real places and names in history in the Bible, like all ancient writings, does not go very far to confirm the accuracy or literal historical records of the 'whole Bible'. It only confirms that the authors wrote the books in the context of the real world as they knew it at the time, which most of the more skeptical scholars today would have no problem agreeing with. Which means that those scholars are needy people of my sig because they will only accept the evidence that agrees with them. This also goes for people here on tweb who do the same thing.

[rogero]

[QUOTE=rogero]To reply to me with that expectation and be proud of not only not saying anything on topic, but also being the bad example being a person of my sig, shows you truly are "smart as a tack"

Hmm..., exactly what "on topic" contribution did you have --- oh one as smart as a tack?

R

P.S. Remember, I'm burning in HELL(!) right now, so why should I even be able to answer your posts.

P.P.S. How's that ESL class been goin' for ya?

[cbro]

This thread is a riot.

:popcorn:really? or just me and the other smart one?

[bandecoot]

This thread is a riot.

:popcorn:


Mind if I join you? :popcorn:

[shunyadragon]

Which means that those scholars are needy people of my sig because they will only accept the evidence that agrees with them. This also goes for people here on tweb who do the same thing.

Not sure what you mean here. I do not think that accepting evidence that agrees with them or not is relevant. In my review of the more skeptical literature, the number of places and people verified or possibly verified in the Bible is not an issue today. Their issues are grounded in different problems with the text and history of the Bible than these issues.

The people on Tweb definitely do cover the full spectrum from the bizarre, sureal, to the reasonable, and beyond on all sides of the fences.

[cbro]

Not sure what you mean here. I do not think that accepting evidence that agrees with them or not is relevant. In my review of the more skeptical literature, the number of places and people verified or possibly verified in the Bible is not an issue today. Their issues are grounded in different problems with the text and history of the Bible than these issues.

The people on Tweb definitely do cover the full spectrum from the bizarre, sureal, to the reasonable, and beyond on all sides of the fences.
I mean that the problem those scholars have is that the text and history of the Bible and what they believe will meet their personal needs can't both be true. So they are then forced into being the needy people of my sig. As shown by their insisting it can't be true. No matter how obvious is the evidence they are wrong. Also it is shown with them and some tweb people living as if Life is easier if everything others know is in pencil, and they keep a big eraser handy.

[cbro]

I mean that the problem those scholars have is that the text and history of the Bible and what they believe will meet their personal needs can't both be true. So they are then forced into being the needy people of my sig. As shown by their insisting it can't be true. No matter how obvious is the evidence they are wrong. Also it is shown with them and some tweb people living as if Life is easier if everything others know is in pencil, and they keep a big eraser handy.No comment?

[shunyadragon]

I mean that the problem those scholars have is that the text and history of the Bible and what they believe will meet their personal needs can't both be true. So they are then forced into being the needy people of my sig. As shown by their insisting it can't be true. No matter how obvious is the evidence they are wrong. Also it is shown with them and some tweb people living as if Life is easier if everything others know is in pencil, and they keep a big eraser handy.

Okay!

First, the statement, 'what they believe will meet their personal needs. . .' can apply as the logic of self justification from many different points of view, whether it is true or not. I prefer the most 'accepted academic historical methods', to determine the foundation, than go from there to understand history. From this perspective all ancient sources have varying degrees of reliability, and the Bible is no exception.

Second, it is not a matter of how obvious anybody is wrong by the evidence, because the evidence is not totally conclusive on ALL these historical issues. By the evidence the Bible is apparently sometimes right, sometimes wrong, and sometimes maybe.

Third, living life with everything is in pencil, is a more realistic humble worldview based on the obvious fallibility of human knowledge, and the fact that our knowledge changes with time. It is not easier, in fact it is much easier just to accept things based on faith and not question anything.

[bandecoot]

No comment?



Yes I have a comment.


You are an incomprehensible idiot, any time someone who I might have a rational discussion with turns up, you freakazoids pop up from what ever slime reeking pits you infest and spew this tragically paranoid garbage.

Please feel free to burn in agony for eternity for being pathetic scum. I wish a real God existed just so he could give you the punishment you so richly deserve

Just in case you missed it, the above was hyperbole and sarcasm and no real malice was intended.

[cbro]

Yes I have a comment.


You are an incomprehensible idiot, any time someone who I might have a rational discussion with turns up, you freakazoids pop up from what ever slime reeking pits you infest and spew this tragically paranoid garbage.

Please feel free to burn in agony for eternity for being pathetic scum. I wish a real God existed just so he could give you the punishment you so richly deserve

Just in case you missed it, the above was hyperbole and sarcasm and no real malice was intended.Sounds like you are one of those people that need that eraser I mentioned.