aussieguy55 Posted January 30, 2018 Posted January 30, 2018 I have read the Bible Tells Me So and it presents some challenges to the Old Testament. Enns is frank with his views with Blair Hodges from MI about the historicity of the conquest of Canaan by Joshua etc. Enn's views have support in the work of Israel Finkelstein, Israeli archaeologist's book The Bible Unearthed.Has anyone read a source that challenges this viewpoint?
hope_for_things Posted January 30, 2018 Posted January 30, 2018 12 minutes ago, aussieguy55 said: I have read the Bible Tells Me So and it presents some challenges to the Old Testament. Enns is frank with his views with Blair Hodges from MI about the historicity of the conquest of Canaan by Joshua etc. Enn's views have support in the work of Israel Finkelstein, Israeli archaeologist's book The Bible Unearthed.Has anyone read a source that challenges this viewpoint? I did listen to the MI podcast you're referring to, but its been a little while. Could you clarify what your question specifically is, so that we know what you're asking for support of? Was Enns sharing scholarship that brings the historicity of the conquest of Canaan by Joshua into question. I've read a few of Enns books and from what I've read and followed on podcasts and other writings, he is very much following mainstream biblical scholarship. There isn't strong archaeological or other evidence to support the stories of Moses or Joshua as portrayed in the bible, and there are many questions that a literal interpretation of these events brings to the table. Is it possible that these narratives have some historical components they are based on, yes of course, but the details of the narratives are likely not historical and there is evidence of influence from other cultures and narrative myths in these cultures. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/davidbokovoy/2015/02/stories-of-faith-and-trickery-genesis-as-history-pt-1/ You might find this blog post by David Bokovoy of interest on the subject of the historicity of accounts in Genesis.
aussieguy55 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Posted January 31, 2018 So Charlton Heston and Yul Brunner might have been playing fictional characters? I have listened to William Dever also. Finkelstein seems to do a lot of dirt archaeology and he concludes much the same. Also David and Solomon's kingdoms were not as extensive as described in the Bible
Robert F. Smith Posted January 31, 2018 Posted January 31, 2018 6 hours ago, aussieguy55 said: I have read the Bible Tells Me So and it presents some challenges to the Old Testament. Enns is frank with his views with Blair Hodges from MI about the historicity of the conquest of Canaan by Joshua etc. Enn's views have support in the work of Israel Finkelstein, Israeli archaeologist's book The Bible Unearthed.Has anyone read a source that challenges this viewpoint? 4 hours ago, aussieguy55 said: So Charlton Heston and Yul Brunner might have been playing fictional characters? I have listened to William Dever also. Finkelstein seems to do a lot of dirt archaeology and he concludes much the same. Also David and Solomon's kingdoms were not as extensive as described in the Bible I love to listen to Pete Enns, and time is well spent listening to him by anyone interested in modern biblical scholarship. However, Israel Finkelstein is a minimalist who naturally emphasizes the cup half empty, while his maximalist opponents emphasize the cup half full. Excavations (at Sha'arayim and Jerusalem) in the past decade have left Finkelstein with almost nothing to grab onto archeologically. You may want to read articles and books by Eilat Mazar and Amihai Mazar, as well as by Yosef Garfinkel. https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/jerusalem/did-i-find-king-davids-palace/ . https://www.google.com/url?url=http://scholar.google.com/scholar_url%3Furl%3Dhttps://journals.library.ualberta.ca/jhs/index.php/jhs/article/download/6220/5254%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DX%26scisig%3DAAGBfm3vxcwl_fIWfZE1AsWf-AnbkBPBGA%26nossl%3D1%26oi%3Dscholarr&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi0jZSAu4HZAhVS1GMKHebGASIQgAMIKCgAMAA&usg=AOvVaw2ldj5ozaQiahyyuhlaYL3D 1
clarkgoble Posted January 31, 2018 Posted January 31, 2018 (edited) I confess I just don't get the current fascination by some with Enns. People keep telling me how great he is but when I read him I come away with a "meh" at best. A big problem is that most of the OT as we have it is likely post exilic. There were redactions, summarizations of other texts, texts merged and who knows what else. As God told Nephi lots of things were taken out. Given that it's quite possible that the narratives Nephi had were quite different from what ended up compiled between the time of Ezra and Jesus. So Enns and company being skeptical is completely fine. I'm not sure that entails we should just dismiss everything. Rather we should just acknowledge we don't have a lot of data to go on, but assume there was a Moses, Elijah and others. I'm fine if it turns out Joshua is problematic since there are theologically a lot of problematic parts in Joshua. But I'd just acknowledge I don't know the details of Hebrew history of that era much better than I know the histories of many other groups with fragmentary records written long after the fact. My hope is that as excavations in Jerusalem continue that one day they'll find a sister to the brass plates compiled around 650 BC or better yet something from 1000 BC. Sounds fanciful I know. But who expected the Dead Sea Scrolls and Nag Hammadi corpus? Edited January 31, 2018 by clarkgoble 1
aussieguy55 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Posted January 31, 2018 Peter Enn's view " "Remember those thirty-one Canaanite towns listed in the book of Joshua(plus four other towns on the other side of the Jordan River)?? Sixteen towns were destroyed according to the stories in the books of Numbers, Joshua, and Judges. Of the sixteen, two or three maybe four cities show signs of violent destruction at or around the time when Joshua and his army would have been ploughing through Canaan(thirteenth century BCe, about two hundred years before the time of King David). The towns on the other side of the Jordan River, in Moab, dont look like they were even occupied at the time. We also read in the Bible that twelve towns were taken over without a fight.. But of those twelve , only seven were even occupied at the time according to archaeological findings. And of those same twelve towns that the Bible says were not destroyed, three actually do show signs of destruction. In other words, archaeology and the biblical story don't line up well at all" Peter Enns The Bible Tells Me So p. 59."
aussieguy55 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Posted January 31, 2018 Debate between Finkelstein and Mazar https://biblicalstudiesonline.wordpress.com/2015/01/22/the-quest-for-the-historical-israel-israel-finkelstein-vs-amihai-mazar/
aussieguy55 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Posted January 31, 2018 There is an interesting summary of The Bible Unearthed on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_Unearthed
aussieguy55 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Posted January 31, 2018 https://www.salon.com/2001/02/07/solomon/ is an interesting summary of Finkelstein's book and responses to it.
RevTestament Posted January 31, 2018 Posted January 31, 2018 23 hours ago, aussieguy55 said: I have read the Bible Tells Me So and it presents some challenges to the Old Testament. Enns is frank with his views with Blair Hodges from MI about the historicity of the conquest of Canaan by Joshua etc. Enn's views have support in the work of Israel Finkelstein, Israeli archaeologist's book The Bible Unearthed.Has anyone read a source that challenges this viewpoint? I will add to what Robert said about Finkelstein. Finkelstein takes a very literalist interpretation of the Exodus by insisting there is no evidence for an Exodus in the 13th century BC, and then adding that to his very minimalist view of ancient Israel. I believe he is trying to prove a negative - something that has no evidence because it didn't happen in the 13th century BC. If you are trying to find evidence for something that didn't happen in the 13th century BC, you shouldn't be surprised that you don't find evidence for it. Rather than concluding that it didn't happen, maybe, like Robert, you should look elsewhere in time. Archaeology has had to change its view of history numerous times because it found something it didn't know before. I think Finkelstein, (esp moreso than Enns) will be relegated to the dustbank of archaeological premature opinions. Forming opinions on the basis of a lack of evidence is always subject to change, which is the great weakness of archaeology.
aussieguy55 Posted February 1, 2018 Author Posted February 1, 2018 The Israelites are supposed to have spent 38 of the 40 years at Kadesh-barnea. Finkelstein says "Yet repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence for activity in the Late Bronze Age, not even a single sherd left by a tiny fleeing band of frightened refugees" p.63. One would think these people would publish their reports in peer reviewed journals. You are using the old "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument. Ryan Thomas who has interacted with Robert said "There are lots of more conservative scholars who disagree with Finkelstein and others who dispute the exodus-conquest narrative. But their special pleading is not persuasive"
RevTestament Posted February 1, 2018 Posted February 1, 2018 17 minutes ago, aussieguy55 said: The Israelites are supposed to have spent 38 of the 40 years at Kadesh-barnea. Where does that come from? That is clearly incorrect. Numbers 33 lists many camp sites during those 40 years, and YHWH sent Israel away from its camp site at Kadesh almost immediately upon the return of the 12 spies. Quote Finkelstein says "Yet repeated excavations and surveys throughout the entire area have not provided even the slightest evidence for activity in the Late Bronze Age, not even a single sherd left by a tiny fleeing band of frightened refugees" p.63. One would think these people would publish their reports in peer reviewed journals. You are using the old "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" argument. Ryan Thomas who has interacted with Robert said "There are lots of more conservative scholars who disagree with Finkelstein and others who dispute the exodus-conquest narrative. But their special pleading is not persuasive" Clearly their location of Kadesh Barnea in the upper Negev is incorrect. I'll give them a big hint. Kadesh Barnea is a border marker - not a settlement or a spring. Once archaeologists get a bug up their nose it is sure hard to change their minds. LOL.
aussieguy55 Posted February 1, 2018 Author Posted February 1, 2018 http://www.thebiblejourney.org/biblejourney2/26-the-journey-continues-from-sinai-to-moab/the-israelites-remain-at-kadesh-barnea/ "It is highly likely that, for most of the next thirty-eight years, the Israelites lived at the large oasis of Kadesh Barnea, from where they spread out to neighbouring oases to pasture some of their flocks."
RevTestament Posted February 1, 2018 Posted February 1, 2018 17 hours ago, aussieguy55 said: http://www.thebiblejourney.org/biblejourney2/26-the-journey-continues-from-sinai-to-moab/the-israelites-remain-at-kadesh-barnea/ "It is highly likely that, for most of the next thirty-eight years, the Israelites lived at the large oasis of Kadesh Barnea, from where they spread out to neighbouring oases to pasture some of their flocks." Deut 2: 1 Then we turned, and took our journey into the wilderness by the way of the Red sea, as the Lord spake unto me: and we compassed mount Seir many days. 2 And the Lord spake unto me, saying, 3 Ye have compassed this mountain long enough: turn you northward.
Recommended Posts