I don’t think tis statement is correct at all, but even if it was, it is irrelevant. We are not talking about the archaeological evidence, we are talking about the positions held by scholars.
Maybe you would you like an opportunity to reconsider this statement, unklee?
Yes I saw that from April 30, 2015 at 8:18 am, and it says nothing. Again, as I said above, it’s clear you don’t know much about Dever. He’s quite solid in his position, but has always been rather gentle with theists. Letting them down gently, that is.
I asked for evidences, and you have presented nothing. I asked you detail what you base your belief on, and you have presented nothing. I asked you to cite what papers you’ve read that support your position, and you gave me nothing.
You mention radiocarbon dating. I believe here you’re trying to throw out a much-used evangelical claim regarding the dating of the walls of Jericho. Three returns of dozens (made by Kenyon in the 50’s) were found to be wobbly. This is true. Now, what evangelicals never mention is this: there have been over 900 dating’s taken since by nearly a dozen separate archaeological teams over the years, and they all line up and verify Kenyon’s original assessments. So 900, or 3? Which do you think is more reliable?
Also, as I mentioned above, you are simply ignoring the fact that a completely different, entirely contradictory history of the early Jews has been uncovered and cemented over the years. There in not an “absence of evidence,” rather an ocean liner filled with evidence… and it’s all contradictory. This has been verified (archaeologically) through settlement patterns and population maps, and corroborated by general near eastern historians and textural experts. It’s fact. Fact: the hills began to be settled in 1100 BCE, 50 years after the arrival of the Sea People (the Philistines) on the Levant, and the numbers never exceeded 30,000 in the first 100 years of this period, but was more likely around 15,000 to 20,000. There simply isn’t anyone in the hills prior to this moment other than perhaps nomadic herders. These are refugees from the Canaanite coastal states who brought with them the same culture, construction techniques, pottery, clothing, etc.
The arrival of the Philistine (which the bible claims were on the Levant in 1,800 BCE, which is pure fantasy) also explains the Jews diet. After 1100 BCE the waste sites in Canaanite coastal cities start to show an inordinate amount of pork bones. Huge quantities suddenly start showing up in the strata. Clearly, the Philistines loved their pork. In the hills after 1150 BCE, in the first settlements, however, not a single pork bone is found. Not one. This is explained by the refugees purposefully distinguishing themselves from “them” down there (those bastards who forced us out of our homes), and “us” up here.
I remind you, the biblical narrative has 2.5 million foreigners (people who would have after 500 years in Egypt a unique language, diet, technology, weapons, pottery, dress, culture, etc) arriving 300 years earlier. That simply never happened, nor was there ever a conquest prior to establishing the two hill kingdoms, Israel and Judah in the 10th Century.
Now, I understand you want to try and hold onto this story, but ignoring the facts does not serve you well.
“Yet my research plainly suggests the majority of the bunch of non minimalists you named are evangelical. Certainly Kitchen, Hoerth, Kaiser etc are.”
Hi Ark, this is good, we are finally getting somewhere. In defence of your statement that “regarding the Pentateuch the overwhelming, scientific and scholarly view based on what the evidence (or lack thereof) shows is the one held to be minimalist”, you are now arguing (apparently) that scholars who are christian are not true scholars and therefore don’t contribute to the scholarly view.
So now all you have to do is demonstrate the truth of that statement!
here is what really happened,
at the last supper jeezzuuuss said, “drink my blood and eat my flesh”.
after he was entombed,
the disciples snuck in and did just that,, they ate him.
of course they had to grind up his bones, that’s why it took three days.
John, you aren’t listening. Please go back and read what I have said.
You’ll find this sequence of events ….
1. Ark asked me some questions about the Pentateuch.
2. I answered them – you apparently haven’t read my answers (you can find the way back if you are interested).
3. The only response Ark made included the statement: “regarding the Pentateuch the overwhelming, scientific and scholarly view based on what the evidence (or lack thereof) shows is the one held to be minimalist”.
4. I disagreed with that statement, and said there were many scholar with non-minimalist views.
5. And so the discussion has gone on from there.
I don’t think anything in your last comment addressed that question.
As I have already pointed out to you, of all the names you have listed as supposed “experts” only one has ever published a peer-reviewed paper in a “real” journal, and it was on cisterns and drainage at Quamran.
Either present the evidences you have to support your position, or give it up. You’re making yourself look like a fool… and that’s just not necessary. You can avoid it, and i’d encourage you to avoid it.
Aha SPG, that, too! By the time we are finished with this thread, there will be enough alternative explanations to an empty than the christian bargained for
“As I have already pointed out to you, of all the names you have listed as supposed “experts” only one has ever published a peer-reviewed paper in a “real” journal, and it was on cisterns and drainage at Quamran.”
John, thanks for your concern. But I feel fine. if you think the names I mentioned don’t qualify as “real” scholars, it is up to you to show that. Define what you think makes a scholar and show these guys don’t meet those criteria. Then we have something to talk about. Thanks.
Unklee, I, unlike John and Ark, is not interested in scholars consensus. I want to know what you think. Moses story involves talking to a burning bush, killing an Egyptian and burying him less than a foot deep and a murderous rage. Which part of this story do you accept as part of your belief?
Sorry to interject, but this thing has pique my interest.
I would agree with John that if one does not publish in peer-reviewed journals it is very difficult to consider one as an “expert” in the field. This is true for many fields – e.g. evolution where I find it hard to believe “experts” telling me evolution is false when all they do is publish their “research” in non-scientific journals, and my personal experience is that these are generally op-ed, rather than results of vigorous studies.
I’m not saying that your experts whom you’ve named are quacks. However, at least from my point of view, it is akin to hearing someone telling me homeopathy is true, and they have experts to back it up, and when challenged, the defense became “define what you think makes a scholar and show these guys don’t meet those criteria”.
Certainly that is a valid defense, but I would rather hear what you think makes you convinced that the experts said is true. I mean, I didn’t believe what experts say about evolution etc until I read it, gain a basic level of understanding, and generally agree with the broad ideas before deferring the more complex and non-easily understandable parts to the experts. I’m quite sure that this is the same for you. As someone that prides himself in examining evidence, I’ll be surprised if all you could say is “experts said it, therefore I’m ok.”, without reading into anything that the experts have said. That to me will not be “examining evidence”, but if that’s your definition I’m still ok with that, and at least I know where you are coming from.
The reason I would like to hear the specifics, rather than a play of “my experts vs your experts” type of argument, is because honestly I have not heard any strong points or counterarguments against what Ark and John are saying regarding OT history. Hence if you could kindly share what is the most important fact that you’ve read about that clinch it for you would be great, as reading through all the names you’ve quoted is kind of daunting for me.
you are now arguing (apparently) that scholars who are christian are not true scholars and therefore don’t contribute to the scholarly view.
You appear to have omitted reference to the topic under discussion – the Pentateuch and its historical veracity, and specifically the Patriarchs, Egyptian captivity, Exodus, Moses and the Conquest of Canaan.
However, I am sure that was merely an oversight.
As you take umbrage at my sleight on Christian scholars, please, I implore you, submit anything they have contributed that has had an effect toward refuting the overwhelming scientific and scholarly view.
Let me state: I have Googled my fingers off and found absolutely nothing.
Kitchen, for example, specializes in Egyptology for which he is most renowned. If you are aware of any evidence he has uncovered that confirms the biblical captivity tale and subsequent flight into the Sinai then for the benefit of all of us reading this interminable discussion and for the love of whichever god you care to mention, present it.
“…most archaeologists are not actively investigating the exodus, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t happen, although many do think that.”
Most zoologists are not actively investigating fuzzy pink unicorns, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re not out there somewhere, although many do think that.
Despite being regarded in Judaism as the primary factual historical narrative of the origin of the religion, culture and ethnicity, Exodus is now accepted by scholars as having been compiled in the 8th–7th centuries BCE from stories dating possibly as far back as the 13th century BCE, with further polishing in the 6th–5th centuries BCE, as a theological and political manifesto to unite the Israelites in the then‐current battle for territory against Egypt.[2]
Archaeologists from the 19th century onward were actually surprised not to find any evidence whatsoever for the events of Exodus. By the 1970s, archaeologists had largely given up regarding the Bible as any use at all as a field guide.
The archaeological evidence of local Canaanite, rather than Egyptian, origins of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel is * “overwhelming,” and leaves “no room for an Exodus from Egypt or a 40‐year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness.”[3] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult objects are of the Canaanite god El, the pottery is in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet is early Canaanite. Almost the sole marker distinguishing Israelite villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones.
It is considered possible that those Canaanites who started regarding themselves as the Israelites were joined or led by a small group of Semites from Egypt, possibly the Hyksos people, possibly carrying stories that made it into Exodus. As the tribe expanded, they may have begun to clash with neighbors, perhaps sparking the tales of conflict in Joshua and Judges.
William Dever, an archaeologist normally associated with the more conservative end of Syro-Palestinian archaeology, has labeled the question of the historicity of Exodus “dead.” Israeli archaeologist Ze’ev Herzog provides the current consensus view on the historicity of the Exodus: “The Israelites never were in Egypt. They never came from abroad. This whole chain is broken. It is not a historical one. It is a later legendary reconstruction—made in the seventh century [BCE]—of a history that never happened.”[4]
Notice how UnkleE refuses to accept the simple concept that the majority of archeologists (scholars) believe that the Exodus and Conquest of Canaan are fiction; he wants to hold a “middle position”. Yet he jumps up and down demanding that we accept as fact that the majority of scholars believe that there was an empty tomb, thereby, in his mind, rendering the Resurrection as a “reasonable” explanation.
We are not dealing with a rational person. He is an ideologue. It is hopeless to debate these people.
I have shown you, twice. Only one of the names you’ve presented has ever published a peer-reviewed paper in a “real” journal…. and it was on the drainage system at Qumran.
Those of us who know unkleE know that he always wins. He is the ultimate scorekeeper and always has the last say . If you provide 100 experts, he will provide 101. Dare I say this is an overwhelming consensus by those of us who know him ? 🙂
In case you don’t believe me, here is the link to the only peer-reviewed paper that has been published by any one of your “experts.”
And in case you don’t know, scholars are generally referred to as “scholars” when they publish peer-reviewed works. If they don’t then they’re just authors and amateur enthusiasts whose opinions carry very, very, very little weight.
To Dip or Sprinkle? The Qumran Cisterns in Perspective” by Bryant G. Wood
Now, if you know of any other peer-reviewed published papers then do please let me know of them. And as an aside, it would be tremendously relevant if they actually had something to do with the Jewish origin narrative.
Late Saturday night, a Martian mothership hovers over the tomb of Jesus. The commander, a sinister fellow with one eye, commands five of his Martian soldiers to teleport down to the ground, enter the bodies of the Roman soldiers, roll back the stone, and take the body. The body is levitated into the mothership using a tractor beam.
The Martian-possessed Roman soldiers go to the Sanhedrin and report that an angel has stolen the body. The members of the Sanhedrin all soil their undergarments and tell the soldiers to tell the people, “The disciples did it.”
The soldiers leave the Sanhedrin and are immediately teleported up to the mothership which returns to Mars, where a slave class is created from the Roman soldiers…who continue to live on red planet…to this very day.
“Preposterous!” complain Christians.
“Just as preposterous as your tall tale!” I retort.
Finding Truth 
I sincerely hope you are including archaeologists in that sentence.
LikeLike
Maybe you would you like an opportunity to reconsider this statement, unklee?
LikeLiked by 1 person
UnkleE
Yes I saw that from April 30, 2015 at 8:18 am, and it says nothing. Again, as I said above, it’s clear you don’t know much about Dever. He’s quite solid in his position, but has always been rather gentle with theists. Letting them down gently, that is.
I asked for evidences, and you have presented nothing. I asked you detail what you base your belief on, and you have presented nothing. I asked you to cite what papers you’ve read that support your position, and you gave me nothing.
You mention radiocarbon dating. I believe here you’re trying to throw out a much-used evangelical claim regarding the dating of the walls of Jericho. Three returns of dozens (made by Kenyon in the 50’s) were found to be wobbly. This is true. Now, what evangelicals never mention is this: there have been over 900 dating’s taken since by nearly a dozen separate archaeological teams over the years, and they all line up and verify Kenyon’s original assessments. So 900, or 3? Which do you think is more reliable?
Also, as I mentioned above, you are simply ignoring the fact that a completely different, entirely contradictory history of the early Jews has been uncovered and cemented over the years. There in not an “absence of evidence,” rather an ocean liner filled with evidence… and it’s all contradictory. This has been verified (archaeologically) through settlement patterns and population maps, and corroborated by general near eastern historians and textural experts. It’s fact. Fact: the hills began to be settled in 1100 BCE, 50 years after the arrival of the Sea People (the Philistines) on the Levant, and the numbers never exceeded 30,000 in the first 100 years of this period, but was more likely around 15,000 to 20,000. There simply isn’t anyone in the hills prior to this moment other than perhaps nomadic herders. These are refugees from the Canaanite coastal states who brought with them the same culture, construction techniques, pottery, clothing, etc.
The arrival of the Philistine (which the bible claims were on the Levant in 1,800 BCE, which is pure fantasy) also explains the Jews diet. After 1100 BCE the waste sites in Canaanite coastal cities start to show an inordinate amount of pork bones. Huge quantities suddenly start showing up in the strata. Clearly, the Philistines loved their pork. In the hills after 1150 BCE, in the first settlements, however, not a single pork bone is found. Not one. This is explained by the refugees purposefully distinguishing themselves from “them” down there (those bastards who forced us out of our homes), and “us” up here.
I remind you, the biblical narrative has 2.5 million foreigners (people who would have after 500 years in Egypt a unique language, diet, technology, weapons, pottery, dress, culture, etc) arriving 300 years earlier. That simply never happened, nor was there ever a conquest prior to establishing the two hill kingdoms, Israel and Judah in the 10th Century.
Now, I understand you want to try and hold onto this story, but ignoring the facts does not serve you well.
LikeLike
UnkleE
Either present your evidences, or give up.
Ark is entirely correct. This is the consensus position, and its based on overwhelming evidence.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Yet my research plainly suggests the majority of the bunch of non minimalists you named are evangelical. Certainly Kitchen, Hoerth, Kaiser etc are.”
Hi Ark, this is good, we are finally getting somewhere. In defence of your statement that “regarding the Pentateuch the overwhelming, scientific and scholarly view based on what the evidence (or lack thereof) shows is the one held to be minimalist”, you are now arguing (apparently) that scholars who are christian are not true scholars and therefore don’t contribute to the scholarly view.
So now all you have to do is demonstrate the truth of that statement!
Go for it!
LikeLike
here is what really happened,
at the last supper jeezzuuuss said, “drink my blood and eat my flesh”.
after he was entombed,
the disciples snuck in and did just that,, they ate him.
of course they had to grind up his bones, that’s why it took three days.
LikeLike
bone dust is very dry so they had to make a paste with their urine.
LikeLike
John, you aren’t listening. Please go back and read what I have said.
You’ll find this sequence of events ….
1. Ark asked me some questions about the Pentateuch.
2. I answered them – you apparently haven’t read my answers (you can find the way back if you are interested).
3. The only response Ark made included the statement: “regarding the Pentateuch the overwhelming, scientific and scholarly view based on what the evidence (or lack thereof) shows is the one held to be minimalist”.
4. I disagreed with that statement, and said there were many scholar with non-minimalist views.
5. And so the discussion has gone on from there.
I don’t think anything in your last comment addressed that question.
LikeLike
UnkleE
As I have already pointed out to you, of all the names you have listed as supposed “experts” only one has ever published a peer-reviewed paper in a “real” journal, and it was on cisterns and drainage at Quamran.
Either present the evidences you have to support your position, or give it up. You’re making yourself look like a fool… and that’s just not necessary. You can avoid it, and i’d encourage you to avoid it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
tasted like chicken
LikeLike
Aha SPG, that, too! By the time we are finished with this thread, there will be enough alternative explanations to an empty than the christian bargained for
LikeLiked by 1 person
Can we say now, by a vote of those who consent, there is consensus among scholars that the empty tomb doesn’t qualify as evidence of a resurrection?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“As I have already pointed out to you, of all the names you have listed as supposed “experts” only one has ever published a peer-reviewed paper in a “real” journal, and it was on cisterns and drainage at Quamran.”
John, thanks for your concern. But I feel fine. if you think the names I mentioned don’t qualify as “real” scholars, it is up to you to show that. Define what you think makes a scholar and show these guys don’t meet those criteria. Then we have something to talk about. Thanks.
LikeLike
Unklee, I, unlike John and Ark, is not interested in scholars consensus. I want to know what you think. Moses story involves talking to a burning bush, killing an Egyptian and burying him less than a foot deep and a murderous rage. Which part of this story do you accept as part of your belief?
LikeLike
@unklee
Sorry to interject, but this thing has pique my interest.
I would agree with John that if one does not publish in peer-reviewed journals it is very difficult to consider one as an “expert” in the field. This is true for many fields – e.g. evolution where I find it hard to believe “experts” telling me evolution is false when all they do is publish their “research” in non-scientific journals, and my personal experience is that these are generally op-ed, rather than results of vigorous studies.
I’m not saying that your experts whom you’ve named are quacks. However, at least from my point of view, it is akin to hearing someone telling me homeopathy is true, and they have experts to back it up, and when challenged, the defense became “define what you think makes a scholar and show these guys don’t meet those criteria”.
Certainly that is a valid defense, but I would rather hear what you think makes you convinced that the experts said is true. I mean, I didn’t believe what experts say about evolution etc until I read it, gain a basic level of understanding, and generally agree with the broad ideas before deferring the more complex and non-easily understandable parts to the experts. I’m quite sure that this is the same for you. As someone that prides himself in examining evidence, I’ll be surprised if all you could say is “experts said it, therefore I’m ok.”, without reading into anything that the experts have said. That to me will not be “examining evidence”, but if that’s your definition I’m still ok with that, and at least I know where you are coming from.
The reason I would like to hear the specifics, rather than a play of “my experts vs your experts” type of argument, is because honestly I have not heard any strong points or counterarguments against what Ark and John are saying regarding OT history. Hence if you could kindly share what is the most important fact that you’ve read about that clinch it for you would be great, as reading through all the names you’ve quoted is kind of daunting for me.
Apologies for wanting to take the short cut.
Thank you
LikeLike
You appear to have omitted reference to the topic under discussion – the Pentateuch and its historical veracity, and specifically the Patriarchs, Egyptian captivity, Exodus, Moses and the Conquest of Canaan.
However, I am sure that was merely an oversight.
As you take umbrage at my sleight on Christian scholars, please, I implore you, submit anything they have contributed that has had an effect toward refuting the overwhelming scientific and scholarly view.
Let me state: I have Googled my fingers off and found absolutely nothing.
Kitchen, for example, specializes in Egyptology for which he is most renowned. If you are aware of any evidence he has uncovered that confirms the biblical captivity tale and subsequent flight into the Sinai then for the benefit of all of us reading this interminable discussion and for the love of whichever god you care to mention, present it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“The Gospels say that she anointed the feet of Jesus with a pound of Nard” – Are you sure that wasn’t a pound of lard?
LikeLiked by 2 people
“…most archaeologists are not actively investigating the exodus, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t happen, although many do think that.”
Most zoologists are not actively investigating fuzzy pink unicorns, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they’re not out there somewhere, although many do think that.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Mainstream historical consensus
Despite being regarded in Judaism as the primary factual historical narrative of the origin of the religion, culture and ethnicity, Exodus is now accepted by scholars as having been compiled in the 8th–7th centuries BCE from stories dating possibly as far back as the 13th century BCE, with further polishing in the 6th–5th centuries BCE, as a theological and political manifesto to unite the Israelites in the then‐current battle for territory against Egypt.[2]
Archaeologists from the 19th century onward were actually surprised not to find any evidence whatsoever for the events of Exodus. By the 1970s, archaeologists had largely given up regarding the Bible as any use at all as a field guide.
The archaeological evidence of local Canaanite, rather than Egyptian, origins of the kingdoms of Judah and Israel is * “overwhelming,” and leaves “no room for an Exodus from Egypt or a 40‐year pilgrimage through the Sinai wilderness.”[3] The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult objects are of the Canaanite god El, the pottery is in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet is early Canaanite. Almost the sole marker distinguishing Israelite villages from Canaanite sites is an absence of pig bones.
It is considered possible that those Canaanites who started regarding themselves as the Israelites were joined or led by a small group of Semites from Egypt, possibly the Hyksos people, possibly carrying stories that made it into Exodus. As the tribe expanded, they may have begun to clash with neighbors, perhaps sparking the tales of conflict in Joshua and Judges.
William Dever, an archaeologist normally associated with the more conservative end of Syro-Palestinian archaeology, has labeled the question of the historicity of Exodus “dead.” Israeli archaeologist Ze’ev Herzog provides the current consensus view on the historicity of the Exodus: “The Israelites never were in Egypt. They never came from abroad. This whole chain is broken. It is not a historical one. It is a later legendary reconstruction—made in the seventh century [BCE]—of a history that never happened.”[4]
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Evidence_for_the_Exodus#Mainstream_historical_consensus
* my emphasis
I am posting this interesting excerpt for the benefit of those following this thread.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Notice how UnkleE refuses to accept the simple concept that the majority of archeologists (scholars) believe that the Exodus and Conquest of Canaan are fiction; he wants to hold a “middle position”. Yet he jumps up and down demanding that we accept as fact that the majority of scholars believe that there was an empty tomb, thereby, in his mind, rendering the Resurrection as a “reasonable” explanation.
We are not dealing with a rational person. He is an ideologue. It is hopeless to debate these people.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I have shown you, twice. Only one of the names you’ve presented has ever published a peer-reviewed paper in a “real” journal…. and it was on the drainage system at Qumran.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Those of us who know unkleE know that he always wins. He is the ultimate scorekeeper and always has the last say . If you provide 100 experts, he will provide 101. Dare I say this is an overwhelming consensus by those of us who know him ? 🙂
Sorry unkleE, I couldn’t resist. 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
UnkleE
In case you don’t believe me, here is the link to the only peer-reviewed paper that has been published by any one of your “experts.”
And in case you don’t know, scholars are generally referred to as “scholars” when they publish peer-reviewed works. If they don’t then they’re just authors and amateur enthusiasts whose opinions carry very, very, very little weight.
To Dip or Sprinkle? The Qumran Cisterns in Perspective” by Bryant G. Wood
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1356924
Now, if you know of any other peer-reviewed published papers then do please let me know of them. And as an aside, it would be tremendously relevant if they actually had something to do with the Jewish origin narrative.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ken, that is a nice one and it has a lot of truth in it.
Gary, you seem to be learning that quite late. He set the rules of engagement and overwhelming is as per his definition.
Ark I saw what you did there.
John, the bible is peer reviewed by other gods. What more are you looking for?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Alternative Explanation for the Empty Tomb, #4:
Martians done it!
Late Saturday night, a Martian mothership hovers over the tomb of Jesus. The commander, a sinister fellow with one eye, commands five of his Martian soldiers to teleport down to the ground, enter the bodies of the Roman soldiers, roll back the stone, and take the body. The body is levitated into the mothership using a tractor beam.
The Martian-possessed Roman soldiers go to the Sanhedrin and report that an angel has stolen the body. The members of the Sanhedrin all soil their undergarments and tell the soldiers to tell the people, “The disciples did it.”
The soldiers leave the Sanhedrin and are immediately teleported up to the mothership which returns to Mars, where a slave class is created from the Roman soldiers…who continue to live on red planet…to this very day.
“Preposterous!” complain Christians.
“Just as preposterous as your tall tale!” I retort.
LikeLiked by 1 person