Historical problems with the old testament

  • Thread starter Thread starter preacher_of_christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, you can certainly understand the Bible out of a perspective that takes the time and culture into account. You can often interpret the Bible out of such a perspective.
 
preacher_of_christ said:
OT history is not my main interest so i go with general historical methods.
Click to expand...
If you are going to cite
preacher_of_christ said:
I would argue that the lack of evidence from major events such as half a million slaves escaping Egypt, a large monarchy under the rule of David and Solomon, is in of itself evidence against the events. What is the catholic view of these stories? Can you interpret certain things in non literal ways etc?
Click to expand...
You really should know something of the Old Testament and then a fair bit about archaelogy.
There is a great series on Archaeology by William Dever called How Archaeology illuminates the Bible.

It is well worth watching as it covers the history of Biblical lands archaeology and discusses some important finds.
 
preacher_of_christ said:
Im just citing general history.
Click to expand...
You haven’t cited anything. You claimed there is a lack of evidence from major events and gave Exodus as an example, then went onto the kingdom of David. But you have not discussed any evidence or general history.
I keep asking you what you have so it can be discussed.

If it is a website that you have found with general history, why not post its link so we can look at it.
In the meantime I do highly recommend that DVD series, it is a series of lectures by William Dever. He has been working in archaeology in the Middle East for decades, was one of the first, has taught students, was taught by the originals, has his degrees from Harvard.

Dever Has a great sense of humour that comes out in this lecture series and most important discusses many findings or lack there of and their relationship to Middle eastern history, including that mentioned biblically and that outside of biblical mention .

William Dever puts up many photos of what has been found and that is fascinating in itself. Many of the Biblical Kings have artefacts found that teach us about their lives and that of those living in different eras.
 
Last edited:
Im not here to debate, I simply ask how Catholics can understand the narratives in relation to historical findings.
 
preacher_of_christ said:
Im not here to debate, I simply ask how Catholics can understand the narratives in relation to historical findings.
Click to expand...
But your OP wasn’t discussing findings, your OP was pointing out “This thing probably never happened, because archaeologists haven’t found independent physical evidence to indicate it. Can we interpret the Exodus narrative in a non-literal way?”

There’s a lot of things in history that don’t have a lot of independent physical evidence. The only reason why we care about an obscure confederation of Semitic-speaking tribes is because of their role in religion/salvation history. And because of that, we hold Biblical archaeology to a higher standard than we do, say, MesoAmerican archaeology or the Hopewell Moundbuilders.

Who would want a non-literal Exodus? What would the point of that be?

It’s probably one of the most significant events in the OT, to the point that it’s still commemorated today— but instead of focusing on things like “following a column of fire” or “manna from heaven” or “being miraculously swamped with quail”, your concern is, “Well, where’s the evidence of the campfires? The tent holes? And the quail bones?” 🙂
 
preacher_of_christ said:
Im just citing general history.
Click to expand...
General History or Private Interpretation?

(I was never in the military… I tend to get those ranks confused.)

🤣 😉
preacher_of_christ said:
I simply ask how Catholics can understand the narratives in relation to historical findings.
Click to expand...
Your assertion that “it seems like there would be a lot of evidence” isn’t a “historical finding”… it’s a rather loose and unfounded presumption.
 
preacher_of_christ said:
I would argue that the lack of evidence from major events such as half a million slaves escaping Egypt, a large monarchy under the rule of David and Solomon, is in of itself evidence against the events.
Click to expand...
You would be arguing from ignorance.

Hardly a month goes by that we don’t get yet another archaeological report in the regular news confirming some detail or another of Old Testament accounts, names, cities, e tc. that contradicts the “accepted” view that that city or king didn’t exist, etc.
 
I [could] interpret the OT nonliterally, and used to, but the closer I get to Christ the more literally I accept the OT because my faith in Jesus has become stronger. I don’t believe in His Presence in the Eucharist because the ancient Israelites at unleavened bread at Passover. I believe because, while sitting in adoration, He told me, “What you are looking at is my glorified body, not bloody, dead flesh. It’s ok to believe!” Once that happened, it mattered much less how literally true the OT was. Not that I’m taking it on blind faith here. But for the purpose of analogy, when a fireman saves you from a fire and tells you he did it by spraying the fire with water, you don’t care so much what the pH of the water is.

(and here I thought I was going to go to bed without making a bad analogy today :))
 
Because people attack my claim in the wrong way so I have to.
 
preacher_of_christ said:
I would argue that the lack of evidence from major events such as half a million slaves escaping Egypt, a large monarchy under the rule of David and Solomon, is in of itself evidence against the events. What is the catholic view of these stories? Can you interpret certain things in non literal ways etc?
Click to expand...
A lack of archaeological evidence for a particular historical event does not equate with it not occurring. At one time non-theists argued the Hittites, who existed as far back as the days of Abraham, didn’t exist since there was no archaeological evidence to back up the Biblical claim they did…until archaeological evidence proved otherwise. And there is archaeological evidence King David existed as well. So, the claims of the Bible are not dependent on non-Biblical evidence, since it is self-authoritative and the inspired word of God. Plus, Jesus affirmed the events of Genesis were real life events, and people like Adam, Noah, Abraham, David, Solomon, etc were real historical people. So, there is no reason to entertain the idea they weren’t.
 
preacher_of_christ said:
I never argued for a non-literal exodus.
Click to expand...
When you say—
preacher_of_christ said:
I would argue that the lack of evidence from major events such as half a million slaves escaping Egypt… is in of itself evidence against the events. … Can you interpret certain things in non literal ways etc?
Click to expand...
People are going to think you’re arguing for a non-literal Exodus.

Because that’s the argument for a non-literal Exodus.
 
Exactly. Israel cannot be explained historically or theologically without an exodus. The OP should look up the Ipuwer Papyrus, which contains descriptions that parallel the plagues described in the Bible. The Merneptah Stele also includes the phrase ‘Israel, foreign people’.
 
Dan_Defender said:
Exactly. Israel cannot be explained historically or theologically without an exodus.
Click to expand...
🤔

Can’t it be explained as “they concocted the ‘descent into Egypt’ story wholecloth”, along with “and they made up the whole ‘God is giving us this land’ narrative”, as well?

I’m not saying that this is true, or even that there’s evidence to support that assertion… but it would be the assertion that would be made by naysayers, right?
 
Never mind the naysayers. There is enough evidence of the land of Israel being taken over by this ancient well-organized monotheistic group that differentiated itself from the peoples and tribes around. The question is where did they come from and how could they prevail? The exodus is the answer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top