Jericho and Exodus

[nguirado]

I saw the History channel Exodus Decoded show on the History channel, but found it unconvincing. I’ve also been investigating Jericho. What’s the current state of scholarship on these two subjects?

 

[nguirado]

Does anybody have a book recommendation, at least. Preferably something from relatively neutral archaeologists.

 

[Ranp]

I saw the History channel Exodus Decoded show on the History channel, but found it unconvincing. I’ve also been investigating Jericho. What’s the current state of scholarship on these two subjects?

Take the History Channel with a large bucket of salt. The only goal of the History Channel is to provide entertainment. History is just the subject area of that entertainment. Expect no more “good history” from the History Channel then you would from any other cabel network.

 

[crazzeto]

I saw the History channel Exodus Decoded show on the History channel, but found it unconvincing. I’ve also been investigating Jericho. What’s the current state of scholarship on these two subjects?

I would avoid History Channel, or Athiest-Channel as I like to call it, when they try to air religious stuff.

They’ve gone off the deepend, from good academic nutrality, to evangalizing athism. Sadly from what I’m hearing from people who’ve gone through university for history, archeology and certaily philosophy that seems to be the norm “industry wide”. How sad.

 

[nguirado]

Thanks. Any resources you guys can point me to.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I saw the History channel Exodus Decoded show on the History channel, but found it unconvincing. I’ve also been investigating Jericho. What’s the current state of scholarship on these two subjects?

I saw part of the show, but I got fed up with the endless special effects, which made it difficult to focus on the actual evidence, or lack thereof.

The reality is though that a lot of things that we assume were “miraculous” because they’re in Scripture were in fact of natural origin. The “pillars of salt” for example, one of which Lot’s wife was supposed to have become has a natural origin. If there was a plague of frogs, there was probably a natural explanation. Likewise a plague of boils, flies, or anything else.

You might find the following links interesting. One thing mentioned is that ancient peoples nearly always claimed their origins from gods, goddesses or historical figures of great authority. It’s always a wonderful ego trip to believe one descended from the gods. Whereas in the Bible, the Jews admit being slaves in Egypt. That is very much out of keeping with normal mythological accounts of origins.

jbq.jewishbible.org/extra-biblical-evidence-of-the-exodus/

tektonics.org/gk/jericho.html

 

[CWBetts]

I saw part of the show, but I got fed up with the endless special effects, which made it difficult to focus on the actual evidence, or lack thereof.

The reality is though that a lot of things that we assume were “miraculous” because they’re in Scripture were in fact of natural origin. The “pillars of salt” for example, one of which Lot’s wife was supposed to have become has a natural origin. If there was a plague of frogs, there was probably a natural explanation. Likewise a plague of boils, flies, or anything else.

You might find the following links interesting. One thing mentioned is that ancient peoples nearly always claimed their origins from gods, goddesses or historical figures of great authority. It’s always a wonderful ego trip to believe one descended from the gods. Whereas in the Bible, the Jews admit being slaves in Egypt. That is very much out of keeping with normal mythological accounts of origins.

jbq.jewishbible.org/extra-biblical-evidence-of-the-exodus/

tektonics.org/gk/jericho.html

Or maybe, just maybe, God upon occasion performs miracles!

 

[nguirado]

It looks like it’s possible that something similar to the Exodus happened, but that it can’t be proven.

 

[JimmieD]

Blenkinsopp may be a little outdated (1994), but his book called “the Penteteuch” has a short explanation about the, then, current status of archeology. His summary is that older methods were being questioned. The disupute over Jericho was wether or not it was occupied by anyone during the time of Joshua’s conquest and wether or not Kathleen Kenyon’s methods were accurate. John Monson’s essay in Daniel Block’s “Israel: Ancient Kingdom or Late Invention” is pretty up do date books.google.com/books?id=EFYp8I3icisC&printsec=frontcover&dq=daniel+block+Israel&source=bl&ots=87LjW1l0zk&sig=PvzG2Zr27LvsC8G39_shmbA5vj8&hl=en&ei=DBqMS9OGPM-0tgeXyvHBDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAYQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Jericho&f=false (see page 34) with a quick summary. William G. Dever is a well known archeologist; I’m not sure what he says on the subject, but he would be worth glancing at. A little more up to date than Blenkinsopp is Kenneth Kitchen’s “The Reliability of the Old Testament” p 187 (2003) which has a little on Jericho ( books.google.com/books?id=Kw6U05qBiXcC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Kenneth+Kitchen&cd=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false ).

 

[diggerdomer]

I saw the History channel Exodus Decoded show on the History channel, but found it unconvincing. I’ve also been investigating Jericho. What’s the current state of scholarship on these two subjects?

Unfortunately I haven’t seen it, so for the benefit of those like me can you say more about what was unconvincing to you? I’ll try to find a way to view what you may be referring to, but in the interim, what specifically are you wondering about? Thanks.

 

[nguirado]

Thank you for the references. I think I’ll read the Kitchen book.