PBS' 'The Bible's Buried Secrets': Seek and ye shall find?

Orlando Sentinel ^ | Saturday, November 16, 2008 | Hal Boedeker

[angelsonmyside]

Whats PBS?

I thought it stood for “Pure Bull S,,,”

[Berosus]

Did I tell you David Rohl has been reading my blog? He posted comments on it more than once, last February and July. I wrote about this PBS documentary when I first heard about it, largely for his benefit. Of course, like Velikovsky, he has declared that the Bible is historically accurate.

[SunkenCiv]

Wow, nice! FReepmail (private reply) the URL, if you have time.

[Minnehaha]

285 a highway in Colorado ;_}

[ApplegateRanch]

385 is a highway that goes through Wind Cave National Park.

[Fred Nerks]

http://www.specialtyinterests.net/encyclo.html

[Judith Anne]

Many years ago I read all of Velikovsky I could find anywhere. I want to thank you for another fascinating hour spent skimming your post, and the chance to print it out to re-read.

Great profile page, as well, FRiend. FR is richer for your presence.

[Fred Nerks]

many thanks for the kind words, you may enjoy these:

http://www.varchive.org/

http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/JNHDA/wic.htm

[NYer]

Thanks for the ping, SunkenCiv! The one thing PBS knows how to bury is the Truth.

---

Heads up ping!

Catholic Ping List
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[Cvengr]

All of human history is His Story.

One of the best ways of studying Scripture is by beginning with Genesis and studying through to Revelation in order of historical presentation. The Gospel of the New Testament becomes much more intuitively understood than beginning with Matthew independently of the rest of Scripture.

Likewise, all history and future events are best understood by interpreting them in light of His Word, rather than attempting to interpret His Word by current events or historical evidence.

Faith in Him first in all things.

[SunkenCiv]

bought this tonight:

(also bought the new Scientific American [sic])

[Antoninus]

While this is the first (and so far only) mention of King David outside of the Bible, it does not exactly prove his existence nor the historical role assigned to him by the biblical texts.

It doesn't prove it. However, it does provide very strong evidence for it. With archaeology, circumstantial evidence is generally the best you can do, and as circumstantial evidence goes, this is a lot stronger than most of the other claims put forward on the program.

[razorback-bert]

I watched it last night and thought it was good show, but then I don’t have a dog in the fight.

I didn’t get how the gates prove a central authority, people are quick to copy something new and better,

[VietVet]

Correct. While it does not prove the existence of David the King of a united Kingdom of Isreal and Judea, as an important political figure in his own day, it does prove that, about a century after his own time, his memory and the tradition of his reign was important enough in Isreal for a current King to claim him as an ancestor.

Better proof would be contemporary documents or monuments, from Isreal, Judea, Philistine, Syria, Phoenicia, Mesopotamia, or Egypt recording his name and office.

If this was the among the stronger pieces of evidence presented, a skeptic would say that the show did not make a very good case for whatever it was trying to prove.

VietVet