Danny Denier:
"Your first link, Wikipedia, explains that ancient dating methods require "previously established chronology."
Where does that come from, other than from wild guesses?" "Previously established chronology" can come from pretty much anywhere, historical documents for example.
"Chronological dating, or simply dating, is the process of attributing to an object or event a date in the past, allowing such object or event to be located in a previously established chronology.
This usually requires what is commonly known as a "dating method".
Several dating methods exist, depending on different criteria and techniques, and some very well known examples of disciplines using such techniques are, for example, history, archaeology, geology, paleontology, astronomy and even forensic science... ...Dating methods are most commonly classified following two criteria: relative dating and absolute dating."
Danny Denier:
"Using that timeline, they can claim that the excavated city of Jericho, which exists today exactly like the biblical narrative predicts, cannot possibly be the biblical Jericho because it doesn't match the Shoshenq=Shishak timeline/
In other words, archeologists use a circular argument of a known biblical date (the ransacking of Jerusalem by Shishak) to "disprove" all previous dates.
Slick, huh?" Settlements at ancient Jericho start back circa 9,000 BC, using carbon-14 absolute dating, with many levels, some destroyed by earthquakes, some by fire.
Excavations of Jericho began with Warren in 1868, Sellin & Watzinger in 1906, Garstang in 1930, Kenyon in 1952, Nigro & Marchetti in 1997 and Yasine since 2015.
One major destruction at Jericho has been dated to 1500 BC, which some Biblical scholars say doesn't match its chronology.
Others say it does. ![]()
>>Danny Denier: “Your first link, Wikipedia, explains that ancient dating methods require “previously established chronology.” Where does that come from, other than from wild guesses?”
>>History Denier Joey said: “Previously established chronology” can come from pretty much anywhere, historical documents for example. . .”
No, Joey. The “established chronology”, which is known as the “Conventional Archeological Chronology,” or CAC, comes from the conflation of the archaeologically discovered Egyptian Pharoah Shoshenk with the biblical Pharoah Shishak, which is then used to inaccurately date biblical events prior to Shishak. It essentially pushes the biblical date of the Exodus forward a couple of hundred years, which points wrongly to Ramsees as the Pharoah of the Exodus, and consequently, to no presence of Israel in Egypt. There is plenty of evidence for Israel in Egypt, but not at the “right” time. The CAC also points to Jericho being destroyed before Joshua arrives, since the CAC puts Joshua at about 1200 BC, rather than the biblical 1400 BC.
Don’t waste our time with quotes from the Left-Wing Wikipedia, Joey.
*****************
>>Danny Denier: “Using that timeline, they can claim that the excavated city of Jericho, which exists today exactly like the biblical narrative predicts, cannot possibly be the biblical Jericho because it doesn’t match the Shoshenq=Shishak timeline. In other words, archeologists use a circular argument of a known biblical date (the ransacking of Jerusalem by Shishak) to “disprove” all previous dates. Slick, huh?”
>>History Denier Joey said: “Settlements at ancient Jericho start back circa 9,000 BC, using carbon-14 absolute dating, with many levels, some destroyed by earthquakes, some by fire.”
Baloney. There are no ancient cities older than about 4000-5000 years. The earlier ones were destroyed in the flood. There are dinosaur fossils, coal and diamonds that date less than 10,000 years using Carbon 14.
*****************
>>History Denier Joey said: “Excavations of Jericho began with Warren in 1868, Sellin & Watzinger in 1906, Garstang in 1930, Kenyon in 1952, Nigro & Marchetti in 1997 and Yasine since 2015. One major destruction at Jericho has been dated to 1500 BC, which some Biblical scholars say doesn’t match its chronology. Others say it does.
The following is from a article on Jericho by archaeologist Bryant Wood, which reveals the remarkable accuracy of the historical narrative in the Bible, even in the most trivial of details:
“Jericho was once thought to be a ‘Bible problem’ because of the seeming disagreement between archaeology and the Bible. When the archaeology is correctly interpreted, however, the opposite is the case. The archaeological evidence supports the historical accuracy of the Biblical account in every detail. Every aspect of the story that could possibly be verified by the findings of archaeology is, in fact, verified.” [Bryant G. Wood, “The Walls of Jericho.” Associates for Biblical Research, June 8, 1999]
https://biblearchaeology.org/research/conquest-of-canaan/3625-The-Walls-of-Jericho
Mr. Kalamata