Posted on 01/29/2005 6:12:28 AM PST by NYer
Hamilton, Ontario, Jan. 28, 2005 (CNA) - Canadian archaeologist Russell Adams, a professor at McMaster University has recently unearthed evidence, which helps to show the historical accuracy of the Bible.
Professor Adams and his team of colleagues have found information that points to the existence of the Biblical Kingdom of Edom existing at precisely the time Scripture claims it existed.
The evidence flies in the face of a common belief that Edom actually came into existence at least 200 years later.
According to the Canadian Globe and Mail, the group’s findings “mean that those scholars convinced that the Hebrew Old Testament is at best a compendium of revisionist, fragmented history, mixed with folklore and theology, and at worst a piece of outright propaganda, likely will have to apply the brakes to their thinking.”
The Kingdom of Edom, mentioned throughout the Old Testament, and a continuous source of hostility for Biblical Israel, is thought to have existed in what is now southern Jordan.
The group made their discovery while investigating a copper mining site called Khirbat en-Nahas.
According to the Globe and Mail, radiocarbon dating of their finds, “firmly established that occupation of the site began in the 11th century BC and a monumental fortress was built in the 10th century BC, supporting the argument for existence of an Edomite state at least 200 years earlier than had been assumed.”
The evidence is also said to suggest that the Kingdom existed at the same time David, who scripture recounts as warring with Edom, was king over Israel.
Communism was a major enemy. Vast resources, dedicated and disciplined operatives. Read "Dedication and Leadership" by Douglas Hyde.
You are right but who would believe a chronic loser? ;^)
I think this is all amazing! (And predictable!) Human weakenesses and mistakes are finally being corrected.
Your ignorance of the Catholic Church is apparent in your comments. This is not surprising. Most anti-Catholics are not well-informed about the Church, and early church history.
Most of the epistles were written to local churches that were experiencing moral and/or doctrinal problems. Paul and most of the other New Testament writers sent letters to these local churches (e.g., 1 and 2 Corinthians and Galatians) in order to rectify these problems. There was no attempt on the part of the writers to impart a vast body of basic doctrinal instruction to non-believers, nor even to simply summarize everything for the believers who received the letters. Look - the Christian faith existed and flourished for years before the first book of the New Testament was written. The books of the New Testament were composed decades after Christ ascended into heaven, and it took centuries for there to be general agreement among Christians as to which books comprised the New Testament. Early Christians did not sit around reading the Bible. There was no NT Bible in the early Church! The Church Christ established was – and remains – the Catholic Church.
Please do the following - go to www.catholic.com
Go to the library section, and look at the actual teachings of the Church, not some biased or bigoted misrepresentation. And get a copy of Karl Keating's “Catholicism and Fundamentalism”
You need to know what you believe.
Well said.
See, one must understand that after the 60's, the Church, I feel, became more liberal. The Church position stands though.
Good news bump.
"The Bible says different from 1 Timothy 3:2"
As you interpret it, maybe.
Read the early Church Fathers and Doctors though and you'll discover a different story.
As I said earlier, married priests and bishops exist in the Church, just as celibate priests and bishops do.
Are you suggesting that ONLY married men can be priests? Who is your priest and is he/she married?
Public schools have long done the same. Your point?
Good post, thanks.
"Do you believe in transubstantiation? That strictly obeys the word of the Bible."
Great point, Council. When I talk with people on this topic, I use the line, "When Christ said 'This is my Body', we Catholics don't have to debate what the meaning of "is" is.
Most non-catholics do not know that Catholic doctrines are the most literal translations of the Bible.
Great point. No member of the Church, no cleric, no council can alter one jot or tittle of the Deposit of Faith, including Sacred Scripture. When God say No Divorce, He meant NO DIVORCE. Therefore the Church has never and will never allow divorce. There are many more examples, yours is central and key. Thank you.
Not like Clinton :)
And the Bible stays the same through out the ages,,,,seems the Church's liberal veering into the ditch is not a good thing... come to think of it liberals mess up everything they come into contact with, why should the Church excape that fate?
The Church is a divine institution. It is overseen by God and can never be destroyed. Those in the Church may try to subvert it, but they will never succeed. "And the gates of Hell shall never prevail against it" (i think thats how it goes).
Is everybody this paranoid around here?
Cool cat on your profile.
You keep confusing the men and women of the Church with the Church. The Church Christ founded is intact, indefectible and immaculate. Flawed and sinful men are just that.
So what parts of the Bible do you reject? I assume you have a married Bishop, right? Who is that person? OIr have you rejected 1 Timothy 3:2?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.