>>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History Denier Joey said: “Previously established chronology” can come from pretty much anywhere, historical documents for example.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
Danny Denier from post #413:
"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." I understand that serious scholars differ on this particular point and my faith does not depend on which ones are right or wrong.
I'm patient and at my age expect to learn the real truth, all in due time.
Danny Denier: "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."
Sorry, but I can't get excited over those 200 years.
Either is fine by me.
Danny Denier "Don’t waste our time with quotes from the Left-Wing Wikipedia, Joey."
Once again: Wikipedia represents standard cultural "conventional wisdom" supported by well known references.
It's great for looking up names, dates & basic ideas.
At best its reporting is "fair & balanced", intending to present both sides with a neutral tone.
Wikipedia is also the only similar site I know not cluttered up with ads & other popup nonsense.
In other words, I can find the standard data I'm looking for in Wikipedia often in far less than half the time it takes looking anywhere else.
Danny, if I understand correctly, you yourself have "thousands of books" which you (or your lovely research assistant) can apparently access through word searches.
By contrast, I have dozens-hundreds of hard-copy books on many subjects, some last read decades ago.
And as that exercise with Shermer's Holocaust book illustrated, with word searches you can ferret out quotes from electronic books, quotes that I had long since forgotten were even there in my hard copies.
So Wikipedia provides quick access to standard data and represents today's "conventional wisdom" -- a pretty good place to start any discussion.
It doesn't necessarily mean the Wiki report is correct, but does suggest where debate should begin.
Danny Denier on Jericho's age: "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."
All lies, total complete scurrilous lies, absolute fantasies.
The scientific data is what it is and carbon-14 dating can go back about 50,000 years.
There are no confirmed legitimate dates as you suggest here.
Danny Denier quoting Wood 1999: "The archaeological evidence supports the historical accuracy of the Biblical account in every detail. "
Like I said, serious scholars disagree and I expect to learn the real truth, all in due time. ![]()