• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christians- How do you know Jesus and the Bible are true?

joelr

Well-Known Member
This find seems to show the existence of a system of writing a lot earlier than the early monarchy. Moses could have used it to write scripture.
It's not evidence yet. If this said they worshipped Ashera on this sketchy evidence you would be jumping and screaming at how bad this evidence is.
They released a drawing and a photo of the outside of the tablet, were not licensed and haven't shown where they actually found it yet?

Scholars Remain Skeptical​

Although the team’s claims about the lead tablet have made headlines in Israel, and been the subject of popular biblical archaeology podcasts and social media discussions, some scholars and other observers have questioned the find and remain skeptical about its contents and importance. The main reason is that, until now, the team has provided very little written or visual documentation to support their reading and interpretation of the tablet. At the March press conference, the team released a photo of the outside of the tablet (first image, above) and a schematic drawing of the three letters they read as the divine name Yhw (second image, above), but they did not release any images of the scans that show the tablet’s inscribed interior. Additionally, the team has yet to publish the find or their analysis in a peer-reviewed journal, although they are now preparing an article that they hope will appear later in 2022. This lack of any presentation of the supporting evidence for the team’s claims has raised the suspicions of many scholars. As Christopher Rollston, a noted epigrapher from the George Washington University, wrote on his blog, “I would predict that almost all of the readings posited in the press conference will be vigorously contested, once scholars in the field of epigraphy are allowed to see the image. … I am far from convinced of their readings … especially since they have not even provided so much as a single good image!”

Even if the ABR team’s reading holds up under scrutiny, however, Rollston and others caution against making too much of the tablet’s date and significance. Rollston points out, for example, that alphabetic writing was already fairly well known by the late second millennium, likely having been invented sometime around the 18th century B.C.E. Furthermore, even if the team’s reading is accurate, the 40 letters that make up the text were used to write just four unique words: “cursed,” “die,” “god,” and “yhw.” According to Rollston, “To say that based on those four words or roots that somebody could write the whole Bible … well, that’s a bridge (way) too far for me. After all, there are 8500+ words in the Hebrew Bible … and four is a pretty small fraction of the whole, therefore!” Other scholars, like archaeologist Aren Maeir of Bar-Ilan University, note that while the team’s reading of the Mt. Ebal inscription could provide the earliest reference to the divine name Yahweh in ancient Israel, it would not be earliest reference to Yahweh ever found, as possible earlier occurrences have been found in Egypt and elsewhere.



Problems of Provenance​

There are also serious questions about where the tablet was found and how it was discovered. As noted above, the tablet was not found during an excavation but rather while the ABR team was sifting the soil dumps from Adam Zertal’s earlier excavations. As such, the find does not come from a datable, stratified context, though the ABR team says it was able to associate the dump material where the tablet was found with Zertal’s excavation of the altar, which he dated to the time of Joshua. This corresponds to the team’s dating of the script, as well as analysis of the tablet’s lead, which originated from a mine in Greece that was in use during the Late Bronze and early Iron Ages.

Perhaps even more significant is the fact that Mt. Ebal is located in Area B of the West Bank, just a mile north of the Palestinian city of Nablus, and, as such, its archaeology falls under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. An investigation by Haaretz found that the ABR team failed to get permission for the Mt. Ebal sifting project from either the Palestinian Authority or Israel’s Staff Officer for Archaeology of the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria, calling into question the legality of the project and the find. Additionally, the ABR team did not receive an export license to take the tablet out of the country for analysis, as is required by Israeli law.
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
She was saying that this story is not proof that a physical resurrection happened. This was written down years later after the fact. It would have to be proven to Baha'is that a physical resurrection happened for us to move off of how we see it. We consider that what what Abdu'l-Baha said as more conclusive than the story because we came to believe in what Abdu'l-Baha was saying for reasons other than the dispute about this story.

The different Gospels have details that appear to contradict each other, and we find the account that Jesus went bodily to heaven to be unbelievable. I don't want to argue abut those things, though, just assert here how I see it.
And the same with a star guiding the Magi, and the virgin birth, and a voice from heaven, and Satan tempting Jesus, and him walking on water and all the other miracles and healings. What is believable about any of those things? Do Baha'is believe the NT and the Bible are true Scriptures from God or not? It they are not, then fine. But Baha'is use and accept somethings in them and reject the things they don't like and can't use.

And, again, not that I believe the resurrection and ascension of Jesus is true, but I do believe the gospels and in Acts claims they are true. So why reject them? They are scientifically impossible? Yes, and that's the point. Only through God's power could such a thing happen.

But the same with the supposed virgin birth. Which of the gospel writers was there? None of them. So where did they get their information? From Mary? From traditions and legends? Plus, to me, there's a huge problem with the gospel of Matthew taking one verse, out of context, and making it a prophesy about the virgin birth. There are problems with all the supernatural events that are claimed to have happened during the life of Jesus. All of them could have easily been written into the story.

So, is the NT fiction? And you might as well add the Bible and all the other Holy Books to the question, but especially the Bible. Creation? Fiction. The Flood? Fiction. Isaac, the son taken by Abraham to be sacrificed? Fiction. How about the stories of Jonah being swallowed by a big fish. Or Daniel's friends surviving being cast into a fiery furnace? David and Goliath? Elijah being carried off in a fiery chariot?

Easily, all fictional things added into the story to make their deity into the greatest and most powerful God of all. But if it's all fiction, it doesn't make their God into anything. And... if Jesus didn't rise from the dead, he really isn't all that he is made out to be. Which, again, is fine. If that's the truth. I can believe that... That the Bible and the NT are fictional. But... it that what Baha'is are really saying?
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
This find seems to show the existence of a system of writing a lot earlier than the early monarchy. Moses could have used it to write scripture.
Intriguing, though the article seems to be doubtful since the archeologists didn’t release the contents of the tablet, just a curse on the outside.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
In what language? Paleo-Hebrew comes from the monarchy period, give or take.

I don't know, maybe this site can help.

OR this 3 minute long video has archaeological evidence of proto Hebrew at possibly 1400 BC, just after Moses is said to have died.
 

joelr

Well-Known Member
I don't know, maybe this site can help.

OR this 3 minute long video has archaeological evidence of proto Hebrew at possibly 1400 BC, just after Moses is said to have died.
Like I posted scholars are skeptical and the evidence and location have not been released. Why you don't use proper methodology and attempt to prove things false before you believe them true is beyond me.

Proto-Hebrew is a combination of Canaanite and basic Hebrew. Showing they did come from Canaan and not Egypt. GeekyChristian is not a person in the field and is just an apologist.



Scholars Remain Skeptical​

Although the team’s claims about the lead tablet have made headlines in Israel, and been the subject of popular biblical archaeology podcasts and social media discussions, some scholars and other observers have questioned the find and remain skeptical about its contents and importance. The main reason is that, until now, the team has provided very little written or visual documentation to support their reading and interpretation of the tablet. At the March press conference, the team released a photo of the outside of the tablet (first image, above) and a schematic drawing of the three letters they read as the divine name Yhw (second image, above), but they did not release any images of the scans that show the tablet’s inscribed interior. Additionally, the team has yet to publish the find or their analysis in a peer-reviewed journal, although they are now preparing an article that they hope will appear later in 2022. This lack of any presentation of the supporting evidence for the team’s claims has raised the suspicions of many scholars. As Christopher Rollston, a noted epigrapher from the George Washington University, wrote on his blog, “I would predict that almost all of the readings posited in the press conference will be vigorously contested, once scholars in the field of epigraphy are allowed to see the image. … I am far from convinced of their readings … especially since they have not even provided so much as a single good image!”

Even if the ABR team’s reading holds up under scrutiny, however, Rollston and others caution against making too much of the tablet’s date and significance. Rollston points out, for example, that alphabetic writing was already fairly well known by the late second millennium, likely having been invented sometime around the 18th century B.C.E. Furthermore, even if the team’s reading is accurate, the 40 letters that make up the text were used to write just four unique words: “cursed,” “die,” “god,” and “yhw.” According to Rollston, “To say that based on those four words or roots that somebody could write the whole Bible … well, that’s a bridge (way) too far for me. After all, there are 8500+ words in the Hebrew Bible … and four is a pretty small fraction of the whole, therefore!” Other scholars, like archaeologist Aren Maeir of Bar-Ilan University, note that while the team’s reading of the Mt. Ebal inscription could provide the earliest reference to the divine name Yahweh in ancient Israel, it would not be earliest reference to Yahweh ever found, as possible earlier occurrences have been found in Egypt and elsewhere.



Problems of Provenance​

There are also serious questions about where the tablet was found and how it was discovered. As noted above, the tablet was not found during an excavation but rather while the ABR team was sifting the soil dumps from Adam Zertal’s earlier excavations. As such, the find does not come from a datable, stratified context, though the ABR team says it was able to associate the dump material where the tablet was found with Zertal’s excavation of the altar, which he dated to the time of Joshua. This corresponds to the team’s dating of the script, as well as analysis of the tablet’s lead, which originated from a mine in Greece that was in use during the Late Bronze and early Iron Ages.

Perhaps even more significant is the fact that Mt. Ebal is located in Area B of the West Bank, just a mile north of the Palestinian city of Nablus, and, as such, its archaeology falls under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. An investigation by Haaretz found that the ABR team failed to get permission for the Mt. Ebal sifting project from either the Palestinian Authority or Israel’s Staff Officer for Archaeology of the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria, calling into question the legality of the project and the find. Additionally, the ABR team did not receive an export license to take the tablet out of the country for analysis, as is required by Israeli law.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
It's pretty usual to not want to be killed. Do you think they should have wanted to be killed?
Actually according to the gospels Jesus knew His fate that Passover and told His disciples what would happen and marched to His death saying that is why He came to earth.
Yes. If you are going to start a religion where the leader needs to sacrifice his life, at least make him jump at the chance or admit that this wasn’t the plan.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
I don't know which religious leader and which kid you are talking about.
Samuel chose Saul specifically to get Israel to say they are sorry and go back to him. Monarchy takes his power away. After the people loved Saul, Samuel got mad and picked up a kid to take over.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Like I posted scholars are skeptical and the evidence and location have not been released. Why you don't use proper methodology and attempt to prove things false before you believe them true is beyond me.

Proto-Hebrew is a combination of Canaanite and basic Hebrew. Showing they did come from Canaan and not Egypt. GeekyChristian is not a person in the field and is just an apologist.

Yes he is an apologist and can only repeat the evidence of the experts, and yes the peer review is on it's way it seems.
What does attempting to prove this find false look like?

Scholars Remain Skeptical​

Although the team’s claims about the lead tablet have made headlines in Israel, and been the subject of popular biblical archaeology podcasts and social media discussions, some scholars and other observers have questioned the find and remain skeptical about its contents and importance. The main reason is that, until now, the team has provided very little written or visual documentation to support their reading and interpretation of the tablet. At the March press conference, the team released a photo of the outside of the tablet (first image, above) and a schematic drawing of the three letters they read as the divine name Yhw (second image, above), but they did not release any images of the scans that show the tablet’s inscribed interior. Additionally, the team has yet to publish the find or their analysis in a peer-reviewed journal, although they are now preparing an article that they hope will appear later in 2022. This lack of any presentation of the supporting evidence for the team’s claims has raised the suspicions of many scholars. As Christopher Rollston, a noted epigrapher from the George Washington University, wrote on his blog, “I would predict that almost all of the readings posited in the press conference will be vigorously contested, once scholars in the field of epigraphy are allowed to see the image. … I am far from convinced of their readings … especially since they have not even provided so much as a single good image!”

Even if the ABR team’s reading holds up under scrutiny, however, Rollston and others caution against making too much of the tablet’s date and significance. Rollston points out, for example, that alphabetic writing was already fairly well known by the late second millennium, likely having been invented sometime around the 18th century B.C.E. Furthermore, even if the team’s reading is accurate, the 40 letters that make up the text were used to write just four unique words: “cursed,” “die,” “god,” and “yhw.” According to Rollston, “To say that based on those four words or roots that somebody could write the whole Bible … well, that’s a bridge (way) too far for me. After all, there are 8500+ words in the Hebrew Bible … and four is a pretty small fraction of the whole, therefore!” Other scholars, like archaeologist Aren Maeir of Bar-Ilan University, note that while the team’s reading of the Mt. Ebal inscription could provide the earliest reference to the divine name Yahweh in ancient Israel, it would not be earliest reference to Yahweh ever found, as possible earlier occurrences have been found in Egypt and elsewhere.



Problems of Provenance​

There are also serious questions about where the tablet was found and how it was discovered. As noted above, the tablet was not found during an excavation but rather while the ABR team was sifting the soil dumps from Adam Zertal’s earlier excavations. As such, the find does not come from a datable, stratified context, though the ABR team says it was able to associate the dump material where the tablet was found with Zertal’s excavation of the altar, which he dated to the time of Joshua. This corresponds to the team’s dating of the script, as well as analysis of the tablet’s lead, which originated from a mine in Greece that was in use during the Late Bronze and early Iron Ages.

Perhaps even more significant is the fact that Mt. Ebal is located in Area B of the West Bank, just a mile north of the Palestinian city of Nablus, and, as such, its archaeology falls under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. An investigation by Haaretz found that the ABR team failed to get permission for the Mt. Ebal sifting project from either the Palestinian Authority or Israel’s Staff Officer for Archaeology of the Civil Administration of Judea and Samaria, calling into question the legality of the project and the find. Additionally, the ABR team did not receive an export license to take the tablet out of the country for analysis, as is required by Israeli law.

Does attempting to prove this find false, look like this?
 
Last edited:

Brian2

Veteran Member
Yes. If you are going to start a religion where the leader needs to sacrifice his life, at least make him jump at the chance or admit that this wasn’t the plan.

In this case the leader let His disciples know what would happen. After He rose from the dead He let them know where the Hebrew scriptures show that He had to be rejected, suffer and die.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
Samuel chose Saul specifically to get Israel to say they are sorry and go back to him. Monarchy takes his power away. After the people loved Saul, Samuel got mad and picked up a kid to take over.

The story tells us that Samuel did not choose Saul but God did.
1Samuel 9:15 Now the day before Saul came, the Lord had revealed this to Samuel: 16 “About this time tomorrow I will send you a man from the land of Benjamin. Anoint him ruler over my people Israel; he will deliver them from the hand of the Philistines. I have looked on my people, for their cry has reached me.”
17 When Samuel caught sight of Saul, the Lord said to him, “This is the man I spoke to you about; he will govern my people.”

So what you say is an interesting theory which denies the idea of God and the supernatural that we are told about in the pages of the Bible.
 

Kenny

Face to face with my Father
Premium Member
Yes that makes sense because you don't seem to even understand the basics about evidence and rational discourse.

When one attacks the poster, it is a sure evidence that you are on shaky ground. ;)

I am interested in what is true and actually listen to what experts have to say in each specialty. Your last comment was that you think Jewish translators of the Septuagint (they may have been Greek) were more accurate than modern scholars.

Absolutely. Knowing two languages, I fully understand that one can translate a sentence and be accurate yet totally wrong because they don't understand the culture and cultural applications.

So let me ask you a question on Psalm 22. What document are you referring to when comparing?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I believe you will find out the hard way. The proof is in the pudding. Jesus will return.
I believe you will find out the hard way after you die and see Jesus and He tells you He never planned to return.

Yes indeed, the proof is in the pudding but there is no pudding....

Where is Jesus? :shrug:
 

Sgt. Pepper

All you need is love.
I believe you will find out the hard way after you die and see Jesus and He tells you He never planned to return.

Where is Jesus? :shrug:

I believe that there will be many Christians who are in for the shock of their lives (eternal life) after they die and realize they were duped into believing things about heaven and the afterlife that clearly aren't true. And I've been asked, "Where is Jesus?" many times by lost and confused earthbound spirits.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
I believe that there will be many Christians who are in for the shock of their lives (eternal life) after they die and realize they were duped into believing things about heaven and the afterlife that clearly aren't true. And I've been asked, "Where is Jesus?" many times by lost and confused earthbound spirits.
*WINNER*
 

CG Didymus

Veteran Member
She was saying that this story is not proof that a physical resurrection happened. This was written down years later after the fact. It would have to be proven to Baha'is that a physical resurrection happened for us to move off of how we see it. We consider that what what Abdu'l-Baha said as more conclusive than the story because we came to believe in what Abdu'l-Baha was saying for reasons other than the dispute about this story.

The different Gospels have details that appear to contradict each other, and we find the account that Jesus went bodily to heaven to be unbelievable. I don't want to argue abut those things, though, just assert here how I see it.
More thoughts on your post.

You say, "It would have to be proven to Baha'is that a physical resurrection happened for us to move off of how we see it." Interesting, that the word of the gospel writers isn't good enough. Yet, Baha'is expect Atheists to believe the words of their prophet without proof?

And yes, the details about the story of Jesus and his resurrection appear to contradict each other. However, all of them are claiming that he rose from the dead and that they saw him and touched him and saw him to be real.... then floated off into the clouds. Unbelievable? Yes, definitely. But isn't that the point? Only God could have done that.

Or... God didn't raise Jesus up. His body died and stayed dead and rotted away. Much more believable, but then why the story about Jesus being brought back to life? Some kind of mysterious symbolic thing the gospel writers came up with? Or they made up or passed on a legend about a resurrected Jesus... A fictional story about a dying and rising God/man? Now that, to me, is even more believable. But it makes the gospels a fraud and the resurrection a hoax.

I can understand that Baha'is don't want to go that far and call the resurrection a hoax. But... are Baha'is calling it a fictional story? A fictional story whose meaning is in the symbolism? A symbolic, fictional story added on to the end of the crucifixion story? Which, I assume, Baha'is believe was real? Again, there is no indication that the gospel writers switched from talking about the actual events that took place during the crucifixion, then suddenly, after the burial of Jesus, go into a fictional story about the empty tomb and him being raised from the dead.

No, I think it makes much more sense that the writers mixed in actual events with some made up embellishments. But if the resurrection is just one of those added made up embellishments, then it didn't really happen. Which makes the story false. Right? Or how exactly do Baha'is explain it?
 

Zwing

Active Member
Christians today have never met Jesus physically yet believe in Him. Why?
A number of reasons. A couple of big ones are the seductive idea (which seems a lie) of ultracorporeal life, and the even more seductive concept of having “the clean slate”, which is one of Christianity’s big selling-points. “Have all your sins washed away, and become a new man in Christ”, eh? (If only it were truly that easy.) As such, belief in Jesus, and that he was/is the “Christ” of St. Paul, is done out of slavish expedience to the foregoing causes.
 
Top