Here's a recent book (Copyright 2001) by Matthew Sturgis that explores the archaeological history of the "Holy Land", exploring the dirt, the bones, the remnants left behind by the civilizations that occupied this land for the past two to three millennia, and seeking confirmation of the Biblical "history" as found in the pages of the books which supposedly chronicled the taking of this land by the early Jewish followers of Yahweh.
Not surprisingly to those of us who have been following these archaeological quests for some time (See: Reading List), his review of recent work in the area again discloses that the Bible is unreliable as an historical tool; the stories of conquest appear to be later figments of vivid imaginations; the Jews were peaceful, nomadic sheepherders who were of Canaanite stock and by no means a separate line of humanity.
And there is good reason to seek to confirm or deny the Biblical stories: after all, battle has raged in the Middle East for over two millennia over this "sacred" ground, all because the Jews have a "prior claim from God" to ownership of it. So, was it taken by Jewish warriors of old as the tales would have us believe, or not?
Well, examples abound of the error of the story as the Bible tells it. Firstly, we find this: "Is the Bible's account of events backed up in other written records? The answer, (he) soon discovered, is an emphatic 'No'. So far, only two external sources have been found that even mention Israel up to the mid-ninth century B.C.E." (Note: the stories of Joshua's Godly army destroying the walls at Jericho supposedly took place in the 10th century B.C.E.; same with David killing Goliath and establishing the capital of Israel at Jerusalem - all 10th century B.C.E.)
So, if no external written records are available (that is to say, the Egyptians who had supposedly enslaved the Jews, then lost an army in the pursuit of them at the Sea of Reeds and who kept records of Every Other Contact with a foreign nation or peoples, and of every military campaign, but kept No Record of any contact with the Jews!), what do the physical remains tell us?
Again, from the book: "When the site at Jericho was reworked in the 1950s (Kathleen Kenyon) for example, it was discovered that the walls had fallen down (most likely due to an earthquake: my comment) long before Joshua and his people were supposed to have arrived - and that at that time Jericho was almost certainly unoccupied." And further: "The fact that the archaeological evidence at Jericho - and at other sites mentioned in the Bible - refutes the conquest story, came as a shock." (Emphasis added by GB)
Now he states unequivocally: ".....not only was there no conquest of Canaan by Joshua and the Children of Israel (that was all a later invention) but that the Israelites were in fact Canaanites."
Let's swallow hard and read that sentence again, putting emphasis where it belongs:
... THERE WAS NO CONQUEST OF CANAAN BY JOSHUA !!!
... THE ISRAELITES WERE IN FACT CANAANITES !!!
Yet people have, for the nearly 2500 years of the existence of the Hebrew Bible, believed these myths, preached these myths, proselytized in the Name of these Myths, and fought and died for these myths! And they continue to do so right up to this very day: November 16th, 2010!!!
The book has so much detail it would be impossible for me to summarize it all in the time I have left to live, so please - get the book, read it actively (highlighting, checking its references, etc.) and ponder just what our world might look like now if these stories hadn't been created by the spin doctors of old, hadn't been rammed down the throats of innocent children in the Middle East for two and a half millennia, and hadn't been used as a pretext for the continuing battles that rage in the "Holy Land".
It truly boggles the mind.
gb
No comments:
Post a Comment