Independent Historical Corroboration for Biblical Events

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter:
I'm curious to know (and I've asked this in many discussions elsewhere
without much luck) if anyone knows of historial writings or evidence
which corroborates any of the events of the bible.

---

http://www.mada.org.il/website/html/eng/2_1_1-24.htmHere is some evicence for a great flood, but not a global one. The links to his sources didn't work when I tried.This, or something like it, gets my vote for the origin of the flood myths of antiquity--- Sumerian, Babylonian, etc.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

I've read many possibilities for the sources of the
flood myths.I was really looking for something which directly
corroborates the literal interpretation of the Bible.I doubt it really exists ... but I'm always open to evidence.

I'm running late so I can't look this up right now, but I saw a program on BBC America last night about the archeological investigation of some tunnels mentioned in Hezekiah. The slant of the show was that they found a tunnel dug by Hezekiah to supply water to Jerusalem (I may be wrong about the city).Take care.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

This is the kind of evidence that bothers me most.Find some tunnels in a city where a bible story says
they were built ... does that corroborate the bible ?Not unless there is some evidence of the builder being
the same person and the dates being right.My line of argument is roughly that fiction will use fact
to make it more realistic and accessible to the reader.I need references to the characters in the bible, not just
cities.Not even Jesus gets a direct mention, apart from when historians
are talking about christian beliefs. I don't doubt the
existence of christians only the literality (is that
a word???) of the bible.

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but Steve Austin of ICR has an article in Intnl Geology Review on the earthquake of Amos. I'm not sure what the point of this is since it is more than likely that many of the events depicted in the bible are real and some are myth. For example, the Flood of Noah is almost certainly a variation of the Gilgamesh epic.CheersJoe Meert

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter:
This is the kind of evidence that bothers me most.

​

Find some tunnels in a city where a bible story says
they were built ... does that corroborate the bible ?

​

Not unless there is some evidence of the builder being
the same person and the dates being right.

---

Well, that's what struck me about this program. They seemed to have all the dates right, the names, everything. I've been meaning to look for more info but haven't yet had time. If I find anything I'll post it.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by John:
Well, that's what struck me about this program. They seemed to have all the dates right, the names, everything. I've been meaning to look for more info but haven't yet had time. If I find anything I'll post it.

---

That's definitely what I'm looking for then!!

I'm not sure how far I'd take this kind of corroboration. In any good work of fiction the author tries for as much versimilitude as possible by adding as many "real" details as possible. For example, Clancy's books - total, if fun, fiction if there ever was some - have a lot of true details added in the scenes he presents. One which had a scene from London had street names right, shop names, bus lines, etc. It's still fiction. No reason the professional story tellers that invented the stories that were amalgamated into the OT wouldn't be as good. Especially if there was either a popular mythic, legendary or even real person they could throw in.Picture this (a kind of reductio ad absurdum, but an interesting thought piece anyway): 2000 years from now someone digs up a copy of "Sum of All Fears". Although English is a dead language, it's still taught alongside really ancient Latin, so there are people who can read it. An archeologist digging around the former site of ancient London finds street names, even a shop sign identical - and in the identical place - that appears in the book! Would this person then be justified in claiming that the book represents a true historical account of the late 20th Century? Sound familiar to anyone?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Quetzal:
I'm not sure how far I'd take this kind of corroboration. In any good work of fiction the author tries for as much versimilitude as possible by adding as many "real" details as possible.

---

I agree. Smart composers would do just what you suggest. It doesn't prove the veracity of the rest of the book. And this event is hardly critical.------------------
www.hells-handmaiden.com

That's always been my reasoning ... and it's why I would need
more than a single event/person combination.Even then it's the significant events in the bible that need
corroboration from independent sources. Without that I don't
see how anyone can accept the Bible as fact rather than fiction.I don't know of any other text that, alone and without independent
verification, is considered fact. The Iliad is about the siege of
Troy, and has features that can be correlated to archeological
finds, but I don't think anyone is suggesting that there was
in fact a near invulnerable warrior involved in the proceedings.

I thought that it was generally agreed knowledge that various parts of the Old Testament refer to historical events (generally from the perspective of the Hebrews, of course). Much of the pressure for Egyptian archaeology in Victorian times was from organisations anxious to uncover biblical events.The obvious reference for all this is David Rohl and his New Chronology (a controversial proposal involving altering of Egyptian dates by a few hundred years, which brings a number of archaeological discoveries into syncronisation with biblical stories. In his book 'Test of Time' he argues that he has found a statue of Jacob, and a clay tablet mentioning Saul, David and Jesse. Is this what you mean by 'proving' incidents and persons in the bible? Here are a few urls; I am sure you could find out a lot more just by looking for 'David Rohl'http://www.santafe.edu/~shalizi/White/antiquity/new.htmlhttp://www.nunki.net/Stijlvol interieur in Scandinavisch design BGA.NLNote that he attracts a lot of flak from Egyptologists who disagree with his dating proposals. These are not Creationist inspired (afaik), but do contradict established opinion in the field, and Rohl's tendency to go on television to present his work also annoys other researchers. So do not be surprised at the controversy.

[darned double-posting thingy][This message has been edited by blitz77, 08-20-2002]

How about this site?If you want to learn more, try David Rohl's "A Test of Time: From Myth to History" and "Legend: The Genesis of Civilization" books. [NB: the books are very long, about 500 A4 sized pages each chock full of chronologies, pictures, diagrams, tablets, ancient writings, etc]Also, David Rohl is not Christian so you can't accuse him of bias.[This message has been edited by blitz77, 08-20-2002]

Little confused here .... according to the new chronology
the 1st dynasty started in 2781BC ... that is 4783 years ago ...
but the great flood is supposed to have happened 4500 years ago.How does that help biblical chronology ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter:
Little confused here .... according to the new chronology
the 1st dynasty started in 2781BC ... that is 4783 years ago ...
but the great flood is supposed to have happened 4500 years ago.

​

How does that help biblical chronology ?

---

Ah, Peter, our rock -You have found out one of the features of the bible - it is not a single piece of writing, but composed of many works, some fragmentary, some historical, some didactic stories, some myths and legends, some erotic poetry, and much else. You must have seen earlier posts pointing this out.Briefly, current belief is that the biblical flood story is a legend, a copy of an earlier telling of that legend in other cultures, Assyrian, I think, though I am sure someone will correct me. The legend may have had its origin in a real happening, and some paeleo-archaeologists have proposed more or less likely incidents - floods between 10,000 and 5000 bc which might have started stories. This is all speculation, however, and we are unlikely ever to get any proof. The flood disasters, such as the inundation of the Black Sea, may have happened, but we cannot attach the details of the Noah story to them.Incidentally, no archaeologist claims that the world was entirely under water. All proposed disasters for which there is evidence are large, but localised. I wonder if the original biblical writer ever meant 'the world' anyway - he could have been using a generalism like 'everywhere', meaning over a wide area. The French word for everyone is 'tout le monde' - it could have been that kind of use.Other parts of the bible are not thought to be legend, but history. So figures like Saul, Jonathan and David might have existed. Like all history you have to take it with a pinch of salt - this would be history from the Hebrew point of view, for instance. But items of this kind might be testable by reference to records from other cultures around the area at the time. Typically, we are talking about battles and conquest here, since this sort of thing leaves good archaeological evidence. And in these areas, we can find some agreement between cultural records.So parts of the bible are believed to be true, and parts not. A bit like the curate's egg. If you can specify the bits you are interested in, we can look for the corroboration you desire.