Audie wrote:Archaeology has of course of course uncovered remains of some of the sites mentioned in the bible. Not by any means all, but some.Furstentum Liechtenstein wrote:Sorry, Audie, but you are simply wrong.
Archaeology in Isarel & Jordan has consistently proven various biblical narratives as factual and historical.
I used to be an atheist so I understand quite well the distaste - the revulsion - this must elicit in you. You will continue to disparage the evidence - as I once did - because the alternative is unacceptable.
I understand that and don't fault you for it. as they say, Been there, done that.
FL
For some places and events, there is no trace of evidence. Tower of Babel, red sea crossing, garden of eden,
S and G, No evidence. Egypt, lots of evidence. The "flood", as an historic world wide event is found supported only by pseudo-science woo woo. To say archaeology supports the bible is to make an overly broad statement ignoring the exceptions and opposites.
Whatever you say you are or used to be does not qualify you in the least to any claim of knowing anything about me.
I find your making up insulting nonsense about me no more charming than I did with jac. You've not "been there and done
that", regarding specific education, ways of thinking, attitudes and belief. You dont know a thing about me.
If you want to discuss archaeology / bible, fine. If you are going to continue projecting your fantasies onto me, conversation
is over.
Audie, while you do have a point, I think FL can say he has been there, done that. He used to be an atheist, didn`t believe in God, now he does. Why?
I get that you don`t want to make a blind leap, why would you? But.... it does appear that anything that is said, you won`t accept.
What proof would you need?
No one on here, in my opinion, has a go at you but they may disagree with what you say. You know we all love you here but you do tend to take things too personally.