0
Other archaeologists writing in "Biblical Archaeology Review" in The Biblical Archaeology Forum , say that:-
I have just finished reading his book 'David & Solomon' and find it to be one filled with unfounded conjecture, theory and no facts. It seems that when [he does] not like a passage of The Bible, [he] simply re-date[s] or re-write[s] it at will and to make scriptures fit [his] agenda.
I find this guy ... to be a great travesty on archaeology as, when [he] cannot find contemporary evidence (circa 10th c. b.c.) to support [his] thinking, [he goes] 80 to 300 years into the 'future' and use[s] material for those generations to support [his] denial of the Biblical record.
[He] believe[s] and promote[s] a late authorship yet ... cannot produce one iota of evidence to support such a claim nor ... demonstrate the validity of any copying and editing being done.
[He] also show[s] a complete ignorance of construction methods as [he] make[s] bold claims that the buildings left behind prove the two kings [ie David & Solomon] did not reign as the Bible says.
[He] present[s] confusing ideas which contradict each other and to make it work [he] must omit certain facts and pieces of evidence which goes contrary to [his] thinking.
[He] only investigate[s] far enough to decide that [he] has 'proof' for [his] agenda but [is] afraid to dig deeper for [fear he] might find something that undermines [his] objective.
In reading this work, I have found that it doesn't even contain enough good kernals to be of any value to anyone except those who wish to find an excuse to dismiss the Biblical record.
Title: Re: israel finkelstein
Post by: ... on Feb 11, 2008, 03:06 PM...Finkelstein ignores a lot when he makes statements that fit his agenda and he attributes much to the omrides [sic] even though they did not do what he has claimed.
This guy is one of the great deceivers in the archaeological world and someone needs to knock him down a few pegs.
Title: Re: israel finkelstein
Post by:... on Feb 20, 2008, 06:20 PM... I do not care much for his ideas or work. ... Many people cannot accept the existence of God because they do not want to be held accountable to Him.
Title: Re: israel finkelstein
Post by: ...on Feb 21, 2008, 02:48 PM...Finkelstein expects to find physical evidence for every little event or he will dismiss it as untrue. [W]hen he is presented evidence [to the contrary] he finds some way to dismiss it as he did to ...
I find that [he is] not looking for any truth but want[s] to remove the Biblical accounts from Jewish history.
Even Dever wants him to provide proof for his theories and he can't do it. In his book, David and Solomon, all he could do is say--'we suggest' or 'we argue' and then skip 80 to 300 years to try and disprove the biblical claims. I find his ... works are not honest.
David Cohen in the article "Separating Fact and Fiction In The Bible" says:-
[He leads] a movement in Biblical archaeology that flies in the face of the interpretation of the Bible as a largely historical document. He argues that the traditional dating of many archaeological finds relating to biblical events is out by up to one-and-a-half centuries. His conclusion is uncompromising: many famous biblical stories are probably pure fiction. The exodus of the Israelites from Egypt never happened, and Joshua never attacked Jericho, let alone brought its walls down. "There is no evidence that Jericho even had city walls at that time," Finkelstein says. David and Solomon were not great kings who ruled over the ancient land of Canaan in the 10th century BC from a palace in Jerusalem, as the Bible portrays; at best they were minor chieftains of some small-time tribe in that area. Their memory was later inflated and mythologised in the 7th century BC to serve particular political and military agendas, he says.
...Finkelstein is highly regarded in his field. ... But this doesn't mean that Finkelstein's ideas have been widely accepted. ...Wolff says: "I can't name more than a handful of archaeologists who accept his theory. It has made more waves in the popular media than it has in academic circles."
... Others dismiss his work as ideologically motivated. In one barbed attack, William Dever, a specialist in the region's archaeology at the University of Arizona, accused him of being a fashion-led "post-Zionist" who is caught up in a race to push the writing of the Bible into more recent times.
Finkelstein is about as Israeli as they come. Born in the small town of Petah Tikva close to Tel Aviv, he can trace his family's roots in the area back to 1850, almost a century before the foundation of the Jewish state. "My family arrived in the mid-19th century from Grodno [in what is now Belarus] to Hebron. I don't need any more legitimacy than that, nor does the state of Israel need the Bible to justify its right to exist," he says. He has lived in [Israel] and counts himself a traditional Jew. "I'm not a believer, but we keep kosher at home, and I celebrate all the festivals." Even the Passover festival, which celebrates the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt and their journey to the promised land - Biblical stories he believes are pure fiction. "Of course! Why not? This is my identity. I do it gladly." Isn't that a contradiction? "Not at all. I can separate my convictions about my culture and my identity on the one hand from my research on the other...."
Israel Finkelstein from my point of view is not out to prove the Bible is anything. He is an archaeologist who uses fieldwork, surveys, and research to make temporary adjustments to our current understanding of history. Don't let the above comments skew your quest to find reliable answers. Finkelstein is a well regarded archaeologist in his field and is greatly respected for his careful and precise fieldwork. The fact is that it is a losing proposition to expect the evidence in the ground to correspond with the words of the Bible. This is because in case after case the evidence is just not there. Now you can view this as a fault in the evidence or a fault in the Bible depending on what sort of evidence you as a person value greater. Careful and dedicated archaeolists do not try to prove anything. They dig in the ground and base their conclusions upon what they find. Only idealogues and Biblical Apologists start out with the conclusion and temper the evidence to prove that conslusion true. Biblical Archaeology, if it is to remain a science, must start out as a blank slate and conclusions drawn from the evidence gathered
What else can I help you with?
Is there any evidence that Moses parted the Red Sea?
None at all. In fact, the weight of evidence is that there actually was no Exodus from Egypt. The respected Israeli archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein says that over 90 per cent of scholars believe that the Exodus never really happened as described in the Bible. Because of the extreme improbablility of this event, some conservative Christians have sought to find explanations. Some say that it was the Reed Sea, a very shallow waterway in the Nile Delta, although please note that the similarity of names is a coincidence of the modern English language. Some have claimed to find underwater geological formations that would have made it possible, or at least proved it could have happened. But no one has come forward with evidence that the parting of the Red Sea really did happen.
What type of scientist studies mummies?
sicaligest Edit: I don't think that's right. I would say it's an archaeologist, in particular an Egyptologist. Also, there's all a lot of science and technology involved now. So, various types of scientist could be involved.
Is it true that there is no archaeological evidence that the Children of Israel wandered in the wilderness for forty years?
Rabbi Dovid Lichtman writes: "As for the issue of encampments are concerned, it is nearly impossible to find traces of large Bedouin encampments in the Sinai Desert from 200-300 years ago. So would one expect the remains of large encampments after 3,000 years?" Some Archaeologists also say evidence may yet be found. It could be contended by some that the arguments against the evidence of the children of Israel ever being in the wilderness is really simply one form of an argument from silence. However according to others it is actually worse than that since archaelogists acknowledge themselves that nomads typically do not leave archaelogical remains. Finkelstein in particular has rejected the 'no remains therefore no occupation' theories that form the basis of the objection that there simply were no late bronze age (the time of the Israelite conquest) cultural remains and therefore no invasion or occupation by Israel {1}. He points out that arid dwelling peoples typically have a behaviour range from the sedentary to the nomadic. The latter does not leave remains to be found by archaeologists. These so-called 'invisible nomads' have been documented by Finkelstein in a number of well known cases where we have explicit written records of peoples existing but have absolutely no archaeological evidence for them{2}. These include the following: 1. Edom and Seir in the late bronze age - referred to in numerous Egyptian documents. 2. Arabs in Neo-Assyrian times - referred to in numerous royal records of Tiglath-Pileser11,Sargon11, Esarhaddon, etc. 3. The early Nabataeans- referred to by Diodorus of Sicily and Hieronymous of Cardia. 4. The Sinai Saracens of the Byzantine period - referred to by Ammonius, Egeria, Nilus,Procopius, et.al. 5. Bedouin of the Medieval period- referred to in Bedouin historical sources. 6. Bedouin tribes in the first part of the 20th century - known from modern sources. The point here is that, especially in the latter relatively recent case, a lack of remains does not necessarily prove that something did not happen, especially when arachaeologists like Finkelstein and others acknowledge the settlement patterns of ancient peoples. Further to the above practice was the policy of 'scraping sites clean' when a new construction project was begun. This obviously obliterated a great deal of evidence of earlier settlement and also caused confusion when fragments from the earlier settlement would turn up in the later peiod. Finkelstein acknowledges on top of all this that vast areas of the Negev region (through which the Israelites would have had to pass) have simply not been surveyed. This was one reason for the heading placed on this post. In other words the verdict is not yet in. The conclusions that can be made on what hasn't been found are therefore minimal, especially since we know there is good reason for scant, if any, remains. {1} Living On The Fringe - The Archaeology and History of the Negev, Sinai, and Neighboring Regions in the Bronze and Iron Ages, Israel Finkelstein, Sheffield Academic, 1995. see pages 10ff,30ff, 94ff. {2} ibid. p.27-30. Confusion Regarding Sites Sites mentioned during the Israelite Exodus such as Arad and Heshbon are acknowledged by archaeologists as being somewhat uncertain as to their location. It is quite likely that there is more than one Arad. This is supported by the fact that Pharoah Shishak of Egypt in 926 Ad claimed to have captured two Arads in the Negev region, Arad the Great (possibly the current archaeological site) and Arad of the House of Yeroham. A straightforward perusal of the Biblical accounts in regard both to Arad and Heshbon also clearly indicates a plurality of cities as well as a region that was conquered and thus points to the fact that the site may not yet be found. These accounts are found in Numbers 21:1-3 in the case of Arad and Deuteronomy 2:34 in the case of Heshbon. As far as Heshbon specifically is concerned there are other sites of the relevant late bronze age era nearby, and even further to that there have in fact been some late bronze fragments found at the current 'Heshbon' site itself. Further to the above comments, the Biblical records also indicate name changes which may further add to the difficulty in identification of the correct site. An Unanswerable Question Strictly speaking in terms of the way the question is phrased it would be virtually impossible for any archaeological investigation to demonstrate that the children of Israel wandered for 40 years in the desert. Most certainly there is evidence of invaders into the land during the relevant time frame. Most certainly there is evidence of a pattern consistent with the Biblical record which includes destruction of some sites and non-destruction of others until a later date. In such cases archaeology demonstrates a continuity of Canaanite culture. Archaeology also demonstrates in Egyptian records that Israel was invaded a number of times by the relevant pharoah's in the years following the c. 1400 BC Israelite invasion. The interesting point here is that the Egyptians never recorded that they attacked any region which the Bible records as being occupied by the Israelites. A worthwhile discussion could also centre around the al-amarna letters relevant to this period, where military help from Egypt was repeatedly requested against the 'hapiru'. Thus, even though there probably cannot be any absolute archaeological proof of an exact 40 year wilderness wandering, the signs of what followed are abundant and they point to Israel. In addition, as mentioned above, the written historical records of "invisible nomads" are accepted as sufficient proof where no archaeological evidence exists. The Bible also provides a written record that is substantiated on very many other points by clear archaeological evidence.
Where can you find artifacts that archaeologist found to prove Cleopatra vii was alive?
In Egypt there are temple carvings of Cleopatra making offerings to the gods. There are also statues of Cleopatra in the Egyptian style and there is a famous bust of someone they say is Cleopatra. But the best evidence for her existence is in the various coins dating to her reign and bearing her picture.
How do archaeologists tell how long a person has lived?
By examining teeth, growth plates in bones, and the development of bones, archaeologists can estimate a person's age at the time of death. Additionally, analysis of burial practices, grave goods, and other artifacts can provide clues to the age of the individual.
Who united Israel David or Solomon?
A:The Bible says that Israel was united under King David.On the other hand, many biblical scholars say that historically there never was a United Monarchy of Israel. The respected Israeli archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein says that the two nations of Israel and Judah were always separate, with their own separate cultures, pottery styles and even different dialects of the Hebrew language.
Is Judah in Israel?
The former kingdom of Judah is now part of modern Israel and partly in the Palestinian Territory. Judah was a small inland enclave surrounding the city of Jerusalem and quite separate from the kingdom of Israel to its north. Biblical tradition holds that in former times, Judah and Israel had formed a United Monarchy, also known as Israel, but noted archaeologists such as Israel Finkelstein say that this was never the case. Judah and Israel were always separate and had their own separate culture, pottery styles and even their own separate dialects of the Hebrew language.
How long did the kingdom of Israel exist?
AnswerWe do know that the kingdom of Israel ceased to exist after its conquest by the Assyrians in 722 BCE. Biblical tradition says that the Israelites settled the area around 1400 BCE, although archaeologists say that the region was not really settled until around 1250 BCE.From the biblical version, we can say that Israel existed for about 680 years.From the archaeological evidence, Israel actually existed for around 530 years.From the time of Saul, if indeed he was a king of Israel, to the destruction of Israel, was about 300 years.
Does anyone really follow the 10 Commandments?
The Ten Commandments do not exist now, other than as passages in the Od Testament, and probably never existed. The respected Israeli archaeologist Israel Finkelstein says that over ninety per cent of scholars say that there never was an Exodus from Israel. Without the Exodus, the story of Moses is simply a legend, and he never received the Ten Commandments from God.
Is there a rational and scientific explanation for the ten plagues of Egypt in the Book of Exodus?
Archaeology is a science, and archaeologists say that the ten plagues never happened. So the rational and scientific explanation is that there never were the ten plagues of Egypt. In fact, the respected Israeli archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein, says that over 90 per cent of scholars believe that the Exodus from Egypt never happened [allowing for those scholars who accept no evidence contrary to a literal reading of the Bible].
How many miles did the Israelites traveled from Egypt to the Promised Land?
The Book of Exodus tells us that the Israelites travelled from Egypt to the Promised Land, but does not provide sufficient detail to establish the length of this journey. There is considerable debate as to just what route they would have taken.On the other hand, the respected Israeli archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein says that over ninety per cent of scholars say there never was an Exodus from Egypt as described in The Bible. The Israelites did not actually travel from Egypt to the Promised Land.
How do you say archaeologist in french?
archéologue
Did Jesus part the sea?
There is a very shallow body of water known as the Reed Sea, near the Nile delta. Because many have found the story of parting the Red Sea to be an improbably difficult miracle, some biblical interpreters say that it was really this sea that was parted. After all, the name is so similar that confusion could occur. The most serious problem with this explanation is that it accepts that God's powers really are very limited, not something that most believers would like to admit to. Also, the similarity of name only applies in the English language, and the Bible was not written in English. The real answer is to be found by consulting scholars on the matter. The respected Israeli archaeologist, Israel Finkelstein, says that over 90 per cent of scholars do not believe that the Exodus from Egypt really happened. Without the biblical Exodus, there was no parting of any sea.
Where does it say in the bible that if a church does not grow it is not biblical?
It doesn't say that. It cannot. The word - biblical - does not appear in the Bible.
What were the names of the 2 kingdoms after the division of the 12 tribes of Israel?
Judah and Israel. After Solomon's death, the people approached his son Rehav'am (Rehoboam) and asked that he now lower the tax. He ignored the counsel of his elder advisers and refused the people's request. This led the Ten Tribes to break away (1 Kings ch.12).
Who united the Hebrew kingdom?
King Saul.Archaeologists such as Israel Finkelstein of Tel Aviv University say there is no evidence there ever was a United Monarchy of Israel. It is likely that the legend that Kings Saul, David and Solomon ruled over a magnificent united Hebrew kingdom came about after the Assyrian conquest of Israel in 722 BCE. By the time of the Babylonian Exile, the people of Judah, the southern kingdom, were beginning to refer to themselves as 'Israelites' and were beginning to see themselves as the true inheritors of the rich Israelite territory.
Why is Archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon so controversial?
I would say that she is esteemed.
