The fall of Jericho - PROOF!

by Bloody Hotdogs! 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Bloody Hotdogs!

  From the November 2015 Watchtower:

  What have archaeologists found that shows that Jericho was captured in a short time?

  Joshua 6:10-15, 20 says that the Israelite soldiers marched around the city of Jericho once a day for six days. On the seventh day, they went around the city seven times. Then God made the strong walls of Jericho fall, and the Israelites captured the city. Have archaeologists found anything that shows that the siege of Jericho was short, just as the Bible says?

  So, forgive me, but I thought this article would provide evidence for the miraculous fall of Jericho's walls. After all, that's the most remarkable part of the story!

  Instead, the topic is substantially narrowed in the last sentence: "Have archaeologists found anything that shows that the siege of Jericho was short, just as the Bible says?" Hmmm... Disappointing.

  In ancient times, a city was under siege when an army surrounded its walls, ready to attack it. If a siege lasted a long time, the people in the city would eat most of the food they had stored. When the soldiers finally captured the city, they would take everything they wanted, including any food that was left. That is why archaeologists have discovered very little food or none at all in the ruins of cities in Palestine that were attacked in this way. But the ruins of Jericho are different. Biblical Archaeology Review says: “The most abundant item found in the destruction, apart from pottery, was grain.” It adds: “To find such an extensive amount of grain is exceptional.”
  

  Pretend for a moment that this is actually interesting information...

  WOW! Extensive amounts of grain - surely enough to feed a city during an extended siege! Never eaten! Never plundered!

  Well, not exactly...

  The Biblical Archaeology Review article (quoted, but not properly referenced, hmmm...) was written by Bryant G. Wood, a young earth creationist. He refers to the work of archaeologist Kathleen Kenyon, who excavated Jericho in the 1950s. She is said to have discovered "six bushels" of grain over the entire dig site. Six bushels. That's a sack and a bit of grain.

  
  

  But wait, it gets worse. The grain found by Kenyon does not carbon date to the time of the bible story. Not even close.

  The Bible says that the Israelites did not take any of the food in Jericho because Jehovah had commanded them not to. (Joshua 6:17, 18) It also says that the Israelites attacked Jericho in the spring, right after the harvest, when there was a lot of grain stored in the city. (Joshua 3:15-17; 5:10) So the fact that there was still a lot of grain in Jericho after the siege confirms that the siege was short, just as the Bible says.
  

  So, based on some scattered grain, dating from a thousand years too early, and the "research" of a young earth creationist, the Watchtower concludes that the bible story is true.

  How scholarly!
• 

  cantleave

  The Great Crowd are one step closer to graduating from Watchtarded University.
• 

  opusdei1972

  if the siege of Jericho was short it does not follow that the Israelites were causing that siege. For example, if what we read in 1 Kings 6:1 were true, the Israelites ended their 40 years in the wilderness around the year 1407 BCE. However, radiocarbon measurements state that this siege was around 1550 BCE, so 150 years before the Israelites started to conquer cities. So, if there was a man called Joshua leading the Israelites after 1400 BCE, he arrived at Jericho when the city was already destroyed.
  
• 

  SecretSlaveClass

  I once found bear scat in the back of my truck. Therefore My conclusion is bears prefer to take a crap in trucks.
• 

  DATA-DOG

  Remember, this is brought to you by the same minds that explained the "Ten Toes" and claimed that CTR predicted the I-Phone.

  JW UNIVERSITY: Ignorantia beata est.

  DD
• 

  Sabin

  I don't disagree with you here as I don't have the facts. The W.Ts take on things is usually to benefit themselves in some way. When it comes to the Bible then I tread cautiously. Many times it`s been said to be wrong only down the line to turn out right. The city of Petra for example. Wasnt it said to be impossible for a city to be built in a mountain & then they found it. The Exodus, crossing the Red sea etc. Well that's my opinion be it right or wrong I happen to have a great deal of respect for the bible. The WTBTS
• 

  Brokeback Watchtower

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Jericho

  Origins and historicity[edit]
  In 1868 Charles Warren identified Tell es-Sultan as the site of Jericho. In 1930–36 John Garstang conducted excavations there and discovered the remains of a network of collapsed walls which he dated to about 1400 BCE, the accepted biblical date of the conquest. Kathleen Kenyon re-excavated the site over 1952–1958 and demonstrated that the destruction occurred c.1500 BCE during a well-attested Egyptian campaign of that period, and that Jericho had been deserted throughout the mid-late 13th century.[4] Kenyon's work was corroborated in 1995 by radiocarbon tests which dated the destruction level to the late 17th or 16th centuries.[5] A small unwalled settlement was rebuilt in the 15th century, but the tell was unoccupied from the late 15th century until the 10th/9th centuries.[2] In the face of the archaeological evidence, the biblical story of the fall of Jericho "cannot have been founded on genuine historical sources".[6]
  Almost all scholars agree that the book of Joshua holds little of historical value.[7] It was written by authors far removed from the times it depicts,[8] and was intended to illustrate a theological scheme in which Israel and her leaders are judged by their obedience to the teachings and laws (the covenant) set down in the book of Deuteronomy, rather than as history in the modern sense.[9] The story of Jericho, and the conquest generally, probably represents the nationalist propaganda of the kings of Judah and their claims to the territory of theKingdom of Israel after 722 BCE;[10] these chapters were later incorporated into an early form of Joshua written late in the reign of king Josiah (reigned 640–609 BCE), and the book was revised and completed after the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in 586, and possibly after the return from the Babylonian exile in 538.[11] The combination of archaeological evidence and analysis of the composition history and theological purposes of the Book of Joshua lies behind the judgement of archaeologist William G. Dever that the battle of Jericho "seems invented out of whole cloth."[6]

  
  
• 

  DATA-DOG

  I don't think the WTBTS has ever predicted anything correctly. They do like to make the general statement, "When scholars disagree with the Bible, Archaeology eventually proves the bible correct."

  They usually attribute this proof to some anonymous critic being proven wrong by the discovery of a town or the confirmation of a particular city mentioned in the bible.

  The problem is that you cannot trust them to honestly quote any source, critic or "supporter."

  DD
• 

  Diogenesister

  As I have understood it Jericho didn't exsist at the time of Joshua.

  Among Biblical scholars and archaeologists it is almost axiomatic that the Israelites entered Canaan about 1230–1220 B.C. In terms of archaeological periods, this would be towards the end of the Late Bronze Age, for which the Generally Accepted Date (GAD ) is 1550–1200 B.C. Yet there are enormous problems with this dating. In recent decades an increasing number of scholars have recognized that if we accept the GAD of 1230–1220 B.C. for the Israelite entry into Canaan, we must reject the Biblical account of Israel’s conquest of Canaanite cities. This is because the Biblical account conflicts so strongly with the archaeological record. The Bible describes the Israelite conquest of Canaan at length and refers to a number of cities encountered by Joshua and his armies. In almost every case the archaeological evidence is inconsistent with the Biblical evidence—if we date the Israelite entry into Canaan to the GAD and 6 of 1230–1220 B.C. Jericho was the first city encountered by Joshua and the Israelites when they crossed the Jordan (Joshua 2 ). According to the Bible, the Israelites conquered and destroyed Jericho. But according to the archaeologists—and the site has been very extensively excavated—there was no city at Jericho in 1230–1220 B.C. for the Israelites to destroy. Indeed, no trace of occupation at Jericho has been found between about 1300 B.C. and the 11th century B.C.,1 the probable date of the earliest Iron Age remains.

  Redating the Exodus By John J. Bimson and David Livingston Originally published in BAR 13:05, Sep/Oct 1987
  
• 

  Jeffro

  Sabin:

  I don't disagree with you here as I don't have the facts. The W.Ts take on things is usually to benefit themselves in some way. When it comes to the Bible then I tread cautiously. Many times it`s been said to be wrong only down the line to turn out right. The city of Petra for example. Wasnt it said to be impossible for a city to be built in a mountain & then they found it. The Exodus, crossing the Red sea etc. Well that's my opinion be it right or wrong I happen to have a great deal of respect for the bible. The WTBTS
  

  The city of Petra is not mentioned in the Bible. The city of Sela in Edom is not the same place as Petra.

  

  There is also no evidence that the 'Exodus' was a real event or that the Jews were in Egypt or that Moses existed or that there were 10 plagues or that the Jews were in the wilderness for 40 years.