The fall of Jericho - PROOF!

by Bloody Hotdogs! 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Joe Grundy
    Joe Grundy

    This is well worth watching in its entirety.

  • tiki
    There was an interesting show on tv I saw debunking or explaining biblical miracles....Jericho sat on a tectonic fault and those guys marching in circles had nothing to do with the earthquake that took down those walls.
  • stuckinarut2
    Quote mining at its best once again!
  • FadingTruth

    who excavated Jericho in the 1950s. She is said to have discovered "six bushels" of grain over the entire dig site

    Actual quote: "In her limited excavation area, Kenyon recovered six bushels of grain in one season!"

    scattered grain, dating from a thousand years too early

    Actual quote: "Additional tests were done on six grain samples from the destruction level resulting in dates between 1640 and 1520 B.C."

    120-240 years is hardly "1000 years"

    I'm by no means a JW apologist, but just because they mine quote and take things out of context doesn't give anyone else a free pass to do the same. We don't need to exaggerate the evidence to show how deceptive the WT is.

  • Bloody Hotdogs!
    Bloody Hotdogs!
    @ FadingTruth Thank you for clarifying. Remember, I am a graduate of "Watchtarded University".

    By "entire dig site", I mean Kathleen Kenyon's entire dig site.

    It looks as though I have confused the two relevant destructions of Jericho. The massive walls fell a thousand years before Joshua, and a bronze-age "backwater" fell 150 years before Joshua. The grain dates from the later destruction.
    The double city wall Garstang associated with the Israelite invasion in about 1400 B.C.E. in fact dated to the Early Bronze Age some 1,000 years earlier. The destruction of Garstang’s City IV, which he had dated to about 1400 B.C.E., occurred, according to Kenyon, at the end of the Middle Bronze Age, about 1550 B.C.E.14

    I didn't see Wood's additional note about carbon dates, because it's not in the actual article. Nevertheless, from what I have read in other sources these earlier dates are stronger than ever, based on the latest calibration curves.

    I still think it's a stretch to say that the grain could only point to a short siege and a non-plundering conquerer. The grain discovered and tested was "charred" - surely, even a plundering army wouldn't want it!

    So... what I should have said is: Based on some grain, dating from 150 years too early, the Watchtower concludes that the bible story is true, even though the "walls of Jericho" fell a thousand years before.

  • Brokeback Watchtower
    Brokeback Watchtower
    I second what Joe Grundy said, the video is well worth watching.
  • steve2
    The Watchtower's rationale is built upon an overly-literal take on Biblical inerrancy - alarm bells should ring loud, whatever the specifics of archaeological findings.

Share this