• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Walls Of Jericho; Explain to me or Wonder as I do...

Somerville said:
Joshua 5:13 - 15 (NRSV)
Joshua’s Vision
13 Once when Joshua was by Jericho, he looked up and saw a man standing before him with a drawn sword in his hand. Joshua went to him and said to him, “Are you one of us, or one of our adversaries?” 14 He replied, “Neither; but as commander of the army of the Lord I have now come.” And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and worshiped, and he said to him, “What do you command your servant, my lord?” 15 The commander of the army of the Lord said to Joshua, “Remove the sandals from your feet, for the place where you stand is holy.” And Joshua did so.

You can "point to it" but that don't make it so. When one believes something to be "true", the historical background of a document seems to lose all other understandings.

I and many others disagree with the modern evangelical interpretations of an ancient text which are used by the evangelicals to show us the "prophecies" found in the earlier texts are fulfilled in the stories told in the Gospels. The scholarly understanding of the Jewish texts is one which says the early Christian apologists incorporated the ancient words into their writings in order to provide additional support for their theology.
Click to expand...

So, Joshua saw a guy with a sword who claimed, with no evidence to support it, that he was a part of the Army of the Lord. Joshua, having been born before modern science and modern education were even thought of, was just superstitious enough to believe him, so he prostrated himself on the ground and asked what he might do to serve the guy.

So, the guy with the sword chuckled to himself over the great joke he had played on Joshua.
 
Manc Skipper said:
Exactly. A chain of ever greater castles built on a single grain. Such foolishness is to be avoided is what they are saying.
Click to expand...

What single grain? :roll:


That guy just simply wanted to be cautious - that's all. Afraid to commit!
He's afraid to put his credibility on the line - unlike the archeologist, Wood (?) who found co-relations.

Furthermore, there's also the atheist factor to consider - it's become politics!
 
Chagos said:
Read the article that was linked to in post #9

Read it in its entirety.
Click to expand...

stop dodging the question.

archeology has said that the biblical account is accurate. so
what authority do you have to say that the archeology is wrong?

there have been several people that have posted archeologist saying that
the account is accurate.

so if you think they wrong what studies have you done and what authority do you have to say they are wrong.
if you don't then you are simply appealing to authority.
 
ludin said:
stop dodging the question.

archeology has said that the biblical account is accurate. so
what authority do you have to say that the archeology is wrong?

there have been several people that have posted archeologist saying that
the account is accurate.

so if you think they wrong what studies have you done and what authority do you have to say they are wrong.
if you don't then you are simply appealing to authority.
Click to expand...

Archeology has said that Joshua and his team played trumpets and marched around the city, and that's what made the walls come down, or that the power of god made the walls fall?

Or did archeology simply say that there once was a walled city there, and that the walls are now rubble?
 
There are lots of ruins of walled cities. Were they all destroyed by guys playing trumpets?
 
Logicman said:
Another theologically-stunted response.

The Angel of the Lord is Jesus. "Angel" means "messenger" in the following:

Angel of the LORD
Click to expand...


And, of course, this is being very stupid indeed. A messenger is not the person who gives the message. Unless, of course, you are rejecting Jesus being God. Do you reject Jesus being 'The Lord'??

I will note that the only place the phrase 'THe Angel of the Lord' is on that page is the page title. When it comes to references to God that is listed, not one is 'messenger'. It's almost as it you did a google search of 'angel of the lord' and 'Jesus', and randomly took a page without reading it.
 
Last edited:
Dittohead not! said:
Archeology has said that Joshua and his team played trumpets and marched around the city, and that's what made the walls come down, or that the power of god made the walls fall?

Or did archeology simply say that there once was a walled city there, and that the walls are now rubble?
Click to expand...

it said that the archeology backed up the account in the bible.
 
RAMOSS said:
And, of course, this is being very stupid indeed. A messenger is not the person who gives the message. Unless, of course, you are rejecting Jesus being God. Do you reject Jesus being 'The Lord'??
Click to expand...

"A messenger is not the person who gives the message."

That's brilliant. LOL!

And don't forget about the Father either, giving a message to the divine Jesus.

You don't even believe in God anyway, Ramoss, so what do you really care?
 
ludin said:
it said that the archeology backed up the account in the bible.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is said that. However, when you look at the actual archaeological articles, that is not the case. Even the study given (By Dame Kenyon), is used to minimize the evidence for the "Wall of Jericho" having actual evidence for it.
 
Logicman said:
"A messenger is not the person who gives the message."

That's brilliant. LOL!

And don't forget about the Father either, giving a message to the divine Jesus.

You don't even believe in God anyway, Ramoss, so what do you really care?
Click to expand...


You do love telling people what they believe, or don't believe in, don't you? How nice.
 
ludin said:
stop dodging the question.
Click to expand...
stop dodging the responsibility of reading properly before spouting upon what you merely think you have read.

Where I'd be perfectly happy to argue archaeology (see below) and history to boot, go back to the post of mine that you quoted and look again what it actually responded to.

THEN talk.

archeology has said that the biblical account is accurate. so
what authority do you have to say that the archeology is wrong?
Click to expand...
archaeology has said nothing of the sort.

there have been several people that have posted archeologist saying that
the account is accurate.
Click to expand...
Heck, I can summon up several people saying that the moon is made of green cheese.

so if you think they wrong what studies have you done and what authority do you have to say they are wrong. if you don't then you are simply appealing to authority.
Click to expand...
It might benefit you to study that concept a bit more, lest you become completely devoid of logic altogether.

To offer you some overall help: archaeology is (and remains) divided in its findings upon the topic. That means your claim of archaeology having stated the biblical account to be true is no more than an expression of your confusion.

What some archaeologists have arrived at by way of conclusion (not representative of the whole field) is irrelevant. If you prefer to acknowledge just those, that's fine. It would however show you to fall into exactly the trap of appeal to authority that you accuse me of having fallen to. Possibly by your apparent lack of understanding the principle at all, not to mention your apparent lack of logic altogether.

If you want to pursue this any further, come up with something that makes sense for once. Apart from which, not that it's such a biggie seeing how I knew what you meant, learn how to spell archaeology and archaeologist. A thesaurus is not that difficult to come by.
 
RAMOSS said:
You do love telling people what they believe, or don't believe in, don't you? How nice.
Click to expand...

Well why don't you go on record, then, and prove me wrong?

The fact is you love bashing other people's theological beliefs but you're too fearful of letting your own be identified / vetted.
 
zyzygy said:
There are lots of ruins of walled cities. Were they all destroyed by guys playing trumpets?
Click to expand...
"Satchmo fit the battle of Jericho, Jericho, Jerico-woh-oh-oh...."
 
tosca1 said:
What single grain? :roll:


That guy just simply wanted to be cautious - that's all. Afraid to commit!
He's afraid to put his credibility on the line - unlike the archeologist, Wood (?) who found co-relations.

Furthermore, there's also the atheist factor to consider - it's become politics!
Click to expand...

Fallen walls with evidence of burning (the grain) is a commonplace worldwide in archaeology. Slotting that into the pre-existing claim that that those walls were therefore brought down with God's assistance by the sound of trumpets (the castles) is frankly ridiculous.
 
zyzygy said:
They found the trumpets?
Click to expand...

why do they have to find trumpets that they would have taken them with them?
or they would have corroded themselves out?

nitpicking is not arguments of anything. it is actually a fallacy.

Using the technical tools of logic in an unhelpful and pedantic manner by focusing on trivial details instead of directly addressing the main issue in a dispute. Irrelevant over precision
 
Chagos said:
stop dodging the responsibility of reading properly before spouting upon what you merely think you have read.

Where I'd be perfectly happy to argue archaeology (see below) and history to boot, go back to the post of mine that you quoted and look again what it actually responded to.

THEN talk.
Click to expand...

It is not my job to make your argument for you. it is u to you to defend your statements against people that have way more experience in the matter than you do.
if you are saying that they are wrong then please present your credentials to say they are wrong.

it is on you to support your argument not me.

archaeology has said nothing of the sort.
Click to expand...

You evidently didn't read the articles that have been posted that says otherwise.

Heck, I can summon up several people saying that the moon is made of green cheese.
Click to expand...
what qualifications do they have to make that argument. the fact is we have been to the moon and it is not made of green cheese.
just like the fact that archeologist have been to Jericho and what they found supports the biblical story.

It might =benefit you to study that concept a bit more, lest you become completely devoid of logic altogether.
Click to expand...
so far you have yet to present any logic at all. you post your opinion and just think your opinion is correct.

To offer you some overall help: archaeology is (and remains) divided in its findings upon the topic. That means your claim of archaeology having stated the biblical account to be true is no more than an expression of your confusion.
Click to expand...

ignoring the posts in this thread from archaeologists does not help you but hurts you. more so cherry picking makes it even worse.

What some archaeologists have arrived at by way of conclusion (not representative of the whole field) is irrelevant. If you prefer to acknowledge just those, that's fine. It would however show you to fall into exactly the trap of appeal to authority that you accuse me of having fallen to. Possibly by your apparent lack of understanding the principle at all, not to mention your apparent lack of logic altogether.
Click to expand...

present evidence they are confused or what authority you have to say they are confused. if you can't then you are just stating your bias opinion.
you evidently don't understand what an appeal to authority is.
says the person that hasn't presented one piece of logic yet. you are now projecting.

If you want to pursue this any further, come up with something that makes sense for once. Apart from which, not that it's such a biggie seeing how I knew what you meant, learn how to spell archaeology and archaeologist. A thesaurus is not that difficult to come by.
Click to expand...

and the ad hominem which proves you don't have an argument at all and you lose.
again it isn't up to me to make your argument. you have yet to back up anything of what you have said except you say so.
yet you have no authority to make these claims (appeal to authority by the way).
 
ludin said:
why do they have to find trumpets that they would have taken them with them?
or they would have corroded themselves out?
Click to expand...

True. They still haven't found the bagpipes that destroyed Babylon.
 
tosca1 said:
Dr. Lawrence Stager, professor of archeology in Israel at Harvard University, said: 'On the whole, the archeological assessment is not unreasonable. There is evidence of destruction, and the date isn't too far wrong.
Click to expand...
Well, just to preclude citing of only what is convenient, Stager DOES continue
But Dr. Stager questioned the linkage of the archeological evidence for Jericho's destruction at about 1400 with the Israelites as the agents of that destruction. As Dr. Wood acknowledged, many specialists in biblical history cite biblical and archeological evidence to indicate that the Israelites did not emerge in the land of the Canaanites, later to be known as Palestine, until about 1200 B.C.

Moreover, Dr. Stager said the story of military conquest may have been a ''literary embellishment'' for what more probably was a migration of pastoral Israelites, who began to settle into village life in Canaan and came into sporadic armed conflict with the inhabitants. As often happens, in the retelling the stories grew more heroic.
Click to expand...

The link in the above is broken but works when clicking this one

Believers Score in Battle Over the Battle of Jericho - NYTimes.com
 
ludin said:
It is not my job ....................
Click to expand...
Read!!!!!

THAT is the first of your jobs. Next one being to show some comprehension of what you've read.

tosca1 said:
This is a very long article.


The language that Joshua uses in addressing the sun and moon is the language of ordinary observation still used today in the scientific age. Probably Joshua and his contemporaries thought of the sun as moving around the earth, but his language should not be pressed to construct a "view of the universe" any more than should todays reference to the rising and setting of the sun (Marten Woodstra, The Book of Joshua, Grand Rapids, Eerdmans: 1981, p. 175).

Some people feel that Joshua made a scientifically accurate request.

We might say, "How little Joshua knew." But he knew his God! He knew that God had promised to go before His people to fight their battles and give them victory (Joshua 10:8). And in this battle he saw victory in its grasp, but time was running out. If he didnt conquer the enemy before dark, they would regroup and attack Israel the next day.

Knowing his God, his Gods power, and his Gods promise, he called out to God for help, and in the presence of all Israel, he commanded the "sun to stand still." But the sun was already standing still, Joshua. It is the earth that moves, not the sun. Why didnt Joshua cry out, "Earth quit moving," or "Earth, slow down your spinning on your axis to prolong time."

Joshua had no idea that his command slowed down 6.6 sextrillion tons of spinning gravel and water to give Israel victory over her enemies. But Joshua did know something that God had revealed to him. Over 3,000 years ago he said something that would have met the approval of todays scientific establishment.
His command in the Hebrew language was not "Sun, stand thou still," but "Sun, cease acting, or "Sun, stop working." It was then that the gravitational pull of the sun affected the earth. It was then the earth began to slow down and the day was lengthened (Robert Boyd, Boyds Bible Handbook, Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House, 1983 p. 124).

It is not necessary to assume Joshua was scientifically sophisticated. It is more likely that God honored the spirit of his request than to assume Joshua had some scientific insight that was not shared by the people of his day.



Conclusion

We have seen that there are a variety of explanations to Joshuas long day without having to admit to scientific error. Although several of these views are possible, the theory that the sun actually slowed down its movement seems to be the best way of looking at the evidence. Leon Wood writes:



https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_625.cfm
Click to expand...
The bolded parts of the above (header and conclusion) edited in my quote for brevity to find inclusion in my response

Chagos said:
awfercryinoutloud.

Whole thing never happened but in the grasping at any straw we gotta even consider this puerile crap.:roll:
Click to expand...

The rest of your post is irrelevant as having no bearing on this particular matter whatsoever.
 
Chagos said:
Read!!!!!

THAT is the first of your jobs. Next one being to show some comprehension of what you've read.
Click to expand...

Still being dishonest but well that is to be expected.
yes it is not my job to make your argument for you that is your job.
your failure to do so is not my problem but yours.

The rest of your post is irrelevant as having no bearing on this particular matter whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Other than you saying you are right and everyone else is wrong what exactly have you posted that is relevant?
so far I haven't seen anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom