Mt. Ebal Curse Tablet: A Response (w/ Chris Rollston)

Подписаться 293 тыс.

Просмотров 16 тыс.

50% 1

Have archaeologists discovered the oldest proto-Hebrew text at Mt. Ebal? Recently, I interviewed archaeologist Scott Stripling about his team's peer-reviewed article in defense of the legitimacy of the writing on the tablet. Today, I bring another perspective from one of the leading epigraphers-Dr. Christopher Rollston.
WATCH: Oldest Hebrew Writing? Mt. Ebal Curse Tablet (w/ Scott Stripling): • Oldest Hebrew Writing?...
Dr. Chris Rollston blog: www.rollstonepi...
READ: "You are Cursed by the God YHW" an early Hebrew inscription from Mt. Ebal: shorturl.at/bmKSX
*Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (bit.ly/3LdNqKf)
*USE Discount Code [SMDCERTDISC] for $100 off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (bit.ly/3AzfPFM)
*See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (bit.ly/448STKK)
FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA:
Twitter: / sean_mcdowell
TikTok: @sean_mcdowell
Instagram: / seanmcdowell
Website: seanmcdowell.org

Опубликовано:

12 сен 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 230

@MikeWinger Год назад

Thank you, gentlemen.

@SeanMcDowell Год назад

Of course! Glad to see you here Mike!

@JarredStanley777 Месяц назад

@@SeanMcDowell Honestly, to claim that Scott is your friend, and yet to go forth to interview Rollston to disgrace and belittle Scott and to disannul the momentous lead tablet discovery: is an abomination before God. You could not clearly see the many easily identifiable letters in the images as provided in the Heritage Science article? Out of the 48 images, I count 21 that are identifiable! That is far from Rollston's "may be a few" but not sure lie! Sean, Rollston is not even a true Christian since he denies the Bible as valid and correct! To question the Exodus clearly shows his true colors. Furthermore, all scripts do not come from the Phoenician script which is much later (earliest inscriptions 1050-1100) than the Wadi el-Hol (1800) and Serabit el-Khadim scripts (1500). The alphabet was developed by one or a small number of Hebrew people while in Egypt after they became familiar with the hieroglyphics. What script do you believe Moses used to write the Torah? Phoenician, which was much later? No! What script did the LORD use when He wrote the Ten Commandments? Phoenician? Come on Sean! In his swelling pride, Rollston smirks and laughs as he damages Scott's reputation and belittles the Bible! You knew full well who Rollston was and that he goes forth to shame anyone who believes differently than he does. That is his agenda. He cannot accept the lead curse tablet because it disrupts and disannuls what he has believed and taught for many years. Scott provided rebuttals to all four who discounted the lead tablet discovery, including Rollston. Scott was honest and up front and admitted weaknesses in drawings that were in the article. He also exposed their dishonesty. Yes, you had Scott on after Rollston again but you had done the damage by having Rollston on in the first place. Sean, you are more concerned about yourself (making a name for yourself) and having a following than you are about God's truth and your so-called "friends." You proved yourself to not be a genuine friend, and more importantly you proved that you were not concerned about God`s work. Once again, anyone can identify many letters in the scans that were provided in Scott`s article. You must consider that: 1. The lead tablet is very small and it would have been extremely difficult for the writer to be precise in the formation of the letters. 2. Epigraphers commonly have to work with pieces of artifacts with text partially or entirely missing and / or faded or unclear letters. It is common to have to piece together letters and establish the most likely translation.

@brentcampbell459 Год назад

Being a complete novice in this discussion, I would have welcomed more counter-evidence rather than rhetoric. I was confused at the downplaying of context as well. Does Dr. Chris think that a curse tablet on a mountain of curses in any way plays into the interpretation of the tablet? Does he deny it’s a tablet, period? If there’s any writing whatsoever wouldn’t that be significant? I have no idea, as I’m not an epigraphical scholar. I was hoping to hear from one. I just wish there had been more clear evidence and argumentation based on the facts that were given rather than veiled ad hominem attacks (even if those attacks were warranted).

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

Oh please, this guy is an expert. This isn't just 'rhetoric'. Explain specifically where Rollston is wrong and why.

@brentcampbell459 Год назад

@@anonymoususer6037 You may have missed the thrust of my point. He’s certainly an expert. I acknowledged that. I also didn’t say he was wrong. I, being an untrained idiot, have neither the qualifications nor the inclination to say he’s wrong out of hand. My disappointment is with the quality of the argumentation rather than his credentials. He could have said, “For example, this marking here on this section of the lead could be a letter for x,y,z reasons but these 4 markings over here are almost certainly not letters for these 3 reasons.” Instead, he largely appealed to his own and others authority in the subject matter. Which, as an expert, he’s allowed to do. That doesn’t make the argumentation evidence based. I’d love to hear him back on the show with more detailed arguments. It’s possible this convo went the way it did because of the relatively short notice.

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

@@brentcampbell459 Look at the actual scans from the published article. He strains credulity to believe that there are letters there, let alone a coherent message. Especially with the way the so-called letters have to be read--in such a winding path. Look at other RU-vid videos recently about this by actual archaeologists or Biblical scholars.

@brentcampbell459 Год назад

@@anonymoususer6037 I have no problem doing that. I'm also not in any way married to Dr. Stiplings assertions. Like I said, it's not my purview. I know nothing about this area. You still might be missing what my point was. I'll blame myself. I used the term "rhetoric" not as some sort of sarcastic negative. I was using it to say that he used a rhetoric-based argument which any other person skilled in rhetoric might have been able to do. I was hoping for the specific, evidence-based, argumentation that only he (or another epigraphical scholar) could make. What you're saying to me is that if I want that sort of argumentation I should have looked at another RU-vid video. Which, I think, makes my point. I wanted to not have to go to another video. But this one was enjoyable from a rhetoric standpoint. I just wanted more of that argumentation you gave me in this comment section, only litigated by a professional.

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

@@brentcampbell459 The team makes a claim that there are letters there; Rollston says he doesn't see letters, and in addition, not many others see letters. That's the first piece of evidence. There are squiggles and lines, but he also says that this is lead, it's soft, it's been in the ground for a long time--so there will be indentations from stones, and those indentations may appear vertical or horizontal or circular but people outside of the team cannot see letters or what Stripling says is there. He also says in most inscriptions, the debate isn't about whether or not there are letters/texts there, there is discussion how to read the letters into words. Second, he states that the drawings of the letters and photographs don't match. It's too bad that neither Rollston nor McDowells had the pictures and drawings to show. The script is early alphabetic, which isn't associated with any particular ethic group. Also, the words that they claim to exist could be associated with many other Semitic languages. Even the presence of the divine name doesn't point to Hebrew, since there are Moabite texts with the divine name. So if the divine name is present it doesn't mean that it must be a Hebrew text. Note, too, that even one member of Stripling's team says he doesn't see letters there! The problem for you is that they didn't show pictures--you need to see the pictures.

@jaim0368 Год назад

Thankful for scholars like Dr. Rollston and Dr. Falk who are willing to follow truth, even against the current of what others are pushing for. Thank you for this interview. This helps to restore my trust in the channel.

@valeried7210 Год назад

I'm glad you bring on opposing views, and I'm glad he was upfront he doesn't believe in biblical inerrancy. I thought he showed some historical bias though when he said that even if the tablet had the name Yahweh it didn't mean that it was proto-Hebrew and then he gave the other examples of Moabites and Egypt. But. Those are in the geographical setting of those peoples and the inscriptions are about their kings. The biblical text proclaims a nomadic people had Yahweh as their king and it was found on Mount Ebal the mountain of curses. If context couldn't be considered then it should never be considered. It seemed like a bias against Israel existing with a language because the context would fit. I'm not sure your audience would catch in this case if they hadn't watched the earlier interviews that the lead tablet could not be opened without destroying it, so they did an x-ray and the paper did not include scan "slices" where the epigraphers saw text. And that's what they are demanding. Since I saw your earlier interviews with Scott Stripling and checked this out on my own, I can see why epigraphers are skeptical. But I'd encourage people to go to the curse tablet page on Wikipedia. Once I did that, and then looked at the paper, I saw some letters. It helps to know what writing looks like on lead. So my questions are: does the archaeological community disagree that this is a curse tablet? Is it only a curse tablet if some letters can be made out? Will a paper come out about the dating of the lead? If so and the dating is confirmed, I think it's pretty neat biblical evidence in itself if a curse tablet dating back that far was found on the mountain of curses. Thanks Sean for this - your videos covering the tablet ignited in me more of an interest in biblical archaeology. I had already been watching Sergio and Rhoda in Israel (you should have them on!). I think the geography itself is such a good apologetic. And I found the Expedition Bible channel by Joel Kramer. He does such a good job of visuals along with defending the Bible. Random, but today I was also watching Reese (an ex-Muslim) that has a channel called "Give Light." It's great. I think it would be fun if you interviewed him. Thanks again. This will be an interesting story to follow.

@DrKippDavis Год назад

"The biblical text proclaims a nomadic people had Yahweh as their king and it was found on Mount Ebal the mountain of curses." Yes, but as Rollston pointed out, there is no certainty that the letters יהו are to be interpreted as "Yahweh." This also looks exactly like a third plural verb. And, given that the letters are themselves in a chaotic jumble, it is difficult to grant Stripling and his team that their interpretation is even the most likely. "...the lead tablet could not be opened without destroying it, so they did an x-ray and the paper did not include scan 'slices' where the epigraphers saw text. And that's what they are demanding." Well, no. The paper included a separate file, which is an animation of all the slices in the scans. There have been a few scholars now who have extracted each slice and attempted to align them with what the authors claimed, and without any success. And yes, we have now seen a few of the higher resolution images, and they are not remotely convincing. "But I'd encourage people to go to the curse tablet page on Wikipedia. Once I did that, and then looked at the paper, I saw some letters. It helps to know what writing looks like on lead." Wikipedia? Are you serious? I am sure that you, a non-specialist, can make out what you think look like what the authors claim to be "letters," but these are NOT convincing to actual scholars. I am an epigrapher, and I am telling you that what is on this object much more closely resembles natural striations on the lead than actual letters. "... does the archaeological community disagree that this is a curse tablet?" Some think it could be, but also that what Stripling's team identified as text is highly spurious. Many think it is something else, like a clasp. "Will a paper come out about the dating of the lead? If so and the dating is confirmed, I think it's pretty neat biblical evidence in itself if a curse tablet dating back that far was found on the mountain of curses." Not quite. Even if the lead itself dates back to the Middle Bronze Age as claimed, that does not mean the object was fashioned into this form that early. Ancient people recycled ALL their metals, for hundreds of years after they were refined or processed. It is very likely that if the metal dates to 1400 BCE, this object could have been discarded many hundreds of years later. "...your videos covering the tablet ignited in me more of an interest in biblical archaeology." I encourage you to also watch Robert Cargill XKV8R. He is an actual archaeologist who teaches archaeology at the University of Iowa, and most of his stuff is excellent.

@valeried7210 Год назад

@@DrKippDavis thanks for the update. Regarding the first point I made that you quoted - I saw his argument about the occurrence of the word Yahweh not necessarily pointing to the Israelites as a separate argument from his point that the letters could just be a verb, since he gave examples of Yahweh occurring in those other cultural contexts. Yes, the lead piece could have been discarded many years later, but again, context has to mean something and be considered. Stripling argued that there are only two archaeological layers. I'll check out the channel.

@DrKippDavis Год назад

@Valerie D One of the problems with Stripling's entire operation on the site is that he is making unverifiable assumptions about debris piles that have been sitting out in the open for nearly forty years. This is why proper archaeological protocols are so important. Stripling did not observe these, but, to be fair, it was also impossible for him to do so given the purpose behind the project. Within the field, we would classify this as a non-provenanced object, and without a reliable provenance, it is nearly impossible to assess accurately.

@valeried7210 Год назад

@@DrKippDavis I did watch one of Cargill's videos so far, and I believe he has real criticisms. But I did look up the definition of unprovenced objects. From my lay perspective, it seems you're stretching the definition a bit. That and not laying out a clear separate case for the tablet generally before seemingly dismissing it all together is the sort of thing that makes lay people not trust scholars.

@ancalagonyt Год назад

This guy really rubbed me the wrong way. It looks like he's just going out of his way not to admit what's there, at all. He keeps using degrading language towards the original team, but not *quite* applying it to them. "Would we look at a Greek inscription and say it's Hebrew because it has the name Yahweh in it? That's absurd!" Well, yeah, and it isn't what the original team said either, and it makes no sense to even make that comparison, because we've got the proto-alphabetic Hebrew on the site of an altar in Israel where we have a recorded ceremony by the Hebrews. Not even in the same ballpark. "I think facts are really nice." As if he thinks the team disagrees with that somehow. He's certainly trying hard to generate that impression. I kept waiting for him to talk evidence, but instead he repeated things like "it just isn't there". He kept saying how important it was to have evidence, but he didn't bring it for his own assertion. Passive agressive snide nastiness is not an argument. The way he talked about the team "reconstituting" was unclear, but it seemed like he was trying to imply something. But all he had was a rumor he'd heard. But I think we now see what the opposing argument will be: mean girl style reputation destruction and smearing, along with "I see nothing" repeated ad nauseum. And that is terribly disappointing. If I don't see any higher quality of argument on this subject, I'll end up concluding that Stripling is just plain right. Fundamentally, opponents of this need to put together a quality argument. If this guy is the best they have, then they don't have anything. I got to 33 minutes in, and had to stop. There's only so much of this that I can take. Not at all blaming you for having him on, opposing views can be valuable. Hopefully you can find someone with an opposing view who's less obnoxious.

@pete2397 Год назад

Exactly. Thank you.

@DrKippDavis Год назад

Most epigraphers have now looked at Stripling's article, and they agree that there is likely not any writing on it. The evidence is that marks on the tablet can easily be interpreted as virtually anything, and Galil's drawing looks nothing like what is actually there.

@joshnichols1438 Год назад

If you find a tablet and claim there are letters on it then your must prove it. He is being very nice considering the circumstances.

@ancalagonyt Год назад

@@joshnichols1438 Go ahead and look at the paper. Actually read it, and look at the drawings compared to the images. Not all are clear matches, but many are so clear they're undeniable. The claim that there's "no writing on it" is absurd. You can see with your own eyes that that's false. And being condescending and smug is never nice under any circumstances. What I expected from this guy was something like "I see these characters, but not those" or "the characters are there all right, but this is how it actually reads" or "this character is here, but the shape is wrong for the date given" or something along those lines. What I got was a smug, condescending guy who told me not to believe my lying eyes, without explanation. I doubt the guy has even read the paper. If he had, he might well have been unconvinced, or said negative things about it, but he wouldn't be saying the ridiculous thing he is saying.

@derinderruheliegt Год назад

@ancalagonyt “The use of the divine name YHW leaves no doubt that the text is Hebrew and not Canaanite.” -Direct quote from the paper's conclusion. Also, if you want more detailed information, you could try engaging with Dr. Kipp Davis who already responded on your thread. Additionally, Dr. Cargill has some analysis videos breaking down the details of this find.

@daledouglass6723 Год назад

Sean, thank you for bringing this new evidence to us, your viewers. I appreciate how you keep your content balanced.

@OnTheThirdDay Год назад

The thing I haven't heard people say is how complete is the record we have. If the earliest Hebrew inscription is 900 BC or so then what is the next? How many inscriptions do we have around this time that makes us so sure that 900BC is the earliest date of an inscription? For instance, if the next inscription is a hundred years later then it feels weird to feel that no inscriptions exist in between these or that the one we have is actually the earliest. This is the question I have.

@JosiahTheSiah Год назад

Because usually texts are dated by their archaeological context. Epigraphy only comes into the dating process when you have lots of other texts to compare. (this is my understanding as a non-expert in the field!)

@Drakemiser Год назад

Just from my limited knowledge, I can see an 'aleph' and a 'heh' and a 'yud'. So I don't understand how people can say it's just random markings when these characters are visible, the 'aleph' and the 'heh' in particular. So I don't understand how some of these people aren't seeing them.

@xiaoliu7071 Год назад

I believe it is called cognitive dissonance

@Drakemiser Год назад

@@xiaoliu7071 Yeah, they call Christians paranoid. And then look at this tablet, that obviously has some writing on it and say, "Nope. Nothing there." Is it purposeful gas lighting? Or is there a more spiritual theme happening? I guess we'll never know unless--on down the road--this artifact gets more vindication. I say, let's not jump to conclusions on either side, or any other tangential side, and allow this. to go through proper peer review like everything else.

@xiaoliu7071 Год назад

@@Drakemiser it already went through peer review and was published

@Drakemiser Год назад

@@xiaoliu7071 I know. What I meant was further study.

@JarredStanley777 14 дней назад

I wrote to Sean and he never responded. This is what I told him but I removed the first sentence and the last paragraph. Sean...... You could not clearly see the many easily identifiable letters in the images as provided in the Heritage Science article? Out of the 48 images, I count 21 that are identifiable! That is far from Rollston's "may be a few" but not sure lie! Sean, Rollston is not even a true Christian since he denies the Bible as valid and correct! To question the Exodus clearly shows his true colors. Furthermore, all scripts do not come from the Phoenician script which is much later (earliest inscriptions 1050-1100) than the Wadi el-Hol (1800) and Serabit el-Khadim scripts (1500). The alphabet was developed by one or a small number of Hebrew people while in Egypt after they became familiar with the hieroglyphics. What script do you believe Moses used to write the Torah? Phoenician, which was much later? No! What script did the LORD use when He wrote the Ten Commandments? Phoenician? Come on Sean! In his swelling pride, Rollston smirks and laughs as he damages Scott's reputation and belittles the Bible! You knew full well who Rollston was and that he goes forth to shame anyone who believes differently than he does. That is his agenda. He cannot accept the lead curse tablet because it disrupts and disannuls what he has believed and taught for many years. Scott provided rebuttals to all four who discounted the lead tablet discovery, including Rollston. Scott was honest and up front and admitted weaknesses in drawings that were in the article. He also exposed their dishonesty.

@rgbarnes46 Год назад

A bit of reference and displwy of the actual report and tomography would have been more honest. It does not appear that Rollston can face up to the actual data as presented. Saying Mt Rushmore does not exist and then showing a picture from 1920 as evidence does not improve his case. Share the truth, the whole truth, instead of just giving an opinions.

@DrKippDavis Год назад

The article is open access. Anyone can access it and see for themselves precisely the numerous problems with the inscription pointed out by Rollston here. Even a nonspecialist should be able to see that Galil's drawing of the text looks virtually nothing like what is actually there. The majority of trained scholars have not been convinced by the article.

@derinderruheliegt Год назад

@Kipp Davis I’m honestly surprised how far they went with their claims in the published article. Seems like they should still be debating what’s actually there (as Rollston alluded to). Instead they jumped to “it’s proto-Hebrew and here’s what it means.”

@adifferenttake8971 Год назад

In BDB, the version of the verb to be on which YHWH's name is based is rare. There is a similar verb that is common. I had so many questions that could have been put to this guest. Maybe he would have answers but I'm not convinced by his reasoning. I'm not convinced by the found yet either, but the find is interesting regardless of what pans out re any discernable letters.

@andrewpatrick2563 Год назад

I think he is sincere but also seems to have a hard time seeing past his own presumptions

@jroark101 Год назад

It’s ironic. Most apologist can believe that God exquisitely and precisely created the universe in such a way that it sustains life but people have trouble believing parts of the Bible. If you can believe the cosmology stuff why not believe he can direct the Bible to he 100% trie in it’s entirety? If you are a Christian there is nothing wrong with gaining more knowledge and learning how to defend the faith but you main job is to spread the gospel. I believe there is a sort of danger in losing balance in life and focusing more on evidence etc.

@BrianLassek Год назад

A few thoughts if I may. Truly we must major on the majors and minor on the minors. I also think we must be careful to not be anti-intellectual / anti-scholar. Remember that the vast majority of the new testament was written by two highly educated men, Luke and Paul. And without text critics, translators, archeologist, scholars, and teachers ect. our faith would be basically dead in the modern era. I think wisdom puts things in their proper places. We can be wise without denigrating things that aren't central. Not every bible verse is directly about Jesus, and not every Christian discussion has to be about they gospel. That said, a teacher that doesn't regularly connect with and present the gospel is probably heading the wrong direction....

@BrianLassek Год назад

@@TalbotSlade Well said. I agree, and would also highlight: The scholarship is mostly where the line between historical details & literary devices are worked out. Some details (like the number of Israelites at a certain point) don't seem to matter much until it is used as a weapon against our faith. Overly literal and overly mythic interpretations of scripture are both prevalent and both problematic. Knowing how language was used in different times/places/documents helps us to know "the plain meaning" of the text. And the Holy spirit combined with church history should also be our guide so we don't get miss lead by fad interpretations either popular or scholarly.

@purpleglitter9596 8 месяцев назад

Why would the creator of the r universe write such an absurd and ridiculous hateful book?

@morlewen7218 Год назад

It is a good thing to have a more critcial voice on this topic. This whole affair was driven by sensationalism to a certain degree. Scientist of all origins can fall to it. You want something to be true because it fits beautifully with your expectations.

@georgesparks7833 Год назад

Nice way to say it... 😎

@avidentes Год назад

Big thumbs up Sean for the honest and balanced approach to this subject. Honestly I was a bit dissapointed when you picked up dr Striplings (very sus) proposal but I'm glad you also gave a spotlight for some (much needed) scolarly discussion. On a sidenote the location this amulet was found (zertal's proposed joshua altar) is really intriguing in its own right and a far more appealing candidate as evidence for biblical israel imo.

@SeanMcDowell Год назад

Thanks!

@yankeegonesouth4973 Год назад

@aeiuo6511 Fully agreed with your side note. One of the major issues I had with the curse amulet controversy is that it distracts from the discoveries about the location itself, which may have very interesting biblical connections.

@karlesmcquade2863 Год назад

Good. Now maybe Dr McDowell will do something similar for the DSS forgeries?

@mikelsikel73 Год назад

I have put the occasional, shall we say, snarky comment into some of the threads on Sean’s videos before. That said, I’d really like to do the opposite here and *compliment* Sean for bringing Dr Rollston on who gave a critical review of the prior interview guest Dr Stripling. This was a humble move on Sean’s part, and I respect it. I was not expecting it, but clearly Sean has heard some of the criticism of the paper and he is using his platform to air that and help bring other expert voices to the discussion. I would also thank Dr Rollston for his patient explanations. I learned a number of things. The Israelite language connection with the Phoenicians was new to me, for example. It was also good to see Dr Rollston be quite charitable, and not attack the other research team personally, but simply call out where he did not see the evidence supporting the purported strength of the claims. Although by the end I did note Dr Rollston’s language got a bit stronger, eliciting “wow” etc from Sean as this was clearly a pretty clear dismissal of a prior video guest’s statements. Anyways… well done all around

@PC-vg8vn Год назад

It's also possible that the markings do constitute Hebrew script and he is wrong in believing Hebrew isnt that old. And if the lead tablet is pliable as he says, then it's also possible some of the original markings have largely disappeared, rather than stones or rocks making indentations. It all seems to be up in the air and needs other experts to see the original artefact not just photos.

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

Most other experts are of the same opinion. If you try to look at the original scans, it is clear that those authors saw what they wanted to see.

@Jimgoodwin846 Год назад

I watched both interviews…I was completely fascinated by Dr. Rollston, and he has impeccable credentials. Thank you for your videos.

@TravelingGhost Год назад

I really appreciated this conversation. I didn't have a firm opinion, but I have heard others coming against the curse tablet in a way that was... demeaning, unhelpful, and not truly enlighting to what the serious push back truly was about. I really appreciated Dr. Rollston's careful, honoring approach with his concerns. Also! His enthusiasm in his field! Wonderful to see/hear. Thank you.

@Silverheart1956 Год назад

Dear Dr. Sean McDowell, Great idea to have Rollston on the address this issue ! I value his thoughts and experience and what he said to clarify the understanding he has about this find. Often as a discussion such as this goes on, many question's arise. There were some questions that just jump out and seemingly demand to be asked and answered. I wish you had asked these questions to clarify some very significant points that were left hanging. 1. Is it reasonable to affirm that the Hebrew Language is one of several Canaanite dialects that were intra-intelligible among each other ? 2. How distinct would a specifically Hebrew Language be from other closely related languages (Phoenician, Amorite, Ammonite, Moabite, and Edomite) at the time period that this artifact is being attributed to (Late Bronze IIa) ? It is my understanding That Hebrew was very close to other languages in the Canaanite language group, enough so that they could understand each other, but still had some distinctions where one could differentiate other Canaanite languages from the Hebrew Language. Similar situation to American English, British English and Australian English - mostly intra-intelligible, yet distinct enough to differentiate 3. Is it possible that the Proto-Alphabetic Script became a script that could be used by various Canaanite languages and dialects. 4. Is the Proto-Alphabetic Script the foundation script from which Phoenician, Paleo-Hebrew and other specific written languages evolve from ? 5. If those who spoke Hebrew, wanted to record their history during the Late Bronze Age II, is it reasonable to think that they could have used the Proto-Alphabetic Script to write their records in the Hebrew language ? 6. If they did use the Proto-Alphabetic Script to express the Hebrew language in written form, why would that expression not be considered Proto-Hebrew ? Consider The Classical Latin Alphabet has 26 letters, which are the very same letters used in the English Alphabet (which evolved form the Classical Latin alphabet). When these 26 letters are used to record thoughts in the Latin Language, we say that this is, "Latin", because these letters are used to represent Latin words and thoughts When these very same 26 letters are used to record thoughts in the English Language, we say that this is, "English", because then the very same letters of this alphabetic script is used to represent English words and thoughts. Same Alphabet used, but one text identified as Latin, and the other text identified as English. Why not the same with the Proto-Alphabetic/Proto-Sinaitic Script ??? If the script is used to to represent Hebrew words and thoughts, it is Hebrew. If the script is used to to represent Moabite words and thoughts, it is Moabite. If the script is used to to represent Phoenician words and thoughts, it is Phoenician. WHY NOT ?? A few of the questions prompted by the discussion that were left hanging. Be Well, DZ

@txazfan5049 Год назад

Appreciate this conversation. Also - I'm laughing at myself for just now realizing (via an internet search) that you, Sean, are the son of Josh McDowell, whom I've been reading for over 50 years. Doh!

@karenduncan6004 Год назад

Very interesting. I'm glad to know what the critics are saying, and appreciate your presenting an opposing view. But Sean, I can't believe you consider this man gracious. He clearly implied that the team was made up of unqualified dopes who had no right to have anyone listen to their ideas. He wasnt even honest enough to mention Scott Stripling's constant use of qualifiers: "if this is what we think it is," "what we think we have here," and "wait for the second paper." Your guest seems to have been offended by the original press conference announcing the find, and closed his mind at that point. Your guest was not willing to entertain the possibility that new data could affect his preconceptions. The fact that he plans to rescue "the people in the pews" from these deceivers who happen not to teach at Georgetown seems arrogant, especially when all the findings are not yet published. Using the term "debunk" alone is downright insulting to these reputable scholars. Gracious? Nope. Also, how reasonable is it to criticize the technicians who made the scans for not being experienced epigraphers? They're exploring the use of a new technology here! Isn't that a little bit interesting? I, for one, am familiar with every one of the "real" inscriptions that your guest wishes people would talk about instead of the curse tablet. They're fascinating, and I rejoice in the ways they correlate with the Word of God. Now I'm interested in seeing where this new discovery leads, and what light it might shine on this episode in Scripture.

@derinderruheliegt Год назад

I am going to counter and say Dr. Rollston’s response is well founded. Regarding what you wrote: “ He wasnt even honest enough to mention Scott Stripling's constant use of qualifiers: "if this is what we think it is," "what we think we have here," and "wait for the second paper." “ Now here is the *Conclusion* paragraph of the team’s published paper- accessible for free to anyone online: “An expedition to wet sift Adam Zertal’s dump piles from the 1980s at el-Burnat (A) yielded a small, folded lead object. Enhanced photogrammetry and tomographic reconstructions revealed letters written in a proto-alphabetic (= Proto-Hebrew) script, likely dating to the Late Bronze Age II (ca. 1400-1200 BCE), but no later than ca. 1250 BCE. The original archaeological context and analysis of the lead reinforce this date. The text contains repeated use of the word ’arur (= curse) and is the oldest Hebrew text found within the borders of ancient Israel, predating the Khirbet Qeiyafa ostracon by at least two centuries. The use of the divine name YHW leaves no doubt that the text is Hebrew and not Canaanite. The recovery of this formulaic curse from an altar on Mt. Ebal synchronizes with Joshua 8, which mentions the construction of an altar (vss. 30-31), writing (vs. 32), and pronouncement of curses (vss. 33-34). This text requires adjustments to certain anthropological and biblical paradigms.” So, not many qualifiers in their published conclusions (where it counts). A little uncertainty is left to the object’s dating, but not about what is found, not whether or not there are characters, not what language it is, and not what it translates to.

@ancalagonyt Год назад

@@derinderruheliegt His response is not well founded. He claimed that there "is nothing there". If you read the paper, you will see the images matching the drawings pretty often, sometimes so clearly that it's undeniable. I don't think he actually read the paper at all. There was no substance to his complaints, and what he claimed didn't match what we can see with our own eyes. There may be a well founded response to be made to the tablet or the paper, but this guy certainly wasn't it.

@derinderruheliegt Год назад

@ancalagonyt How did they make the drawings?

@ancalagonyt Год назад

@@derinderruheliegt The answer to that is pretty obvious.

@derinderruheliegt Год назад

@ancalagonyt I’m not sure how that kind of reply helps. Is it obvious to everyone? How do you think they made the drawings? Maybe we’re not on the same page.

@izzykhach Год назад

Are Christopher Rollston and his archeologist friend going to suggest an alternative reading? I understand that the current reading is gibberish but Rollston did say that there may be some letters present, whether they are in a Phoenician script or something else. People are curious to know if the tablet has any writing that can be deciphered.

@dw8773 Год назад

I haven't watched the interview yet but I did a quick scan of the comments and didn't see any mention of the fact that Dr. Rollston was featured prominently in the film Patterns of Evidence: The Moses Controversy. This conversation seems to be almost a continuation of that film. I found the film fascinating and highly recommend it. To get a feel for Dr. Rollston's perspective, read the comment here from Tim Prismon. I found it to be very accurate.

@biddiemutter3481 Год назад

Fascinating timing for me. I went and saw early Sumerian? texts at the British Museum for the first time last week! I have a distinct feeling that God is on my case.

@davidgadbois6839 Год назад

Anyone who hasn't looked at the tomographic scans and used software to filter the images really can't comment on the content of the tablet. Perhaps one can criticize the ABR team for not releasing it, but it is too early to dismiss their interpretation.

@joshnichols1438 Год назад

There are many reasons to doubt ABR…

@pete2397 Год назад

@@joshnichols1438 such as?

@mcba6811 Год назад

Thanks for presenting another POV. He made a statement that there are no facts. What about the fact that this was found at Joshua’s altar? Surely archaeology plays some role in interpreting this? The other thing is that he acted as if he already had a presupposition that they KNOW the timeline of Hebrew script. So is he really open to another pov…I don’t think so. I’m not sure what the truth is but it may not be as open and shut as this guy makes it out to be. But again, it’s awesome to get another expert opinion. Kudos to you also for not over selling this find from the beginning because I was a believer until now.

@daleproctor3723 Год назад

When and how did did it get verified there was an historical Joshua and that it was in fact Joshua's altar?

@mcba6811 Год назад

Probably a fair question as almost everything can be questioned when you’re talking about dates this old. But at a minimum, the Bible can be considered a historical document and has proven the critics wrong over and over. But I realize that there is a lot of skepticism around the accounts of Joshua. The previous archaeologist of this site (Adam Zertal) also thought this was Joshua’s altar. So it’s probably best to say as ancient digs go, there is reason to believe that this was Joshua’s alter.

@daleproctor3723 Год назад

@@mcba6811 So we can sum up your position here as being since the bible is considered a consistently reliable historical record it’s reasonable to assume that this is in fact Joshua’s altar? That is erroneous thinking on more that one front. Imagine you have a book with ten facts in them. Just because nine of the facts are verified doesn’t mean # 10 is true. Also, the bible is not the reliable history you think it is. For starters the supernatural elements are hardly verifiable and you have to gullible to believe them. There isn’t any other history to confirm the Exodus and archaeology isn’t bearing out the conquest but rather showing the Israelites evolved out the indigenous population of that area. As for the altar structure that was found, if I understand and remember correctly, it isn’t anywhere near where it should be to match the biblical account.

@beanny0073 Год назад

I wish there was someone knowledgeable who can answer this man's objections.

@lovemorgan-7 Год назад

Agreed…maybe if Dr. Stripling were on as well to respond?

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

If you look at the actual article itself, and the scans provided, you can see that the original authors saw what they wanted to see. It strains credulity to think that there was an actual written message. Most other experts also agree with Rollston's objections.

@xiaoliu7071 Год назад

This was certainly a strange decision by Sean. Especially given Rollstons reputation. For those wondering he was kicked out of his previous institution because of his cognitive dissonance

@Learnerofthings 8 месяцев назад

Ive seen the original interview and it wasn’t that it was written in the language Canaanites used but it was the verbiage used and that it was Hebraic in nature. Fascinating. It has also been peer-reviewed and published.

@mdb1239 Год назад

Great interview. I a layman's layman could see the letters YHW and something that looked like a "J" and definitely an aleph. I could see no other letters. But those I could make out from the photos/scans. Rollston needs to encourage others to officially comment on the Ebal curse tablet in published journal. But enjoyed Dr. Rollston's view.

@yvichenj333 Год назад

Why would it be relevant that the tomography scan experts in the Czech Republic have a background in epigraghy? I sounded like he just added that to add padding to his case.

@SpielbergMichael Год назад

This guy doesn’t seem to trust or have faith in the Bible. Jesus believed that both Moses and David were real men. For me that’s the end of the discussion. As a Christian, I know there are people (including academics) who don’t have faith in what the Bible says. That’s their choice. I have no idea why any Christian would be interested in listening to anything they say.

@johnathanl8396 3 месяца назад

This guy literally said that he believed Moses and David were real

@temsumongbajamir1582 Год назад

I have been waiting for a sceptical interview on this topic. Thank you Dr Sean.

@sandorrabe5745 Год назад

What about the fact that the article was peer-reviewed? If it is of such a poor quality that no serious scholar would even take time to refute the claims stated therein, then what can be said about the quality of the peer-review process?

@stephengray1344 Год назад

The journal in question is a good journal for an article about the imaging techniques used. But the epigraphy (which is the main substance, and the sole reason ABR is claiming this as a major find) is well outside of its usual subject matter. So it's not entirely clear whether the peer review included somebody who is actually an expert in epigraphy.

@nonprogrediestregredi1711 Год назад

It was published in an open access journal that did not address the epigraphy to substantiate the extremely dubious claims by Dr Stripling. There is more context to this than just saying that it was peer reviewed.

@theresahoward9902 Год назад

Well, I agree with Wes Singleton that this gives your channel credibility. Great job Sean. I was one that immediately jumped on the bandwagon and was so excited when you did the breaking news with Scott Stripling. My heart sank into the abyss after watching this but it sounds right and sometimes we need the truth - loved the last question too - would love to read his article about how to assess sessional claims from this world but thank you Sean for putting this together. Your a legend! I heard Ed Stetzer is coming to Talbot - that's cool. You should have him on about . . . anything. He is amazing. Blessings and peace!

@horridhenry9920 Год назад

Watch Dr Cargill’s destruction of Dr Stripling’s claims, it’s painful.

@calvarychapelharrogate3015 Год назад

@@horridhenry9920 thanks I will

@theresahoward9902 Год назад

@@horridhenry9920 Actually, I watched that video and I thought that guy was as biased as he was accusing Stripling and every other conservative Bible believer of being. Plus, he makes some very unscholarly statements and assumptions - again, the very thing he accuses Striping of. I would stay away from that guy myself. I found nothing good in that video . . . he even said something about this being in America - he doesn't know what he is talking about. Sorry Horrid Henry I don't agree with you on this one however Rollston obviously knows what he is talking about.

@horridhenry9920 Год назад

@@theresahoward9902 The only question that matters is whether what he said is true. When you publish any academic paper you have to be prepared to defend it against critics. To say “he does not know what he is talking about” implies you know more about the subject than he does. When I listen to disputes between experts I defer to their expertise and look for the preponderance of expert opinions. So far, Stripling does not have a great deal of support from independent epigraphers. Effectively his paper is going through the public peer review process and he has some work to do to defend it.

@CodeRedCoder Год назад

Another great interview by Dr. McDowell! I love hearing experts in their field speak so plainly and passionately, particularly on Biblical Studies and adjacent fields.

@surfcruzer Год назад

Sean great interview, Mr Rollston has a lot of skepticism but limited evidence that applies to his claims. Only time will tell.

@BrianLassek Год назад

I was not aware of this drama. I grateful for the neat info on written language history. Thanks for sharing!

@SeanMcDowell Год назад

Glad we could bring this to you!

@MinimumSpeedOperator Год назад

I completely understand his position but after looking at the images I do believe there are a good many letters on the tablet. Now is it proto Hebrew??? You got me. I have no idea. I’d say maybe it is maybe it isn’t. I’m not absolutely convinced yet not willing to say it isn’t either.

@timprismon1195 Год назад

I think it’s fairly clear Dr Rolloston’s critique is steeped in his own theory / presupposition and that of the minimalist camp… (that he’s associated with - writing with Finklestein and his crew) of the development of Hebrew writing much later and out of the culture of Canaan. This camp is highly sceptical of the evidence in Scripture. He doesn’t believe Moses wrote Torah as the Bible says. He doesn’t believe that Israel practiced monotheism - his writings on this can be found. He’s written off lots of text from likely Israelite and said no they aren’t because that fits his big theory. This is just his latest slash job. He doesn’t believe the Bible folks- keep that in mind. He really plays up the evidence that demands a verdict bit- what schmoozing!

@kaptaink1959 Год назад

Chris uses a lot of words. But has only his opinion. From what he said I think he hasn't seen the tablet up close. His objection that the tablet has dents from rocks is week. Becuz it is amazing that there are 40ish dents that look like actual letters. This was a waste of time.

@wasing02 Год назад

Thank you for this critical analysis. It gives your channel credibility.

@SeanMcDowell Год назад

I appreciate that.

@slamrn9689 Год назад

Dr. Rollston is a top notch scholar, so glad that you had him on today, thank you!

@SeanMcDowell Год назад

He’s great, thanks!

@veronicaredeemed Год назад

I first heard about this tablet and the peer reviewed article on 'inspiring philosophy' s stream with David Schreiner. I saw your interview two days later, and it left me concerned. Thank you for revisiting this

@Bonddeeee Год назад

Appreciate giving an alternative view here.

@joshuaelek Год назад

I was really hoping you would point to the Sennacherib prism, it's got a special place in my heart.

@joecoolmccall Год назад

Wow this is a blast from the past for me. I took OT courses under Rollston while at Emmanuel. I can't wait to read the comments section...

@daleproctor3723 Год назад

I hope this video’s lesson is taken on board by the faith heads. It’s prudent and rational to want to have actual, reality based evidence to confirm your beliefs but when sensational claims come along you really need to exercise some caution and skepticism before jumping on board and trumpeting them. (See the comments in Sean’s previous video on this topic for examples.) “The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.” (Proverbs 14:15)

@BibleSongs 11 месяцев назад

I love the reference to the other inscriptions and images.

@valerieprice1745 Год назад

I looked at the scans, and I can easily see the letters. The impressions are distinct. It's consistent inside and out. Maybe this fellow needs glasses, or new glasses. I don't know how he can't see the script. He should see an eye doctor to make sure he doesn't have macular degeneration or cataracts or something.

@xiaoliu7071 Год назад

Rollston is an expert in the field in the same that the American CDC are experts on COVID. As they say "trust the experts"...

@joecoolmccall Год назад

.....please stop.

@valerieprice1745 Год назад

@@joecoolmccall truth matters.

@GTX1123 11 месяцев назад

I find Rollston's circular reasoning downright ALARMING. If in fact the divine name "Yaweh" is what is etched into this curse tablet - which it appears to be - it can't possibly be Hebrew because...WHY? i.e. the "consensus" is that Hebrew wasn't a developed language in that time period so it must be Canaanite? WHAT? Skeptical academia claims that the Hebrew "Yaweh" was a copycat of a Canaanite deity that they allege was spelled the same. This deity watched over the guild of metallurgists. Based on this, they claim that the entirety of scripture is a make believe story borrowed from a Canaanite deity. While I'm not saying that's what Rollston is saying here, if you believe the biblical account from Exodus 3, wouldn't you point out that there cannot be any connection between this Canaanite deity and the God we claim to believe in, other than a sheer coincidence in the spelling???? So some pagan Canaanite decides to etch the name of a pagan god into a lead tablet. The first question is, can this be matched to Canaanite script of that time period any more than to what could be a very early, primitive form of Hebrew? And why would a Canaanite do this? "Oh, well because he's trying to honor the god of metallurgy by inscribing it into a lead tablet". At Mt. Ebal??? Why there? And if there is even ONE MENTION OF A CURSE, then why is the Canaanite invoking this god to curse someone at Mt. Ebal of all places???? BOTTOM LINE for me is that it takes more faith to believe that, than it does that this inscription is DIRECTLY related to where it was found - Isaelites performing the curses on Mt. Ebal in accordance with God's commands. Don't believe these people just because they have "credintials". The skepticism cuts BOTH WAYS friends...

@azbuckeyegirl9523 11 месяцев назад

Thank you for this comment. I agree. I like to be open-minded, but sometimes open-mindedness can get kind of crazy. You start talking yourself “out” of believe the more logical and start believing the more unlikely.

@GTX1123 11 месяцев назад

@@azbuckeyegirl9523 Yep. I find it interesting that virtually none of these critics give any explanation as to why a lead tablet ends up on Mt. Ebal right around the time of the early / CORRECT dating of Joshua 8. I'm open to all reasonable explanations based on FACTS but we're getting NONE from the so called "experts"

@adamcosper3308 10 месяцев назад

I thought Christians valued faith?

@GTX1123 10 месяцев назад

@@adamcosper3308 Believers do value faith. Valuing faith doesn't mean you check your brains at the door any more than it means that you limit yourself to your 5 pysical senses / the material world when it comes to faith. God ignited the flame of my faith 43 years ago when I read the Gospels. I believed and was born again. In the years since, I've spent endless hours BOTH receiving the "bread of life" from the Word of God while at the same time studying theology, the historicity of scripture / archaeology. What I have found in those studies has only served to strengthen my faith.

@xiaoliu7071 Год назад

This interview does more harm than good for those who are not familiar with the find and field. Rollston is not a "respected scholar" in facr he lost his position at Emmanuel because of his extreme cognitive dissonance.

@therealkillerb7643 Год назад

Professional scholars have to guard their words carefully, or destroy their reputation and hence their careers; fair enough. However, Dr. Rollston also demonstrates a weak view of Scripture - he allows for the plausibility of the Exodus, or the possibility of a Solomon or that some things in Scripture are "literary" rather than "factual." It is one thing to say, "We do not have archeological evidence to support this statement in Scripture" and "I'm not sure whether this event actually happened, because there is no archeological evidence." Where Dr. McDowell is your presuppositional analysis of his position here?

@OnTheThirdDay Год назад

I agree with your take. Take a thumbs up for a careful and essential distinction. (For instance, the professor does not seem to be aware that by his reasoning before the tel dan stele and etc there would be outside source for David... however the evidence laid to be discovered somewhere. Lots of Israel is not dug up, even most of the sites, and many of the places were built upon again and again. So, for instance, we can't exactly tear up Jerusalem to see if we can find any evidence of David. And there might be more evidence we will dig up that will be for Saul or etc. Carefully thinking through assumptions is important.

@OnTheThirdDay Год назад

@@georgesparks7833 It sounds like he knows a lot about archeology and linguistics. However that does not mean that he is right or that he is thinking clearly about thr situation from a philsophical or theological level. Just a good thing to keep in mind.

@mikelsikel73 Год назад

If Dr Rollston doesn’t hold to inerrancy, then he can allow for the texts to contain some elements of actual figures’ lives (Moses, David etc) without every bit about said people being true. I think it would be very difficult to maintain a strong position on inerrancy when getting into the depth of study that Dr Rollston has done - it just becomes too obvious that the Bible was written by fallible humans and it’s very hard to unsee that, once you allow yourself to start thinking that way (as I have)

@adamcosper3308 10 месяцев назад

Oh God, I didn't know Sean was pushing presuppositional apologetics. Easily the most annoying form of apologetics.

@bpmachete Год назад

I thought he said language and script is not the same and when YHWH was in ancient Egyptian he says that it couldn't be Hebrew language, why couldn't it be Hebrew language in Egyptian script?

@Nighthawkinlight Год назад

Excellent interview.

@SeanMcDowell Год назад

Thanks!

@keenapowell8715 Год назад

Fascinating! Is there a collection of those discovered artifacts that actually DO confirm and/or supplement the Bible?

@sandorrabe5745 Год назад

Beloved, you yourself are an artifact that confirms the truthfulness of the Bible. And so it is for all of His creation, from the beginning to the end, amen.

@TheRevering Год назад

What a lovely guy, great spirit with him. Thanks!

@GodlessGubment Год назад

What a scam.

@jacquevanlopeznoroff8827 Год назад

Sorry, so you’re a Christian but you think the Bible hyperbolized the numbers?

@izzykhach Год назад

But YHWH showing up in a random tablet (if it were actually the case that it is there), wouldn't probability dictate that it is in all likelihood a Hebrew inscription? It's perhaps an aberration that the two earliest instances where we found the Divine name are in non-Israelite sources. The Moabite Meshe Stele at least does refer to the name as the God of Israel.

@TacoTuesday4 Год назад

Will be good to hear this. I don’t think it is a forgery. I just think it isn’t what the people that found it think it is.

@lizpetruzzi7700 Год назад

What a great interview! I learned a lot! One question…..how does his regular size head contain that giant brain?

@rochellecaffee1417 Год назад

Thank you guys.❤😊

@Katharina643 Год назад

Excellent discussion! Thank you! Truth and context matter!

@LanyaIce Год назад

This interview left me feeling disappointed. Virtually all criticisms were leveled at Stripling and his team. This seems irrelevant given his findings have been published in what I understand to be a highly reputable journal. Even if we grant there are no discernable letters (which somehow escaped the peer review process), the amount of data we have that align with the accounts in Deuteronomy and Joshua are undeniable.

@Lucas1Apple12 Год назад

So glad you shared this more widely accepted perspective !

@josheller541 Год назад

Awesome interview.

@markwilburn546 Год назад

I'm disappointed that you didn't push back especially when he said that no creditable archeologist is going to give this any serious thought. Let's think about this with some logic and basic common sense. Starting out with the assumption that no writing can be discerned at all. Does it still have archeological significance? If you were to erase all of the references to identifying letters of any kind (Canaanite, Hebrew or any other ancient near eastern language) from the paper and only focus upon the data points collected from the dating methods by the location in the strata, the metallurgical signature from the old lead mine, the consistency with other known lead curse tablets (dimensions, folding method, etc.) and its geographical location at Mt. Ebal then you have enough evidence to say that it definitely has archeological significance. It's intellectually dishonest for Dr. Rollston to completely dismiss this as a nothing burger. Furthermore, I'm more disappointed in you Dr. McDowell for not pushing back on such blatant disregard to any archeological significance by Dr. Rollston. This was a terrible interview where you basically just let a supposed academic call another academic a lazy, incompetent charlatan.

@ccdnpb820 Год назад

Wow, thanks so much for this interview. I sure don't like being mislead. I just want to know the truth. Great advice for assessing evidence.

@KravMagoo Год назад

Not sure why people aren't willing to call this what it obviously is--A SCAM. There is no there there. They have NO TANGIBLE REASON FOR ANY CLAIM THEY HAVE MADE. Pure Scam.

@yvichenj333 Год назад

"Sensational claims require sensational evidence"... Sounds a lot like the Extraordinary Evidence Fallacy. 🤔

@keenapowell8715 Год назад

In book form?

@Sam-fp8zm Год назад

This is all very good but as of today I can't see any replies to the curse tablet study in the literature so once this guy or someone else writes in disputing the article then a serious discussion can begin. And at the end he says no one will bother writing in to refute it but it has been "debunked" on blogs, and videos! lol.

@kimalonzo3363 Год назад

No hablo Greek.

@OnTheThirdDay Год назад

Harris, is that you?

@shanebuckles9134 Год назад

It doesnt take a genius to say no matter what language its written in, who was there at the time.

@willard73 Год назад

Paulogia has new video about this artifact, with Dr Kipp Davis.

@shanebuckles9134 Год назад

Its only debated because he cant stand the fact that the bible is historically correct.

@KevTCC Год назад

It would be something if one could disprove something in the Scripture but this practice of only believing things from it which can be confirmed or meets your ability to understand has got to go. He may not think the Exodus happened as the Scripture says it did, but he has no factual information not to think so. Since the Scripture scores 100% on what we can test it is reasonable to believe it in the areas we cannot.

@sanjeevgig8918 Год назад

"Since the Scripture scores 100% on what we can test it is reasonable to believe it in the areas we cannot." THIS is why Xtians fall for PONZI schemes. LOL

@adamcosper3308 10 месяцев назад

Sounds like you just believe regardless of the available evidence.

@KevTCC 10 месяцев назад

@@adamcosper3308 that is the opposite of what I wrote.

@adamcosper3308 10 месяцев назад

@@KevTCC No, it isn't. You're a textbook anti-intellectual.

@humbleebee Месяц назад

Fav 55:23

@kwood55 Год назад

Historic figures were real people. So what?

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

McDowell worries about the world view of epigraphers (is there willingness to follow the evidence wherever it leads) as if the scholarly community isn't evidence based. But the evangelical apologist community specifically is NOT willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads--because the Bible must literally true. Thus, you get the nonsense that Stripling claims, since the evidence must prove the Bible correct--these apologists can't go wherever the evidence leads because if that were the cause, it might show the Bible is wrong. If parts of the Bible are confirmed, it doesn't mean it's all true. Yes there is tension between the archaeological record and the description of the Exodus. Rollston even points out places where the Bible isn't 100% accurate.

@xiaoliu7071 Год назад

There will always be tension when you've purposefully misdated the conquest. Let me tell you, if the conquest and exodus were a narrative outside the biblical text the current secular scholarship would be laughed out of town for their positions. For the crowd that seems so interested in "following the evidence" they are uniquely able to miss (or rather dismiss) every piece.

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

@@xiaoliu7071 No real evidence for the Exodus on the scale discussed in the Bible, and it doesn't look like there was a conquest either. When the Bible can't be wrong, why pursue any evidence? Because you will always make the facts fit the evidence in that view. A 6000 year old Earth, for example. Zero evidence to support that position. A world wide flood?--even the apologists who know anything about geochemistry find contradictions.

@dadsonworldwide3238 Год назад

So they argue technological scaned reading. No one can make you see things you dont want to see. We dont asked technology to prove dating we add filters . Evolutionary filters most often to meet deep time estimates lol

@Katharina643 Год назад

On this theme of establishing facts, I find the following very interesting. The New Chronology is an alternative chronology of the ancient Near East developed by English Egyptologist David Rohl and other researchers beginning with A Test of Time: The Bible - from Myth to History in 1995. It contradicts mainstream Egyptology by proposing a major revision of the established Egyptian chronology, in particular by re-dating Egyptian kings of the Nineteenth through Twenty-fifth Dynasties, bringing forward conventional dating by up to 350 years. Rohl asserts that the New Chronology allows him to identify some of the characters in the Hebrew Bible with people whose names appear in archaeological finds. (Wikipedia)

@stephengray1344 Год назад

Rohl's New Chronology also contradicts over a dozen different synchronisms (pieces of evidence that two people lived at the same time).

@22beanbean Год назад

I wished he gave his reason to believe in Moses and the exodus. I think there is a massive lack of evidence. Probably the reason he said the exodus was smaller than the Bible say it was. 100k+ people in the Egypt should’ve been written about in their history out side the Bible. And people leave of that size would leave some evidence.

@sanjeevgig8918 Год назад

THEY found a postage stamp sized manuscript. . THEREFORE, everything in our book is TRUE. LOL

@surfboy344 Год назад

Use a codex

@sanjeevgig8918 Год назад

@@surfboy344 A codex doesn't tell you REAL text from FAKE text. LOL

@surfboy344 Год назад

@Sanjeev Gig fake text don't make it in. Unless, of course, you're assuming ALL of them are fake, in which case the burden of proof shifts to you to prove that assertion.

@sanjeevgig8918 Год назад

@@surfboy344 Such manuscripts ONLY prove someone wrote down something. Text DO NOT PROVE Angels, Demons, Spirits, Witches, Dirt into man, rib into woman, talking snakes, talking donkeys, teenager getting pregnant without sex, water into wine, man bodily rising to the sky. LOL

@PC-vg8vn Год назад

They believe it is further evidence that the events as described in the Bible are historically true. Given the voices that claim it's completely historically unreliable, I think that's pretty useful.

@bethshebaashe777 Год назад

Unfortunately, Rollston has a habit of commenting on books and articles before he's seen them and then sticking to his POV afterwards. Rollston would dispute 4 + 4 = 8. I think his reputation is over-rated and he brings very little new information to the subject, being content to simply collate and critic the work of others and throw popcorn. And what on earth is he talking about - not being able to see the letters? The paper over at Springer includes photos of every single letter - all taken with X-ray computed tomography and advanced data processing. He only needs to click the "Full sized Image" buttons to see them all for himself? Or does he doubt the ability of X-rays to see things the human eye cannot? If so, I hope he never breaks a leg.

@rochellecaffee1417 Год назад

I really don’t understand the subject…Mt. Ebal? Curses are not an interest to me. Who is Lanier theological seminary, who or what do they represent? I went to school with a Scott Strickland. Did someone make something up about an inscription? Do you have examples of all these different scripts? Where is Mt. Ebal? Isn’t the verb and the Divine name the same? I agree. This is really not relevant, it’s a bunny trail. I love truth too. But i don’t see the point in going that far into the weeds that most people can not recognize or are able to explain in a clear way. Reminds me of being fascinated with “bean counting”….sorry. It’s about material things, and men, in particular are challenged with those kind of things. But i am a woman, and am more concerned with something that feeds the soul. There are some verses in what i just was reading in the OT, about the “seers”, who were noted. This guy actually is probably misled, by u-know-who. 2 Chronicles 29:30, seer, Asaph. Just because someone calls me on the phone, does not mean i have to answer. Have a good time. That’s what leads people away from what’s important. Make a statement and catalogue it for the pew members. True believers will not be concerned to fret about it. Claims are made everyday. Great boasts…as James would say. What IS THEIR MOTIVE? Jesus said, “Make a right judgement,” which means check all your sources. Trust but verify. Even the Lord will guide you to a good decision. (Paul in Philippians)

@tomyossarian7681 Год назад

Have you lost your taste for "Liars for Jeebus" movement yet? 🤭

@UnderTheFloor79 Год назад

I guess Rollston can't see any of the letters. Hard to believe.

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

Huh? Most people can't see any letters. And what sorts of message meanders like that?

@UnderTheFloor79 Год назад

@@anonymoususer6037 Most people can see some letters. The Bible gives the history of what took place at that alter. There was a ceremony in which all the nation was to participate in either speaking curses or blessings. The different sizes of the letters and the meandering path suggests that the curse tablet was written by multiple representatives of the people so that it could apply to the whole nation.

@anonymoususer6037 Год назад

@@UnderTheFloor79 The place where they found the altar/lead tablet is on the north side of Mt Ebal, 1.7 km away and 140 meters below the summit, so it's a strained interpretation that the altar was part of the ceremony described in the Bible. (Mt Gerizim is to the south of the Mt. Ebal) As for your explanation of the different sizes of the letters and the path of the text, well, now you're reaching. Again apologists likes to twist and stretch the data to make it fit with the Bible. This lead object is very small, around the size of your thumbnail.

@UnderTheFloor79 Год назад

@@anonymoususer6037 You are making up fake criteria that isn't in the biblical narrative and then claiming we are straining to make the alter fit your fake criteria. The alter fits perfectly with the biblical narrative. There is no reason the alter had to be on the south side of Ebal since the sacrifices happened before the nation split up on the two mountains to call out the curses and blessings.

@davissalaki8703 Год назад

Sean, this guy is either an unbeliever or has a weak faith. He certainly doesn't hold a high view of Scripture from his statements. And his opinion that his fellow academics are unbiased and true seekers of truth is ridiculous and directly contradicts Scripture. The Bible tells us that men deceive themselves and want to dwell in darkness (Jeremiah 17:9, 1 Cor 3:18-20, Romans 1:19-22, John 3:19-20) We know much of current academia is not made of seekers of truth, but men trying to justify their own rebellion against their Creator. His PhD is fine, but doesn't do anything for me if he's not going over the letters and explaining where the problems are. What good is a PhD when any rando off the street can make these same points? His vague statements and appeal to authority arguments do not speak highly of him as a scholar. Looked at the tablet myself with the gif of the CT scan as well as the letters and drawings and it seems to me that most of them match. Still there were a couple I struggled with and who knows what order they should be read in. I'm sure it's also possible that indentations in the tablet and cracks could also mimic letters, so this whole endeavor seems more art then science. I also wonder how someone becomes an expert in reading these faded texts, as there is no objective measure as to who is right or wrong. The person that wrote the letters obviously can't weigh in, and the majority of experts could be hilariously wrong. Jesus isn't going to gasp at how many letters we have after our name when we stand before Him.

@adamcosper3308 10 месяцев назад

What a nice defense mechanism. Push a religion without good evidence and then include passages in your scripture that denigrate people who dare to care about evidence.