Old testament v. new testament

[solja247]

Sol, you can kid yourself all you like but modern archaeology has trashed the OT.

There were no patriarchs. No Exodus. No Conquest. No "Glorious" United Kingdom. It's all an invention of later writers....and it does not hold up to modern scientific inquiry.

There was a (relatively ) wealthy northern kingdom. There was a painfully poor and useless southern kingdom. There were Philistines. There were Assyrians. There were Babylonians and Egyptians and Phoenicians all pretty much behaving as every other petty principality of the time.

What is singularly missing in the archaeological record is any indication of the deeds or existence of your precious Jews.

Find the evidence, you say? They are down to bedrock in places in Jerusalem which is not that big an area. They have found flint tools from paleolithic hunters. The only piece missing is the capitol of David's "empire" which no one else in the ancient world seems to know about, either. Why don't you strain your brain a bit and see if you can figure out why that is.

Lack of evidence doesnt mean there isnt . We are still finding stuff mate. Just be patient.

solja247 how about you stop trying to justify the cruelties of your god and accept them for what they are: murders and atrocities. Your O.T. god is a master at tyranny, scaring people into believing in him by force, not much free will involved in that. Serve me or die.

I guess the only difference between an atheist and fundamentalist is.

That one actually believes it
The other uses straw men and proof texting to show why they dont believe it.