Sodom found?

[The Grand Nudger]

Meh, I think this is one of the rare occassions that brian hits the nail precisely on the head. These stories are as based in history as abraham lincoln vampire slayer, mostly less.

[brewer]

[Spongebob]

I really hate theists arguments, of any religion when they point out to holy writings, that this place existed or that person existed. Ok, by that logic flying like Superman is real because I have seen movies with Superman flying around New York and San Francisco. 

A few years back, some B movie makers made a movie about Lincoln being a vampire slayer.

That "B movie" you refer to is "Abraham Lincoln vampire hunter" and it was most certainly not a B movie.  It had a budget of over $69 million and grossed well over $100 million and was directed by Tim Burton.  What in the world does this film have to do with Biblical stories?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I really hate theists arguments, of any religion when they point out to holy writings, that this place existed or that person existed. Ok, by that logic flying like Superman is real because I have seen movies with Superman flying around New York and San Francisco. 

A few years back, some B movie makers made a movie about Lincoln being a vampire slayer.

That "B movie" you refer to is "Abraham Lincoln vampire hunter" and it was most certainly not a B movie.  It had a budget of over $69 million and grossed well over $100 million and was directed by Tim Burton.  What in the world does this film have to do with Biblical stories?

Just to pick a nit, it wasn’t directed by Tim Burton.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Meh, I think this is one of the rare occassions that brian hits the nail precisely on the head.  These stories are as based in history as abraham lincoln vampire slayer, mostly less.

No one is claiming that the Biblical story of Sodom is ‘based’ in history, merely that it may have been inspired by an historical event.

Just because the Noahic flood is ahistorical doesn’t mean ancient people didn’t deal with floods.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

That's the entire reason the story has buzz...and almost certainly the reason that the authors got it published.

With the specific case in question, it appears to be an issue of biblical archaeology. A materially false claim which would invalidate the hypothesis if true. Which is to say that whatever inspired the story, assuming some actual thing did, and assuming that this were sodom, it's still not what the paper proposed. This, as I was mentioning, according to one of the researchers the paper cites as establishing their hypothesis specifically with regards to shocked quartz and impact events. Others have pointed out that they assume that all of the people were blown to bits and their splintered bones scattered throughout - why we find no human remains from this purported event in the destruction layers..which, bioarcheaeologists have pointed out are, in fact, the bones of small game from dinner. The sites were abandoned. They were certainly destroyed, but literally every piece of every finding from this site and every other in the region powerfully argues against the mere possibility of the conclusion that study arrived at. Something shitty went down, for sure, and the sites were abandoned. Not depopulated in an instant. The timeframe itself, even in the paper, doesn't match the biblical narrative or timeframe, to begin with.

From the textual end, neither the story of the deluge nor the story of sodom were arrived at because people dealt with floods or impacts, they're narrative vehicles for politics and theology.

[Angrboda]

Meh, I think this is one of the rare occassions that brian hits the nail precisely on the head.  These stories are as based in history as abraham lincoln vampire slayer, mostly less.

No one is claiming that the Biblical story of Sodom is ‘based’ in history, merely that it may have been inspired by an historical event.

Just because the Noahic flood is ahistorical doesn’t mean ancient people didn’t deal with floods.

Boru

Nonsense. It's the usual bait and switch.

"We're not saying magic Jesus existed, we just want to know if it's based on something historical."

"Okay, it's quite possible that it is based upon something historical."

"Praise Jesus, magic Jesus did exist! Hallelujah!"

[The Grand Nudger]

In fairness, the paper only mentions god once.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

That's the entire reason the story has buzz...and almost certainly the reason that the authors got it published.  

With the specific case in question, it appears to be an issue of biblical archaeology.  A materially false claim which would invalidate the hypothesis if true.  Which is to say that whatever inspired the story, assuming some actual thing did, and assuming that this were sodom, it's still not what the paper proposed.  This, as I was mentioning, according to one of the researchers the paper cites as establishing their hypothesis specifically with regards to shocked quartz and impact events.  Others have pointed out that they assume that all of the people were blown to bits and their splintered bones scattered throughout - why we find no human remains from this purported event in the destruction layers..which, bioarcheaeologists have pointed out are, in fact, the bones of small game from dinner.  The sites were abandoned.  They were certainly destroyed, but literally every piece of every finding from this site and every other in the region powerfully argues against the mere possibility of the conclusion that study arrived at.  Something shitty went down, for sure, and the sites were abandoned.  Not depopulated in an instant.  The timeframe itself, even in the paper, doesn't match the biblical narrative or timeframe, to begin with.

From the textual end, neither the story of the deluge nor the story of sodom were arrived at because people dealt with floods or impacts,  they're narrative vehicles for politics and theology.

So it’s not just science, but bad science. I don’t disagree. But if the existence of Sodom were to be confirmed, it wouldn't validate the biblical legend, any more than the discovery of Troy confirms the spat between Hector and Achilles.

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

No one is claiming that the Biblical story of Sodom is ‘based’ in history, merely that it may have been inspired by an historical event.

Just because the Noahic flood is ahistorical doesn’t mean ancient people didn’t deal with floods.

Boru

Nonsense.  It's the usual bait and switch.  

"We're not saying magic Jesus existed, we just want to know if it's based on something historical."

"Okay, it's quite possible that it is based upon something historical."

"Praise Jesus, magic Jesus did exist!  Hallelujah!"

Which would constitute a bad interpretation of available evidence. No argument. There’s no question that the motives of biblical archaeologists are suspect, but that’s not a good reason to dismiss archaeology related to the biblical era.

Boru