VISIT OUR FACEBOOK PAGE!

Jericho was Empty?

by Glenn
(Watkinsville, GA)

In 1907-1911, 2 German archaeologists, Watzinger & Sellin, concluded that the city of Jericho was unoccupied at the time of Joshua's conquest.

Then, Kathleen Kenyon, concluded the same after digging from 1952-58. She states that Jericho was deserted at the time of this conquest. Finally, in 1995, a radiocarbon test was done with 95% accuracy, to prove Watzinger, Sellin, & Kenyon findings.

So was the city empty or occupied? Scientific facts do not lie! Or do they?

Comments for Jericho was Empty?

Average Rating

Click here to add your own comments

Apr 02, 2012
Rating

Archaeology and Jericho
by: Anonymous

How uneducated we must be to believe Junk Science like this. Archaeological digs unearth physical things but cannot "prove" the detailed timings or conditions of events.

Furthermore, Carbon 14 dating can not prove ANYTHING other than how long a specific once-living plant or animal has been dead. Even then, the accuracy rate plummets logarithmically the further back such death took place, making it C14 dating wholly unreliable for any deaths having taken place before about 4500 years ago.

So how in the world could any archaeologist(s) "prove" a city was inhabited or not at the time of a conquest? The short answer is they can't. Using C14 dating or otherwise, all an archaeologist can do is look for clues to try to piece together a possible picture of what MIGHT have happened.

Any attempt to "prove" or "disprove" any Biblical history, especially when it comes to intangibles that cannot be directly unearthed, exposes the supposed scientist as having an agenda and therefore being a fraud.

Feb 01, 2012
Rating

Archaeologist John Garstang
by: Anonymous

Archaeologist John Garstang had the fall of Jericho pegged to Egyptian king Amenhotep III's reign.

Amenhotep III received the Tel-Amarna letters from Canaanite kings who claimed the Haribu (Hebrews)were invading Canaan.

Amenhotep III sent no troops to help the Canaanites. He proclaimed himself sun-god of Egypt when the sun stood still in the sky for almost 24 hours. (Joshua 10:12-13)

Akenaton proclaimed the sun-god was the only god the Egyptians should worship after Joshua had died. Akenaton believed wrongfully Joshua had
received power from the sun-god. Joshua worshiped a monotheistic god. Akenaton god was monotheistic in nature.

It is wrong for historians to say Moses received the concept of monotheism from the Egyptians when the Exodus occurred before Akenaton was born.

Feb 01, 2012
Rating

The truth, the whole truth, and...
by: Zed Bee

So, Jericho was abandoned by its inhabitants after the 17th earthquake which brought down its walls, leaving the town under a hill of dust more than a thousand years before Joshua was born, so what?

No need to question the veracity of the storyteller, just call an earthquake Joshua to turn a biblical tale into gospel truth in every particular.

Oct 22, 2011
Rating

Scientific fact about Jericho
by: REX

One should look at the history of the Middle-East and compare it with Bible chronology.

Abraham lived 1992-1817 B.C. Isaac 1892-1712 B.C. Jacob 1832-1685 B.C. Joseph 1741-1631 B.C. Moses 1575-1455 B.C. Solomon's real reign 1019-979 B.C. 4th year 1015 B.C. Exodus 1495 B.C. (1 Kings 6:1)

Egyptian chronology should be lowered because Joseph entered Egypt during Senusret III reign.

Traditional reign for Senusret III is 1879-1840 B.C.Real reign 1724-1685 B.C. Amenemhet III real reign is 1685-1640 B.C. Amenemhet III completed Bahr Yosef (Joseph's canal)

There is around 150 years from the traditional to the real dates. Its science which is not accurate.

Oct 22, 2011
Rating

Science Provides Theories, Not Necessarily Proof
by: Newzee

Science is limited by virtue of its earthly attempts to explain phenomenon clinically.

The world becomes flat because of what observation tells the scientist, and in theory, a curvature doesn't make sense without new information.

Carbon dating has been under correction. As for evolution, a major law of science is that everything in nature tends towards simplicity, not into more complicated creatures as the theory of evolution suggests.

One would think science should tend to believe accounts of those who were there at the time, as opposed to people digging a site centuries later not taking into account errors due to ignorance, the supernatural and other possibilities.

As long as there is one scientifically unexplained phenomenon, and as long as there is proof of God in everything from incredible design to agreement from a number of witnesses, scientific theories remain only just that.

Theories.

Jun 29, 2011
Rating

Archaeology and Jericho
by: Anonymous

I have an article on Jericho and what was found by Archaeologists. If interested cf. the following url

http://www.bibleorigins.net/Jerichosanomalies.html

Jun 27, 2011
Rating

Jericho
by: Lujack Skylark

At what date was Jericho empty? 1455 B.C.? 1280 B.C.? One should have a date before releasing a comment.

Jun 27, 2011
Rating

Jericho
by: Robert Marshall

Concerning ancient Jericho, read Joshua 6: 17-21. Either God is wrong, or science is wrong. You choose.

Click here to add your own comments

Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How? Simply click here to return to Jericho Discussion Forum.