Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Pagans ...what do you think of this quote?

"It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference" -Nelson Glueck

If you do not agree can you give me some examples?



Asked by Anonymous at 10:55 PM on Dec. 16, 2009 in Religion & Beliefs

This question is closed.
Answers (8)
  • In science, absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. And actually, geological evidence has shown that the whole world was never flooded all at the same time :)

    Answer by Ati_13 at 11:24 PM on Dec. 16, 2009

  • No archeological discovery has ever confirmed or denied ANY religion's sacred texts. When archeologists discover things, the objects show clearly that sacred texts are based firmly in the facts of the times they were written such as political skirmishes and international trade and movement.

    The quote doesn't prove or deny that the Bible is THE only worthwhile holy book.

    Don't muck rake. Very un-Christian to muck rake.

    Answer by ecodani at 11:00 PM on Dec. 16, 2009

  • Who is "Nelson Glueck" and what are his credentials? Where is he getting his info? Why should we care what he says??


    Answer by Anonymous at 11:02 PM on Dec. 16, 2009

  • Don't muck rake. Very un-Christian to muck rake.


    ...Did you assume that i am Christian?


    Answer by Anonymous at 11:03 PM on Dec. 16, 2009

  • This is who he is, not sure what the question has to do with Pagans really
    Dr. Glueck was the author of several books on archaeology, religion, and the intersection of the two. They include Explorations in Eastern Palestine (4 vol., 1934–51), The Other Side of the Jordan (1940), The River Jordan (1946), Rivers in the Desert: A History of the Negev (1959), Deities and Dolphins (1965), and Hesed in the Bible (1968). Although he worked to develop a historical understanding of biblical events, Dr. Glueck always maintained that his faith was not based on a literal interpretation of the bible. To do that, he once said, would be to "confuse fact with faith, history with holiness, science with religion." He died in Cincinnati in 1971, after having previously announced plans to step down from the HUC presidency the following year, and just four months after his final trip to Israel

    Answer by SophiaofLight at 6:45 AM on Dec. 17, 2009

  • DebateandRelate

    Answer by DebateandRelate at 1:09 PM on Dec. 17, 2009

  • I dont agree with it per se and even if its correct it wouldnt change my mind.

    You cant prove Jesus was a savior no matter how much proof is found archeologically.

    Answer by Amaranth361 at 1:12 PM on Dec. 17, 2009

  • I couldn't have said it any better than Amaranth361.

    Answer by pnwmom at 1:36 PM on Dec. 17, 2009