雛ドール ✵☽ on Nostr: The problem with Biblical Archaeology is, it's still rooted in a drive to use ...
The problem with Biblical Archaeology is, it's still rooted in a drive to use archaeology to "prove" the bible.
It's still rooted in European Christian biases about the Ancient Near East, which is why you still see charged biblical terms like "Tophet" used for any Levantine pile of bones, or "Nimrud" still used to refer to the Assyrian City of Kalhu (which wasn't even called Nimrud in the Bible, it's Biblical name was Calah)
Published at
2024-06-09 19:56:14Event JSON
{
"id": "ff9d9488f2603347f2145bd6b55f1683e8500ce81f86803719e160f86a3376a2",
"pubkey": "c5380fbed0726f56a81f2cc25059d488960b833b7a5ad9bca9331032d3fd4c67",
"created_at": 1717955774,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"proxy",
"https://social.translunar.academy/objects/b09dbc4f-1b45-4c0b-b462-7fe059888241",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "The problem with Biblical Archaeology is, it's still rooted in a drive to use archaeology to \"prove\" the bible. \n\nIt's still rooted in European Christian biases about the Ancient Near East, which is why you still see charged biblical terms like \"Tophet\" used for any Levantine pile of bones, or \"Nimrud\" still used to refer to the Assyrian City of Kalhu (which wasn't even called Nimrud in the Bible, it's Biblical name was Calah)",
"sig": "4a5e6933ff93fda26866486040f62b7bc66e8910cef2cea8e296d11e2209eb24fd42b4b2f0657a050053f2493bf47b61e2c303dfbd9cd10c3b969adc29bd8277"
}