Re: Cuneiform tablet names biblical person

On 19 Jul, 17:21, "Agamemnon" <agamem...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"SteveT" <rumplestilts...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:hq7u93hkdos0qs3h145a89ais1jh9gutuv@xxxxxxxxxx





If you said that after Alexander the Greeks turned up in Judah & were
interested in Judaism, to the extent that they translated the Jewish
religious documents, then I would agree with you.

There are no prior "jewish" religious documents. If you think there were
please
post the URLs to them. Speculation that there were prior documents is
based
solely upon faith without physical evidence.

But you seem to be saying that the Jewish religious documents didn't
exist until the Greeks turned up, & that puts you at odds with pretty
much every scholar who studies the subject.

When one says scholars consider that term includes High School seniors
who are
National Merit Scholars. Pardon if I expect a much narrower definition of
who we
are talking about than just scholar.

I use the term to describe academic people who get their work
published by way of peer review. Ideally that is by a university press
like Chicago or Cambridge, but there are commercial publishers with
equally high standards.

We have a problem on this subject. The popular narrative is no more than
"what
everyone knows" going back centuries. Trying to base statements on reason
and
fact is an uphill fight against those who assume that because it was
always
believed it has a superior standing. It has no greater standing than the
world
being created in 4004 BC or Noah's flood.

I get the feeling that you have a problem with creationists. There are
no creationists where I live, in fact the "traditional" view of the OT
(in my family, school etc.) has always been that its a lot of old
mythology & folklore.

And I think a lot has changed in the last 20 years. I mean, people
might have thought that much of the OT was wrong before, but now we
have archaeologists telling us pretty much exactly where it is wrong,
and how, and why, etc.

Statements can only be based upon the known facts. The fact is there is
no
physical evidence of anything like this religion prior to the Septuagint.
That
is the way it is. You can make additional speculation from that point but
the
fact is the fact.

I'm not a historian, I'm a reader of history books, & I go for the
consensus view. In short this view considers the OT to be the product
of several hundred years development. The method they use has to do
with the analysis of text, changes in the use of vocabulary, grammar,
figures of speech etc, & a whole bunch of other stuff. If you have an
argument its with these guys, & they would tell you that they're
dealing with known facts.

The guys in question all came to the conclusion that the hundreds of years
in question in which the bible was concocted all occurred during the
Hellenistic period. It was not until the foundation of the modern state of
Israel that decenters funded by Jewish nationalists began challenging the
historically accepted view with historical revisionism.

The accepted facts are; that the extant Septuagint text predates the extant
Hebrew by up to 100 years; the Septuagint text is closer to the Samaritan
Laws text than the Hebrew text, therefore the Hebrew text is a later
development dating after the destruction of the Samaritan temple by
Alexander Janneus (I think) in about 100 BC when that text was frozen in
time (funny that he has named himself after a Roman God if he was a
monotheist); that the names given to God in the bible all refer to
individual Gods that were worshiped by the Phoenicians who were their defied
kings; and finally that the Jews were polytheists even in Roman times as
shown by the Elephantine letters which make the Phoenician Goddess Ashura
Jehovah's consort and the fact that the temple of Astarte was built on top
of the Jewish temple, Stratos Tower, Ashura and Astarte were worshiped in
snycretised form as Asteroth, the temple of Asclepius/Eshmun was built
adjacent to the Jewish temple, the places regarded by Christians was those
of Christ's birth and resurrections were originally shrines to
Apis/Attis/Tammuz/Osiris.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Not many people, other than you, would claim that the Septuagint was
anything other than a translation from an earlier Hebrew document.
We've already established via the "Hezekiah inscription", that Hebrew
was being written down as early as the 701 B.C.
If you want to talk about original documents, the earliest Koine
versions of the Septuagint are from at least 400 years after the Dead
Sea scrolls, which contain amongst other things the "Book of Isiah".

So using your utterly crazed logic, I could try to argue that the
Septuagint was actually copied from the DSS.
I wouldn't be so daft, mainly because I'm not trying to push some sort
of Marcionite-Helleno Aryan fascist ideology, like you and your
acolyte Spewer.

By the way Ashurah is not a Phoenician goddess, but a Shiah festival!
I think you mean Asherah, who was a Cannanite deity linked to Yawheh
in the Sinai/Edom area. The Elephantine garrison of Yeb was hardly
linked to Rome, as it dates from the time of the Persians and
Cambyses.
Any religious syncretism there probably is evidence of a mixed
population of local Egyptians and Judeans.

The evidence you present about Syro-Phoenician gods being worshipped
in Israel and Judea, is pretty much what it says in the O.T., so what
is this supposed to prove? The Hellenised Syrian-Phoenicians existed
right across Northern Israel in the cities, right into the Roman
period, as is obvious from shrines at places like Banyias (Panyias)
and Bet Shean and many other places.

Hellenistic culture was dominant in the area because the cultures of
the Greek city states and later Rome were economically dominant, but
it met with strong resistance in Judea. But the idea that Judas
Maccabeus "invented" Judaism (which isn't a term that was used at the
time) is complete nonsense.
I don't even think you believe it yourself.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Cuneiform tablet names biblical person
    ... to the extent that they translated the>>> Jewish ... Hebrew by up to 100 years; the Septuagint text is closer to the Samaritan ... It is evidence of the Phoenician Gods, therefore the Phoenicians religion and therefore Phoenicians who the forgers of the bible made into Jews in Hellenistic times. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Cuneiform tablet names biblical person
    ... to the extent that they translated the>>> Jewish ... Hebrew by up to 100 years; the Septuagint text is closer to the Samaritan ... It is evidence of the Phoenician Gods, therefore the Phoenicians religion and therefore Phoenicians who the forgers of the bible made into Jews in Hellenistic times. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Cuneiform tablet names biblical person
    ... Hebrew by up to 100 years; the Septuagint text is closer to the Samaritan ... Jehovah's consort and the fact that the temple of Astarte was built on top ... fought by the Ayatollah Jews and the Ayatollah Jews won. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • Re: Cuneiform tablet names biblical person
    ... to the extent that they translated the Jewish ... Hebrew by up to 100 years; the Septuagint text is closer to the Samaritan ... It is evidence of the Phoenician Gods, therefore the Phoenicians religion and therefore Phoenicians who the forgers of the bible made into Jews in Hellenistic times. ...
    (soc.history.ancient)
  • LIVING WITH MOSHIACH, Parshat Pinchas
    ... Weekly Digest About Moshiach ... Your premiere site for Jewish spirituality. ... Laws of the Holy Temple. ...
    (soc.culture.jewish)
Loading