• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Bible older than we thought?

jmcvann

Navel Gazer
jmcvann
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
660
Here's an interesting article from livescience.com.

Scientists have discovered the earliest known Hebrew writing — an inscription dating from the 10th century B.C., during the period of King David's reign.


The breakthrough could mean that portions of the Bible were written centuries earlier than previously thought. (The Bible's Old Testament is thought to have been first written down in an ancient form of Hebrew.)



Until now, many scholars have held that the Hebrew Bible originated in the 6th century B.C., because Hebrew writing was thought to stretch back no further. But the newly deciphered Hebrew text is about four centuries older, scientists announced this month.
Click to expand...

Your thoughts?
 
There are plenty of clues, particularly anachronisms in the texts, that indicate when various portions of the Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) were written. That there was writing in Israel before ca. 850 BCE, when the J Document is believed to have been written, doesn't mean that the Bible was being written then.
 
Well the Kebra Nagast - from Ethiopia -
writing believed to have been scripted about 1000 AD,
tells of the Queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon in about 1000 BC.

Much of the pre-Solomon narrative is in the Kebra Nagast,
showing that those stories themselves are at least from 1000 BC.

Its interesting to compare the two. The Bible makes no mention
that the Arc of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia at this time
- before the destruction of the temple.

There is a Temple in Ethiopia which seems to hold the Arc to this day;
and
the Bible also does not mention that the union of the visit by Sheba
was Solomon's firstborn Son : Menelek; who was rejected by Israel
for being black. In the centuries to follow Israel collapses.

Are the Ethiopians then the centre of Zionism?
 
Last edited:
to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?
what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?

lunacy
according to mr nobody?

well then
lets have more lunacy
its clearly a GOOD thing
 
jmcvann said:
Here's an interesting article from livescience.com.



Your thoughts?
Click to expand...

We've had that discussion before.

The positive part: It's a piece of proto-Hebrew writing all right, likely one of the intermediate steps between early Akkadian and the final liturgical Hebrew.

The bunk part: well, just about all the rest. That shard does not actually mention King David, nor a united kingdom, and has nothing to do with the Bible.
 
WaterBreather said:
to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial

where did science come from?
who were the first scientists?
what was darwins, newtons, einsteins, copernicus, descartes, galileos, etc beliefs?

lunacy
according to mr nobody?

well then
lets have more lunacy
its clearly a GOOD thing
Click to expand...

Oh, please, could you possibly cram more non-sequitur and BS in one message?

Incidentally Einstein by all accounts was simply fascinated with the universe _itself_. He made it clear when he called it "Spinoza's God", which is just that: a deterministic universe which just does its thing and doesn't give a flying f-word about prayers or anything. He made it clear in repeated occasions that he does _not_ believe in a God personally involved in running everything, and generally which resembles the Christian one in any form or shape.

Not that it'll stop idiot apologists from using him as a prop for their imaginary sky daddy...

Galileo? Now that's a guy who'd have been surprised to hear that his science is based on Christianity. I think he made it pretty clear when he went head on against the church's claims repeatedly, and culminated in his mocking the Pope in his book. (Which was the real reason of his conflict with Urban.)

But as I was saying, it's a non-sequitur. What Einstein believed is fully irrelevant, and ditto for Galileo and all the rest. There is no evidence that _Theism_ was the motivation of any of them. Nor that people wouldn't try to figure out the universe without the Abrahamic sky daddy -- as the Chinese, Egyptians, Sumerians, ancient Greeks, etc, had already done.
 
Last edited:
WaterBreather said:
Well the Kebra Nagast - from Ethiopia -
writing believed to have been scripted about 1000 AD,
tells of the Queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon in about 1000 BC.

Much of the pre-Solomon narrative is in the Kebra Nagast,
showing that those stories themselves are at least from 1000 BC.

Its interesting to compare the two. The Bible makes no mention
that the Arc of the Covenant was taken to Ethiopia at this time
- before the destruction of the temple.

There is a Temple in Ethiopia which seems to hold the Arc to this day;
and
the Bible also does not mention that the union of the visit by Sheba
was Solomon's firstborn Son : Menelek; who was rejected by Israel
for being black. In the centuries to follow Israel collapses.

Are the Ethiopians then the centre of Zionism?
Click to expand...

As far as I've been able to find any information on the Kebra Nagast, it actually seems to have been written rather late, ca. 1,000 CE. If you have reliable information pointing to it being written ca. 1,000 BCE, I would be interested in hearing it.
 
Tim:
I see no reason to change the dating system from the convention of AD/BC.
That serves only to distract.
As you well know.

...

Herr Mustermann.
Your vitriol makes your passage virtually unreadable.

My point was to show that believing in God
does not make one a lunatic,
regardless of what YOU mean by the word.

Yes, Einstein was a determinist.
Even when the EPR experiment proved otherwise.
So he was probably the worst example I chose.

Keep denying that Theism is the most powerful force in humanity.
Thats right.
Keep denying the cognitive dissonance in your own mind which
resulted in your ad hominem diatribe.

Keep pretending that your mind is an atom.
 
I would be interested in seeing the actual inscription. Does the inscription in any way corroborate the Bible?

I wouldn't be surprised if the Bible had been edited numerous times either.
 
WAterbreather your a funny, well mannered, mature person, now that you have gotten some attention could you please get the f out of the pool and let the big kids play?
 
HansMustermann said:
Nor that people wouldn't try to figure out the universe without the Abrahamic sky daddy -- as the Chinese, Egyptians, Sumerians, ancient Greeks, etc, had already done.
Click to expand...

Case in point, the Abrahamic sky daddy didn't help the Hebrews figure anything out as they simply copied the beliefs of the civilisations around them. The modern world owes more to the Babylonians and the Greeks than it ever did to the Bible which just acted as a method of transmission but was never original in its own right.

:p
 
Last edited:
WaterBreather said:
Tim:
I see no reason to change the dating system from the convention of AD/BC.
Click to expand...

Of course you do. Is this going to be another War over Xmas?

To paraphrase Tsiolkovski's quote:

"Theism is the cradle of civilization. But one should not want to live in a cradle forever.

I recommend a soothing video:

 
Last edited:
WaterBreather said:
to refer to the most powerful force in humanity (Theism)
as lunacy
is to ignore the evidence of thousands of years of history
its blatant denial
Click to expand...

Sledge appears to be talking not about theists or Christians in general but specifically about Creationists. If someone in a western democracy in the 21st century chooses to believe that the earth 6000 years old, then that person is, at best, willfully ignorant. The evidence that the earth is billions of years old is overwhelming. A denial of this evidence falls somewhere between blinding oneself to the facts and lunacy.
 
Last edited:
The Bible? *giggles*

I think the youngest bits are not older that the turn of 1st to 2nd century, and maybe a bit younger.

Just sayin'. :teacher:
 
Last edited:
I would not surprise me if many of the stories in the Bible are many times older than what was even discovered, so far. The stories that have "stuck" appeal the best to human instincts and interests, and human minds could only conjure up a limited number of appealing stories, (until science and technology inspire narrative innovations).

Stories of Jesus-like entities existed loooong before anyone decided to write about Jesus.

World-engulfing flood stories have existed since... well... the existence of floods, actually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom