The oldest biblical character who probably existed

[Matt Giwer]

Since I couldn't get Matt Giwer to answer me concerning this temple of Astarte in first century CE jerusalem, I decided to Google it. What I found was that, after the Jewish revolt of CE 70, followed by the CE 135 bar Kochba revolt, the Romans flattened the city once more and built on its site a classical city complete with a temple to Zeus. The city was called Aelia Colonia Capitolina. It was in this city, not the Jerusalem of the Jews, that the temple to Astarte was built. Emperor Constantine had this temple torn down ca. CE 326. It is, apparently, the current site of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.

Astarte's Temple

search all the Strato mentions

Strato’s Tower Was Part of Antonia and North of the Temple

One would think it is hard to use google to find the relationship between Yahweh's and Astarte's temple

 

[ddt]

Astarte's Temple

search all the Strato mentions

Strato’s Tower Was Part of Antonia and North of the Temple

One would think it is hard to use google to find the relationship between Yahweh's and Astarte's temple

Those links give evidence that in the 1st C. CE, there was a structure called "Strato's Tower" on the Temple Mount. That's no evidence that:
(a) this structure once was a temple for Ashtarte, or was remnant thereof;
(b) much less that Ashtarte was still venerated there.

Do these "Wotan's oaks" constitute evidence that present-day Dutchmen still venerate Wotan?

 

[Matt Giwer]

Those links give evidence that in the 1st C. CE, there was a structure called "Strato's Tower" on the Temple Mount. That's no evidence that:
(a) this structure once was a temple for Ashtarte, or was remnant thereof;
(b) much less that Ashtarte was still venerated there.

Do these "Wotan's oaks" constitute evidence that present-day Dutchmen still venerate Wotan?

If BYT STRT is not a temple of Astarte then BYT YHWH is a tower of some guy with a strange name. So lets always refer to the tower Herod renovated.

The religion of the people is not the religion of the priests. Try to let that sink in.

 

[ddt]

So no evidence?

 

[Wroclaw]

Please produce physical evidence to embarrass me.

It's been done, Matt.

Please demonstrate that my arguments about the number of books of the Old Testament or linguistic distinctions between Aramaic and Hebrew are wrong.

You can't do it. So you bolted. Typical.

You'd do much better if you'd learn to concede. Makes a person looks less doctrinaire.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

If BYT STRT is not a temple of Astarte then BYT YHWH is a tower of some guy with a strange name. So lets always refer to the tower Herod renovated.

The religion of the people is not the religion of the priests. Try to let that sink in.

As we've discussed before, BYT was "house" in just several meanings of the word. From an actual home, to a city, to a clan, to a whole land, to a temple. Or do you believe that BYT LHM was a temple to some deity too?

It also doesn't have to be a person. In fact, all over the middle East, they had houses of this and of that, which weren't even based on some person. E.g., BYT LHM as "house of bread" for an agricultural city, or the "house of life" as a department of Egyptian temples.

Besides, you seem to have gotten your history all wrong again. What Josephus says is not that some tower of Strato was renovated in Jerusalem on the temple mount.

The "Strato's Tower" that he mentions as renovated by Herod was the old name of the city Caesarea on the coast, and which he even makes clear that it was 600 furlongs away. And it's clearly not mentioned as a temple, but as a city. (Again, we really see the construct of "BYT-someone" as in "house of Omri", "house of DWD", etc, only in this case a city-state as the house of some ancient ruler. Or so Josephus says. It might be based on Astarte after all.)

The Strato's Tower by the temple that Josephus mentions in chapter 3 is explicitly some kind of tunnel, and used to walk from here to there. Antigonus isn't mentioned as going to worship there or anything, but is just passing through on his way to see his brother.

It's also pretty clear that there aren't all that many more such Strato's Towers that Josephus knows of. In fact the whole "whoa, it looked like the prophecy was wrong, but it turns out to be right after all" plot in chapter 3 hinges on there not being so many of them. It was prophecised that Antigonus will be killed in Strato's Tower, which everyone takes to mean the city of Caesarea, some 600 furlongs away. So when he's seen on the same day so far away from that city, it's taken to mean that the prophecy can't come true any more, since there's no freaking way he can walk or ride six hundred furlongs in one day. But then, lo and behold, he takes a shortcut through a tunnel also called "Strato's Tower" and he gets killed there on the prophecised day after all. The whole setup makes no sense if BYT-STRT were known to mean a temple in Jerusalem.

Basically lay down the crack pipe and discuss what the sources actually say, not what wild flights of fantasy you can do yourself on the topic.

(Source for Josephus's text, for example, here: http://reluctant-messenger.com/josephusW01.htm )

Which leaves us with the Antonia Fortress, also restored by Herod and even dedicated to his patron Mark Anthony. The thing to remember there is that it's hardly a part of the temple or anything. It's a frikken military barracks of the Roman garrison. The most connection to the temple it has is that one tower of it is tall enough to have a grand view of the whole temple complex. It's not inconceivable that the Romans would have their own shrine somewhere in there (most castra had some place of worship or another), to their own approved gods. But it's still a military fort, not some temple of the natives or anything. There is nothing in the text to suggest that the Jews were going in and out the Roman garrison for worship all the time. Heck, there is no indication that such a strategic fort would even be open to the public at all, as all official business with the Romans would be done at the praetorium, which was on the opposite side of the city.

 

[tsig]

As long as it invalidates the Jews claim to Israel, it's good enough for Matt.

Yep, Seems like he's trying to erase them from history, anything that rubs the Jew out is fine with NN's*.


*NeoNazis.

 

[tsig]

Could you retry that in English? I can't make heads nor tails from your arguments.

Looks to me like his arguments' heads are eating their tails.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

TBH, that's actually what I don't understand.

I mean, sure, those guys made a lot BS up, like every religion did. Even the historiography of the ancients was more propaganda than what we'd call a honest scholarly approach nowadays. The Jews are no different in that aspect.

And, sure, they tried to make themselves more ancient than they really were. Most civilizations tried to stretch their history all the way to the creation of the Earth. Check out the lists of kings of Kish for some guys who clearly went "ah, screw it" past a point and started padding with ridiculously long lifespans as they went back. And I mean even after factoring in the conversion factor screw-up that made them look even more ridiculous, things still get silly as they get farther and farther back and still have a few thousand years left to pad.

Again, the Jews turn out to be just people in that aspect. Their kings and priests pad things in their favour, and sometimes lay the BS so thick, it's ridiculous.

And their moralizing stories are at times like they're not even trying to pretend it isn't fiction. I mean, you have stories where there was an orchard owner called Fruits, and he runs into trouble with queen Slut, or where a jewish girl called Jewess (yeah, that's what Judith means) tricks the enemy commander. It's not like they even bothered finding believable names for their characters, you know?

Heck, even their genesis story, has a first man called Man. Or sorta like calling him Homo nowadays. Yeah, Adammu already meant "man" by the time of Ebla.

And generally, we know that most of them didn't come from anywhere and as a separate group they aren't as ancient as they thought either.

But why would anyone try to erase them from history entirely?

And, at that, what's with the idea that they were making those stories up for the Romans? The thing is, the Romans had very rigid views of honour and duty and all that. Even Odysseus was a villain by Roman standards: just about every time he does something clever by Greek standards, it's despicably dishonourable by Roman standards. So, really, if a bunch of Jews were actually to come up with a fake history to con the Romans with... they couldn't come up with better stuff than that? Most stuff in there is stuff that you'd want hidden from the Romans, not stuff you'd invent to make the Romans like you.

I mean, really, the kind of thing that Romans respected the heck out of, was a last fight to the last man or honourable suicide like at Masada. That's the kind of story you'd want to invent if you want the Romans to respect you. Stuff where a civilian girl called Jewess dishonourably tricks and kills the enemy commander is exactly the stuff you wouldn't want to brag to the Romans about. Or stuff like telling the troops before an assault that the enemy's gold is tainted and it should all be given to the priests for decontamination? (Yeah, I guess those priests of Yahweh doubled as a hazmat team) Yeah, screwing your soldiers out of a fair reward is exactly what the Romans would appreciate... NOT.

 

[TimCallahan]

Astarte's Temple

search all the Strato mentions

Strato’s Tower Was Part of Antonia and North of the Temple

One would think it is hard to use google to find the relationship between Yahweh's and Astarte's temple

Most of these links deal with a military fortress. One points out that a structure was originally a temple to Ashtart in the first temple period ca. 1,000 to 587 BCE. So, once again, you have no evidence to support your assertion that the Jews of the first century CE were worshipping Astarte.

 

[TimCallahan]

Matt Giwer:

Please provide evidence to support your assertion that Sennacherib's chronicle, referring to how he crushed the revolt of Hezekiah (ANET 287 -288), is a forgery. I would also like to know if you consider references by Shlamaneser III to Ahab and Jehu (ANET 277 - 281) and and the account of the destruction of Samaria by Sargon II (ANET 284 - 287) to also be forgeries.

 

[tsig]

It's been done, Matt.

Please demonstrate that my arguments about the number of books of the Old Testament or linguistic distinctions between Aramaic and Hebrew are wrong.

You can't do it. So you bolted. Typical.

You'd do much better if you'd learn to concede. Makes a person looks less doctrinaire.

Yes, dogmatism makes one look like a believer.

 

[Wroclaw]

Matt Giwer:

Please provide evidence to support your assertion that Sennacherib's chronicle, referring to how he crushed the revolt of Hezekiah (ANET 287 -288), is a forgery. I would also like to know if you consider references by Shlamaneser III to Ahab and Jehu (ANET 277 - 281) and and the account of the destruction of Samaria by Sargon II (ANET 284 - 287) to also be forgeries.

I wouldn't hold your breath...

 

[TimCallahan]

I wouldn't hold your breath...

Well, rather than wait on Matt, I decided to go to his website. His argument against the Merneptah victory stele is that it actually describes a campaign against Libya(!). Thus, none it refers to Canaan. However, he gives no evidence to support this assertion.

He says that the obelisk of Shalmaneser has been mistranslated regarding references to Israel, Jehu and Omri. Apparently, those translating it, who were experts in the Assyrian variant of the Akkadian language flubbed the translation, and only Matt Giwer knows the truth.

He argues that the Moabite Stone has no provenance, and we've already seen his arguments against the Tel Dan inscription.

I did not find on his website any mention of Sennacherib's chronicle or why he sees it as a forgery.

 

[SpuriusMaximus]

Additionally, it now occured to me to check exactly what supposed confusion there can be before "Straton's Tower" and "Astarte's Temple", rather than take Matt's word for it. And it starts to look funny.

The words used by Josephus are "Stratonos pyrgos", where "pyrgos" is actually meaning "tower." It's used as "tower" by other ancient writers too, e.g., by Diodorus. Also it seems like the Romans called it Turris Stratonis, i.e., literally "Straton's Tower."

There is no ambigous "byt" or "strt" in there or anything. We have the exact words for "tower" and "Straton" in both Latin and Greek. In neither of those was there any ambiguity between "tower" and "temple", nor between "Straton" and "Astarte". Astarte would be known as Aphrodite to the Greeks anyway, not as Straton, a male name.

Note that all that doesn't exclude a historical connection to a temple of Astarte, but obviously by the 1st century CE, that connection is obviously long gone from anyone from anyone's mind. Josephus is naming the city by its name that would be known to the Greeks at the time, and that name is literally "Straton's Tower."

 

[TimCallahan]

Additionally, it now occured to me to check exactly what supposed confusion there can be before "Straton's Tower" and "Astarte's Temple", rather than take Matt's word for it. And it starts to look funny.

The words used by Josephus are "Stratonos pyrgos", where "pyrgos" is actually meaning "tower." It's used as "tower" by other ancient writers too, e.g., by Diodorus. Also it seems like the Romans called it Turris Stratonis, i.e., literally "Straton's Tower."

There is no ambigous "byt" or "strt" in there or anything. We have the exact words for "tower" and "Straton" in both Latin and Greek. In neither of those was there any ambiguity between "tower" and "temple", nor between "Straton" and "Astarte". Astarte would be known as Aphrodite to the Greeks anyway, not as Straton, a male name.

Note that all that doesn't exclude a historical connection to a temple of Astarte, but obviously by the 1st century CE, that connection is obviously long gone from anyone from anyone's mind. Josephus is naming the city by its name that would be known to the Greeks at the time, and that name is literally "Straton's Tower."

Okay, Matt Giwer, by now you must have seen what I posted, as well as the post above by Hans. What's your response? Or have you fled this thread? If you remain silent, it is a tacit admission on your part that you're wrong on all points you have made so far on this thread.

 

[TimCallahan]

Okay, Matt Giwer, by now you must have seen what I posted, as well as the post above by Hans. What's your response? Or have you fled this thread? If you remain silent, it is a tacit admission on your part that you're wrong on all points you have made so far on this thread.

It's three days now, and there's no response from Matt Giwer to the challenge above. So, I guess he's admitting he was wrong on all points; either that or he's simply run away.

 

[dafydd]

Just what I wanted, this thread invaded by an holocaust denier with anti-Semitic tendencies. Are there any lengths you will not go to in order to discredit jews and their history?

No,Matt will go to any lengths to display his ignorance and his hatred of Jews. Sad,but amusing.

 

[dafydd]

Matt Giwer:

Please provide evidence to support your assertion that Sennacherib's chronicle, referring to how he crushed the revolt of Hezekiah (ANET 287 -288), is a forgery. I would also like to know if you consider references by Shlamaneser III to Ahab and Jehu (ANET 277 - 281) and and the account of the destruction of Samaria by Sargon II (ANET 284 - 287) to also be forgeries.

He's scouring the loony right wing websites even as we speak. Expect an answer from his handlers soon.