FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Philosophy & Religious Studies > History of Abrahamic Religions & Related Texts
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 01:23 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-29-2013, 01:19 PM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 322
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenorikuma View Post
According to Lemche, the Tel Dan Stele already disproved the existence of King David by showing that bwtdwd originated as a toponym in use around the 8th century.
His latest speculations concern the possibility of this dwd from the Tel Dan stele being the name of a god, probably the god Shalim, whom the biblical Solomon also is possibly a personification of, according to Lemche. But he regards the stele as a probable forgery to begin with.
Cesc is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 10:09 AM   #12
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesc View Post
His latest speculations concern the possibility of this dwd from the Tel Dan stele being the name of a god, probably the god Shalim, whom the biblical Solomon also is possibly a personification of, according to Lemche. But he regards the stele as a probable forgery to begin with.
Lemche takes a fringe position and claims of forgery are not followed by most. You also have the Mesha stele that is controversial that has the possibility of David


He is too far left into minimalism for my liking.


David carries a very small amount of historicty, in my opinion. Biblical text do not portray the real history or man as far as im concerned. I follow Finklesetin on this one who is a little more right inbetween minimalism and maximalism.
outhouse is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 02:15 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Hillsborough, NJ
Posts: 3,551
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesc View Post
His latest speculations concern the possibility of this dwd from the Tel Dan stele being the name of a god, probably the god Shalim, whom the biblical Solomon also is possibly a personification of, according to Lemche. But he regards the stele as a probable forgery to begin with.
Lemche takes a fringe position and claims of forgery are not followed by most. You also have the Mesha stele that is controversial that has the possibility of David


He is too far left into minimalism for my liking.


David carries a very small amount of historicty, in my opinion. Biblical text do not portray the real history or man as far as im concerned. I follow Finklesetin on this one who is a little more right inbetween minimalism and maximalism.
I was considering making an identical post earlier today but decided to let this slide.

Did David and Solomon Exist?

is an interesting discussion of the issues. Dr. Cline seems to side with the majority but does wonder (as I have) who the fuck was Solomon?

This is a rare instance where a minimalist position is taking some heat - sort of a man bites dog.

Given the probable existence of a David, you get a lot of scholars immediately jumping to a united monarchy.
semiopen is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 02:46 PM   #14
Talk Freethought Staff
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Deep South, USA
Posts: 7,568
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
It's difficult to collect enough evidence to prove something never existed.
Depends on the claim trying to be disproved.

Does it not? :huh:
If one finds a small green top hat and a pot of gold, it could be presented as evidence of the existence of leprechauns. As improbable as a leprechaun might be, the absence of little green hats and pots of gold is not evidence of their non-existence.

What is the evidence of non-existence, except a lack of evidence?
Bronzeage is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 05:58 PM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
Given the probable existence of a David, you get a lot of scholars immediately jumping to a united monarchy.

I have a serious problem with that nonsense.

I dont even like minimalist or maximalist camps, its one time I agree with one scholar Finklestein who likes to ride in the midddle.


There is no united monarchy outside biased scholarships. This doesnt mean the OT is whole cloth fiction either.
outhouse is offline  
Old 07-30-2013, 06:01 PM   #16
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auburn ca
Posts: 4,269
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post

Depends on the claim trying to be disproved.

Does it not? :huh:
If one finds a small green top hat and a pot of gold, it could be presented as evidence of the existence of leprechauns. As improbable as a leprechaun might be, the absence of little green hats and pots of gold is not evidence of their non-existence.

What is the evidence of non-existence, except a lack of evidence?
I agree with your stance here.

Sometimes claims are made, and evidence proves these claims to be unsubstantiated. Thus, evidence in some cases proves non-existence.
outhouse is offline  
Old 08-01-2013, 05:56 PM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,808
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenorikuma View Post
According to Lemche, the Tel Dan Stele already disproved the existence of King David by showing that bwtdwd originated as a toponym in use around the 8th century.
I highly recommend George Athas' "The Tel Dan Inscription" (or via: amazon.co.uk) for a full discussion of this very important point.
Minimalist is offline  
Old 08-01-2013, 06:18 PM   #18
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Athas book can be previewed on Amazon or Google Books. There is a Vridar post here
Toto is offline  
Old 08-01-2013, 07:29 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 4,095
Default

This is grasping at straws for heaven's sake......to prove OR to disprove that King David existed based on chicken scratches. How preposterous.
This logic could be applied equally to anything and anyone in ancient history and would be equally useless either way. But of course we have to keep these folks earning a living, don't we?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Minimalist View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tenorikuma View Post
According to Lemche, the Tel Dan Stele already disproved the existence of King David by showing that bwtdwd originated as a toponym in use around the 8th century.
I highly recommend George Athas' "The Tel Dan Inscription" (or via: amazon.co.uk) for a full discussion of this very important point.
Duvduv is offline  
Old 08-01-2013, 08:25 PM   #20
Talk Freethought Staff
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Deep South, USA
Posts: 7,568
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by outhouse View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bronzeage View Post

If one finds a small green top hat and a pot of gold, it could be presented as evidence of the existence of leprechauns. As improbable as a leprechaun might be, the absence of little green hats and pots of gold is not evidence of their non-existence.

What is the evidence of non-existence, except a lack of evidence?
I agree with your stance here.

Sometimes claims are made, and evidence proves these claims to be unsubstantiated. Thus, evidence in some cases proves non-existence.
Failure to prove existence is not the same thing as proving non-existence.

I can prove I do not have a leprechaun in my pocket, but this does not prove a thing about anyone else's pocket.
Bronzeage is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:38 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.