Davka

There are tons of alternatives. pretending that your favorite source's speculation (however well-informed) equals "fact" is laughable.

This most certainly does not "settle it." We would expect to see the same thing if the Yawhists/proto-Israelites had gradually moved into the area over the course of three centuries, assimilating into the Canaanite culture.

The FACT is that there is not yet enough information to settle the issue. Your personal love-affair with the conclusions of Finklestein and Silberman does not make those conclusions any more accurate. My own expectation, having watched the debate over this issue for the past 20 years, is that academic positions will continue to shift as new evidence is unearthed. It may well turn out that Finklestein and Silberman are right, but I doubt that even they would state their current position in as absolute terms as you are using.

Grog

I'm just providing the quote. However, if you want to find out what he says about that and he evidence he presents, read the book.

outhouse

You know I love ya brother Davka, no need to get to far off the grid here.

It is a fact, that the pottery found for two hundred year in factually identical to Canaanite.

It is a fact Israelites used Canaanite deities.


It is a fact Israelites used the Canaanite alphabet.


That is why Finklestein can use the word "fact" in his/their decriptions.




Being a Yahwist does not identify a Israelite. At their formation 1200 BC "proto Israelites" and even after 1000BC Israelites factually worshipped many of the Canaanite seities. the bible is full of their polytheistic past.

Monotheism to Yahweh did not begin ubtil 600 years after the formation of Israelites.


All 4 of the top archeologist refer to Israelites after 1200 BC as proto Israelites. Israelites did not even begin to become Israelites until after 1000 BC and for centuries these people constantly wiped out by war factually changed and they have always been MULTI CULTURAL.



Then explain why Israelites first used Canaanite deities, alphabet and pottery for hundreds of years.

In the beginning El was the father of Yahweh and Asherah was Els wife, Baal was Yahwehs brother. Its not until 800 BC that we see some tribes giving all Els attributes to Yahweh.

But one more time monotheism to Yahweh didnt start unrtil after 622 BC and even then it took hundreds of years to flush out their polytheistic past.


Your right it doesnt, the FACTS do it all by themselves.

Again Canaanite deities, alphabet, and pottery are facts not a conclusion nor opinion.




The facts have only emerged within the last 20 years tops, and these new facts so far have gone UNREFUTED.

All 4 of the top archeologist agree with proto Israelites after 1200 BC, even they do differ in the evolution process slightly.

Fact, No evidence exist for Israelites prior to 1209 BC

Fact, both previous culture Egyptian and Canaanite with excellent writing make no mention of Israelites until the Merneptah stele that indicates a semi nomadic people, not a place. At this time there were no major settlements in Israel. Factually after 1200 BC and till 1000 BC do we see a slow migration to the highlands of Israel who are identical in almost all ways as displaced Canaanites would be who lost their central governement as their previous civilization had crumbled some 50 years previous.

Canaanites in these areas were well known up until 1250 BC, and no settlements in the highlands are noted.



Now I have not even began to deconstruct the OT which factually cannot be used to recontruct thi searly period as the latest writings of the OT can roughly traced back to 1000 ish BC mainly claim 960-980 BC for the oldest source based on traditions dealing with Yahweh and 920 -940 BC for Els traditions. Both of these early traditions were based on more of a north south division.


Brother Davka, would you like to argue about Noah being influenced by Gilgamesh which was influenced first by Ziusudra too?

Davka

Which proves nothing, except that the YHWists used canaanite pottery. Perhaps they had no tradition of making their own pottery before coming to the area? There are any number of possible explanations.

Which proves nothing yet again.


Which proves nothing yet again.


Indeed. But which assertions do they assign the word 'fact' to, and are they the same assertions that YOU assign the word to?



Yep.

Source?


None of which means "ergo, they were indisputably Canaanites."


Done.

This is pretty sketchy, based on very thin evidence.

. . . and?
No, they don't. The facts lend themselves to certain conclusions, but the conclusions don't magically become facts as a result.

Correct, but the conclusions some have derived from those facts are not themselves facts.

You seem to have a serious problem with distinguishing between observable fact and the possible (or even probable) conclusions which can be reached via application of those facts. The issue is far from settled, and your repetition of "is too!" changes nothing.

outhouse

Davka Yahwist did not exist at that time. Yahweh was factually a Canaanites deity. [facepalm]

I refuse to debate with you until you stop these unsupported statements that have zero evidence. When I am providing facts supporting mine.


Provide evidence for Yahwist only for Israelites ethnogenesis. Hell provide any credible source Yahwist existed from 1200 - 1000 BC.

You do know Yahweh was factually a Canaanite deity previous to Israelites existing??????

False.


Archeology. Paintings found that date to 800 BC show a some people not all, claimed Yahweh and his consort Asherah, with what may be a picture of Baal.


Isrealites polytheistic past is not up for debate



If the head archeologist in Israel today, who's work is unrefuted, and claims his own ethnogenesis is factually from the Canaanite culture. Its good enough for me, with all the study I have done on this topic which is one of my specialties.







what is your hypothesis?

andrewcriddle

If the Israelite claim that they originated from outside Canaan has no historical foundation then why is it so strong in what seem to be the early traditions ?

NB 1 One could argue that the traditions of an origin outside Canaan did not take shape until the Babylonian exile but this is IMO unlikely.

NB 2 It seems extremely likely (again IMO) that the Israelites were biologically mostly descended from the Canaanites, but that is different from the claim that no historical events lie behind the claim of an origin from elsewhere.

Andrew Criddle

Grog

Andrew, I don't know if this is particularly good argument against Finkelstein/Silberman's hypothesis. Origin myths, it seems to me, can have no roots in reality. My grandmother was an indigenous woman from Zacatecas, Mexico, and she used to say that her people believed that they were descended from Egyptians who came to Mexico on boats. I don't know how this idea emerged, but it doesn't appear to be rooted in reality.

outhouse

That's the exact point, as written it is not a early tradition and reflects their 7'th century cultural needs.

Example. Noahs mythology stolen from the Mesopotamians and details brought back from their return from exile. Im sure flood legends in the levant have been common since Ziusudras.

But the point is, look at how the Isrealites whole cloth molded it to their personal theology, all 100% fictional.

outhouse

That is not true.


It is a fact Israelites used Canaanite deities. Unrefuted.

Its a fact they used the Canaanite alphabet. Urefuted.

Its a fact their pottery was the same for two hundred years. Unrefuted.


4 of the best and and learned men on this topic, all agree Isrealites formed after 1200 BC after the Canaanite civilization collapsed.

Toto

outhouse:

If you provide references and write in complete sentences, you might be able to have a productive discussion instead of this useless exchange of "fact!" "not fact!" "unrefuted!"

It is also bad form in this forum to compare anyone to a creationist.