Freethought & Rationalism Archive

gurugeorge · 07-02-2007, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biomystic

Quote:

Originally Posted by gurugeorge

Check the first paragraph of the OP.

The first paragraph tells us nothing about the "House of David" inscription. That's my point. Why accept it as referring to a man named "David" when the Moab Stone and Canaanite references to "dawidum", or "Davids" in the plural indicates the word may just stand for chieftains with a singular "David" as referring to the Chief, head honcho, hefe, etc., e.g. "House of the Chief" with no particular chieftain named.

To me, it is significant that the word "chieftains" is used often in the story of David the Tanakh.

I think before any meaningful speculations about a historical David can occur, archeologists and historians need to know exactly what the ancient Canaanite(?) or Aramaic(?) word, "dawidum" meant, the word for chieftains.

I was pointing out that you seemed to be oblivious of the fact that the OP in the thread your post was originally in had specifically requested that that thread was meant to take David's existence (in the way Silbertstein etc., suggest) as given.

But now that your digression from that thread has been kindly accommodated by the moderators with its own thread, my point is irrelevant

I'm not an academic myself, but one of the marks of scholarly discussion is to keep discussions within limits so that some detail can be dug up. It's very easy to go hareing off into all sorts of speculations and interesting points connected with what someone's talking about (I do it myself here all the time, I can't help it sometimes); but it's a good scholarly discipline that this forum imposes to try and stick as precisely as possible to certain limited topics, so that there can be a bit of depth.

Minimalist · 07-02-2007, 09:54 AM

Thanks, Toto. I have to post a link to that on my archaeology board.

Biomystic · 07-02-2007, 10:08 AM

so it's not easy for me to stay the course of structured discussion. But I don't post things off the top of my head--got a real live book and everything

that backs up my opinions as something I've given quite a bit of thought to over the years, but still, I am a visionary type and hope only to inspire others and perhaps I have

"But now that your digression from that thread has been kindly accommodated by the moderators with its own thread, my point is irrelevant"

07-02-2007, 10:08 AM	#13
Biomystic Banned Join Date: May 2007 Location: Northern California Posts: 48	Scholars study what visionaries produce so it's not easy for me to stay the course of structured discussion. But I don't post things off the top of my head--got a real live book and everything that backs up my opinions as something I've given quite a bit of thought to over the years, but still, I am a visionary type and hope only to inspire others and perhaps I have "But now that your digression from that thread has been kindly accommodated by the moderators with its own thread, my point is irrelevant"

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-02-2007, 09:54 AM	#12
Minimalist Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,808	Thanks, Toto. I have to post a link to that on my archaeology board.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.