premjan

You don't like the archaeological proof for antiquity of Egypt, Sumeria, the Indus Valley etc.? Perhaps you just don't believe in carbon dates.

bacht

Just a guess, but I would think that the Greeks (Myceneans, Dorians, Ionians etc), roughly contemporary with the Jews (ca 1200-330 BCE), have more material to look at, both internal and external :huh:

IamJoseph

Yes, agreed. They have more and they were a super power controlling the then world - greek language and writings became as is english today.

Yet this affirms, instead of denying the point: even if second, it is still the most substantial proof concerning the history of Israel being authentic. And when it comes to pre-2500 years, the Hebrew evidence wins by a huge ratio with writings and relics. The greeks begot the alpha beta writings from the Hebrew alef bet when they became the first nation to translate the Hebrew scriptures [The Septuagint bible].

IamJoseph

I've no problem with those nations being older - it is easily evidenced. Israel came late in the ancient world scene. The pyramids predated Abraham by 1200 years; the original red writings on the Pyramids came from India 5200 years ago - even then an advanced nation.

Yet there is an anomoly that Israel shows more evidence in writings and archeological relics of her history, than far older nations. Where are the historical, alphabetical books of the Sumerians, ancient Egyptians and ancient India? Why does Israel have the oldest alphabetical books, despite being in constant exile and displacements? This is the factor which confuses.

premjan

There are plenty of records from Egypt, India, and there is mythology from Sumeria (the epic of Gilgamesh etc.) I guess you don't like the style in which they are written, or you don't believe their antiquity. It is possible that Israel took more care to preserve some records, and also it is possible that some of those supposedly historical records are post hoc inventions.

bacht

I don't follow your argument about the alphabet. My understanding is that its origin in the Levant (Phoenicia?) was after 1000 BCE. It may have been adopted by the Hebrews and the Greeks around the same time.

It's not impossible that the first Hebrew scriptures were written at the same time as Homer's stories were recorded. The Septuagint is much later, begun in the 3rd C, after Aramaic had replaced Hebrew as the spoken language of the Jews.

The Bronze Age stories in Genesis may have been introduced after the Babylonian exile. We can't assume that Jews in monarchical times studied material from before Moses and the exodus, which was their founding national mythology.

fatpie42

And what is in the story of Herakles which contradicts history?

I can't believe that you expect me to believe that a story about a man with superhuman strength and magic hair who was able to defeat an entire army with a jawbone and knock down a building from inside is historical fact.

Doug Shaver

How nice. You will get to spend eternity saying "I told you so."

IamJoseph

I've no knowledge about Herakles, but I see many stats in the Samson story alligning with history, which you have been selective in dismissing altogether.

Samson was not superhuman - in fact very human in seccumbing to the power of the flesh. The hair was not magic but alligned with a nazerite vow undertaken by his parents - very normal with many who undertook vows of abstention for repentence or to acquire a cleansing, etc. The kind of power ascribed to Samson is not impossible or outside imperical possibility; the hair acted as an inspirational, psychological instigator: Samson was afflicted with polio, his power subject to certain impulses which reverses one's plight in compensationary measure - as with blind peoples having powerful singing voices or psychic perception, and with deformed people having their only usable limb being more powerful than the norms.

Being strong, blinded and afflicted with polio - amidst a time of a war against a terrorist group as the Philistines embedded in caves in Gaza - and also falling for a Philistine woman - seems a reasonable believable story with only a small dose of the unusal. Matched against the 1000s of attaching historical stats - it only becomes more credible. Of note is that Samson was totally castigated by his people for other reasons, implying a non-biased writings.

The defeat of many with a jawbone of an ass, specially its settings, placing himself in a narrow gauge an army could only enter few at a time - is very believable. This is also how Greece prevailed over the far more mightier Persian armies.

IamJoseph

That the Hebrew books constitute the first 'alphabetical' books, is what my belief is. I don't say there was no writings before; the Greeks themselves admit they got the alphabets from the Hebrew - not the phoenecian, which had no 'V', and no alphabetical books pre-hebrew. The Aramaic, a generic language in the region, became prominant when Rome forbid Hebrew; privately, Jews spoke and prayed in hebrew. There are no greek alphabetical books pre-Septuagint.

I know that most links and references place phoenecian as a pre-hebrew, however my own research does not agree with this - to the extent it appears the reverse is the case. The Phoenecians had much interaction with the Jews and periodically alligned with them [Solomon's naval vessels were a joint venture with phonecians], and they prevailed for up to 800 years after Israel was established as a sovereign nation: so where are the historical, alphabetical Phoaenecian books - which should be in far greater measure than the Hebrew - if it was the proto-type of the Hebrew? I know of not even 'ONE' such phoenecian book, and it seems the majority view is derived solely from some bits of alphabets [remnants of non-historical epitaphs and trade reciepts, said to resemble the Hebrew].

These premises came from early European sources which were totally inclined in negating anything connected with Jews - which even a cursory study of ancient history and European writers will confirm. A reasonable and genuine pursuit of the truth must ask for proof of Phoenecian historical books - with dates, names, events traceable via other historical accounts and relics - as with the five Mosaic books and later prophetic writings.

Even if the Genesis story was a total fiction - it would still require a super computer to manage its excellence in maths; not to mention the scientifically authenticated 'names' - archeology works 90% via names and mode of writing inflections [paleanthology].

The notion of writing in the babylonian exile is historically negated: this history was evidenced pre-586 BCE [pre-exile] in Judea and Samaria, where all the laws inscribed in the Mosaic were adhered to, including the first Temple
period.


The psalms of David are totally alligned with the Mosaic, and mentions Moses by name numerously. The law of circumsizion and Monotheism predates Moses, evidencing a thread of belief pre and of Moses. While there are some stretched and remarkable assumptions in the Hebrew bible, its alligning with history, maths, science, medicine and such an advanced form of alphabetical and grammatical delivery - renders it as perhaps the most mysterious writings in existence, and thus challenging.