Freethought & Rationalism Archive

spin · 12-13-2006, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by neilgodfrey

Yep, that's according to George Athas, Niels Peter Lemche, Thomas Thompson and Keith Whitelam.

Really? I know that David is usually seen as "beloved", which could well be the reference to a deity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neilgodfrey

Bethelehem = House of Bread;
Bethel = House of God;
Bethdavid = House of Praise.

You'll also find Beth-Dagon, Beth-Anat and Beth-Shamash. Should be a place where there is a temple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neilgodfrey

(What's Bethsaida?)

House of the hunter?

spin

driver8 · 12-13-2006, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Evil One

Of the four rivers mentioned in Genesis 2 as flowing out of Eden, two can be identified as the tigris and euphrates, real rivers with real geographical locations. Would this justify a claim that "the modern study of geography supports the bible account"? If you adopt the same standard as those who make the parallel claim for archaeology, then yes.

I'm ignorant to say the least, but every once in awhile a squirrel finds a nut.

I recommend the OP (and others) read the following site, which I have referenced before. It sounds as though the middle school "teacher" is desperately in need of such education as well.

From the "chair of USU's Religious Studies Certificate Program."
http://cc.usu.edu/%7Efath6/index.html

Start here:
An Anthropologist Looks at the Judeo-Christian Scriptures
http://cc.usu.edu/%7Efath6/contents-bible.htm

Regarding the Garden of Eden story, look at this page:
The Creation: The Ancient Semitic Cosmology
http://cc.usu.edu/%7Efath6/worldview.html
The OT mythology, including the creation story, seems to originate largely in Sumer. Not surprisingly, the Garden of Eden story was set there, as this page describes. The Chiddeqel = the Tigris, the Parat = the Euphrates, and the Gihon and Pishon have been identified through satellite imagery. So, there is an identified "Garden of Eden," but that of course doesn't mean any creation events occured there. The account concludes as follows:

Quote:

Sumer, the Garden Watered by Four Rivers
From this description of the four rivers of Genesis, it can be seen that the biblical story of Eden corresponds with the lands of ancient Sumer, the world's earliest civiliation. Sumer arose in southern Mesopotamia about 3500 BCE in the form of a series of city-states that were linked to one another by trade and to regions to the north and west by land and south by sea as well. By their own accounts, the earliest of these Sumerian city-states was the city of Eridu, which like the later Sumerian cities of Ur and Erech was founded on the banks of the Euphrates River. The ruins of these ancient cities now lie about 400 miles upstream from where the Euphrates enters the Persian Gulf, but in that day the Gulf extended all the way to where these cities of commerce were founded. Their agriculture flourished in the rich delta soils deposited by the Euphrates and Tigris River, a process that gradually filled the northern reaches of the Gulf with silt, gradually moving the coast over the millenia toward the south to its present location. At the writing of the Genesis account around 1000 BCE, the silting process had moved the coast far enough south, that instead of flowing directly into the Gulf itself, as they had done in earlier times, the Gihon (which no longer flowed regularly) and the Pishon flowed directly into the Euphrates south of where it is joined by the Tigris, the configuration described in the Genesis account. Thus, the Eden of the Genesis story can be identified as the great flood plain of the Euphrates south of the ancient cities of Sumer.

This website has been a very valuable internet resource for me. The uneasy movement from polytheism to monotheism is captured here. Unfortunately, it treats the Jesus account in a very traditional sense after having somewhat laid bare the foundations for the overall myth.

The Evil One · 12-13-2006, 08:03 AM

My point was that finding real geography as background in a story does not mean that geography supports the story. Similarly finding real history as background in a story does not mean that history / archaeology supports the story. And as has been pointed out, the history we find as background to the Bible story is, by and large, not real history until the later period.

John Kesler · 12-13-2006, 08:43 AM

2 Kings 3 mentions Mesha, king of Moab, and his existence is verified by the Moabite Stone/Mesha Stele. If you substitute Yahweh, the Hebrew God, for Kemosh/Chemosh, the Moabite deity, the Moabite Stone reads like a page from the Old Testament. Just as the OT authors attributed military failure to Yahweh's displeasure, and claimed that their God ordered military strikes, so, too, does the Mesha stele make these claims for Chemosh.

Tartantyco · 12-13-2006, 08:54 AM

Quote:

She asked if anyone knew who wrote the bible, and then told them that King James did.

-This is what caught my eye, it's simply astounding how little most christians know about their religion.... You're going to "confront" her, right sea star? I would require a complete After Action Report in that case

.

neilgodfrey · 12-13-2006, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Really? I know that David is usually seen as "beloved", which could well be the reference to a deity.

spin

Good work. Was just testing to see if anyone was reading!

Clivedurdle · 12-13-2006, 12:54 PM

http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/...566336,00.html

Persian Fire (or via: amazon.co.uk) gives a good overview of what was going on around here slightly later - fascinating that the Bible only mentions in passing one of the biggest empires on the planet!

12-13-2006, 03:28 PM

Is my vague memory of David wrong? Or is there perhaps a dispute that I vaguely recall one side of?

I thought there was some sort of folk tale and the odd scrap of archaeological backing to his existence, nothing definite but comparable to King Arthur. As I said, I'm an ignoramus here, so I make no claims, Are any of the copious links & refs supplied above particularly pertinent to David? (And thanks, all, this looks like some fun reading.)

neilgodfrey · 12-13-2006, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cajela

Is my vague memory of David wrong? Or is there perhaps a dispute that I vaguely recall one side of?

I thought there was some sort of folk tale and the odd scrap of archaeological backing to his existence, nothing definite but comparable to King Arthur. As I said, I'm an ignoramus here, so I make no claims, Are any of the copious links & refs supplied above particularly pertinent to David? (And thanks, all, this looks like some fun reading.)

Go to "Monument 4" on this page. It has a summary of the BethDwd inscription and link to a link to an email by George Athas iirc.

Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

sea star · 12-13-2006, 05:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tartantyco

-This is what caught my eye, it's simply astounding how little most christians know about their religion.... You're going to "confront" her, right sea star? I would require a complete After Action Report in that case

.

If I do, it will have to wait until after the celebration of the birth of our saviour, right? Don't want to seem unchristian, now do I?

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

12-13-2006, 08:03 AM	#13
The Evil One Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: England Posts: 2,561	My point was that finding real geography as background in a story does not mean that geography supports the story. Similarly finding real history as background in a story does not mean that history / archaeology supports the story. And as has been pointed out, the history we find as background to the Bible story is, by and large, not real history until the later period.

12-13-2006, 08:43 AM	#14
John Kesler Veteran Member Join Date: May 2005 Location: Charleston, WV Posts: 1,037	2 Kings 3 mentions Mesha, king of Moab, and his existence is verified by the Moabite Stone/Mesha Stele. If you substitute Yahweh, the Hebrew God, for Kemosh/Chemosh, the Moabite deity, the Moabite Stone reads like a page from the Old Testament. Just as the OT authors attributed military failure to Yahweh's displeasure, and claimed that their God ordered military strikes, so, too, does the Mesha stele make these claims for Chemosh.

12-13-2006, 12:54 PM	#17
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/...566336,00.html Persian Fire (or via: amazon.co.uk) gives a good overview of what was going on around here slightly later - fascinating that the Bible only mentions in passing one of the biggest empires on the planet!

12-13-2006, 03:28 PM	#18
cajela Guest Posts: n/a	Is my vague memory of David wrong? Or is there perhaps a dispute that I vaguely recall one side of? I thought there was some sort of folk tale and the odd scrap of archaeological backing to his existence, nothing definite but comparable to King Arthur. As I said, I'm an ignoramus here, so I make no claims, Are any of the copious links & refs supplied above particularly pertinent to David? (And thanks, all, this looks like some fun reading.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.