9
   

Europe is the bastion of human civilization.

 
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 07:23 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
All scholars agree that Egyptian records show that the Hebrew deity was a local deity in the area where desert nomads roamed.


This is untrue. No one believes this outside of the community of religious believers who really really want the story to be true.

You made this claim, back it up. Point to a single reputable secular source to back up this claim you are making.

oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 08:37 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
You made this claim, back it up. Point to a single reputable secular source to back up this claim you are making.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shasu
Quote:
Shasu of Yhw
There are two Egyptian texts, one dated to the period of Amenhotep III (14th century BCE), the other to the age of Ramesses II (13th century BCE) which refer to 'Yahu in the land of the Šosū-Bedouins' (t3 š3św jhw3), in which Yahu is a toponym. Regarding the name Yhw, Michael Astour observed that the "hieroglyphic rendering corresponds very precisely to the Hebrew tetragrammaton YHWH, or Yahweh, and antedates the hitherto oldest occurrence of that divine name -- on the Moabite Stone -- by over five hundred years."[6]
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 08:49 am
Just in the interest of balance here, this is the part which Oralloy left out:

Quote:
Objections exist to the proposed link between the Israelites and the Shasu, given that the group[which? in the Merneptah reliefs identified with the Israelites are not described or depicted as Shasu. The Shasu are usually depicted hieroglyphically with a determinative indicating a land, not a people. The usefulness of the determinatives has been called into question, though; it has been pointed out that in Egyptian writings, including the Merneptah Stele, determinatives are used arbitrarily. The most frequent designation for the "foes of Shasu" is the hill-country determinative. Thus they are differentiated from the Canaanites, who are defending the fortified cities of Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yenoam. At the same time, the hill-country determinative is not always used for Shasu, as is the case in the "Shasu of Yhw" name rings from Soleb and Amarah-West. Gösta Werner Ahlström argued that this doesn't disprove a possible connection; the reason Shasu and Israelites are differentiated from each other in the Merneptah Stele is that these Shasu were nomads while the Israelites were a sedentary subset of the Shasu.

Frank J. Yurco and Michael G. Hasel would distinguish the Shasu in Merneptah's Karnak reliefs from the people of Israel since they wear different clothing, hairstyles,[verification needed] and are determined differently by Egyptian scribes. Moreover, Israel is determined as a people, though not necessarily as a socioethnic group. Egyptian scribes tended to bundle up "rather disparate groups of people within a single artificially unifying rubric."


I would also point out that Gösta Werner Ahlström, mentioned above, is employing an argument from ignorance--if you can't disprove the connection, it must be valid.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 08:54 am
@oralloy,
Can you provide a link to Historical scholar without a religious bias who makes this claim? Wikipedia is not a scholarly link, and this article seems to be relying on the word one or two religion fans.

There are two ways to approach these questions

1) Start with the assumption that the Bible is true... then look through history to find any evidence that supports your pre-existing belief and ignore any counter-evidence.

2) Start by looking at all of the evidence, and then base your understanding of history based on what you find and learn without any religious pre-conceptions.

The people who use the second approach understand that there was no significant presence of Hebrews living in Egypt either as slaves or in any other circumstance. There is no real evidence that this was the case, and the circumstantial evidence that people who really really want to believe provide doesn't hold up when you look at all the facts.

Do you have the same faith that Noah's Ark is true?

What about the talking Snake?
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 09:05 am
@Setanta,
Quote:
Objections exist to the proposed link between the Israelites and the Shasu, given that the group[which? in the Merneptah reliefs identified with the Israelites are not described or depicted as Shasu. The Shasu are usually depicted hieroglyphically with a determinative indicating a land, not a people.

Of course a proposed link between the two populations will raise objections. The idea is that some escaped slaves picked up the religion as they passed by on their way home, not that the Israelites were descended from the original worshipers.


Setanta wrote:
I would also point out that Gösta Werner Ahlström, mentioned above, is employing an argument from ignorance--if you can't disprove the connection, it must be valid.

It might be that he was just arguing that it is possible, as opposed to being absolutely true beyond any doubt.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 09:51 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:
Can you provide a link to Historical scholar without a religious bias who makes this claim? Wikipedia is not a scholarly link, and this article seems to be relying on the word one or two religion fans.

I've no idea who does or doesn't have a religious bias, but the hieroglyphs either exist or they don't. I've never seen anyone claim that they do not exist.


maxdancona wrote:
The people who use the second approach understand that there was no significant presence of Hebrews living in Egypt either as slaves or in any other circumstance. There is no real evidence that this was the case, and the circumstantial evidence that people who really really want to believe provide doesn't hold up when you look at all the facts.

They would not have been Hebrews. They would have been Canaanites. Israelite culture did not arise until the start of the Iron Age, and the slaves would not have been introduced to the Hebrew deity until after they had escaped.

The Hyksos had a pretty significant presence in Egypt:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyksos


maxdancona wrote:
Do you have the same faith that Noah's Ark is true?

There was a recent PBS documentary (Nova maybe??) that made a good case that ancient Mesopotamian culture had people prepare giant boats in case the Tigris/Euphrates flooded. It seemed a plausible origin for the story.


maxdancona wrote:
What about the talking Snake?

I'm not sure which story you are referring to. Was that part of Moses' arguments with the Pharaoh?

I've heard people suggest that the 10 (or is it 12?) plagues inflicted on Egypt could have had natural origins, with the later plagues being the result of what happened in the earlier plagues. I've not seen the subject given any serious scrutiny though, so I can't say if the idea has merit.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 01:35 pm
@oralloy,
Who are the slaves to whom you refer? Did you decide to just ignore the evidence presented that the pyramids were built by skilled labor and not by slaves?
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 02:39 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
Who are the slaves to whom you refer?

They were a group of Canaanites. Their escape from slavery was quite inspirational in parts of Canaan after the chaos of the societal collapse at the end of the Bronze Age.


Setanta wrote:
Did you decide to just ignore the evidence presented that the pyramids were built by skilled labor and not by slaves?

I can't see how the question of who built the pyramids relates to the points that I was making.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 02:57 pm
@oralloy,
Your answer, for which you provide zero evidence, just underscores your continuing attempt to introduce a biblical narrative into an historical discussion. I have absolutely no reason to believe your claims. The Jews are Semites, very likely originally Akkadians, and came from far to the east of what you are refering to as Canaan.
oralloy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 03:50 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
oralloy wrote:
They were a group of Canaanites. Their escape from slavery was quite inspirational in parts of Canaan after the chaos of the societal collapse at the end of the Bronze Age.

Your answer, for which you provide zero evidence, just underscores your continuing attempt to introduce a biblical narrative into an historical discussion.

The discussion started with a claim that certain parts of the Bible are untrue. I am not sure how my pointing out that history is in fact compatible with those parts of the Bible is introducing anything, as the Bible has been part of the discussion from the start.

As far as evidence goes, I earlier mentioned that textual analysis shows that the part about the slaves escaping across the Red Sea are the most ancient part of the Bible.

Note: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Song_of_the_sea
Quote:
The Song of the Sea is noted for its archaic language. It is written in a style of Hebrew much older than that of the rest Exodus. Most scholars consider it the oldest surviving text describing the Exodus, dating to the pre-monarchic period. An alternative is that it was deliberately written in an archaic style, a literary device not unknown.[3]

The fact that the story of the slaves' escape formed such a vital part of their national identity that we still know the story today seems to be pretty good evidence that it was deeply popular in their culture at the time.



Setanta wrote:
The Jews are Semites, very likely originally Akkadians, and came from far to the east of what you are refering to as Canaan.

This is incorrect. The Israelites were one of the Iron Age cultures that descended directly from the Canaanites after the collapse of the Bronze Age.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 06:06 pm
This all shoots right over your head, doesn't it? My point is that you are attempting to introduce a biblical narrative as though it were reliable history--which it is not.

Wikipedia has been vandalized by christian fanatics since at least late 2013, if not earlier. Wikipedia is an entirely unreliable source for any christian or biblical subjects.

You make your remarks about the origin of the Jews as Canaanites without a shred of substantiation.

You're peddling bullsh*t, a long established habit of yours.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 06:24 pm
@Setanta,
"bastion o civilization" . I see only connected haplogroups withmore advancing ways to kill
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 06:27 pm
I believe Max's title was intended as sarcastic irony--someone in another thread was touting Europe as the source of all culture, ethics and morality. Not everyone here is buying that.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 06:39 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
This all shoots right over your head, doesn't it?

No. I have the matter well in hand.


Setanta wrote:
My point is that you are attempting to introduce a biblical narrative as though it were reliable history--which it is not.

I can hardly be introducing a subject that has been the topic of discussion from the beginning of the tangent.

That there are Egyptian records attesting to Iron Age Israelite culture as far back as 1200 BC is very reliable history.

That there are even earlier Egyptian records attesting to the existence of the Hebrew deity at a specific location in the lands of the desert nomads is also very reliable history.

The textual analysis giving an ancient date to the part of the Bible covering the crossing of the Red Sea is good science.


Setanta wrote:
Wikipedia has been vandalized by christian fanatics since at least late 2013, if not earlier. Wikipedia is an entirely unreliable source for any christian or biblical subjects.

The fact that Wikipedia accurately reflects the fact that science and history show ancient dates for the Israelites and their religion does not mean that they've been vandalized.


Setanta wrote:
You make your remarks about the origin of the Jews as Canaanites without a shred of substantiation.

Correct. At the moment I am not bothering to substantiate that claim in this thread. It is tangential to the points that I am making, and the history is pretty straightforward and noncontroversial. Better to devote my limited energy to substantiating my points.


Setanta wrote:
You're peddling bullsh*t, a long established habit of yours.

Wrong on both counts. My posts here are entirely factual, and all my posts elsewhere are also entirely factual.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 06:51 pm
No, your posts are not factual and as usual you seem to think that all you need to do is say so and that makes it true. In fact, the most recent genetic studies show that the Jews are most closely related to the Cypriots and the Druze.

Quote:
The study, as expected, confirmed the Middle Eastern, or Levantine, origins of Jews as documented in ancient Hebrew scriptures. This lineage is clearly visible in communities today, ages after the Jews were expelled from Israel.

More unexpected, though, was the discovery that Jewish patterns of SNPs were closer to those of Cypriots and Druze than with the other populations of the Middle East.


Source

I have not the least doubt that you'll claim everything you write is factural, even when it is shown that that is clearly not the case.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 07:04 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
No, your posts are not factual

Yes they are.


Setanta wrote:
and as usual you seem to think that all you need to do is say so and that makes it true.

The really handy thing about facts is, they do not need to be made true. They are simply true of their own accord.


Setanta wrote:

Interesting article.


Setanta wrote:
I have not the least doubt that you'll claim everything you write is factural, even when it is shown that that is clearly not the case.

On the occasions where Parados has shown that I've made an error, I've acknowledged it.

No one on a2k other than Parados has ever shown that I've made an error.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 07:10 pm
I've shown you making errors again and again. This is one example. Your constant attempts to claim that the crusades were organized to protect Europe from Muslim invasion are another example.

You spread the religiously and politically conservative bullsh*t you choose to believe, but that does not make it true.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 07:21 pm
@Fil Albuquerque,
Image result for oldest universities in europe
Founded before 1500
Year University Location................ Year University Original
1088 University of Bologna............. Kingdom of Italy, Holy Roman Empire
1096-1167 (charter granted in 1248)..University of Oxford Kingdom of England
1134 (charter granted in 1218)........ University of Salamanca Kingdom of León
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 07:29 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
I've shown you making errors again and again.

No you haven't.


Setanta wrote:
This is one example.

You've not shown any errors on my part in this thread.


Setanta wrote:
Your constant attempts to claim that the crusades were organized to protect Europe from Muslim invasion are another example.

The Crusades were a reaction to Muslims destroying the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in the Middle East (which greatly inflamed public outrage), and to Muslims invading and overrunning part of the Byzantine Empire (which led to the Empire's call for military support from Western governments).

In both cases the West was reacting defensively to Islamic aggression.
0 Replies
 
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Sat 12 Mar, 2016 08:07 pm
One better hire an accountant to sum up all the art, all the literature, all the philosophy, all the music, all the science, including rocket science, all the design, etiquette, good manners on which the entire western and even modern eastern world was build upon. Perhaps then facts will be facts and wanna bees wanna bees.../thread close.
 

Related Topics

THE BRITISH THREAD II - Discussion by jespah
FOLLOWING THE EUROPEAN UNION - Discussion by Mapleleaf
The United Kingdom's bye bye to Europe - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
Sinti and Roma: History repeating - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
[B]THE RED ROSE COUNTY[/B] - Discussion by Mathos
Leaving today for Europe - Discussion by cicerone imposter
So you think you know Europe? - Discussion by nimh
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/15/2021 at 11:57:53