|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: A Working Definition of God | |||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Percy, I know for a fact the Hebrews are mentioned by Egyptian artefact and that they have found the lost city. It was even on discovery channel. Your side just simply ignore evidence when it suits you. Mike, you're gonna have to go further than simply making an assertion like that. If you know of any mention of Hebrews in Egypt before about 6BC, can you please present it? Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
jar, I'm not going to get into the debates of the actual facts until I do more research. However, Richard Hooker demonstrates some interesting information as to why it would be reasonable to conclude that the Hebrews really did dwell around these parts around this time in history:
quote: Incidently, just off the top of my head, archeologists digging up settlements from ancient Egypt have unearthed three kinds of sun-dried bricks -- some were made of good straw, some containing mere roots and bits of straw, and some with no straw -- apparently confirming the Scriptural account of slave labour found in Exodus 5:10 and following:
quote: Consequently, now with further research, I might add that lack of evidence does not necessarilly imply that they were not there. This is certainly the case with Akhenaten -- a Pharoah of Egypt --who was nearly wiped of the history books within mere generations of his own rule. In fact, many scholars will admit that we know more about him today than thoese generations that immediately preceeded his own.
quote: Incidently, when one opens the Hebrew Scriptures to Psalm 104, the great manifesto of God's all-encompassing power, and read how God created grass for cattle to eat, and trees for birds to nest in, and the sea for ships to sail and fish to swim in:
quote: And then among the remains of Amarna culture you find the Hymn to the Aten, purportedly written by Akhenaten himself, and it says:
quote: The similarity is simply astounding. It seems incontrovertible that cultural exchange from Egypt to Israel or Israel to Egypt transpired somehow. Even though most historians would conclude that Israel borrowed from Egypt, it yet remains fairly evident that there were at least some points of contact between the Israel culture and the Egyptian culture -- and around the same time that most scholars suspect that the account of the Exodus emerged in history at that. This message has been edited by Magisterium Devolver, 04-19-2005 06:51 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Well, first, semitic people. That in no way implies Hebrews. So there is nothing more than assertion there.
Second, the matter of the bricks might be of some interest if it were documented (I've seen that allegation but it's never attributed or supported by evidence) but even then it is pretty damn weak support when there is simply no other evidence of either a large hebrew population, an Exodus, or any support of an entrance into Cannaan. The earliest documented case I know of for the presence of Hebrews in Egypt is from a scarab dating from around 6BC. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: |
Doesn't the Rosetta stone mention Hebrews? (aslo thanks to Magisterium Devolver for input)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
What about the reference to the foreign 'habiru' noted in the quote:
quote: The author noted that it's a hotly contested issue, however, this name "habiru" seems to be very similar to the "Hebrew" name -- and it's not entirely out of the scope of the discussion to note that language changes over time. Even Moses' name was actually an Egyptian name before it was converted into the Hebrew language. This is to saym his name changed from the original Egyptian as it was not originally a Hebrew name. I'm not saying this is definite evidence. However, it's not entirely outside the scope of a reasonable possibility either. I will research the issue of the bricks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Doesn't the Rosetta stone mention Hebrews? Nope. But even if it did, it dates from around 196BC, over a thousand years after the alleged Exodus. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
mike the wiz Member Posts: 4755 From: u.k Joined: |
Jar, I know a stone of some type definitely mentioned an early Israel people. I have searched to no end.
What we do know is that the city of Rameses is found, as you people keep ignoring. You seem to ignore any evidence which might favour an Exodus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Ah, the old "habiru" or "ibiru" or "Hapiru" gambit.
Actually that's some of the strongest evidence that the Exodus and conquest of Canaan never happened. There was no one people called the Hibiru, but instead it was a somewhat derogotry name used similar to "gypsy" to refer to homeless wanderers and brigands. They don't seem to have any one ethnicity and certainly no organization or structure. And they are discussed over many, many centuries in locations from Egypt in the south to the upper reaches of Mesopotamia. It was term common to Egypt, Sumeria, Akaadian, Hittite and Mittani civilizations. They were often hired as mercenaries and get discussed quite often in the Amarna letters. The Amarna letters are important; they were written at about the time Joshua was supposedly conquering Canaan. Sadly, none of the heads of the city states there seemed to notice, even those ruling cities he had supposedly destroyed. But the Hapiru are mentioned. They were being hired by the different heads of the City-States in a series of inter-city wars that were going on at the time. Sometimes they are on one side, often then on the other. But nowhere are they seen or shown as a unified, organized or even particular nation. You can read the Amarna Letters here. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Mike, there are references but they date from the time of the Kingdoms on. Nothing early. And finding a city called Ramses is not really adding any weight.
Folk... We are getting way away from the subject. While the Exodus myth is interesting, it has NOTHING to do with this thread. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
quote: I gave you the barest beginnings of a definition of God according to Christian theology. Whole books are written on "The Attributes of God." But there's no point in contributing more information until you make it clearer what you are after here. You lopped off the parts of my definition that referred to His actions. Well, it's your topic, so if you want to limit it that way, I have no problem with it. But then you said some comic book character fit what was left, as if that were relevant to anything, and then disappeared. What's your point? Are you just looking for an excuse to mock definitions of God or what? You don't need to have a thread for that purpose you know; people do it quite freely around here. You got my definition and you got "I Am" from jar, and you got "God is Love" from somebody. Where do you want to take this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
jar writes: Actually that's some of the strongest evidence that the Exodus and conquest of Canaan never happened. If you mean that it disproves that the 'habiru' term applied solely and distinctly to the Hebrew descendents of the Abram (later Abraham) -- then I wholeheartedly agree. However, that's not what I'm suggesting.
jar writes: There was no one people called the Hibiru, but instead it was a somewhat derogotry name used similar to "gypsy" to refer to homeless wanderers and brigands. They don't seem to have any one ethnicity and certainly no organization or structure. And they are discussed over many, many centuries in locations from Egypt in the south to the upper reaches of Mesopotamia. It was term common to Egypt, Sumeria, Akaadian, Hittite and Mittani civilizations. Exactly.
jar writes: They were often hired as mercenaries and get discussed quite often in the Amarna letters. The Amarna letters are important; they were written at about the time Joshua was supposedly conquering Canaan. Sadly, none of the heads of the city states there seemed to notice, even those ruling cities he had supposedly destroyed. But the Hapiru are mentioned. They were being hired by the different heads of the City-States in a series of inter-city wars that were going on at the time. Sometimes they are on one side, often then on the other. But nowhere are they seen or shown as a unified, organized or even particular nation. And that's exactly my point. I'm not trying to suggest that the 'habiru' was unique to Abraham and his descendants. I'm suggesting, provided the names can genuinely be traced to one another, that the term 'habiru' was adopted from the broader Egyptian culture by Abraham's descendants and made into a distinctly Hebrew feature probably sometime aroud Moses. I've already noted how words can change as they are transformed into new languages -- even those languages that are very similar. Even more so, as I already noted above, Abram changed his name to Abraham as a sign in and of itself to God's calling. Likewise Moses' original name was most likely Egyptian. When the name Mose appears by itself, as it occasionally does in Egyptian, it simply means "the Child" or "the Offspring." But in Egyptian, Mose most frequently appears along with the name of a god as part of a compound name. Moses' Hebrew name was Moshe, the true meaning of which is now unknown. Some relate the name to the Hebrew word mashah, which means "drawn out" a reference to the story of his having been drawn out of the water where his mother had placed him in a reed basket to save him from the death that had been decreed by the Pharaoh against the firstborn of all of the children of Israel in Egypt. This is found in the Hebrews Scriptures of Exodus 2:10. One Jewish source, however, says that the name he was given by by the daughter of the Pharaoh was Miniot, which meant "taken out" in Egyptian, and that Moshe was a translation of this Egyptian name into Hebrew. Some have seen in this story a parallel with the story of Sargon of Assyria who was also said to have been drawn from the water as an infant:
quote: Alternatively, as I began to note above, some authorities have pointed to the fact that Exodus 2:10 says that Pharaoh's daughter "made him her son," as a possible reference to another source for his name. During the eighteenth dynasy of Egypt, the suffix -mose was a common element in names and meant "son of." This Egyptian naming convention is illustrated in names from the period such as Thut-mose ("son of Toth") and Ra-moses ("son of Ra"). According to this view, the name Moshe would simply be a transliteration into Hebrew of a longer Egyptian name that ended in -mose. Suffice it to say, if any of these things are true, then a link with Egyptian culture again seems to be implied. Regardless of how Moses actually acquired his name, it should be noted that many times in the Scriptures names are changed or adopted in order to signify a great change has occurrd. Examples of this could even include Saul of Tarsus changing his name to Paul. Likewise, regardless of his orginal name, Moses was eventually known as Moshe within the Hebrew language itself. Interestingly enough, the name 'Hebrew' itself seems to be partially influenced by the word 'eber' which seems to litterally mean something akin to 'beyond, on the other side'. However, when one looks at the Semitic language itself, the term Hebrew can more readilly be traced from the Semitic word 'habiru' -- which clearly means 'wanderer' in the derogatory sense. As Dr. Orville Boyd Jenkins notes, Abraham may have been part of a broader movement of "habiru" migrating or nomadic peoples referred to in various contemporary sources. Now some may hold that the term 'habiru' was solely distinct to Abraham's descendants and eventually was changed over time to the 'Hebrew' we see today -- but I don't think the current body of evidence supports this conclusion. However, if one see this 'habiru' derogatory name as being part of the broader Egyptian culture -- and that it was adopted and transformed by the descendents of Abrham during Moses' time into the elevated 'Hebrew' we are familar with today, then I still think this link still holds much promise. In one sense, it certainly jives with one of the central messages of the gospel in the sense that, although he can certainly do so, God generally does not call the wise:
I Corinthians 1:26-29 NIV writes: Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things -- and the things that are not -- to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. Consequently God calling a desert wanderer from amongst a group of migrating or nomadic peoples (as referred to in various contemporary sources) in order to shame the powers-that-be seems to fit exactly in line with his modus operandi -- his unvarying or habitual method of procedure. In I Peter 2:15, we see a similar concept being expressed when he says, "For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men." Indeed, Christ's death on the cross is itself seen within this very same context -- foolish by the standards of the world. Although some would disagree, many Christians do beleive that these ideas are expressed as well within the Hebrew Scriptures. Even more so, although there is some debate as to exactly whom this passage is directed at, the following Hebrew Scriptures definitely can be identified with God chosing the lowly in order to shame the wise:
Isaiah 53: The Suffering Servant writes:
Behold, my servant shall prosper, he shall be exalted and lifted up, and shall be very high. As many were astonished at him his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form beyond that of the sons of men so shall he sprinkle many nations; kings shall shut their mouths because of him; for that which has not been told them they shall see, and that which they have not heard they shall understand. Who has believed our message? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or comeliness that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth;like a lamb that is led to the slaughter, and like a sheep that before its shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away; and as for his generation, who considered that he was cut off out of the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people? And they made his grave with the wicked and with a rich man in his death, although he had done no violence, and there was no deceit in his mouth. Yet it was the will of the LORD to bruise him; he has put him to grief; when he makes himself an offering for sin, he shall see his offspring, he shall prolong his days; the will of the LORD shall prosper in his hand; he shall see the fruit of the travail of his soul and be satisfied; by his knowledge shall the righteous one, my servant, make many to be accounted righteous; and he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore I will divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he poured out his soul to death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors. That many Christians identify this passage as being a prophecy in regards to Christ's suffering in order to redeem us is a given. However, for the sake of this discussion in regards to the 'habiru' link, I think it might be overlooking the more important fact that many modern day Israelites more readilly identify this passage with their own Hebrew people throughout the course of human history -- which speaks volumes in itself about God's modus operandi.
jar writes: You can read the Amarna Letters here. Thank you. But, in doing this, I'm not sure if you've necessarilly disproved anything that I've suggested here. We both agree that 'habiru' -- if indeed there is a link to 'Hebrew' -- was almost certainly not a name which was distinct to Abraham's descendents alone. In fact, if I'm reading this correctly, your link seems to reinforce what I was already suggesting. At the very least, the body of evidence certainly seem to leave open the possibilty of the term 'habiru' being adopted from the broader Egyptian culture by Abraham's descendants -- and made into a distinctly Hebrew feature probably sometime aroud Moses. This message has been edited by Magisterium Devolver, 04-20-2005 05:31 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Well, if you want to discuss this further you might want to start yet another thread on the subject. It's certainly been one of interest here and has come up often.
But it has nothing to do with this thread. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mr. Ex Nihilo Member (Idle past 1367 days) Posts: 712 Joined: |
meh -- not interested. Though if someone else wants to start a new topic for this OP discussion, I'll probably partake in it.
I've been side-tracked by this thread anyway. I'm going to be posting back to the pseudo-science discusion I started before. Take care Dan's Clever Alias. Hope you find whatever answers you're looking for.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Monk Member (Idle past 3954 days) Posts: 782 From: Kansas, USA Joined: |
quote: You are referring to the Merneptah Stele which is the first and only egyptian inscription to reference Israel. It's only a brief phrase "Israel is wasted, bare of seed"but it is there nonetheless and it dates to the traditional time of Exodus circa 13th century BCE
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1474 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
quote: Totally, when it comes to this topic. It's great for cures for disease, space exploration, vaccinations and computers but it's absolutely irrelevant for knowing anything about God or spirit beings or anything else having to do with spiritual life. It's the wrong tool for the job, and insisting on making it the method and the standard where it is unfitted to the task IS pretty nutty.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024