Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is the oldest religious text?
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 20 of 56 (238836)
08-31-2005 5:35 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by hoaryhead
08-30-2005 6:23 PM


Re: Modern Reference Encyclopedia
2) Law of Moses - 1635-1594 BC.
Your evidence for this would be?
Gen 5.1 - c. 4148 BC.
Your evidence for this would be?
Surely even you do not think that Genesis was written over 6000 years ago
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by hoaryhead, posted 08-30-2005 6:23 PM hoaryhead has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Phat, posted 08-31-2005 5:57 AM Brian has replied
 Message 25 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 9:39 AM Brian has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 23 of 56 (238883)
08-31-2005 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by Phat
08-31-2005 5:57 AM


Re: Modern Reference Encyclopedia
Hi Phat, how's it going?
We have to remember that the book of Genesis contains texts that were written down at various periods of time, probably over a period of about 700 years.
It is difficult to date anything in the early books of the OT, for example, take the Patriarchs, there is nothing in any of their stories that is unique to any one time period so we cannot really determine when the patriarchs were supposed to have lived. Although many people tend to use the Bible itself to date the Patriarchs, this is nothing other than circular reasoning.
One quick example of how difficult it is to date Genesis is the story of Joseph. The internal clues suggests a time of around 1000 BCE (United Monarchy period) for the invention of Joseph's tale. Joseph’s Egyptian name, Zaphenath-paneah (Genesis 41:45) has no exact parallel in extant Egyptian records, but names with a similar structure are attested to from the 21st Dynasty (about 1070-945 B.C.) and later. (McCarter, P. K. The Patriarchal Age in Shanks (Ed) Ancient Israel: A Short History from Abraham to the Roman Destruction of the Temple Prentice Hall: Biblical Archaeological Society, Englewood Cliffs; Washington DC. page 27).
I wouldn't date any book of the Old Testament to before the exilic period. Obviously parts of the bible are very old, 'The Song of Miriam' for example, has been dated by textual similarities in Ugaritic poetry to the 13th century BCE (Cross and Freedman: (1955) Song of Miriam, JNES 14, 237-250). But these older texts are mingled in with information that is far younger. An example of this would be the store city of Pithom in Ex. 1.11, however, the name Pithom was never used for a city before the Saite period, around 610 BCE.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Phat, posted 08-31-2005 5:57 AM Phat has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 28 of 56 (238962)
08-31-2005 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by hoaryhead
08-31-2005 9:39 AM


Re: A Bible Timeline
You do know that this entire post is nothing but circular reasoning?
Perhaps you don't, so allow me to explain.
Every date you have given has been supported by nothing other than biblical references, you have given no external references at all. You are claiming, for example, that the enslavement of the Hebrews in Egypt was 430 years based on NOTHING but a Bible reference. This is not acceptable, you cannot support one part of the Bible by citing another part of the Bible (not in an historical context anyway).
Apart from that, your source demonstrates a very poor understanding of the text, and we don't even have to examine every date to show this. One example is evidence enough to show the inaccuracy of this timeline, I will even use your own dates to demonstrate this.
Now, by your sources reckoning, the Israelite monarchy began in 1090 BCE, and ended in 588 BCE.
There is a terminal flaw here. If the 1090 date is correct we can work from there to discover when King Solomon came to power. Solomon's reign is very important for dating the Exodus, and your source dates the Exodus to 1635 BCE.
So, the first King of Israel was Saul, who reigned for forty years.
Acts 13:21 21Then the people asked for a king, and he gave them Saul son of Kish, of the tribe of Benjamin, who ruled forty years.
This would mean that David came to power in 1050, he also reigned for forty years.
1 Kings 2:10-12
Then David rested with his fathers and was buried in the City of David. He had reigned forty years over Israelseven years in Hebron and thirty-three in Jerusalem. So Solomon sat on the throne of his father David, and his rule was firmly established.
This then informs us that Solomon must have came to the throne around 1010 BCE, since we have had two reigns of forty years, the most exact science known to man tells us that two times forty is eighty, and 1090 minus 80 is 1010.
Here is where the terminal problem can be found.
1 Kings 6:1
In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, he began to build the temple of the LORD.
This says that in the fourth year of his reign Solomon began to build the Temple. It also informs us that 480 years before the building of the Temple began, the Israelites came out of Egypt.
What does the most exact science tell us about the date of the Exodus according to this verse?
Well, 1010 minus the 4 years of Solomon's reign that had elapsed, gives us a date of 1006 for the beginning of the building of the Temple.
Now, add the 480 years of 1 Kings 6:1 on to 1006 and you get 1486 BCE for the Exodus.
Your source is inaccurate, and I am willing to bet that the book you took it from is quite an old book because this date of 1635 was abandonned about a century ago. Either that or your source hasn't done their (there's that word again) homework.
The reat of the post is drivel, and unsupported. if you wish to promote these dates at least include some external evidence.
If you wish to discuss any other dates let me know. For example, the 450 year period of the Judges is an incredible mess, as is the 34 years of the conquest, we can discuss why if you wish.
Finally, what I thought was amusing, I am absolutey terrible at maths, my mental arithmetic is extremely good though, and I have a problem with this date:
1. Jesus born of Mary, in Bethlehem: 4 BC
2. Jesus 12 years of age: AD 8
How can 5 plus 8 equal 12?
Didn't we have a year 0, did we go from 1 BCE to 1 CE?
Keep up the good work, you are highly entertaining.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 9:39 AM hoaryhead has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 4:29 PM Brian has replied
 Message 37 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 6:16 PM Brian has replied
 Message 43 by RAZD, posted 08-31-2005 9:18 PM Brian has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 30 of 56 (238972)
08-31-2005 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by hoaryhead
08-31-2005 12:24 PM


Re: A Bible Timeline
California existed c.4500 yars ago?
I was under the impression that the United Staes was a relatively young country. I didn't realise that there was a place called California all those years ago, or is this another example of poor grammar, or is it an anachronism?
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 12:24 PM hoaryhead has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 38 of 56 (239174)
08-31-2005 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by hoaryhead
08-31-2005 4:29 PM


More drivel
For: Brian;
1) "Now, add the 480 years of 1 Kings 6.1 on to 1006 [BC] and you get 1488 BC for the Exodus."
Nope, I never said 1488, I said 1486, go back and read it again.
2) I love it when you Atheists talk so foolishly,
Why have you put a capital 'A' at atheist?
as though you were wiser than your Maker,
Well we invented God so obviously we are wiser.
and as though your words could overrule the word of God.
I didn't over rule the word of God, I used it to demonstrate that your source is inaccurate.
The reason is this: "Sometimes you touch on a subject that I have not investigated,
I don't think that you have investigated very much.
But Brian has ignored the deliverance from the Dark Ages, and has returned to deductive logic - only.
Evidence is a damn nuisance isn't it? I wish I didn't have to insist on it so often.
4) "The God of gory appeared........drivel......drivel.......drivel now totaling 567 years.
How do you arrive at 567 years?
Who is the God of gory?
7) Another opposer of God also denied the 450 years of Judges. But Paul was dogmatic, saying, "450 years until Samuel the prophet" (13.20).
So then, in the book of Judges we have 410 years of Judges, but it is stated that Israel did not always listen to the judges (2.17); and Eli judged 40 years (1Sam 4.18), "until Samuel."
410 Years + 40 Years = 450 Years of Judges until Samuel.
What evidence do you have that the period of the Judges lasted 450 years, or are we taking the circular reasoning route again?
8) That is too much evidence to be dismissed lightly.
You havent provided any evidence at all, nothing but bible quotes. What evidence do you have that there was a period of the Judges?
(1 Kings 6.1) means. (This was a supernatural operation.
Roughly translated as "I havent got a clue so I will play the anti-intellectual card.
Because I am a faithful witness to the True and Living God, and to His Son, Iesous Anointed; He has promised to send me Wisdom. See: James 1.4-8.
Are you feeling okay?
"He will be (HYHY) in eighty years and in 400 years [Gen 15.13], to coming; sons of Israel; from land of Egypt, in the fourth year, in month of Ziv; this the second month to Solomon 'kinging' over Israel, and he built the temple to 'He Is' (Yahweh)" - 1Ki 6.1.
Very good, but this isn't 1 Kings 6:1.
This is:
In the four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt, in the fourth year of Solomon's reign over Israel, in the month of Ziv, the second month, he began to build the temple of the LORD.
The verse is clear that there was 480 years between the exodus and the fourth year of Solomon's reign, hallucinate all you want, the text doesn't say what you want it to.
The four hundred and eightieth year after the Israelites had come out of Egypt, you need to read the text because this is getting extremely boring.
God was "in" the 80 years [Judg 3.30], and in the 400 years [2035 - 1635 BC], and Solomon built the temple to "He Is" [God is only in the present tense].
God can be in whatever she wants, your source is still inaccurate.
That is why the Devil wants your mind on "the long ago" and on "the far off."
Better to have a mind and be deceived than never to have thought at all.
Come back when you have a better understanding of the Old Testament.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 4:29 PM hoaryhead has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 40 of 56 (239182)
08-31-2005 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by hoaryhead
08-31-2005 6:16 PM


Re: Learning to Read
1) Modern Reference Encyclopedia - dating Hinduism last. 2) Josephus, the world famous Jewish historian.
Josephus says what and where does he say it?
3) Encyclopedia date - 606 BC - for fall of Judah in 588 BC.
based on what?
4) Robert Milligan.
Spike's brother?
5) John L. Bray.
This explains a lot.
6) 4 book titles on "inclusive language."
Do I have to use ESP to discover the titles? Anyway, you don't need books to know that "their" can be used in a singular context.
7) Modern Reference Encyclopedia - dating last book of Old Testament in 2nd century BC.
Based on what?
When does it date the writing down of Genesis?
I am sure there have been many others; but you have lied about everything that I have posted.
I have lied
I am not in the habit of telling lies, but if you show me an example I will apologise for it.
Brian.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by hoaryhead, posted 08-31-2005 6:16 PM hoaryhead has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024