The Hebrew Bible (Butterflytyrant and IamJoseph Only)

Great Debate challenge to IamJoseph

In many threads IamJoseph has made a series of claims regarding the Hebrew Bible. The comments are never on topic for the thread he is on and when I call him on it, we derail the thread.

I have challenged IamJoseph to start a thread of his own in order to put his claims up for debate, he has refused.

I have tried to start threads related to his claims in open forums but have been denied.

I have challenged IamJoseph in various threads but in the end get in trouble for derailing threads.

It has got to the stage that if I challenge IamJoseph on his unsubstantiated claims when he brings them up in a random off topic thread, I will be suspended for a week.

My only option it appears is to challenge IamJoseph to a great debate.

I will do the best I can stating IamJosephs claims. I did not make the claims so there will propably be errors. I will quote as much as possible.

What I request from IamJoseph is clarifications of the claims and evidence supporting his claims.

I am not sure that I will be refuting all of the claims. I would like IamJoseph to support some of his claims with evidence so that I can use them if needed in future and be comfortable knowing that they are actually facts. At present, it is not possible to use his claims as they have not been verified or supported with any evidence. I am only too happy to be educated. I need evidence to be educated, not unsupported claims.

I have included the claims and some conversation we have had already.

The claims used in this thread come from Message 208

The same claims have been made in many other threads also.

The Hebrew bible marks the first recording of a host of factors and is unique: 1. The universe is finite. 2. The first listing of life form groups [species] 3. The intoruction of the DAY & WEEK. 4. The oldest active calendar [5770] 5. The first recording of a host of historical items [Mount Ararat, the Tigris, Goshen, Mount Nebo], and ancient nations [Midianites, Moabites, Philistines]; the first kings [Nimrod, Ramseys], the first alphabetical book, the first cencus[sic], the only source for the history of Abraham and Israel.

From this quote, I will rephrase the individual statements and request that IamJoseph confirm them.

1. We will need to establish an agreed upon time for the first Hebrew Bible. We began to discuss this.

my comment - You will need to provide the earliest recording of the Hebrew Bible that includes the statement you are discussing. your reply - We don't have copies of the Septuagint to its contemporary date [no thanks to Europe!], but we have cross-nation proof this was done in 300 BCE by the Greeks. The dead sea scrolls is dated as upto 250 BCE, but this not mean the bible was created on this date. I would say it was created as per the writings by Moses 3,500 years ago: we have an Egyptian stelle dated 3,500 which affirms parts of the biblical story. Writings was a very expensive and time consuming work in those times, but we know Hebrew writings existed becase we now have proof of King David [The Tel Dan find], and he wrote the psalms 3000 years ago. The original would have been destroyed in the Babylon destruction.

from Message 212

You mentioned that you are accepting the dead sea scrolls. In some discussions regarding this matter you have been very specific about accepting BOOKS only. These are scrolls. The hint is in the title. This is fine though. The Dead sea scrolls are the first I am aware of also. You have given a number of different dates. The earliest date I have found for the Dead Sea Scrolls is an approximate 250BCE (source : http://www.deadseascrollsfoundation.com/) This is the earliest (partial) copy of this text ever found. You mention a date of 3500 ago according to Moses. If you can provide the document with a link so I can have a look, I will be happy to concede this. However, from the way you phrased it, you wont be able to do this. You have to provide the document. You have said the first recording. So you will have to actually provide the first recording. 250BCE to 65 AD is the age from my source. And it is not all of the Old Testement. The next oldest is fragments, 800-1000 ACE, the oldest complete copy is the Leningrad Codex from 1008AD (same source). Will you accept 250BCE as the oldest known copy of the Old Testement in existence? That will give me a confirmed date to work from.

2. The Hebrew Bible is Unique in its claims. I am not sure what IamJoseph means by this. It could be that the Hebrew Bible is unique in making these claims. If the Hebrew Bible was first at something, then it would be unique at that time. It will stop being unique until someone else makes the same statements. I will need IamJoseph to clarify this statement.

3. The Hebrew Bible is the first recording of the claim that the universe being finite.

IamJoseph additional information - Genesis opening verse; first 3 words: IN THE BEGINNING. The entire verse is open to no other reading than the heavens and the earth [universe] had a beginning. This is my reference.

from Message 212

Ok, Good reference, I can find the chapter and verse too. The key phrase is 'In the beginning'. So any religious document I can find that discusses a beginning is acceptable. There is the issue that we dont currently know that the universe is actually finite. The only way we could scientifically prove this, is to find its edge. Your interpretation that 'In the Beginning' means the universe is finite can also be challenged. It only means that it began. God, being all powerful and capable of anything is certainly capable of creating an infinite universe. But that does not matter. It is not the interpretation I am trying to argue. But you could think on these things to strengthen your arguement for future debates. To refute the claim, I need to find a text dated prior to 250BCE that mentions a beginning in its creation narrative.

4. The Hebrew Bible is the first listing of life form groups [species]

IamJoseph additional info - Its only the most known writings on earth: Ch1/V9-31. The seperation is by terrain and habitat - the most fundamental ones.

from Message 212

Ok, so it does not actually mention species. And it does not match the definition of species. It is a grouping into kinds. This is fair enough. So, to refute this, I need to find a recording, prior to 250BCE, of animals being grouped in some manner. Any manner. The 'kinds' grouping system (airborne, waterborne etc) do not match current scientific groupings of animals so I need not provide an accurate grouping method.

5. The Hebrew Bible was the first recording of the separation of time into days and weeks.

IamJoseph additional info - These are the first recording of day and week: And there was evening and there was morning, one day. Duet 16/9 Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee; from the time the sickle is first put to the standing corn shalt thou begin to number seven weeks.

from Message 212

Ok, so to refute this claim, I need to provide any reference, dated prior to 250BCE, to evenings, mornings or single days (breaks in time), weeks of days.

6. The Hebrew calendar is the oldest active calendar [5770]

IamJoseph additional info - It begins after the 6 creation days. The first Saturday occured 5750 years ago, and all events since then are diarised, as seen in any Hebrew newspaper. This is the oldest active calendar and the most accurate one

from Message 212

I will need you to produce evidence of the calendar that began in 3759BCE. From what you have written, you are using the Bible as a source to prove itself. This is not good enough unfortunately. Any writer can write something and backdate it 2000 years. I could write a calendar right now and backdate it 250 000 years. This does not mean that my calendar is the first calendar in existence. You will need to actually provide non biblical evidence of your claim. This statement comes in two parts, the oldest active calendar and the most accurate calendar.

In order to refute this claim, I need to find a calendar that is confirmed to date prior to 250BCE. I will see if I can find one that is also still in use somewhere and is as accurate. I will check the accuracy of the Jewish calendar also.

We had a bit of a chat about the mentioning of the geological formations. It will probably be too difficult or irrelevant to discuss them further. I will move on to the next claim.

7. The Hebrew Bible contains the first recorded census.

I have asked for clarification of what you mean and received this reply.

Look for it!

from Message 212

Hmmmm. Thats not really how it works. If I dont know exactly what you are talking about, it is difficult for me to research your claim for you to verify or refute it dont you think?

How about I try it this way -

The definition of census - An official count or survey of a population, typically recording various details of individuals.

So, to refute you claim, I need to find an official count or survey of people confirmed dated prior to 250BCE. Hows that?

8. The Hebrew Bible is the first alphabetical book.

In order to refute this, I will you to confirm what your definition of alphabetical book is and supply your date (with supporting evidence) of the oldest known copy of the Hebrew Bible.

9. The Hebrew Bible is "the only source for the history of Abraham and Israel".

I can refute this one straight away. Lots of books discuss the history of Abraham and Israel. Grab any encyclopedia. Or try googling "the history of abraham and Israel". You will be given many, many sources. Here is one source for the history of Abraham and Israel : http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/story-of-abraham.html. This proves that the Hebrew Bible is NOT the only source for the History of Abraham and the Bible.

Hello IamJoseph,

I am already starting to learn new things about history, religions and archeology that have muddied the waters a little.

One element I will need you to clarify is which terms you would like me to use. I have read that some prefer the term Hebrew Bible over Old Testament. I am happy to do this if this is if you are of this group. Also, some use the word 'Torah' to describe only the first 5 books of Moses (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) or the entire Jewish Bible or Tanakh. I will use whichever terminology you suggest in order for us both to be talking about the same thing.

The other hiccup I have is with finding the first actual recordings of the claims. In the original post, I had accepted the Dead Sea Scrolls (250BCE) as the oldest recording of the claims made. However I have come to understand that many of the claims do not appear in the Dead Sea Scrolls. A fair bit of Genesis does appear, but not the Creation Narrative. I could be wrong and have just not found it though. In this case, let me know where I can find this information and I will be happy to accept the date. You will have to do this with each one of the claims. You will need to provide a source to the first recording of the claims.

To provide an example of what I mean using an unrelated issue - Many of the laws that we have discussed in previous debates seem to be oral only up to the 2nd century ACE. The Talmud was completed in the 5th century ACE. The oldest full copy of this code of laws is the Leiden Jerusalem Talmud. This manuscript has been dated 1289ACE. If we were to be debating about the oldest recording of a set of laws, then using 250BCE from the Dead Sea Scrolls would be incorrect.

I am all to happy to be corrected on any of the dates that I suggest. I will provide sources for any of the dating that I use also. The Hebrew Bible is your field so I dont mind being directed as long as you can back up the claims with a verifiable source.

I will provide the source for any of my claims in two ways. If I use a dirct quote I will in-text reference and mark the quote using quotation marks (""). For example, I will be buying runner bean seeds because "runner beans are easy to grow" (http://www.organicgardeningpractices.com/runnerbeans.php). That way you will be able to go directly to the page I have sourced and find that quote. I will also provide a reference list at the bottom of my post to list other pages or books I have used but not quoted from.

One last thing. How about we deal with one item at a time. It will be easier for both of us.

Over to you...

References
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...002_0019_0_19546.html
http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm
http://www.vatican.va/...doc_20020212_popolo-ebraico_en.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Testament

Edited by Butterflytyrant, : adding one last thing

IamJoseph,

As far as I can tell you have not actually provided any of the information requested.

You have initiated this thread, in response to my understanding of the Hebrew bible

Wrong. I have initiated this thread because you have made claims that I do not believe you can verify.

I even state this in the OP. Here it is -

quote:

---

What I request from IamJoseph is clarifications of the claims and evidence supporting his claims.

---

Books can be in scroll or parchment form, but it must show a multi-page continueing narrative.

A scroll is not a book. A piece of parchment is not a book. A book is a book. A scroll is not 'multi-page'. It is one continuous page.

Yes I accept the scrolls' 250 BCE dates. This does not mean the writings were composed on that date, obviously it is much older, with 100's of copies found in the parcel, and 1000's of bits of writings, obviously destroyed in the fires of Rome which burned down all of Jerusalem city cubit by cubit. It is amazing that anything of the scrolls survived. While we do not have a 3,500 original scroll, which is believed to be contained in an arc hidden away or destroyed, we have loads of evidence [as opposed hard proof] of these writings being much earlier.

You use obvioulsy a few times in this post. And evidence as well. But you have provided nothing obvious and provided no evidence. You need to provide what you do have.

This is how you can present it - The first recording of the words "In the Beginning" can be found in x y z. Here is a source to check - Source :xyz.

I have provided you with an example of how to do this already.

Here is an example of how you would provide a source for a particular claim. The phrase "hop on pop" first appears in a book by Theodor Geisel (Dr Suess) in 1963. Here is a source for you to check : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hop_on_Pop.

What you need to do is state you claim (The phrase "hop on pop" first appears in a book by Theodor Geisel (Dr Suess) in 1963) and back it up with a verifiable source (Here is a source for you to check : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hop_on_Pop).

That is what you need to do.

but more impacting are the dates, places, events and cross nation interactions mentioned in the Hebrew bible - almost all of these descriptions have been vindicated. The writings have blah blah blahdy blah

How about we keep the introduction of new random unverified claims to a minimum (none at all would be good) and stick to the ones in the OP.

my queery - The Hebrew Bible is Unique in its claims. I am not sure what IamJoseph means by this. It could be that the Hebrew Bible is unique in making these claims. If the Hebrew Bible was first at something, then it would be unique at that time. It will stop being unique until someone else makes the same statements. I will need IamJoseph to clarify this statement. your reply - Yes, of course it is unique. It introduced many things, including creationism, monotheism, science, medicine, democrasy, what became known as evolution, judiciary laws, the first cencus in the millions, the first mention of the philistines, mount ararat, mount nebo, the first king, the first human name, the oldest active calendar. One can go on and on. That is unique.

Unique - Being the only one of its kind

Creationism is the religious belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the universe are the creation of a supernatural being. This is not unique to the Hebrew Bible. Another example: Hindu beliefs

Monotheism is the belief in the existence of a single (one) god. This is not unique to the Hebrew Bible. Other exampls: Christianity, Islam

Science is "knowledge attained through study or practice," or "knowledge covering general truths of the operation of general laws, esp. as obtained and tested through scientific method [and] concerned with the physical world. (Source: http://www.sciencemadesimple.com/science-definition.html). This is not unique to the Hebrew Bible. The Quran contains examples of science. Here is a link to a good science textbook : http://www.amazon.com/...iology-9th-Jane-Reece/dp/0321558235. Not unique to the Hebrew Bible.

Medicine -
1.a. The science of diagnosing, treating, or preventing disease and other damage to the body or mind.
b. The branch of this science encompassing treatment by drugs, diet, exercise, and other nonsurgical means.
2. The practice of medicine.
(Source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/medicine)
Medicine is not unique to the Hebrew Bible. Here is a link to another book about anatomy and physiology : http://www.amazon.com/...siology-Elaine-Marieb/dp/0805359095. Not unique to the Hebrew Bible.

Democracy (Greek terms demos (meaning "people") and kratos (meaning "power"). Democracy was developed in ancient Greece around 500BCE. (Source: http://www.smjuhsd.k12.ca.us/.../cp/instruct/greek_demos.pdf) Not unique to the Hebrew Bible. Also, pre Dead Sea Scrolls.

The Theory of Evolution did not come from the Hebrew Bible.

Judiciary Laws are also not unique to the Hebrew Bible. Code of Hammurabi, circa 1700BCE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi). Pre Dead Sea Scrolls. Not unique to the Hebrew Bible.

The other claims are either being dealt with individually or are not part of this thread. None of the items you have claimed to be unique are actually unique. Try to stay on topic.

With regards to the phrase "in the beginning" being the first recording of the universe being finite you have said -

The point is you cannot show another earlier recording of the universe being finite. You don't need a text, but you do need evidence. I gave you that above and you cannot show such equivalence elsewhere. Nor does it matter if you use the 250 BCE date - it is still the oldest record of a finite universe.

You have yet to provide a verifiable source that shows that the words "In the Beginning" appear in the dead Sea Scrolls. I do need a text. This is what you have claimed to have. The first recording of these words. Provide a source to back up your claim. Without you providing the information that supports your claim, it is refuted.

my comment - Ok, so it does not actually mention species. And it does not match the definition of species. It is a grouping into kinds. This is fair enough. So, to refute this, I need to find a recording, prior to 250BCE, of animals being grouped in some manner. Any manner. The 'kinds' grouping system (airborne, waterborne etc) do not match current scientific groupings of animals so I need not provide an accurate grouping method. your reply - If it mentioned species we can be sure it is a fake - the term was invented recently. Of curse, 'KINDS' is more authentic of its period, yet applicable today. Of course, seperation by terrain and habitat is more fundamental than skeletal and hidden genes. The first thing one sees of a zebra and a fish is terrain not their hidden organs.

As I indicated in a later post, you will need to provide a verifiable source that shows the first recording of this claim. What you need to do is supply the information that has lead you to believe the claim that you are making. When you have supplied the required information, I can begin my search for a seperation of groups of animals in any other text.

Does OK mean you agree Genesis first recorded life form groupings - you are not forthcoming here, which leads only to a circular arguement?

Your problems with the English language have lead you to this conclusion. I know that it is pointless to correct you though so I wont bother. What you have said here has no relevance to what I actually said.

You need to show DAY and WEEK. The seven week cycle was required to be stated before accounting harvest periods and rremembering anniversary laws which followed.

You need to provide a verifiable source that backs up your claim. You need to provide the information that has lead you to believe that this claim first appeared in the Hebrew Bible. You need to provide a link to a source so I can verify your claim. Until you do this, your claim is refuted. If/when you do provide the evidence, I need to provide any document that contains reference to days and weeks dated prior to your document.

This says Genesis is intelligent and it's writings are in the correct protocol.

How about we leave out the random conjecture and opinions and stick to the facts.

There is no history pre-Hebrew calendar: no names, nations, wars, kings, etc. In contrast, we have a calendar listing events of 5772 years, and substanially evidenced, to the extent of anything which can be evidenced. Show us an earlier reference of Mount Ararat - or a name older than Adam? So I am not using the Hebrew writings as its own self evidence; we have no alternate factors which can serve as a counter.

There are many unverifiable and incorrect statements in this quote. Pretty much all of it is wrong. But I dont care. I have a list of your claims that I am interested in discussing. Most of your comment is unrelated random blather. The key issue, the issue we are actually debating is your claim that the Hebrew Calendar is the first recorded calendar. What you need to do is provide a source showing this calendar. It needs to be a source that can be checked. The rest of your comment is again unrelated blather. Provide your evidence to support your claim. Until you do, your claim remains refuted.

my comment - IamJosephs claim = The Hebrew Bible contains the first recorded census. I have asked for clarification of what you mean and received this reply. - Look for it! your further clarification of your claim. - Because you are expected to know what you are arguing against.

It is your fucking claim! How am I supposed to know exactly what YOUR CLAIM is?

The Hebrew bible contains the first scientific cencus

Provide your source. Provide a verifiable source that supports this claim. Until you do, your claim is refuted.

as well as the first graduation of a tribal group to a nation - the word NATION OF ISRAEL is used after the cencus following the Egyptian exodus, retained thereafter thoughout the remaining five books, with sub-tota.... blah blah blah.... and grand total are tallied, with names of tribal leaders and in fractions of counts. If you know of an earlier cencus than please enlighten us?

You use the words earlier cencus. Earlier than when exactly. You have not provided a verifiable source that shows the earliest recording. You have provided this scripture -

Numbers Chapter 1 1 And the LORD spoke unto Moses in the wilderness of Sinai, in the tent of meeting, on the first day of the second month, in the second year after they were come out of the land of Egypt, saying: 2 'Take ye the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by their families, by their fathers' houses, according to the number of names, every male, by their polls; 3 from twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel: ye shall number them by their hosts Numbers Ch. 2/- 32 These are they that were numbered of the children of Israel by their fathers' houses; all that were numbered of the camps according to their hosts were six hundred thousand and three thousand and five hundred and fifty. 33 But the Levites were not numbered among the children of Israel;

Great. You are halfway there. Now you need to provide a verifiable source that shows the earliest recording of these verses. Until you do, your claim is refuted.

I asked you to provide your definition of an alphabetical book, your reply -

I already did. Any multi-page continueing narrative [book, scroll, parchment, etc] in alphabetical mode older than the Hebrew will suffice

Yes, you did. But you provided a definition that does not define the word book. I am sure you will not understand why this may be confusing. Basically, I need to provide anything with writting on it older than the Dead Sea Scrolls (250BCE).

This is your claim - 9. The Hebrew Bible is "the only source for the history of Abraham and Israel". This is me refuting your claim - I can refute this one straight away. Lots of books discuss the history of Abraham and Israel. Grab any encyclopedia. Or try googling "the history of abraham and Israel". You will be given many, many sources. Here is one source for the history of Abraham and Israel : http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/story-of-abraham.html. This proves that the Hebrew Bible is NOT the only source for the History of Abraham and the Bible. This is your reply - The precedence factor rules. Otherwise I can be the author of all of Shakespeare's works.

Precedence? Precedence does not change the fact that I have refuted your statement. You made a claim. It was wrong. I have provided evidence why it was wrong. Point refuted.

The term OT is a political stunt and I see it as derogatory. It is called the Hebrew bible in english. As can be seen by your own posts, it is not old but very active in contemporary discussions of science & history today in all forums, more so than any other theological writings. Old infers negated - yet its laws rule us today exclusively.

Was all of this posturing required. I was polite enough to ask you what terms you preferred. You prefer Hebrew Bible. Fine, I will use this term. It is strange that you are argueming that the term 'old' should not refer to the book we are discussing in a debate where your position is that it is the oldest recording. Irony?

I asked you to provide verifiable sources for your claims and you replied with this -

All of the writings and books are in the scrolls parcel, excepting only the book of Esther, which was written in Babylon 2,700 years ago, after the Babylon invasion and exodus there. This book also mentions the Hebrew bible and a host of books which were obviously written earlier - which I account as proof of the Hebrew writings' datings.

Can you tell me where your verifiable source is in there? I know that "Fragments of every book of the Hebrew canon have been discovered except for the book of Esther". (Source: http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html). Fragments. Not entire books with all chapters and verses. What you need to do is actually verify your statements. Until you provide a verifiable source to support your claims, they remain refuted.

You may be confusing laws with traditions. There are 613 laws [commandments] in the Hebrew Mosaic - the five books. These are all active today.

No I am not and no they are not. But I am not going to discuss that in this thread. I was providing an example. I dont care if you disagree with the example. Did you get the point of the example? The point was that you will need to provide verifiable sources to support your claims. Until you do this, your claims remain refuted.

We are still at square one really.

How about we deal with one claim at a time.

how about you start your next post with the first claim. We can ignore you claim for uniqueness because I believe that this claim comes from an incorrect definition of unique.

This is the first actual claim to be dealt with -

The Hebrew Bible is the first recording of the claim that the universe being finite.

This is your claim. You need to support this claim with evidence. You need to provide a link to a Hebrew Bible that has the words "in the beginning" in relation to the creation narrative. You need to provide a date for this document. Until you do, your claim remains refuted.

Deal with one claim at a time.

Provide evidence to support your claim.

IamJoseph,

That entire post was pointless.

Your understanding if the definition of the word unique is wrong. This is where your confusion over you claims of unique exists. I wont be your English teacher. You have been corrected. You can feel free to continue to make the same error over and over again but you will continue to be wrong. This is your error. Your confusion. You have been advised where the problem exists. Each time you make the same error you just look stupid. Your position is refuted by nothing other than your own error in the definition of the word unique.

my comment - A scroll is not a book. A piece of parchment is not a book. A book is a book. A scroll is not 'multi-page'. It is one continuous page. your reply - This one you have lost and I won't indulge with you further on it. The term 'multi-page continueing narrative' was qualified and embedded, prempting your runaway nonesense. Think 'BOOK OF DUETERONOMY & BOOK OF KINGS'.

Wrong. A scroll is not a book. It is a scroll. I am happy to accept the Dead Sea Scrolls as a first recording of a particular item. This however does not make the scrolls a book. Just because they have a title (Book of Kings) does not change the fact that they are scrolls. For example. The area between the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers was called the Cradle of Civilisation. This does not mean there was an enourmous cradle there. It is just a title. I am happy to accept the Dead Sea Scrolls as a recording of informtion. The terms you originally used was recording other than book for most of your claims so this is fine.

Lets deal with the claims one at a time and see if we can get anywhere.

This is the first claim -

The Hebrew Bible is the first recording of the claim that the universe being finite.

You are using the words "In the Beginning" as the basis of this claim.

You have said that these words are contained in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

You have not provided a source to verify this claim. You have just said that it appears in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

From my research, I do not believe that those words do appear in the Dead Sea Scrolls.

You need to prove that they do appear in the dead Sea Scrolls or your claim is refuted.

IamJoseph,

I am just going to ignore all of the irrelavent crap in your posts and concentrate on the parts that make sense and are related to this topic.

I have done your work for you with regards to finding an actual verified date for the first claim.

The claim is the that Hebrew Bible was the first document to suggest that the universe was finite. It did this by using the words "In the beginning". Your conclusion is that if the universe had a beginning then it is finite.

You are correct that most of the Hebrew Bible can be found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. What you dont seem to understand is that most of it is in fragments. Over 100 000 fragments. The words "In the Beginning God made the Heavens and the Earth" do not appear on any one scroll. There are actually two scrolls (4QGenb and 4QGenk) that have been combined in order to construct the sentence.

quote:

---

In one scroll (4QGenb) we have only the following words preserved for Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning Go made [ ].” Fortunately, another scroll contains this part of Genesis 1:1, “In the begin[ ] God [ ] the heavens and the earth.”

---

(Source: http://hebrewheritage.squarespace.com/...ntic-biblical-books)

I tracked down two sources that dated these scrolls. This is the job you were supposed to do. These scrolls have been dated to 1 - 100CE (one source has 1-30CE, the other has 30-100CE)
(Sources:
PAGE 76 : http://books.google.com.au/books?id=vx9FR8QqhUkC&pg=PR6&l...
and
PAGE 434 : http://books.google.com.au/books?id=KSvTYdbo4zIC&pg=PR46&...)

The wiki article you supplied to verify your date of 250BCE actually states the following -

quote:

---

These manuscripts generally date between 150 BCE and 70 CE.

---

So for the first claim, the oldest known date for a recording of "In the Beginning" is between 1CE and 100CE.

Will it make any difference to your desperate and continuing nonsense?

Yes. Providing a verifiable source that backs up your claim will in fact make a difference. The source you supplied actually refuted the 250BCE date.

Research - what research!? 24 copies of The Book of Genesis have been found in the scrolls parcel. Hello?

This does not mean 24 complete copies of the book of Genesis were found. No complete copies of the book of Genesis were found. That figure includes every fragment attributed to the book of Genesis.

Some of it is in reasonable condition. Most of it is not.

This is as much research as I can do for a while.

I have been called away for work. I will be out of town for about 10 days.

I dont really want to have to do your work for you and provide the dates for your claims.

It is your job to provide and accurate verifiable source for your claim.

This attempt was at least a good try for you. It was not accurate, only off by 250 to 350 years.

Maybe you could use the 10 days I am away to provide sources for your dates?

They are after all your claims that you are saying are true.

Sources :
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=exAVAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA71&...

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=KSvTYdbo4zIC&pg=PA185...

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=KSvTYdbo4zIC&pg=PR46&...

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=vx9FR8QqhUkC&pg=PR6&l...

IamJoseph,

You are getting more desperate as you post! Your assumption the first verse of Genesis is open to questioning is ridiculous. Do you even realize taking your wild assumption of an inferred later addition of the opening verse still renders the verse as first no matter which dating you want to use - are you even aware till a few centuries ago, the Hebrew bible is the only theology which did NOT say the earth is flat!? Be good to yourself and accept defeat!

What was the point of any of that? I have posted no assumptions or inferences. I have provided facts backed up with sources. Check the sources. They are direct translations of the scrolls. The quote can be checked. Just click on the link. The dates can be checked, just click on the link.

Here are my reasons for supplying the date 1CE to 100CE again -

quote:

---

You are correct that most of the Hebrew Bible can be found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. What you dont seem to understand is that most of it is in fragments. Over 100 000 fragments. The words "In the Beginning God made the Heavens and the Earth" do not appear on any one scroll. There are actually two scrolls (4QGenb and 4QGenk) that have been combined in order to construct the sentence.

quote:

---

In one scroll (4QGenb) we have only the following words preserved for Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning Go made [ ].” Fortunately, another scroll contains this part of Genesis 1:1, “In the begin[ ] God [ ] the heavens and the earth.”

---

(Source: http://hebrewheritage.squarespace.com/...ntic-biblical-books)

I tracked down two sources that dated these scrolls. This is the job you were supposed to do. These scrolls have been dated to 1 - 100CE (one source has 1-30CE, the other has 30-100CE)
(Sources:
PAGE 76 : http://books.google.com.au/books?id=vx9FR8QqhUkC&pg=PR6&l...
and
PAGE 434 : http://books.google.com.au/books?id=KSvTYdbo4zIC&pg=PR46&...)

The wiki article you supplied to verify your date of 250BCE actually states the following -

quote:

---

These manuscripts generally date between 150 BCE and 70 CE.

---

So for the first claim, the oldest known date for a recording of "In the Beginning" is between 1CE and 100CE.

---

I wont be doing your work for you and finding the dates for any of your other claims. That is your job. If you cannot or will not supply verifiable dates (as I have done) then your claims are refuted by default.

Get the dates. This is your job. Or concede the other claims.

Without verifiable sources you are just clapping your cymbals.

Dating the Old Testament

Hello IamJoseph,

I am sorry that it has taken me so long to get back to this. Chaos at work and sick kids has taken up a lot of my time recently. I have done a significant amount of research on the issue and I have included my findings. I have separated each question into its own post for ease of reply. Please deal with each question in their individual parts to keep this easy to follow for us as well as other readers.

First of all, I have tried to nail down the best academic estimates of when the Pentateuch was written. I noticed there was some issue with using the carbon dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls as the date. The following is the best information I can find with regards to this issue of dating the original writing of the Pentateuch (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy).

I believe your claim that the books were written between 1400 and 1500 BCE rests on the assumption that Moses was the sole author and he (obviously) wrote the Pentateuch during his lifetime. But this idea falls apart pretty quickly. There are very few, if any serious scholars who believe that Moses solely wrote these books in his lifetime. From what I can tell, the only people who do believe that Moses wrote the Five Books of Moses are fundamentalists. And I can't find any decent arguments to support their claims. Alternative authorship theories have been around since the 11th century.

There is significant evidence to suggest that Moses was not the sole author, or even the author at all. Of the 39 books of the Old Testament, scholars and sceptics question these 8 books the most: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Isaiah, and Daniel.

Problems with the idea that Moses alone wrote the Pentateuch in his lifetime -

1. Moses would have had to refer to himself in the third person, sometimes in the past tense, sometimes in the present tense.

quote:

---

These are the words which Moses spoke to all Israel across the Jordan in the wilderness, in the Arabah opposite Suph, between Paran and Tophel and Laban and Hazeroth and Dizahab. (Deut 1:1)
Then Moses set apart three cities across the Jordan to the east, (Deut 4:41)
Now this is the law which Moses set before the sons of Israel; these are the testimonies and the statutes and the ordinances which Moses spoke to the sons of Israel, when they came out from Egypt, (Deut 4:44-45)

---

This proves little though as other authors from the past (e.g. Caesar) did the same thing. It does become strange when he refers to himself (mostly in the present tense) in the first person in other chapters though.

quote:

---

Deut 6:2 "so that you and your children and your children’s children may fear the Lord your God all the days of your life, and keep all his decrees and his commandments that I am commanding you, so that your days may be long. "
Deut 6:6 " Keep these words that I am commanding you today in your heart."
Deut 7:11 " Therefore, observe diligently the commandment—the statutes and the ordinances—that I am commanding you today. "
DEUT 8:1 " This entire commandment that I command you today you must diligently observe, so that you may live and increase, and go in and occupy the land that the Lord promised on oath to your ancestors. "

---

This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

2. Moses would have had to write about his own death in the past tense.

quote:

---

So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD. And He buried him in the valley in the land of Moab, opposite Beth-peor; but no man knows his burial place to this day. Although Moses was one hundred and twenty years old when he died, his eye was not dim, nor his vigor abated. So the sons of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days; then the days of weeping and mourning for Moses came to an end. Now Joshua the son of Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom, for Moses had laid his hands on him; and the sons of Israel listened to him and did as the LORD had commanded Moses. Since that time no prophet has risen in Israel like Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face, for all the signs and wonders which the LORD sent him to perform in the land of Egypt against Pharaoh, all his servants, and all his land, and for all the mighty power and for all the great terror which Moses performed in the sight of all Israel. (Deut 34:5-12)

---

It would seem odd for a man to discuss his own death and burial after the fact and also not know where he was buried.
This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.
3. Moses would have to make statements that would be very odd if they were written about oneself.

quote:

---

Now the man Moses was very humble, more than any man who was on the face of the earth. (Num 12:3)

---

Would the humblest man call himself the humblest man?
This only makes sense if some of the work was written by someone other than Moses.

There is also this -

quote:

---

Duet 10-12 " Never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face. 11He was unequalled for all the signs and wonders that the Lord sent him to perform in the land of Egypt, against Pharaoh and all his servants and his entire land, 12and for all the mighty deeds and all the terrifying displays of power that Moses performed in the sight of all Israel. "

---

This passage would have to be written by someone well after the time of Moses. It can't have been written by Moses, particularly if he was the humblest man on the face of the Earth. It could not have been written anytime soon after his death as this would not make sense. Why would you say something like 'never since has there arisen a prophet in Israel like Moses' if he only dies recently?
This only makes sense if some of the work was written by someone other than Moses after the time of Moses.

4. There is mention of Canaan that suggests the text was written after the time of Moses.

quote:

---

Abram passed through the land as far as the site of Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. Now the Canaanite was then in the land. (Gen 12:6)
And there was strife between the herdsmen of Abram's livestock and the herdsmen of Lot's livestock. Now the Canaanite and the Perizzite were dwelling then in the land. (Gen 13:7)

---

Why mention a time when the Canaanites were in a location in the past tense if they were still there? The Canaanites were exterminated when Joshua conquered the 'promised land'. It makes no sense to refer to a past time when the Canaanites lived in an area unless they no longer live there.
This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

5. There is mention of individuals who were not alive until well after the death of Moses. Moses would have to be writing about people who lived up to 400 years after his death.

quote:

---

Now these are the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel. Bela the son of Beor reigned in Edom, and the name of his city was Dinhabah. Then Bela died, and Jobab the son of Zerah of Bozrah became king in his place. Then Jobab died, and Husham of the land of the Temanites became king in his place. Then Husham died, and Hadad the son of Bedad, who defeated Midian in the field of Moab, became king in his place; and the name of his city was Avith. Then Hadad died, and Samlah of Masrekah became king in his place. Then Samlah died, and Shaul of Rehoboth on the Euphrates River became king in his place. Then Shaul died, and Baal-hanan the son of Achbor became king in his place. Then Baal-hanan the son of Achbor died, and Hadar became king in his place; and the name of his city was Pau; and his wife's name was Mehetabel, the daughter of Matred, daughter of Mezahab. (Gen 36:31-39)

---

This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

6. Philistines migrated to Palestine in the 12 century BCE, the Arameans moved into Syria around 1000 BCE. Philistines and Arameans are mentioned in the Pentateuch.

quote:

---

Gen 10:14, the descendents of Mizraim, - "And Pathrusim, and Casluhim, (out of whom came Philistine,) and Caphtorim.".
Deuteronomy 26:5 "Then you shall declare before the LORD your God: 'My father was a wandering Aramean, and he went down into Egypt with a few people and lived there and became a great nation, powerful and numerous'".
Gen 10: 22 - 23 " The descendants of Shem: Elam, Asshur, Arpachshad, Lud, and Aram. The descendants of Aram: Uz, Hul, Gether, and Mash."
Gen 28:5 " Thus Isaac sent Jacob away; and he went to Paddan-aram, to Laban son of Bethuel the Aramean, the brother of Rebekah, Jacob’s and Esau’s mother. "

---

God also directs the Israelites away from or around the land of the Philistines in Exodus 13.
This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

7. Mount Moriah is called 'the Mount of God' in Genesis.

quote:

---

Gen 22:14 " So Abraham called that place ‘The Lord will provide’; as it is said to this day, ‘On the mount of the Lord it shall be provided.’"

---

However it did not acquire this name until after the building of the temple. The choice of location for the Mount of God was not made until after the time of Moses.
This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

8. Another location that was mentioned by a name it did not have until well after the lifetime of Moses was Dan.

quote:

---

Gen 14:14" When Abram heard that his nephew had been taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen of them, and went in pursuit as far as Dan. "

---

However, Dan was not named until after the time of Joshua.

quote:

---

Judges 18:29 " They named the city Dan, after their ancestor Dan, who was born to Israel; but the name of the city was formerly Laish. "

---

This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

9. The story refers to time periods well after the lifetime of Moses in the past tense.

quote:

---

Exodus 16:35 " The Israelites ate manna for forty years, until they came to a habitable land; they ate manna, until they came to the border of the land of Canaan. "

---

This refers to the time of Joshua, after the Death of Moses.
This only makes sense if some of the work was written after the time of Moses.

10. The use of different names for God. Yahweh and Elohim are both used as the name of God throughout the Pentateuch (as well as El Shaddai and El Elyon). I have read several contradictory reasons for this. Most of them discuss the different translation of Hebrew scripture. However, this does not really make sense when you consider the grouping of the usage of the two terms. For example, Genesis 1 refers to God exclusively as Elohim (trans: God). While Gen 2 (beginning Gen 2:4) refers to God exclusively as Yahweh Elohim (trans: the Lord God). Why make this change? Why would one author alter the way he refers to the main character of his story between one chapter and the following chapter?
This only makes sense if there were two different sources or writers for the two sections.

11. Vast differences in diction and style that exist in the Pentateuch.
When you read Shakespeare, you know you are reading Shakespeare. Most people who read regularly can tell their favourite author from reading a few passages of their book. That is why people have favourite authors. Every author has a different style specific to them. People find an author with a style they like and read their books. Often, many authors a person likes have similar styles. It is possible to recognise different authors through patterns in their writing. Even if you cannot identify the author, it is possible to identify if one piece of work is written by a different author to another piece of work. Some areas examined in order to identify different authors include :

quote:

---

Sentence Structure – Do the sentences contain clauses or fragments? What is the word order?
Pace – Does the text focus on description or action and plot?
Expansive / Economical Diction – Is the text precise or elaborate? Does it have both? Why?
Vocabulary – Are the words technical, flowery, slang, colloquial, poetic, etc.?
Figures of Speech – Does the text use imagery, metaphors, similes, etc.?
Use of Dialog – Is dialog used to tell the story? What role does it play in the narrative?
Point of View – Is it first, second, or third person?
Character Development – How are characters introduced and developed? What is their function?
Tone – What is the author’s intent and attitude? What does the mood reveal?

---

(Source: http://www.helpmewithbiblestudy.org/5system_moses/dh10.aspx)

You would expect a single author, writing one story over a period of around 40 years of their life would have a similar style. Particularly if the story was divinely inspired. When an author writes, their style develops over time. There may be changes as they become more experienced but this is a gradual process. This does not happen in the Pentateuch. The diction and style chop and change backwards and forwards as the story goes on. Language professionals have identified not two or three but up to five different individuals who contributed to the writing of the Pentateuch.
The 5 individuals currently believed to have contributed to the Pentateuch are -
J: a writer who used Yahweh/Jehovah as the divine name.
E: a writer who used Elohim as the divine name.
P: a writer who added material of major interest to the priesthood.
D: the author of the book of Deuteronomy.
R: a redactor who welded the contributions of J, E and P together into the present Pentateuch.
(Source : http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm)

This diagram shows the estimated periods that the different authors contributed to the Pentateuch.

A rough explanation of the graph is as follows -

1. "The earliest part of the Pentateuch came from two originally independent documents, the Jehovist (850 B.C.) and Elohist (750 B.C.).

2. From these the Jehovist compiled a narrative work (650 B.C.).

3. Deuteronomy came in Josiah's time and its author incorporated this into the Jehovist's work.

4. The priestly legislation in the Elohist document was largely the work of Ezra and is referred to as the Priestly Document. A later editor(s) revised and edited the conglomeration of documents by about 200 B.C. to form the extant Pentateuch we have today.
(Source : http://carm.org/documentary-hypothesis)
The purpose of this post is not to discuss the documentary hypothesis. A very thorough discussion can be found on the following pages -
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/jepd_gen.htm

12. Which version of the text is used to establish the period of time Moses lived in?
There are four main versions of the Old Testament. The Masoretic text, the Greek Septuagint (LXX), the Samaritan Torah and the Latin Vulgate. Each one of these versions supplies a different century for the lifetime of Moses. A point that needs to be made is that the Dead Sea Scrolls differ from all four of these versions. Different religious groups have many and varied reasons why their particular version is the correct version, the single true version inspired by God. They can't all be right can they?

The Masoretic text - 7th to 10th century CE.
The Masoretic text is Judaism's current official version of the Hebrew Bible. About 35% of the Dead Sea Scrolls align with the Masoretic text.

The Greek Septuagint (LXX) - 300 - 132 BCE
Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, this version was the oldest and most supported version. There are actually 2 different versions of this also, the Vaticanus and the Alexandrinus. About 5% of the Dead Sea Scrolls align with the Septuagint.

The Samaritan Torah - 12 century CE
The Samaritans believe they follow the oral teachings of Moses as handed down from Mt Sinia. They believe that their version is the original and correct version of Mosaic law and they reject the Talmud. About 5% of the Dead Sea Scrolls are aligned with this version.

The Latin Vulgate - 4th century CE
This is the version most available to Western Europe from 400 CE onwards.

The remaining 55% of the Dead Sea Scrolls are either inconsistant in agreeing with the other versions or are significantly different from the all of them.
Depending on which version you happen to believe to be true, the total amount of years between the creation of Adam and the flood is 1656 years (Masoretic), 2242 years (LXX) or or 1307 years (Samaritan). (Source : http://biblerefshelf.sudalyph.org/...es-secrets-of-the-times)
There is a 935 year spread in the top 3 versions of the Old Testament.
The texts themselves can also be quite different. for example -

quote:

---

Genesis 4:7, English Translation from Masoretic Text
Is it not so that if you improve, it will be forgiven you? If you do not improve, however, at the entrance, sin is lying, and to you is its longing, but you can rule over it
Genesis 4:7, LXX
If you offer correctly but do not divide correctly, have you not sinned? Be still; his recourse is to you, and you will rule over him
Genesis 4:7, Latin Vulgate
If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it

---

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint)
Considering these differences between all of the versions (including the Dead Sea Scrolls) how is it possible to establish the one correct version?
A very thorough discussion of the variations can be found in the book "Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls". Most is available online - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=SBMXnB4CRpUC&printsec...
this book is also very good-
The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=6f9-Fnmy3sEC&pg=PA56&...
This webpage also discusses the differences between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the various other versions - http://www.bibleandscience.com/...sources/deadseascrolls.htm
13. The Zohar puts another spanner in the works. Several Jewish mystical texts, the Zohar being the most common, claim that the Torah existed in full prior to the creation of the world.

quote:

---

Zohar (2:16): “God looked into the Torah and created the world.”

---

Is this version correct?

14. One of the final reasons I doubt the dating of the Pentateuch to 1500 BCE is that it defies plain old common sense. To take the Pentateuch seriously, you have to accept the following -
Yocheved's (Moses' mum) was 130 when she had Moses. Moses was 80 years old before God asked him to lead the people out of Egypt. So before God decided to get involved in the lives of this family, Moses' mum had exceeded the standard life expectancy by around a century. Not only was she still alive, she was still fertile. Moses died at 120. Bronze age life exp was less than 30. It is difficult to accept the truth of a text when there are elements (and not just this one element I have mentioned) that are so unbelievable.

15. An enormous assumption needs to be made in order to accept the statements made by IamJoseph in regards to the Hebrew Bible. The assumption that the Dead Sea Scrolls are a flawless, accurate copy of an original needs to be made. Before the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, the Septuagint was without doubt the factual, correct word of God. Now it is not. There could be another version yet to be found, or ten different versions. Maybe they have been found but destroyed because they disagreed with the current most popular version. The point is that it is illogical to assume that the Dead Sea Scrolls are the correct word of God just because they are the oldest version found.

For all of those reasons and more, I do not accept the age of the 5 books of Moses to be anywhere near 1500BCE. The oldest I (and the majority of biblical scholars) would accept is from 900BCE to 400BCE depending on which chapter we are discussing. This time period is the most commonly accepted age of the Pentateuch.

I am aware that you (IamJoseph) are a fundamentalist and will not be able to accept any evidence that conflict with your beliefs. You are not allowed to accept any evidence that contradict your beliefs. This does not change the facts however. It is highly, highly unlikely that the 5 books of Moses were written by Moses in his lifetime. It is much more likely that they were written over several centuries by several authors well after the time of Moses (between 900 and 400 BCE). This is the time period I have used for my replies to your other statements.

Sources -
Dead Sea Scrolls - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls
Torah - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah
Documentary Hypothesis - http://en.wikipedia.org/...ocumentary_hypothesis#cite_note-2
Masoretic Text - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masoretic_text
Septuagint - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint#Dead_Sea_Scrolls
Vulgate - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate
Zohar - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zohar
Talmud - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud
Philistines - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines
Historical Criticism - http://en.wikipedia.org/...istorical_criticism#Old_Testament
Validity of LXX for the Messianic prophesy - http://www.doxa.ws/Messiah/Lxx_mt.html
A Theologico-Political Treatise (1884), by Benedict de Spinoza
The Authorship of the Pentateuch (2000), http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/...moses.html#noclaim
Literary and Historical Criticism of the Pentateuch
By Professor William Stiebing, http://www.skeptically.org/oldtestament/id6.html
Old Testament Life and Literature (1968)
Gerald A. Larue, http://www.infidels.org/...dern/gerald_larue/otll/chap3.html
The Politics of Dead Kings, (2010) Matthew J Suriano - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=MfSfzOqEK4sC&pg=PA138...
God's word in human words: an evangelical appropriation of critical biblical scholarship (2008) Kenton L Sparks - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=qLL_fD4ItOgC&pg=PT75&...
The Problem of the Author of the Pentateuch - http://prosario-2000.0catch.com/...ntroductionPentateuch.htm
Theories of creation in Judaism (1998) Hannu Toyryla - http://users.abo.fi/htoyryla/creart6.pdf
The Oral Torah and Jewish Tradition (2003) John J Parsons - http://www.hebrew4christians.com/...al_Torah/oral_torah.html
Genealogies of Genesis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genealogies_of_Genesis
Pentateuchal Studies Today (1996) Gordon Wenham - http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/..._pentateuch_wenham.html
The Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament and Historicl Criticism (1993) jon Douglas Levenson - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=w4NIsg8KtM0C&printsec...
Who Wrote the Bible (2007) Washington Gladden - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=yNU1Wpg8fqMC&printsec...
A Laymans Guide to Who Wrote the Bible (2006) - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=p7YNx81E6soC&printsec...
Who Really Wrote the Bible (2009) Clayton Howard Ford - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=I7tM8qfETOcC&printsec...
The Chronology of the Old Testament (1993) Floyd Nolen Jones - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=ZkBasQYRy4sC&printsec...
Secrets of the Times: myth and History in Biblical Chronology (1990) Jeremy Hughes - http://biblerefshelf.sudalyph.org/...es-secrets-of-the-times
Biblical Chronology: Legend or Science (1987) James Barr - http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/chronology_barr.pdf
History and Ideology in the Old Testament (2000) James Barr - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=q6iiJmuRZGUC&printsec...
Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures II, Vol 5 (2007) Ehud Ben Zvi - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=vo55jHJv2xYC&pg=PA243...
Old Testament Textual Criticism - http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/OTCrit.html
Literary Criticism of the Old Testament (1971) Norman C Habel - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=F4T9i-nZcs8C&printsec...
The Old Testament and Criticism (1983) Carl E Armerding - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=2gZoa7bYxXYC&printsec...
The Historicity of the Patriarchal Narratives (2002) Thomas L Thompson - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=lwrzapZYqFAC&printsec...
Solving thr Mysteries of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1994) Edward M Cook - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=4pIvWMZaf14C&printsec...
GENESIS 5 AND 11: CHRONOGENEALOGIES IN THE BIBLICAL HISTORY OF BEGINNINGS (1980) Gerard F Hasel - http://www.grisda.org/origins/07023.htm
An Introduction to the Old Testament: The Cannon and Christian Imagination (2003) Walter Brueggerman - http://books.google.com/books?id=WvX4ZlRUxwYC&printsec=fr...
An Introduction to the Old Testament Historical Books (1989) David Howard & David Howard Jr. - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Pzigv2umDpEC&pg=PA70&...
Handbook of Biblican Criticism (2001) Richard Soulen & Kendall Soulen - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=1fZMtoU7s8EC&pg=PA34&...
Some Remarks Preliminary to a Biblical Chronology (1998) Pete Williams - http://www.answersingenesis.org/...cles/tj/v12/n1/chronology
The Documentary Hypothesis on the identity of the Pentateuch's authors (1997) B.A.Robinson - http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm

Claim - The Hebrew Bible is the first recording of the claim that the universe being finite.

This is your reasoning for the claim -

quote:

---

Genesis opening verse; first 3 words: IN THE BEGINNING. The entire verse is open to no other reading than the heavens and the earth [universe] had a beginning. This is my reference.

---

My rebuttal -

Beginning is a reference to time, not space. So the word beginning (or end) does not apply to the size of a space. The size of the universe, being finite in your view is not even mentioned in the Hebrew Bible.

The only way that you could say that 'In the beginning' can signify only a finite universe would be if your God is not all powerful. If your God is capable of anything, then he would be able to create an infinitely space. You have two options.

1. Your God is not capable of creating an infinite space and therefore is not omnipitant. If this is the case, he is not a God.

2. Your God is omnipitant and is therefore capable of creating an infinite space. If this is the case, then 'In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth could mean a finite or infinite universe and your arguement has no basis.

But I am not going to use the illogical premise for your argument to avoid the issue. I have found multiple references to the universe being finite dated prior to 250 BCE. I have some that are based on your faulty premise and others that specifically discuss a universe with limits.

The Enuma Elish circa 2000 BCE
This is what some of it looks like -

quote:

---

It is possible that the division of the poem into seven sections, inscribed upon separate tablets, took place at a later period; but, be this as it may, we may conclude with a considerable degree of confidence that the bulk of the poem, as we know it from late Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian copies, was composed at a period not later than B.C. 2000.

---

(Source : http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/stc/stc03.htm)
From Tablet 1 of the Enuma Elish

quote:

---

When there was no heaven,
no earth, no height, no depth, no name,
when Apsu was alone,
the sweet water, the first begetter; and Tiamat
the bitter water, and that
return to the womb, her Mummu,
when there were no gods-

---

(Source : http://www.gatewaystobabylon.com/.../texts/classic/enuma.htm)
Another translation, most likely from a different version -

quote:

---

When on high the heaven had not been named,
Firm ground below had not been called by name,
Naught but primordial Apsu, their begetter,
(And) Mummu-Tiamat, she who bore them all,

---

(Source : http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/enuma.html)
Apsu and Mummu-Tiamat are the Gods who created the universe. The legend opens with a period of time before creation, thus there was a beginning.
An extensive, though dated analysis of the Enuma Elish can be found here - http://www.sacred-texts.com/ane/stc/stc03.htm
Other references :
http://www.theologywebsite.com/etext/enuma/eintro.shtml
http://annettereed.com/westciv/enuma.pdf
http://www.christiancourier.com/...bylonian-creation-account

Next we move to Egypt. The Egyptians had many different creation myths. The Heliopolitan Creation myth established in the 6th Dynasty (2345 – 2181 BCE) states that the first god Atum created himself and rose out of Nu who was the primordial waters of chaos that existed before creation.
Here is an overview of the Heliopolitan creation myth

quote:

---

Creation of the Universe
The Universe started with nothing but the Water Chaos. It was called Nun. When the water subsided, the first land to appear was the Ben Ben stone. On it stood the Sun God Atum, who created himself. In some legends, Atum was replaced with Ra, who later merged with Amun to Amun Ra.
Atum performed auto fellatio and spat out Shu (the air) and Tephnut (the moisture). When Atum masturbated, the first word he exclaimed was deified into the God Hu, the Divine Utterance. Atum then drew blood from his penis and created the Goddess Sia. Sia was the personification of the Divine Knowledge/Omniscience of the Gods. Hu was the personification of the Divine Utterance, the Voice of the Gods. Heka, the personification of the Divine Power, joined them in a divine Triad.
Shu and Tephnut had two children, Geb (the earth) and Nut (the sky). Nut lay eternally, having sex with Geb. But Shu, their father, later separated them and lifted her up to form the sky as a canopy over Geb. It is said that if Nut every returns to that first position, chaos would reign.
After Geb and Nut were born, mankind was created from the tears of Atum.
Geb and Nut had four children. They were Osiris, Isis, Seth, and Nephtys. Osiris took Isis as his wife, and Seth took Nephtys.

---

Papyrus of Ani - Chapter 17 circa 1250 BCE
The Papyrus of Ani is 78 feet long so is a considerable document. Here is one section of it -

quote:

---

I am Atum at his rising up. I am alone; I have become as Nu.

---

(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch17.html)
Atum rose from nothing as the first God. He rose at a time in the past, there was a beginning.

quote:

---

Nun, also spelled Nu , oldest of the ancient Egyptian gods and father of Re, the sun god. Nun’s name means “primeval waters,” and he represented the waters of chaos out of which Re-Atum began creation.
Re, also spelled Ra, or Pra, in ancient Egyptian religion, god of the sun and creator god. He was believed to travel across the sky in his solar bark and, during the night, to make his passage in another bark through the underworld, where, in order to be born again for the new day, he had to vanquish the evil serpent Apopis (Apepi). As one of the creator gods, he rose from the ocean of chaos on the primeval hill, creating himself and then in turn engendering eight other gods.

---

(Source : http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/492674/Re )
Also from the Papyrus of Ani, Chapter 146 circa 1250 BCE

quote:

---

Lady of rays of light, great of roaring, whose length and breadth are not known, whose likeness has not been found from the beginning

---

(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch146.html)
Another reference to the beginning.

Also from the Papyrus of Ani, Chapter 78 circa 1250

quote:

---

May they make me strong against he who would attack me. May he not come, nor see my helpless one.
I go; I come to the boundaries of heaven.

---

(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch78.html)
That section specifically mentions the boundaries of heaven (finite universe)

Coffin Text - designation : P. OIM 14060. Hieratic language on papyrus
Dated - 2061 BCE

quote:

---

Great One of the horizon, and none se[cond to me] came into being in it. [Come, you gods, and see] me, for I have come on your account, manifest[ed]. He who was [in] the beginning...has enfolded me...She who bore Horus [bore m]e, [the god's] nest created me.

---

(Source : http://wwwapp.cc.columbia.edu/ldpd/apis/item?mode=item&ke...)

The 'He who was in the Beginning' is Re. The creator god. Another reference to the beginning.

The Shabako Stone - 700 BCE (The stone itself is from 700BCE but the story is dated to the New Kingdom circa 1550BCE)

As I mentioned, there are many different Egyptian creation myths. This creation myth is different to the previous one and is from a different period.

quote:

---

"Hail to thee, thou who art great and old, Ta-tenen, father of the gods, the great god from the first primordial time who fashioned mankind and made the gods, who began evolution in primordial times, first one after whom everything that appeared developed, he who made the sky as something that his heart has created, who raised it by the fact that Shu supported it, who founded the earth through that which he himself had made, who surrounded it with Nun [and] the sea, who made the nether world [and] gratified the dead, who causes Re to travel [thither] in order to resuscitate them as lord of eternity (nhh) and lord of boundlessness (td), lord of life, he who lets the throat breathe and gives air to every nose, who with his food keeps all Mankind alive, to whom lifetime, [to be more precise] limitation of time and evolution are subordinate, through whose utterance one lives, he who creates the offerings for all the gods in his guise the great Nun (Nile, in this case), lord of eternity, to whom boundlessness is subordinate, breath of life for everyone who conducts the king to his great seat in his name, 'king of the Two Lands'."

---

(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/texts/shabaka_stone.htm)

You will notice that this whole passage discusses the creation of everything. Thus there was a beginning.

Utterance 486 from the Pyramid of Pepi 1st. 2332 – 2283 BCE

quote:

---

To say the words :
Hail to You, You waters which Shu brought, which Mendjef lifted up, in which Geb bathed his limbs. Hearts were pervaded with fear, hearts were pervaded with terror when I was born in Nun before the sky existed, before the Earth existed, before that which was to be made from existed, before turmoil existed, before that fear which arose on account of the Eye of Horus existed.

---

(Source : http://www.cypha360.com/Book_of_Nun.html)

Notice again it says 'born in Nun' (primordial pre creation). Another reference to a beginning.

Pyramid text - Utterance 627. Pyramid of Unas 2494 to 2345 BCE.

quote:

---

"King Neferkare is a great falcon which is on the battlements of Him-whose-Name-is-Hidden, taking what belongs to Atum to Him who separates the sky from the Earth and Nun."

---

(Source : http://www.maat.sofiatopia.org/nun.htm)

Another example of the beginning. Creation by separating the sky from the earth and the primordial waters pre creation. Isn't this how you described the Old Testament version of creation? The separation? This appears to be the same method but from at least 1000 years.

Coffin text - Utterance 714. Inscribed in multiple locations between 2250-1580 BCE.
(Source : http://www.mircea-eliade.com/from-primitives-to-zen/017.html)

quote:

---

"I am Nun, the sole one, without equal. That is where I (Atum) came into being on the great occasion of my floating when I came into being. I am he who flew up, who came into being {...} who is in his egg. I am the one who began therein, (in) the Nun, and see : the chaos-gods came out of me, see, I am hale. I brought my power into being through my power. I am the one who made myself and I formed myself at my will according to my desire. (...)."

---

(Source : http://maat.sofiatopia.org/nun.htm)

Yet another example of a creation myth discussing the beginning. Atum created the universe and this is Atum self creating.

There is an entire webpage devoted to discussing the pre creation primordial existence called Nun. This is the abstract from their site -

quote:

---

In Ancient Egyptian thought, there is something before creation. This state-of-no-state is approached using two fundamental concepts : the limitless waters (Nun) and the autogenous potential of precreation (Atum). Both form a dual-union and express opposite ideas : Nun is lifeless, inert, dark and everlasting, Atum is life, differentiation, light and eternal recurrence (eternity-in-everlastingness). These notions are as old as the Pyramid Texts (ca. 2348 to 2205 BCE) and probably older.

In this paper, all Pyramid Text utterances containing the word "Nun" have been translated. In the Old Kingdom, Nun is also the "place" where creation started, namely when Atum self-creates and initiates the "first occurrence" (zep tepi). Because of the pre-rational mode of cognition at work in these texts, the distinction between Nun and this first time is not clearly made yet. Arguments are presented to interpret precreation in terms of Nun, the Abyss, hand in hand with Atum, the Pleroma of the deities.

---

This site has dozens of examples from different periods discussing the time before creation and the beginning of creation. Each one of them refutes your position.

Check it out - http://maat.sofiatopia.org/nun.htm

But just to make sure your point is refuted, check this out -

quote:

---

Hymn to Ra - Papyrus of Hunefer 1275 BCE
Thou art the lord of heaven, [thou art] the lord of Earth; [thou art] the creator of those who dwell in the depths. [Thou art] the God, one who came into being in the beginning of time. Thou didst create the earth, thou didst fashion man, thou didst make the watery abyss of the sky, thou didst form Hapi, thou didst create the watery abyss, and thou dost give life unto all that therein is. Thou hast knit together the mountains, thou hast made mankind and the beasts of the field to come into being, thou hast made the heavens and the earth.

---

(Source : page 13 - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=6ecWGblH8ngC&pg=PA52&...)
and
(Source: http://www.britishmuseum.org/...om_the_book_of_the_dead.aspx)
and
(Source : http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/...dead/bodead-plate01.htm)

This one section of papyrus discusses a God, the first god Ra, the creator of the heavens and the Earth, who came into being in the beginning of time. That one papyrus refutes you claim.

Claim - The Hebrew Bible is the first listing of life form groups [species]

This is your reasoning for the claim -

quote:

---

Its only the most known writings on earth: Ch1/V9-31. The separation is by terrain and habitat - the most fundamental ones.

---

My rebuttal -

I have gone checked those verses and included all that mention animals in any way below.

quote:

---

Chapter 1 -
Verse 20 And God said, ‘Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.’
verse 21 So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm, and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good.
Verse 22 God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.
Verse 24 And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind: cattle and creeping things and wild animals of the earth of every kind.’ And it was so.
Verse 25 God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good.
Verse 26 Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind* in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth,* and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.’
Verse 28 God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.’
Verse 30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.’ And it was so.

---

The suggestion that the animals are divided into groups by terrain and habitat is laughable.

Let's have a closer look -
Terrain is the geographic features of land. Habitat is the area or environment where an organism or ecological community normally lives or occurs: a marine habitat or the place where a person or thing is most likely to be found. (defs from dictionary.com)
These are the three groups animals are 'divided' into - sky, sea, the Earth.
Basically you have land sea and air. This is in no way close to a division into species. It is the three main divisions on the planet - land, water and air. This is nothing remarkable. It is not a grouping into habitat. The air is not a habitat for any living thing. Your suggestion that these divisions would lead to the theory of evolution is ridiculous and unfounded.

As all living things live on either primarily on land or primarily in the water, the divisions in Genesis are hardly staggering. They are the kind of divisions a child can make. Most children would be able to do better.

Taxonomy is the science or technique of classification. After only a brief look through some ancient texts, I have found that pretty much every civilisation that existed before the Old Testament was written has a much more advanced system of taxonomy than that written in Genesis.

Here are a dozen or so examples of pre Old Testament taxonomy far more specific than what is written in Genesis. Next to each source is a named animal. A bit more detailed than a living thing 'that moves upon the earth' wouldn't you say?

Armana Tablet EA35 circa 1250 BCE - horse, ox
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/alasiya.htm)

Armana Tablet EA15 circa 1250 BCE - horse
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/a-ashuruballit.htm)

Armana Tablet EA16 circa 1250 BCE - horse
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/a-ashuruballit.htm)

Letter by Rib-Addi of Byblos EA 75 circa 1300 to 1400 BCE - dog
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/a-rib-addi.htm)

Letter by Rib-Addi of Byblos EA79 circa 1300 to 1400 BCE - horse, dog
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/a-rib-addi.htm)

Letters from Akizzi of Qatna EA - oxen
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/a-akizzi.htm)

Papyrus of Ani circa 1500 - 1400 BCE - fish, ass
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch15.html)

Papyrus of Ani Chapter 1 circa 1500 - 1400 BCE - lion
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch1.html)

Papyrus of Ani Chapter 147 circa 1500 - 1400 BCE - bull, worm
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch147.html)

Papyrus of Ani Chapter 134 circa 1500 - 1400 BCE - duck, fish, hawk
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch134.html)

Papyrus of Ani Chapter 86 circa 1500 - 1400 BCE - swallow, scorpion
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch86.html)

Papyrus of Ani Chapter 82 circa 1500 - 1400 BCE - goose
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch82.html)

also mentioned in various texts are : donkey, bell, small beasts, wild beasts, wild oxen, small cattle, rams, lambs, grasshopper, locusts, whale, serpent, boar, cow, buffalo, deer, roebuck, mountain goat, snake, winged ones, birdlike, turtledove, vultures

Just in case you are not happy with that, here is a section from the Enuma Elish (2000 BCE)
1. When the gods in their assembly had made [the heavens],
2. The firmament had established and bound [fast'],
3. Living things of all kinds had created,
4. Cattle of the field, beasts of the field, and moving things of the city.
5. After....unto all kinds of living things....
6. [Between beasts] of the field and moving things of the city had divided....
7. .......all creatures, the whole creation.....
8. ......that which in the whole of my family.....
9. [Then arose] Nin-igi-azag, two small creatures [he created],
10. In the assembly of the beasts he made [their form] brilliant,
11. ......the goddess Gula....
12. .......one white and one black.....
13. ........one white and one black.......
The entire translation can be found in a book called Enuma Elish: The Seven Tablets of the History of Creation by L. W. King, the page this section is from is 145

(Source : http://books.google.com.au/books?id=BXpkvimxrI0C&pg=PA145...)

I can't help but make some comparisons between the words of the Enuma Elish and the Old Testament. The division is there: cattle of the field, beasts of the field and moving things of the city. That is about as good as the divisions supplied in Genesis. I also notice that Genesis seems to follow some of the sentences pretty closely.
for example -

Genesis 1:25 circa 800 BCE
God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good.

Enuma Elish circa 2000 BCE
Living things of all kinds had created,
Cattle of the field, beasts of the field, and moving things of the city.

Even if you subscribe to the notion that the Old Testament was written by Moses during his lifetime, the Enuma Elish is still half a century older. It looks a lot like this is one of the stories that the writers of Genesis used as 'inspiration'.

Claim - The Hebrew Bible was the first recording of the separation of time into days and weeks.

This is your reasoning behind the claim -

quote:

---

These are the first recording of day and week: And there was evening and there was morning, one day. Duet 16/9 Seven weeks shalt thou number unto thee; from the time the sickle is first put to the standing corn shalt thou begin to number seven weeks.

---

My rebuttal -

I am still surprised at how often you made this bullshit claim about the use of the term day.

It requires very little research to find dozens of texts that use the word day. Here are a few with sources -

Armana Tablet EA7 circa 1300 to 1400 BCE
"From the day on which the envoy of my brother arrived before me, my body has not been well, and his envoy has never eaten or drunk before me."
(Source: http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/a-burnaburiash2.htm)
Letter from Abi Milku of Tyre circa 1300 to 1400 BCE
" I am very happy and : a-ru-u (he is satisfied) day by day. "
(Source : http://www.reshafim.org.il/ad/egypt/abi-milku.htm)
Papyrus of Ani circa 1500 - 1400 BCE
"His birth brightens the dawn every day; he has arrived at his place of yesterday. "
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch15.html)
Papyrus of Ani Chapter 1 circa 1500 - 1400 BCE
" I enter and come forth as a fire-god on the day of driving out demons in Letopolis. "
I am with Horus on the day of the festival of Osiris, making offerings on the sixth day of the Quarter Moon Festival in Heliopolis.
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch1.html)
Ugaritic tablet text circa 1300 BCE

"a day, even days pass, from days unto months"
(Source : http://www.marquette.edu/maqom/baalyamm.pdf)

Ugaritic tablet text circa 1300 BCE

"days to months, months to years"
(Source : http://www.marquette.edu/maqom/baalyamm.pdf)

I stopped taking references after this but there are literally hundreds of examples of recordings of the word 'day' to be found.

Week is a bit harder. A week is not a period of time that is associated with a natural pattern. Days, months and years are established using the movements of the sun, moon or the planet. A week can be any amount of days that you want. The word in Hebrew from the Old Testament translated to week is Shabuwa`. It literally translates to : seven, period of seven (days or years), heptad, week. (Source:http://www.biblestudytools.com/...ns/hebrew/kjv/shabuwa.html). So the word in the Old Testament is just the Hebrew word for a period of 7 days, the chosen period of a week for the Jews. An interesting thing to note, the word for week is the same as or is directly derived from the word for 7 in Arabic, Greek, Persian, Armenian, Serbo-Croatian, Hungarian, Breton, Gaelic and Cornish. Let's look at other periods of time that different people considered to be a week.
The Basque people had a 3 day week.
Igbo Nigerians had a 4 day week.
The Javanese people of Indonesia still use a 5 day week.
The Akan people of West Africa still use a 6 day week.
The Etruscans had an 8 day week in use between 600 and 800 BCE.
The Celts used a 9 NIGHT week, 8 days in total but counted by nights.
An ancient Baltic calendar has 9 days.
In China in the Shang Dynasty (1200 to 1045 BCE) used a 10 day week.
The Egyptians had a 10 day week also. The new year for their calendar appears on the rise of the star Sirius in Egypt. The previous rise of Sirius was in 1322 BCE, the one before that was 2782 BCE. Scholars put the latter date as the beginning of their calendar. (Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_calendar)
The Aztecs, Mayans and Balinese had differing periods of weeks also.
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Week)
So, any of those various people could equally claim the first week. All the Old Testament has is mention of a seven day period of a week.
Let's have a look to see where that idea came from.
I have noticed in my research that the number seven appears regularly in ancient writings. A few examples include -

quote:

---

Egyptian pyramid text-
As for the seven glorified spirits, [the are] Imset, Hapy, Duamutef, Qebesenuf, He Who Sees his Father, He Who is Under his Olive Tree, and Horus at the Front of the Blind, whom Anubis has placed as protectors of the mummy of Osiris; otherwise said, behind the pure house of Osiris; otherwise said, as for the seven glorified spirits, [they are] the Strengthener [?], He Who Turns Around, He Who Does Not Give his Flame at the Front of his Fire, He Who Enters In at his Hour, Red-Eyed One in the Temple of Cloth, Flame-Faced One Who Comes Forth and Goes Back and Who Sees in the Night, and He Who Brings by Day.
7 chambers in the papyrus of Ani
Epic of Anzu
The Lord marshalled the Seven of Battle,
The warrior marshalled the seven evil winds,
Who dance in the dust, the seven whirlwinds

The Sumerian myth "The Descent of Inanna into the Nether World", and the later Akkadian version with Ishtar as the main figure, both have the goddess wearing seven items, which she has to surrender one by one during seven stages of her descent.
Ugaritic tablet - AQHT A circa 1300 BCE

"behold a day and a second, he gives food to the skillful ones and drink,
to the daughters of joyful noise, the swallows;
a third, a fouth day, he gives food to the skillful ones and drink,
to the daughters of joyful noise, the swallows;
a fifth, a sixth day, he gives food to the skillful ones and drink,
to the daughters of joyful noise, the swallows;
Lo on the seventh day,
Away from this house go the skillful ones,
the daughters of joyful noise, the swallows "

(Source : http://www.ericlevy.com/.../Intro2/ANET%20Ugarit%20Epics.PDF)

Ugaritic tablets - Tablet I K, II K, III K. circa 1300 BCE
"March a day and a second,
a third, a forth day,
a fifth, a sixth day,
Lo, at the sun on the seventh,
thou arrivest at Udum the Grand"

---

In the Ugaritic Tablets circa 1300 BCE

All of the events in the stories seem to take 7 days in total. 7 of the kings brethren are killen in various ways, They waited for King Pabel to sleep for 7 days and when he did sleep he slept for 7 days, after 7 years the king has 7 sons, it took 7 days to get to Udum the Grand. It seems that 7 was not an uncommon number at the time, the Kindly One spoke 7 times, oblations to the gods take 7 days, Baal failed for 7 years, Aqhat the Youth cried for 7 years,
Source : http://www.ericlevy.com/.../Intro2/ANET%20Ugarit%20Epics.PDF

The Enuma Elish is on 7 tablets. The Babylonian god finished his work within the span of 6 tablets of stone. The last and 7th stone exalted the handiwork and greatness of the deity's work.

7 seems to be a pretty popular number to choose.

The reason 7 was so significant to the Babylonian people was that they had detected 7 planets. They had a seven day astrological week. There is a fair few scholars who suggest that the Babylonian 7 day week inspired the 7 day week of the Jews but nothing concrete.
From my research, the Jews created the first 7 day week not associated with any natural phenomenon. However, the ancient Babylonians had a 7 day astrological calendar active during the same period of time. It appears that the two groups developed a 7 day week independently of each other at around the same time.

There is a whole book on the subject (preview only) that discusses the two weeks in great depth here - The Seven Day Circle: The History and Meaning of the Week
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=Cd5ZjRsNj4sC&printsec...

This book also covers the issue well - The Week - http://books.google.com.au/books?id=nm83AAAAIAAJ&printsec...

There is currently no consensus as to which seven day week came first. The most commonly held belief is that they both developed independently during the same period. In short, no one, including you can say that the Jews introduced the 7 day week.

IamJoseph,

In one scroll (4QGenb) we have only the following words preserved for Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning Go made [ ].” Fortunately, another scroll contains this part of Genesis 1:1, “In the begin[ ] God [ ] the heavens and the earth.”

At no stage has this information been used to refute your position.

It is just a bit of information.

there is a whole post with your claim at the top that refutes your claim.

IamJospeh,

The links refer to picture writings. There would have been a mode of accounting days, but there is no way one can say the DAY [as in evening and morning] can be seen in those links.

What the fuck are you talking about? Did you even check the links???

The Armana Tablet is in cuneiform characters in the diplomatic language of the day, Akkadian. As are the Armana letters.

The papyrus of Ani is in cursive heiroglyphs.

These are conclusions derived from examining the pictures, e.g. a roof denotes a house; the sun or moon denotes a day; etc.

This sentence shows that you have no idea what you are talking about. Do you actually research anything before you say it? Or do you write what you hope is true and pray that people are either stupid enough to believe you or too lazy to check?

Luckily I am neither of these things.

Prior to 1800...

scholars who saw the hieroglyphs tried to interpret them, but they were hindered by a false hypothesis. They assumed that hieroglyphs were nothing more than primitive picture writing, and that their decipherment relied on a literal translation of the images they saw. In fact, the hieroglyphic script and its relatives are phonetic, which is to say that the characters largely represent distinct sounds, just like the letters in the English alphabet.

(Source : http://www.bbc.co.uk/...ient/egyptians/decipherment_01.shtml)

No one has thought that heiroglyphics were mere 'picture writings' since the early 1800's. I am honestly not surprised that you are over two centuries behind in your knowledge.

read this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/...ient/egyptians/decipherment_01.shtml

There examples I have provided are in a minimum of 2 languages. These examples are in cuniform and cursive heiroglyphys.

This is what cuniform looked like in 2500 BCE

This is what cursive heiroglyphics looked like from the papyrus of Ani -

This is paleo Hebrew

Can you give me any logical reason why cuniform and cursive herioglyphs are not acceptable? Preferably a reason that you have not made up.

The week was also first made as a pi like number in Genesis to calculate seasons, harvests and pregnancies, as well as a diarised record of history spanning 3000 years, Adam to Moses.

There is no source for this information. I am guessing you just made this up as well. In all of my research I have not read anything like this.

All you are doing is creating questions to try to avoid facing the real issues.

What the fuck is a pi like number?

the week was introduced to calculate seasons, harvets and pregnancies???

Where do you come up with this shit?

There is no 'diarised record of history spanning 3000 years'

Stop making things up.

You have not come close to dealing with any of the information I have supplied.

Have another go and this time try to find some real information with sources. If you cant, just accept that you are wrong on this one.

IamJoseph,

Do you ever get tired of making yourself look stupid?

I repeat what i said in Message 23

Do you actually research anything before you say it? Or do you write what you hope is true and pray that people are either stupid enough to believe you or too lazy to check?

How about you find out if what you want to say is accurate before you say it. That way I wont have to spend so much time pointing out the reasons why what you say is so wrong.

You are only making yourself look ignorant. And not dealing with anything relevant to the issue being discussed.

Is your intention to reinforce the opinion that you are an ignorant fundamentalist?

Do you have any intention of engaging in honest debate?

If not, there is no point to this.

Cursive means nothing.

How about this, try typeing 'cursive heiroglyphs' into google to see if it means something. That may help you not say things that make you look ignorant.

I googled 'cursive heiroglyphs' and found that it in fact does mean something. What a fucking surprise. If you try doing something called 'basic research' you will probably learn something.

There are two catagories of information you could use.

1. Information that is researched and sourced.
This type of research will have some bearing on the debate.

2. Information you make up out of thin air and hope is right.
this type will have no bearing whatsoever on the debate and will make you look like a fucking idiot.

Cursive heiroglyphs -
"Cursive hieroglyphs are a variety of Egyptian hieroglyphs commonly used for religious documents written on papyrus, such as the Book of the Dead. It was particularly common during the Ramesside Period and many famous documents, such as the Papyrus of Ani, utilize it."
(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cursive_hieroglyphs)

Cursive heiroglyphs a variety of heiroglyphs. I provided more specific information than just saying heiroglyphs. The description is 100% accurate.

The writings of the Armana are picture image writings in blocks, words represented by images; if you give the word cursive as alphabetical of such stone etchings of drawings, then you would have had loads of alphabetical books: where are they!?

I dont know how else to tell you that you are wrong other than to repeat the exact same information as the last time you made this mistake.

Heiroglyphics are not just 'words represented by images'. This discoevry was made in the early 1800's.

I knoww it is hard for you but try to read and understand the information supplied to you. here it is again from Message 23

quote:

---

Prior to 1800...

scholars who saw the hieroglyphs tried to interpret them, but they were hindered by a false hypothesis. They assumed that hieroglyphs were nothing more than primitive picture writing, and that their decipherment relied on a literal translation of the images they saw. In fact, the hieroglyphic script and its relatives are phonetic, which is to say that the characters largely represent distinct sounds, just like the letters in the English alphabet.

(Source : http://www.bbc.co.uk/...ient/egyptians/decipherment_01.shtml)

No one has thought that heiroglyphics were mere 'picture writings' since the early 1800's. I am honestly not surprised that you are over two centuries behind in your knowledge.

read this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/...ient/egyptians/decipherment_01.shtml

---

Try to read the information. It will help you not look like you are intentionally being ignorant.

Further, the verse you quote does not sanction what is a day, but merely 'today', as in 'when'...

I provided 6 different documents. The word day is used in various ways.

...This is very different from the application seen in the Genesis creation chapter, where the day and week are introduced as time divisions impacting the planet, when no history or life forms yet occured, noting what constitutes a 'day' - namely the rising and setting of the sun.

You are obviously not actually reading any of the information provided to you. Also, the word 'day' has a standard set of definitions. If the word day is used, it means one of the following -

quote:

---

day (d)
n.
1. The period of light between dawn and nightfall; the interval from sunrise to sunset.
2.
a. The 24-hour period during which the earth completes one rotation on its axis.
b. The period during which a celestial body makes a similar rotation.
3. Abbr. D One of the numbered 24-hour periods into which a week, month, or year is divided.
4. The portion of a 24-hour period that is devoted to work, school, or business: an eight-hour day; a sale that lasted for three days.
5. A 24-hour period or a portion of it that is reserved for a certain activity: a day of rest.
6.
a. A specific, characteristic period in one's lifetime: In Grandmother's day, skirts were long.
b. A period of opportunity or prominence: Every defendant is entitled to a day in court. That child will have her day.
7. A period of time in history; an era: We studied the tactics used in Napoleon's day. The day of computer science is well upon us.
8. days Period of life or activity: The sick cats days are numbered.

---

It is not necessary to include the definition of 'day' in a sentence when you use the word. The definitions are standardised.

One of the references from th original message -

quote:

---

Papyrus of Ani circa 1500 - 1400 BCE
"His birth brightens the dawn every day; he has arrived at his place of yesterday. "
(Source : http://www.bardo.org/ani/ch15.html)

---

That example used the word day and mentions the dawn as well so it covers the rising of the sun. Using the list of definitions of day supplied from dictionary.com above, please indicate what day means in this example.

Yet the Hebrew came up with the first advanced mode of writings, including the most advanced content; even the first 'historical' writings with identifiable names, places, events and datings, and remained so for some 800 years thereafter. Such is not seen in Egyptian, Babylonian, Phoenecian, Sumerian, Indian, Chinese or any place else.

None of this is true. But none of it is being dealt with in this debate so I will leave it.

Its a fact, not my opinion.

Things that you make up or believe without supporting evidence do not become facts just because you want them to.

The week was made as a measurement constant, a time pe...blah blah blah...rstand what 'solemn assembly' refers to in terms of days and weeks:

Irrelevant bullshit. Makes no difference to the discussion. Try dealing with the information supplied to you.

Lol! The period is derived from the Hebrew calendar, the oldest active one today and the most accur...blah blah blah...itings [Book of Kings; Isaiah; etc]; thereafter to today. Why accuse me of not reading!

I cover this particular bullshit when I refute your claims about the Hebrew Calendar.

Stay on topic.

The two things that my post regarding the day and the week are -

The word day is used in dozens of ancient texts. 6 examples have been provided. All six refute your claim.

The week has many diffirent uses depending on who was using it. The seven day week seems to have appeared for two reasons, the Hebrew week associated with the 7 days of creation and the babylonian astrological 7 day week. There is no concensus amongst scholars as to which came first. No one knows (including you) which came first.

You have not dealt with either of those issues.

You have done nothing but attempt to avoid the issue and send the conversation off on tangents.

Try having another go at dealing withthe subject of the debate.

Either accept that you were mistaken and were unaware of the many examples supplied.

-or-

Provide some examples that predate the examples I have supplied.

IamJoseph,

There is more than sufficient evidence to affirm the dating of the Hebrew bible, with no reason to question it.

No there is not sufficient evidence. And I supplied a whole post filled with reasons to question it. It is for those reasons that most biblical scholars question it. Saying the information does not exist does not make it disappear.

The Hebrew writings is varied both in kind and degree from anything similar anywhere.

untrue, baseless assertion.

If we read there was a war with Egypt and the Hebrews, it is evidenced in an Egyptian stone relic, with the mention of the word 'Israel' and 'war' dated 3,500 years ago. Beat that!

Source?

When we read that Mount Nebo is in Moab [Jordan today] and that it offered a grand view of a whole country, you can go to Jordan today as one of 1000's of tourists do and enjoy this view. Beat that!

Pointless statement also witbh no source. This proves nothing with regards to dates.

It is like the words Palestinians [Philistines]; Jerusalem; Hebron; Israel; Abraham - these words are only known today via the Hebrew bible exclusively.

Pointless statement with no source that you refute in the same post. 5 lines above this phrase you say -

it is evidenced in an Egyptian stone relic, with the mention of the word 'Israel'

Then you say -

It is like the words Palestinians [Philistines]; Jerusalem; Hebron; [bold]Israel[/bold]; Abraham - these words are only known today via the Hebrew bible exclusively.

In the one post you say the word Israel appears on an Egyptian stelle and the the Hebrew Bible is the exclusive source of the word Israel.

You are downplaying a host of new introductions

No I am not.

diminishing and negating them

Not doing this either.

then employing false items as transcending.

This also is not happening. What false items? My information is sourced and verifiable.

It is called blatant denial.

This may be true. If by denial you mean -

Denial - an assertion that something said, believed, alleged, etc., is false.

Then yes, I am denying your claims. I am denying them with alternate claims that are backed up with mulitple verifiable sources.

IamJoseph,

How long do I have to keep repeating myself?

Surprise, surprise again! HIEROGLYPHS are pictures - not alphabeticals. It is a well known fact ancient Egypt was not vested in alphabetical writings despite its advantage of time and power. Perhaps you should cease making bold cursive statements in every post till you at least get something right?

A = A

The image on the left is a picture representing the capital letter A in latin language.

- .
- -
- -

The set above is A in brail.

The image above shows the letter a in heiroglyphics, Heiratic, Phoenician, Greek, Roman and Hebrew.

The Eagle heiroglyphic represents the letter A.

It represents the letter A in exactly the same way as the Hebrew letter for A and in exactly the same way as A means A.

It is a picture of an eagle, it means the letter A.

If what you are saying is true, then the picture of an eagle would mean eagle.

You quote mined that website for your argument. This is yet another example of dishonest debating.

The sentence directly after your quote is -

AS in other languages, words in Egyptian were made up of sounds, partly of consonants and partly of vowels. But, the writing of hieroglyphs constantly ignored and omitted vowels.

it continues on to say -

THE pronunciation of a word is the crucial element in using hieroglyphics, how a word sounds is more important then how it is spelled. For instance, the word that is spelled "cat" is actually pronounced "kat". The name that is spelled "Cleopatra" is pronounced "Kliopadra". So, these word would be written in hieroglyphs the way they sound. Because the words "where" and "wear" sound alike they could be written using the same hieroglyphic signs. The same could be said of the words "there" and "their".

The next 4 sections of the website show the Heiroglyphic alphabet.

The alphabet can be seen here - http://www.egyptartsite.com/hiero.html

Egyptian Hieroglyphic Writings Egyptian hieroglyphic writing was composed entirely of pictures, though the object depicted cannot be identified in every instance. The earliest examples that can be read show the hieroglyphs used as actual writing, that is, with phonetic values, and not as picture writing such as that of the Eskimos or American Indians.

(Source : http://www.islamic-awareness.org/...ad/External/rosetta.html)

I will try one last time to explain heiroglyphics to you.

read this carefully -

There are three main types of hieroglyph. The hieroglyphic language is based on the phonetic value(s) of the hieroglyph, with extra information conveyed by hieroglyphs acting as logograms and determinatives. However, one hieroglyphic sign may act as a logogram, a phonogram or a determinative depending on the situation. The convention in translation is to "transliterate" (turn the hieroglyph into their phonetic values) and then confirm the meaning with reference to the non-phonetic elements of the word (determinatives and logograms).

(Source : http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/...orial.html#Phonograms)

now read this slowly and carefully (it comes with a picture to help you) -

The glyphs have both semantic and phonetic values. For example, the glyph for crocodile is a picture of a crocodile and also represents the sound "msh". When writing the word for crocodile, the Ancient Egyptians combined a picture of a crocodile with the glyphs which spell out "msh". Similarly the hieroglyphs for cat, miw, combine the glyphs for m, i and w with a picture of a cat.

(Source : http://www.omniglot.com/writing/egyptian.htm)

Heiroglyphs are a variety of pictures and symbols that represent sounds. Heiroglyphics is not a pictogram or pictograph system like you are trying to suggest.

[qs]A pictograph, also called pictogram or pictogramme is an ideogram that conveys its meaning through its pictorial resemblance to a physical object. Pictographs are often used in writing and graphic systems in which the characters are to considerable extent pictorial in appearance.

Pictography is a form of writing which uses representational, pictorial drawings. It is a basis of cuneiform and, to some extent, hieroglyphic writing, which uses drawings also as phonetic letters or determinative rhymes.[qs]
(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pictogram)

Egyptian heiroglyphics are known as a Semanto-phonetic writing systems. Two other common writing systems in this catagory are Chinese and Japanese (Source : http://www.omniglot.com/writing/egyptian.htm). Do you believe that the Chinese and Japanese written language are pictograms open to many interpretations?

Some heiroglyphics are logograms, a picture of something used to represent that thing.

Logograms A hieroglyph used as a logogram defines the object of which it is an image. Logograms are therefore the most frequently used common nouns; they are always accompanied by a mute vertical stroke indicating their status as a logogram (the usage of a vertical stroke is further explained below); in theory, all hieroglyphs would have the ability to be used as logograms. Logograms can be accompanied by phonetic complements.

(Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_hieroglyphs)

Logograms are part of the heiroglyphic script. They are easy to spot in the context of the sentence.

While researching, I discovered that Hebrew is based on pictograms. Check it out here - http://www.hebrew4christians.com/...ctograms/pictograms.html

Byt this does not really matter. The translations of heiroglyphic texts is not in question. It is not a guessing activity like you claim.

If you dont like the heiroglyphic texts, what problem do you have with the cuniform?