Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Canaanite Psalms

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
    Have you even attempted to read Day et al's In Search of Pre-Exilic Israel? It's a fairly comprehensive survey of scholarship, and could not reasonably be considered "fragmentary at best" or "wishful thinking" by an honest reader.
    First, have you read this tome? does it provide specific examples of pre-exilic Hebrew scripture?

    The book is pricy, or I would definitely order it over the internet. I will eventually read it through a library loan. I did some checking on the internet, and found some interesting reviews.

    Source: http://www.bombaxo.com/blog/in-search-of-pre-exilic-israelwordpresscomment1152006-042457-pm/



    Overall however, the volume is certainly valuable, and I’m glad I’ve read it. I’ve found much of it to be of value, though definitely not as much as I expected. I recommend it to anyone interested or involved in the “maximalist” versus “minimalist” controversy. This book weighs in, a welterweight, in the maximalist corner.

    A consistent drawback I’ve noticed shared by this volume with others is that unusual theories, in this case of extraordinarily, unrealistically late datings of the biblical texts, are given validation by interaction, even by refutation. Stupid ideas stupidly posed should rather be ignored. Has anyone taken the time to write a refutation of Velikovsky’s fantasies? Why should some of these other equally unlikely peculiarities be priveleged with response? It’s a waste of preciously valuable time, and original, creative research is thereby left undone because of this dead-ending of attention on second-rate foolishness. It would be refreshing to see the main tendency in biblical studies in general return to study of the primary texts involved, that is, the actual biblical books, rather than an absurd fascination with secondary/tertiary/quaternary texts. The two are not to be equated.

    © Copyright Original Source



    I found the book cheap and ordered it.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-22-2014, 03:42 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      First, have you read this tome? does it provide specific examples of pre-exilic Hebrew scripture?
      I don't own it, but I read it a few years back. I concentrated on Chapter 11, regarding the Psalms, as I was having a discussion about the dating of the psalter then, as well. The book does a very good job of presenting a fair view of the full range of scholarly views on the dating of the different texts of the Old Testament. That's what leads to the review you found: even minority positions are discussed, though it is generally noted when they are minority positions and the reasons they are found to be unconvincing.

      Incidentally, Chapter 16 on pre-Exilic Hebrew inscriptions would also be hugely relevant to this conversation.
      "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
      --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
        I don't own it, but I read it a few years back. I concentrated on Chapter 11, regarding the Psalms, as I was having a discussion about the dating of the psalter then, as well. The book does a very good job of presenting a fair view of the full range of scholarly views on the dating of the different texts of the Old Testament. That's what leads to the review you found: even minority positions are discussed, though it is generally noted when they are minority positions and the reasons they are found to be unconvincing.

        Incidentally, Chapter 16 on pre-Exilic Hebrew inscriptions would also be hugely relevant to this conversation.
        Since I spent the money and ordered it I will read it. I am not encouraged by the logic of the interpretation of the evidence in some references I found on review of the text. I am slowly coming to the conclusion that this is predominately a maximalist book, but I will withhold final judgment until I read the book. The following is an example.

        Source: http://www.dts.edu/reviews/john-day-in-search-of-pre-exilic-israel/


        Terry Fenton examines “Hebrew Poetic Structure as a Basis for Dating” and concludes, “Comparison of Hebrew poetic structures with ancient Canaanite models establishes the antiquity of those structures and of historical material associated with them.” He adds, “Details of content show that the time span of the biblical Hebrew literary tradition runs from at least the eleventh century BCE to the Persian period” (p. 408).

        © Copyright Original Source



        Based on the evidence of psalms found in Canaanite writings, and the lack of the Hebrew writings and Hebrew written language in this period, the above is evidence that, yes, some of the Psalms existed in the 11th century, but the pre-exilic Psalms were Canaanite Psalms with Canaanite poetic structure found in many older Canaanite tablets.
        Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-23-2014, 07:52 AM.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          Where is the archeological evidence that they were anything other then a minor tribe?
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          Need help here with elementary school English. The word is 'minor' not miner. Sarcasm noted without meaningful response.
          That's what
          - She

          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
          - Stephen R. Donaldson

          Comment


          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            Need help here with elementary school English. The word is 'minor' not miner. Sarcasm noted without meaningful response.
            By being dishonest you have, for some people anyway, thrown away your right to meaningful responses.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
              By being dishonest you have, for some people anyway, thrown away your right to meaningful responses.
              Air ball!!!!!!
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                You're simply deluded. He included them with other political powers of the 13th century BC, so your claim that they were a "minor pastoral tribe" up until the exile is complete and utter nonsense.
                Please cite where he claimed this.



                Source: Source: Source: Ancient Israel Through a Social Scientific Lens by Yigal Levin - Biblical Archaeological Review





                In conclusion, Faust charges some scholars with "inventing" a continuity of settlement between the end of the Iron Age (i.e., the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah) and the Persian and Hellenistic periods in order to show that the society of Babylonian and Persian-period Judah was capable of producing many texts of the Bible, which they date to this period. In Faust's opinion, this this is simply impossible: Society of Judah was too depleted and poor to have supported such a huge literary project. Bible scholars, he concludes, will have to take the reality that archeologists present into account when developing their theories of how the Bible was produced.

                © Copyright Original Source



                This does not agree with your conclusion
                Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-23-2014, 10:14 AM.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Please cite where he claimed this.
                  Post 167

                  Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                  If you think that, then there is simply no reasoning with you.



                  from Avraham Faust's Israel's Ethnogenesis, Chapter 16, Menerptah's Israel:


                  Not only does the stele indicate that Israel was a group in the late thirteenth-century BCE Canaan, it also implies that it was of some importance as far as the Egyptians were concerned (e.g. Stager 1985a: 61; Yurco 1991: 61; Bimson 1991: 22-23; Hasel 1994: 54; Dever 1995a: 208; see also Chapter 18) in their mentioning it and taking pride in claiming to have defeated it, along with several major cities. In Hasel's words: 'our study ... has given additional support to the understanding that Israel functioned as an agriculturally-based/sedintary socioethnic entity in the late thirteenth century B.C., one that is significant enough to be included in the military campaign against political powers in Canaan' (1994: 54). More will be said on this much later.

                  [pg. 163]
                  I swear, you are being intentionally a jerk.
                  That's what
                  - She

                  Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                  - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                  I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                  - Stephen R. Donaldson

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Cerebrum123 View Post
                    By being dishonest you have, for some people anyway, thrown away your right to meaningful responses.
                    I doubt he's being intentionally dishonest. Rather, he does not really grasp some of the matters he is trying to discuss, which is true of many people here, when they start debating historical and archaeological issues regarding languages that they have never studied let alone mastered. It may be the case that he occasionally realizes some of his errors and is not inclined to admit his previous misunderstandings, and that is indeed a form of dishonesty, but it is sometimes very hard to determine when and whether or not he has become aware of his misunderstandings, if he will not admit this openly. This is a complaint I have against many if not most Internet apologetic and anti-apologetic discussions. The goal is to score points against an opponent and not to learn new knowledge. The people I know who have learned and taught Akkadian and Ugaritic are the first to admit how much we do not know but would like to know, what are theories and hypotheses, and what their own levels of proficiency are in the various extant bodies of literature.
                    βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                    ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                    אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                      Post 167



                      I swear, you are being intentionally a jerk.
                      Being a distinct group, or Israel functioned as an 'agriculturally-based/sedintary socioethnic entity in the late thirteenth century B.C.' as Faust describes does not translate to a significant political power. Especially since Faust describes them as 'this this is simply impossible: Society of Judah was too depleted and poor to have supported such a huge literary project. Bible scholars, he concludes, will have to take the reality that archeologists present into account when developing their theories of how the Bible was produced.'

                      I am exploring other sources and books and post more.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                        I doubt he's being intentionally dishonest. Rather, he does not really grasp some of the matters he is trying to discuss, which is true of many people here, when they start debating historical and archaeological issues regarding languages that they have never studied let alone mastered. It may be the case that he occasionally realizes some of his errors and is not inclined to admit his previous misunderstandings, and that is indeed a form of dishonesty, but it is sometimes very hard to determine when and whether or not he has become aware of his misunderstandings, if he will not admit this openly. This is a complaint I have against many if not most Internet apologetic and anti-apologetic discussions. The goal is to score points against an opponent and not to learn new knowledge. The people I know who have learned and taught Akkadian and Ugaritic are the first to admit how much we do not know but would like to know, what are theories and hypotheses, and what their own levels of proficiency are in the various extant bodies of literature.
                        I accurately cite my sources, and I will provide more, which does not reflect your denigrating view above.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Being a distinct group, or Israel functioned as an 'agriculturally-based/sedintary socioethnic entity in the late thirteenth century B.C.' as Faust describes does not translate to a significant political power. Especially since Faust describes them as 'this this is simply impossible: Society of Judah was too depleted and poor to have supported such a huge literary project. Bible scholars, he concludes, will have to take the reality that archeologists present into account when developing their theories of how the Bible was produced.'

                          I am exploring other sources and books and post more.
                          I'm done with you. You are either drunk, high, or intentionally being a jackass. Either way, I've had it with you.
                          That's what
                          - She

                          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                          - Stephen R. Donaldson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            Being a distinct group, or Israel functioned as an 'agriculturally-based/sedintary socioethnic entity in the late thirteenth century B.C.' as Faust describes does not translate to a significant political power. Especially since Faust describes them as 'this this is simply impossible: Society of Judah was too depleted and poor to have supported such a huge literary project. Bible scholars, he concludes, will have to take the reality that archeologists present into account when developing their theories of how the Bible was produced.'
                            Now you're mixing up the 13th and 6th centuries.
                            βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                            ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                            אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                              I accurately cite my sources, and I will provide more, which does not reflect your denigrating view above.
                              I am sorry if you are offended, but I am merely trying to be objective about what you do and do not know or understand. This is not an attempt to denigrate you. Some people have studied these languages and some have not, and there are gradations of mastery that should also be taken into account. That is simply part of the objective, factual reality in which we all live. There is no need, and certainly no benefit, to personalize such objective realities.
                              βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                              ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                              אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                                Now you're mixing up the 13th and 6th centuries.
                                No I am not. My references to the lack of Hebrew scripture is prior to the 6th Century. All the known Hebrew scripture is found from the 6th century onward.
                                Last edited by shunyadragon; 12-23-2014, 12:01 PM.
                                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                                Frank

                                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by One Bad Pig, 11-17-2022, 01:47 PM
                                20 responses
                                29 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 08-29-2022, 02:12 PM
                                356 responses
                                1,620 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by little_monkey, 08-13-2022, 04:09 AM
                                317 responses
                                1,732 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Machinist  
                                Started by Cow Poke, 08-11-2021, 09:24 AM
                                36 responses
                                287 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X