• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Did we invent Gods laws in the Old Testament?

Discussion in 'Christian Apologetics' started by ShamashUruk, Sep 11, 2017.

  1. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private
    Well let's take a look at linguistics and cultural adaptation to each culture. Hammurabi being Babylonian would speak in the Babylon native tongue with a Semitic based language, before that time are the Akkadians who also speak a Semitic based language and it is not Babylonian they speak but Sumero-Akkad as they had loan words from Sumer. We cannot include Egypt as they are influenced by the Sub-Saharan African's, but they end up adopting a Semitic tongue as well.

    The earliest tablet of Cuniform found in Nippur (Nibru) is the epic flood of Ziusudra which would predate the Noah epics. Scroll writing was a much later invention practiced by Moses who penned the Penteautch while Cuneiform is much earlier. Essentially the first flood epic doesn't begin with the Common Stock Semitic name Noah, but with Ziusudra in Sumer. The Bible for example uses the term Tevah to describe gopher wood, yet we find that Tevah isn't a term at all for gopher wood, but is quite possibly a Babylonian loan word for Bitumen. Also, in Mesopotamia (this would concern the Noah epic) boats are not fashioned in an ark structure as according to the Bible, they usually would contain reeds due to the type of rivers in Mesopotamia at the time.

    You compare Genesis 38:8 and Deuteronomy 25:5, this is a common motif in Biblical mythologies, we see influence of previous to newer epics, and so on. For example we see in the NT an echoing of commandments from the OT with renditions, we could conclude that Mark 12:31 is infering to Leviticus 19:18 concerning "love thy neighbour". Essentially the claim is that the pinnacle of the revelation at Mount Sinai according to the story of Exodus 19–24, is directly, primarily, and throughout dependent upon the Laws of Hammurabi. Accordingly we would see that about 1446 BC is when the Mt. Sinai event occurs, meanwhile Hammurabi in 1772 BC immplements his code, at least according to the timeline Hammurabi was before Mt. Sinai. I would further claim that Hammurabi though his claim is that of Godly contribution to his codes, is that he instead borrowed from the Ur-Nammu code. Of course that isn't the topic here either, Ur (denoting Ur) is a Sumerian city and is beyond the time of later named cities.

    I have very little comment to "we live under secular rule", being that I am not an atheist and forego most atheist discussion.
     
  2. Ken Rank

    Ken Rank Well-Known Member Supporter

    +4,880
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    We have such a vastly different paradigm we are unable to have any discussion here. Your idea that the NT is an "echoing of commandments from the OT with renditions" says that A. you see Christianity as a new religion (which I do not) and that B. Yeshua changed everything (which he did not). He came to walk prophetically and did so within an EXISTING religion. Over 1/3rd of the NT is either a direct quote or inference of the Tanach (OT) and moreover.... the NT repeatedly points us to study the Torah which of course, most Christians seem to miss. Consider...

    2 Tim 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, (17) that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

    Scripture in Paul's day was not Ephesians... that was a personal letter he sent to Ephesus that was canonized 140 years after Paul's death. Scripture to Paul was the Torah and Prophets (and Psalms) as even the "Writings" were not canon until 30 years after Paul's death. So while WE (or I, I don't know what "other religion" means) consider the NT to be Scripture as well... at that time, in that day... "Scripture" was what we call the OT and he was, by the Spirit, prompting us to use it to learn God's will. So to say the NT just echos and make renditions tells me you don't understand the Hebraic nature of the faith and the disciples.

    It is best that I move on... I doubt we will be able to have a discussion here. Be well!! :)
     
  3. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private


    Well let's see here, the OT is translated from the Tanakh, while the NT is translated from Koine Greek which is a Semitic based language, while modern Greek is Indo-Euro based. So when you state "Over 1/3rd of the NT is either a direct quote or inference of the Tanach (OT) and moreover.... the NT repeatedly points us to study the Torah which of course, most Christians seem to miss" it is a vague comment. If anything there is Greek influence and less Mesopotamian influence.

    Of course Paul's letters are thought to be sent to the Ephesus.

    The early Israelite's adopt out of Canaan, they begin as Nomads, hence their adoption from Polytheism to Monotheism after Babylonian captivity is why their texts are so ellusive. Are you then trying to state that the Israelite's are the first culture? This would be hard pressed to do so, the Babylonian's predate the Israelite's, the Akkadian's predate the Babylonian's, the Sumerian's predate the Akkadian's.

    Before you depart from this discussion, we can look into the Sumerian storm God Iskur who by characteristic, motif, divine interpretation is seen as Ba'al the storm God in Canaan and Yahweh the storm God in Israel, in the NT we see the hero Jesus and the inference to Luke 8:25 as he controls the storms. Are you then saying each culture that predated Luke 8:25 infers to Luke 8:25?

    Ba'al and Yahweh

    West Semitic descriptions emphasize Baal’s theophany in the storm (KTU 1.4 V 6-9, 1.6 III 6f., 12f., 1.19 I 42-46) also his role as warrior (KTU 1.2 IV, 1.5 I 1-5, 1.119.26-29, 34-36; RS 16.144.9 334). These two dimensions of Baal are explicitly linked in KTU 1.4 VII 29-35, 1.101.1-4, and EA 147.13-15 as well as iconography. F. M. Cross treats different descriptions of Baal as a single Gattung with four elements, which appear in these passages in varying degrees. The four components are: (a) the march of the divine warrior, (b) the convulsing of nature as the divine warrior manifests his power, (c) the return of the divine warrior to his holy mountain to assume divine kingship, and (d) the utterance of the divine warrior’s “voice” (i.e., thunder) from his palace, providing rains that fertilize the earth. Biblical material deriding other deities reserves power over the storm for Yahweh (Jer. 10:11-16; 14:22; Amos 4:7; 5:8; 9:6). Biblical descriptions of Yahweh as storm-god (1 Sam. 12:18; Psalm 29; Job 38:25-27, 34-38) and divine warrior (Pss. 50:1-3; 97:1-6; 98:1-2; 104:1-4; Deut. 33:2; Judges 4-5; Job 26:11-13; Isa. 42:10-15, etc.) exhibit this underlying unity and pattern explicitly in Psalm 18 (= 2 Sam. 22):6-19, 68:7-10, and 86:9-19.337 Psalm 29, 1 Kings 19, and 2 Esdras 13:1-4 dramatize the meteorological progression underlying the imagery of Yahweh as warrior. All three passages presuppose the image of the storm moving eastward from the Mediterranean Sea to the coast. In 1 Kings 19 and 2 Esdras 13:1-4 this force is portrayed with human imagery. The procession of the divine warrior is accompanied by a contingent of lesser divine beings (Deut. 32:34; 33:2; Hab. 3:5; KTU 1.5 V 6-9; cf. Judg. 5:20). The Ugaritic antecedent to Resheph in Yahweh’s entourage in Habakkuk 3:5 may be KTU 1. 82.1-3, which perhaps includes Resheph as a warrior with Baal against tnn, related to biblical tannînîm.338 Though the power of other Near Eastern warrior-gods was manifest in the storm (e.g., Amun, Ningirsu/Ninurta, Marduk, and Addu/Adad),339 the proximity of terminology and imagery between the Ugaritic and biblical evidence points to an indigenous cultural influence on meteorological descriptions of Yahweh. Israelite tradition modified its Canaanite heritage by molding the march of the divine warrior specifically to the element of Yahweh’s southern sanctuary, variously called Sinai (Deut. 33:2; cf. Judg. 5:5; Ps. 68:9), Paran (Deut. 33:2; Hab. 3:3), Edom (Judg. 5:4), and Teiman (Hab. 3:3 340 and in the Kuntillet ‘Ajrûd inscriptions; cf. Amos 1:12; Ezek. 25:13). This modification may underlie the difference between Baal’s epithet rkb ‘rpt, “cloud-rider” (e.g., CTA 2.4[KTU 1.2 IV].8), and Yahweh’s title, rokeb bāa‘ărābôt, “rider over the steppes,” in Psalm 68:5 (cf. Deut. 33:26; Ps. 104:3),341 although a shared background for this feature is evident from other descriptions of Baal and Yahweh. The notion of Baal riding on a winged war chariot is implicit in
    mdl, one element in Baal’s meteorological entourage in KTU 1.5 V 6-11.342 Psalm 77:19 refers to the wheels in Yahweh’s storm theophany, which presumes a divine war chariot. Psalm 18 (2 Sam. 22):11 presents Yahweh riding on the wind surrounded by storm clouds. This image forms the basis for the description of the divine chariot in Ezekiel 1 and 10. Psalm 65:12 (E 11) likewise presupposes the storm-chariot image: “You crown your bounteous year, and your tracks drip with fatness.” Similarly, Yahweh’s storm chariot is the image by Habakkuk 3:8 and 15:

    Was your wrath against the rivers, O Yahweh?

    Was your anger against the rivers,

    or your indignation against the sea,

    when you rode upon your horses,

    upon your chariot of victory?

    You trampled the sea with your horses,

    the surging of the mighty waters.

    The description of Yahweh’s horses fits into the larger context of the storm theophany directed against the cosmic enemies, Sea and River. (The horses in this verse are unrelated to the horses dedicated to the sun in 2 Kings 23:11, unless there was a coalescence of the chariot imagery of the storm and the sun.343 ) The motif of chariot-riding storm-god with his divine entourage
    extends in Israelite tradition to the divine armies of Yahweh riding on chariots with horses (2 Kings 2:11; 6:17). Other features originally attributed to Baal also accrued to Yahweh. Albright and other scholars 344 have argued the epithet ‘ly, “the Most High,” belonging to Baal in the Ugaritic texts (KTU 1.16 III 6, 8; cf. RS 18.22.4’), appears as a title of Yahweh in 1 Samuel 2:10, 2 Samuel 23:1, Psalms 18 (2 Sam. 22):14 and 68:6, 30, 35 (cf. Dan. 3:26, 32; 4:14, 21, 22, 29, 31; 5:18, 21; 7:25), in the biblical hypocoristicon ‘ē/î, the name of the priest of Shiloh, and in Hebrew inscriptional personal names yhw‘ly, “Yahu is Most High,” yw‘ly, “Yaw is Most High,” ̔lyhw, “Most High is Yahu,” and ‘lyw, “Most High is Yaw.”346 The bull iconography that Jeroboam I sponsored in Dan and Bethel (1 Kings 12:28-31) has been attributed to the influence of Baal in the northern kingdom. This imagery represented an old northern tradition of divine iconography for Yahweh used probably as a rival symbol to the traditional royal iconography of the cherubim of the Jerusalem temple.347 The old northern tradition of bull iconography for Yahweh is reflected in the name ‘glyw, which may be translated, “Young bull is Yaw,” in Samaria ostracon 41:1.348 The ca. twelfth-century bull figurine discovered at a site in the hill country of Ephraim and the young bull depicted on the tenth-century Taanach stand likewise involve the iconography of a god, either Yahweh or Baal. Newer discoveries have yielded iconography of a deity on a bull on a ninth-century plaque from Dan and an eighth-century stele from Bethsaida.

    Indeed, evidence for Yahweh as bull appears in Amherst Papyrus 63 (column XI): “Horus-Yaho, our bull is with us. May the lord of Bethel answer us on the morrow.”351 Despite later syncretism with Horus, the text apparently preserves a prayer to Yahweh in his emblem-animal as a bull invoked as the patron-god of Bethel. The further question is whether these depictions were specific to either El or Baal (or both) in the Iron Age. The language has been thought also to derive from El, frequently called “bull” (tr) in the Ugaritic texts. There is some evidence pointing to the application of this iconography to El in the IronAge.
     
  4. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,310
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    You should have quite a few direct references to him seeing that he is well known through historical artifacts.
    I don't know any Christians that believe monotheism was developed by the Israelites. We believe it was from the beginning, with gentiles, long before the Israelites.
    I didn't ask that question. I asked you two or three questions which you haven't answered. They are simple questions but you would have to admit that you can't disprove what I can't prove through written historical documents outside the Bible.
     
  5. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private
    Concerning the King of Persia I'd only have Biblical references and possibly Islamic references, I would steer clear of websites on google as they might be misleading. What I do know of Cyrus is that his name is Latinized and is derived from the Greek, we see this with the myth hero Jesus who bares a Hebrew name and with Christ a Greek title.

    Gentile is described as a person who is not Jewish. Also, the term "gentiles" is derived from Latin, used for contextual translation, and not an original Hebrew or Greek word from the Bible. Even on the sermon on the mound Jesus the myth hero infers to Gentiles as "pagans" (Matthew 5:47), bearing in mind that the term Pagan is a derogatory and it meant a country hick during the spread of Christianity in Rome, the proper term is Polytheist. The Israelite's adopt or term the usage of the word God as El and earlier they would term the word Yahweh for their supreme deity. Abraham comes out of Ur, making the common stock West Semitic name Abraham improperly used, meaning Abraham is Sumerian as Ur is a Sumerian city.

    Outside of proper names, the word ’el occurs about 230 times in the Hebrew Bible. It usually occurs as an appellative designating a foreign deity (Ezekiel 28:2) as well as Israel’s chief deity. Most commonly, the word is used with other elements (such as the definite article or a suffix). El appears as a proper name of the deity in poetic books, such as Psalms (5:5, 7:12; 18 [2 Sam 22]:3, 31, 33, 48; 102:25), Job, and Second Isaiah (Isaiah 40:18; 43:12; 45:14, 22; 46:9; cf. 42:5).

    A common assumption is El’s cult didn’t exist in Israel except as part of an identification with Yahweh. For ancient Israel, this question depends on whether Yahweh was a title of El or secondarily identified with El. Besides the grammatical objections sometimes raised against this view, the oldest biblical traditions place Yahweh originally as a god in southern Edom (northwestern Saudi Arabia), known by the biblical names of Edom, Midian, Teman, Paran, and Sinai. This general area for old Yahwistic cult is attested in the Bible (Deuteronomy 33:2; Judges 5:4–5; Psalm 68:9, 18; Habakkuk 3:3)39 as well as in inscriptional sources. Extra Biblical evidence from Kuntillet ‘Ajrud, a southern shrine preserving inscriptions written by visiting northerners, also attests to “Yahweh of Teman.” These facts argue against designation identification of Yahweh as originally a title of El.

    So how were Yahweh and El related? Biblical evidence necessarily occupies a central place in this discussion. In at least one instance, biblical material points to the cult of El in the Iron I period in Israel. C. L. Seow notes El language and characteristics reflected in aspects of the cult of Shiloh. The tent tradition associated with Shiloh (Psalm 78:60; Joshua 18:1; 1 Samuel 2:22) conforms to the Ugaritic descriptions of El’s abode as a tent. The narrative elements of the divine appearance to Samuel in incubation-dreams, the divine gift of a child to Hannah, and the El name of Elqanah (suggesting an El worshipper?), also cohere with the view that El was the original god of the beˆt’elo¯hıˆm (Judges 18:31; cf. 17:5).

    It is no accident that Psalm 78 repeatedly uses El names and epithets in describing the rise and fall of the sanctuary at Shiloh. Traditions concerning the cultic site of Shechem may also illustrate the cultural process behind the Yahwistic inclusion of old cultic sites of El. In the city of Shechem the local god was ’e¯l beˇrıˆt, “El of the covenant” (Judges 9:46; cf. 8:33; 9:4).

    According to many scholars, this word ’ilbrt apparently appears as a Late Bronze Age title for El (CAT 1.128.14–15).45 In the patriarchal narratives, the god of Shechem, ’e¯l, is called ’elo¯heˆ yis´ra¯’e¯l, “the god of Israel,” and is presumed to be Yahweh. In this case, a process of reinterpretation is at work. In the early history of Israel, when the cult of Shechem became Yahwistic, it continued the El traditions of that site. As a result, Yahweh received the title ’e¯l beˇrıˆt, the old title of El.

    Finally, Jerusalem is seen as a cult place of El, if there is a connection of El Elyon and El “creator of the earth” in Genesis 14:8–22. This record illustrates the old transmission of West Semitic/Israelite traditions. Israelite knowledge of the religious traditions about other deities did not only reflect contact between Israel and her Phoenician neighbors in the Iron Age. In addition, as a function of the identification of Yahweh-El at cultic sites of El, such as Shiloh, Shechem, and Jerusalem, the old religious lore of El was inherited by the priesthood in Israel. At a variety of sites, Yahweh was incorporated into the older figure of El, who belonged to Israel’s original West Semitic religious heritage. Other biblical evidence for El suggests that the cult of El perdured into the Iron II period.

    Whatever one is to make of ’eˇlo¯hıˆm in the “E source” or various El epithets” in the “priestly source,” these materials are interpreted as evidence for the cult of El in the Iron II period within Israel. The usage in the book of Job and Psalm 18 (2 Samuel 22), may point in this direction as well.

    The distinction between El and Yahweh in Israel includes not only biblical texts but also Iron II epigraphic evidence. It is not necessary to interpret ’l in the Kuntillet ‘Ajrud inscriptions as “God” and assume the identification with Yahweh, as M. Weinfeld translates one inscription where b‘l and ’l occur in the

    following manner:

    “[W]hen God shines forth (El appears) the mountains melt...Baal on the day of w[ar] . . . for the name of God on the day of w[ar].”

    It is unclear whether ’l here should be translated as El. Similarly, Hebrew proper names with the element ’l should not therefore always be attributed to Yahweh, as W. D. Whitt has recently argued. J. Tigay’s important study of inscriptional onomastica is compatible with the historical reconstruction that early Israelite tradition identified El with Yahweh. Israelite inscriptions include 557 names with Yahweh as the divine element, names with *’l, a handful of names with the divine component *b‘l, and no names referring to the goddesses Anat or Asherah. Tigay argues that the element *’l in proper names represented a title for Yahweh. Just as no cult is attested for Anat or Asherah in Israelite religion, no distinct cult is attested for El except in his identity as Yahweh. It is unclear whether ’l in all these instances is to be understood as a generic reference to Yahweh.

    At some point, a number of Israelite traditions identified El with Yahweh or presupposed this equation. The Hebrew Bible rarely distinguishes between El and Yahweh or offers polemics against El. West Semitic El lies behind the god of the patriarchs in Genesis 33:20 and 46:3 (and possibly elsewhere). Later tradition clearly intended that this god be identified as Yahweh. For example, the priestly theological treatment of Israel’s early religious history in Exodus 6:2–3 identifies the old god El Shadday with Yahweh:

    And God said to Moses, “I am Yahweh. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as El Shadday, but by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them.”

    This passage shows that Yahweh was unknown to the patriarchs. Rather, they are depicted as worshippers of El. In Israel El’s characteristics and epithets became part of the repertoire of descriptions of Yahweh. Like El in the Ugaritic texts, Yahweh is described as an aged, patriarchal god (Psalm 102:28; Job 36:26; Isaiah 40:28; cf. Psalm 90:10; Isaiah 57:15; Habakkuk 3:6; Daniel 6:26; 2 Esdras 8:20; Tobit 13:6, 10; Ben Sira 18:30), enthroned amidst the assembly of divine beings (1 Kings 22:19; Isaiah 6:1–8; cf. Psalms 29:1–2, 82:1, 89:5–8; Isaiah 14:13; Jeremiah 23:18, 22; Zechariah 3; Daniel 3:25). Later biblical texts continued the notion of aged Yahweh enthroned before the heavenly hosts. Daniel 7:9–14, 22 describes Yahweh as the “ancient of days,” and “the Most High.” He is enthroned amid the assembly of heavenly hosts, called in verse 18 “the holy ones of the Most High,” qaddıˆsˇeˆ‘elyoˆnıˆn (cf. 2 Esdras 2:42–48; Revelation 7).

    This description for the angelic hosts derives from the older usage of Hebrew qeˇdo¯sˇıˆm, “holy ones,” used for the divine council (Psalm 89:6; Hosea 12:1; Zechariah 14:5; cf. KAI 4:5, 7; 14:9, 22; 27:12) and the tradition of the enthroned bearded god appears also in a Persian period coin marked yhd, “Yehud.” The iconography belongs to a god, possibly Yahweh. D. V. Edelman has studied the depictions of deities and symbols on coins from the Persian period through the Hasmonean period. She concludes that the late Persian period coins are the first to show any avoidance of depiction of gods other than Yahweh in non cultic contexts; as this single example indicates, Yahweh is evidently represented. Based on this part of Edelman’s study and the reference in Judges 17 to an image, apparently of Yahweh, one might be inclined to suggest that ancient Israel tolerated some images of Yahweh outside of the national shrines

    and condemned images of other deities. In short, the prohibition of images of other deities seems to reflect a general worship of Yahweh that discouraged worship of other deities.

    El and Yahweh are rendered with a similar compassionate disposition toward humanity. Like El, Yahweh is a father (Deuteronomy 32:6; Isaiah 63:16, 64:7; Jeremiah 3:4, 19; 31:9; Malachi 1:6, 2:10; cf. Exodus 4:22; Hosea 11:1) with a compassionate disposition, many times expressed as “merciful and gracious god,” ’e¯l-ra¯hfiuˆm weˇhfiannuˆn (Exodus 34:6; Jonah 4:2; Joel 2:13; Psalms 86:15; 103:8; 145:

    8; Nehemiah 9:17). Both El and Yahweh appear to humans in dream-visions and function as their divine patron. Like El (CAT 1.16 V–VI), Yahweh is a healing god (Genesis 20:17; Numbers 12:13; 2 Kings 20:5, 8; Psalm 107:20; cf. the personal name, reˇpa¯’e¯l, in 1 Chronicles 26:7). Moreover, the description of Yahweh’s dwelling-place as a “tent” (’o¯hel) (e.g., Psalms 15:1; 27:6; 91:10; 132:3), called in the Pentateuchal traditions the “tent of meeting” (’ohel moˆ‘e¯d) (Exodus 33:7–11; Numbers 12:5, 10; Deuteronomy 31:14, 15), recalls the tent of El. The tabernacle of Yahweh has qeˇra¯sˇıˆm, usually understood as “boards” (Exodus 26–40); Numbers 3:36; 4:31), whereas the dwelling of El is called qrsˇ, perhaps “tabernacle” or “pavilion” (CAT 1.2 III 5; 1.3 V 8; 1.4 IV 24; 1.17 V 49). Furthermore, the dwelling of El is set amid the cosmic waters (CAT 1.2 III 4; 1.3 V 6; 1.4 IV 20–22; 1.17 V 47–48), a theme evoked in descriptions of Yahweh’s abode in Jerusalem (Psalms 47:5; 87; Isaiah 33:20–22; Ezekiel 47:1–12; Joel 4:18; Zechariah 14:8). Other passages include motifs that can be traced to traditional descriptions of El (Deuteronomy 32:6–7).

    The eventual identification of Yahweh and El within Israel perhaps held ramifications for the continuation of other deities as well. It has been argued that Asherah became the consort of Yahweh as a result of his identification with El. Perhaps originally associated with El, they became part of the divine assembly subordinate to Yahweh. The information in the preceding section makes this question reasonable, despite the apparent complications that this reconstruction may pose for later theology.

    Moreover, it is a reasonable hypothesis because of one basic piece of information: the name of Israel contains not the divine element of Yahweh but El’s name, with the element *’e¯l. If Yahweh had been the original god of Israel, then its name might have been *yis´raˆ-yahweh, or perhaps better *yis´raˆ-ya¯h in accordance with other Hebrew proper names containing the divine name. This fact would suggest that El not Yahweh was the original chief god of the group named Israel.

    As to your questions, ask specifically your questions. I do not know what you mean by "prove", this isn't an atheistic discussion, wherein you are a Christian and if I was an atheist I would debate; you cannot prove the existence of God. We aren't proving or disproving "God", what we are getting at is whether or not Polytheism came before Monotheism, it would have to, as the only indicator is that the Israelite's are Monotheistic after their captivity in Babylon.
     
  6. Hank77

    Hank77 Well-Known Member Supporter

    +9,310
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    US-Others
    The Tanach was translated into Koine Greek by the Jews for the Hellenistic Jews, it is called the Septuagint.
    Here is another verse that supports this claim.

    Act 17:10 And the brethren immediately, through the night, sent forth both Paul and Silas to Berea, who having come, went to the synagogue of the Jews;
    Act 17:11 and these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, they received the word with all readiness of mind, every day examining the Writings whether those things were so;

    Berea, a city in Macedonia, where Paul preached the Messiah, is where these Bereans search the Writings. The writings of the OT and most likely the Septuagint translation from the Hebrew. It was these OT writings that convinced them that Paul was preaching the truth.

    Moses' Law was not given until 430 yrs. after Abraham but you want to have us believe that Abraham, and other gentiles before him, were all polytheistic? All I can say to that is that you don't believe that God can or does speak to individuals, or use non-believers in Him to bring about His will.

    So for this Christian there is no point in having this conversation which you deem to be a history lesson that you wish to teach.
    Have a good day and remember that the One true God desires that all men should repent and be saved.
     
  7. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private
    Okay the Tanakh is historically Hebrew, not Koine Greek. Though Koine Greek is a Semitic language, so a little history on the Greek and Hebraic translations of the Bible. To be clear I am talking about a much much earlier translation of the Judaic texts. The Septuagint doesn't appear until 300 BC, and it isn't until that time that we see this emergence.

    The Tanakh was mainly written in Biblical Hebrew, with some portions (notably in Daniel and Ezra) in Biblical Aramaic. Biblical Hebrew if you know anything about Biblical Hebrew or Classical Hebrew is Canaanite language. We don't see an emergence of Biblical translations concerning Koine Greek until 3rd Cent BCE, which is about 300 BCE, meaning the Israelite's existed long before this period. The Septugaint or LXX is that translation, so you are talking about a much later translation.

    Your claims concerning "over 1/3rd of the NT is either a direct quote or inference of the Tanach (OT) and moreover.... the NT repeatedly points us to study the Torah which of course, most Christians seem to miss". Okay so you begin reading from the book of Acts which is a NT book, or if you will Septugaint LXX, if you want here is a link to the NT in Greek form

    Greek New Testament Index

    So according to Christian doctrine the NT fulfills the OT with the virgin birth and myth hero Jesus. I don't see how Paul is an issue at all concerning the OT, please provide further explanation.

    St. Moses pens the Pentauteach, while Abraham is much later. We don't see Monotheism pre Israelite's, so please provide how this occurs?

    You got your translation timelines incorrect, I think you need to clarify. Are you now stating the Israelite's spoke a Greek language? The only interaction the early Israelite's in Canaan with any Indo-Euro language interaction MIGHT have been the Hittite's, and that is even hard to determine.

    So, this is a very difficult discussion, I am speaking with you someone with common Bible knowledge. I don't mind and I won't back down from the discussion, but you still didn't answer my questions.

    I will answer yours, please be specific.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2017
  8. Hawkins

    Hawkins Member Supporter

    +174
    Christian
    Married
    No one can tell when Moses was born. All the dates about Moses are speculations. It can hardly be confirmed that Hammurabi was actually born before Moses.
     
  9. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private
    Moses is a common stock west Semitic name, while Hammurabi is most likely Sumerian. What we do know is that the Sumerian's are Pre Semitic. If you could, please explain further.
     
  10. Hawkins

    Hawkins Member Supporter

    +174
    Christian
    Married
    It's common stock possibly after Moses but not before! Moses could be the first to be named Moses! The name means "saved from water" as he's saved from the bucket floating on water.
     
  11. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private
    Moses is a Semitic name and or title, the name or title is not Sumerian. Moses is in Egypt and the Egyptians are influenced by the Sub-Saharan culture, though Moses is not born of Egyptian blood. However, when Moses is in Egypt, the Sumerian and Akkadian culture's had already been well documented, hence Hammurabi had already been in rule. Also, what predates Hammurabi's law codex would be the Ur-Nammu code, from the first cities and societies out of Iraq, which is pre Egyptian.
     
  12. Hawkins

    Hawkins Member Supporter

    +174
    Christian
    Married
    If it's the first one who is named Moses, in what logic you can conclude that it's Semitic?
     
  13. ShamashUruk

    ShamashUruk Hello

    563
    +67
    United States
    Other Religion
    Private
    In the Bible Moses is the human ~mediator of revelation par excellence. His name occurs ca. 765 times in the OT (especially in Exod [290x] - Josh) and ca. 80 times in the NT (more frequently than the name of any other OT person, especially in reference to Moses as lawgiver and author of the Pentateuch) and is borne by no other biblical figure. The name moseh is explained in Exod 2: 10 by means of a wordplay with the root msh, 'to draw': "I drew him out of the water". Although he was a mortal. Moses had received the appearance of a divine being. The idea that God can be known to humankind only in and through Moses. is also expressed in extra-biblical literature. for instance in Ezekiel the Tragedian's Exagoge. He tells about a dream-vision in which Moses saw the following
    scene: God gave him the sceptre and the royal diadem. He himself descended from the throne and seated Moses upon it (Eusebius, Praep. Evang. 9.29.5).
    Concerning Semitic languages, we see borrow or loan words from earlier Sumerian. We see Etana on the kings Sumerian list as being or ascending into Heaven and the same with Nimrod, while Etana is common stock Sumerian name, Nimrod for example is a common stock West Semitic name. We see the same with Moses and Hammurabi, as Hammurabi is Sumerian and Moses is not Sumerian at all. Moses is born of Jewish descent, the Jews are Semitic people. Moses is post Hammurabi and Hammurabi would be in rule 1792 BC to 1750 BC and Moses won't pen the Pentateuch until about 1700 BC, therefore the Hammurabi code is Pre Moses.
     
Loading...