Yeshua/Yahweh vs Ehyeh

[Anto9us]

I just ordered the Stephanie Dalley book, Pluckiy Pilgrim, would that I had funds for - or could even find - the Pritchard.

As for this thread - it seems I have now been called SWINE, WHITE GENTILE, and IDOL WORSHIPPER --

what's next?

"Creepy ANT CRACKER" ??!!??

 

[Phantasman]

Thank you, Phantasman.

I have followed the path of thousands and thousands of CHRISTIAN acadmians and scholars who have studied the ancient texts coming out of Babylon and Sumer in the attempt to shed some light on what the OT says. During my investigation of these texts, my well-worn, marked up, and by now nearly falling apart KJV bible has NEVER left my side, and my trusty Strong's Concordance as well.

CHRISTIAN scholars who have followed the same path that I am on know the same thing that I do. And that uncomfortable and rather sad truth is that hundreds and hundreds of passages in the OT appear to be rewritten copies of stories taken DIRECTLY from the Sumerian and Babylonian texts. In some cases the Jewish scribes responsible for doing this did not even bother to rewrite the Babylonian texts, but put word for word copies (and I do mean verbatim) into the Old Testament.

It's documented and the proof IS there, all taken from clay tablets that are thousands of years older than the OT and those texts have been translated, documented and verified many times over.

Jesus warned us all time and time again against putting our faith in the Pharisees and scribes. And in my well-studied opinion, we should all heed those words carefully.

And I might add that the only people I know of that fling terms like "white gentile" around like it's a lower than low insult are Talmudic Jews.

Should the OP do it again, I shall post what the Babylonian Talmud has to say about GENTILES AND JESUS, and I am fairly certain you will gasp in shock and horror, just like I did when I first laid eyes on it.

Unfortunately, the SAME circle of Pharisees and scribes that wrote the Babylonian Talmud also "edited" the Old Testament...

I try to see the scriptures (writings of Hebrews and Greeks) as a whole and not a division that the catholics gave us in 325AD. The Early followers of Christ, those beyond Paul and the four Gospels (of the same) has a lot of information and wisdom, though people tend to only seer catholic ideas.

The Holy Ghost was active in the times before Christ, but no one ever had it with in them. No one healed, or had all truth, etc. At best they wrote and followed best they could, by the miracles performed FOR them, not BY them. The first time the Holy Spirit was given was by Jesus to the Apostles
at the end of John when he breathed it on them.

It is this Holy Spirit that gives the authors the writing ability that the OT writers didn't have. They could only rely what they had seen, or maybe visions. But truth comes from the spirit itself.


John 10:8
All that ever came before me are thieves and robbers: but the sheep did not hear them.

No one will read this verse and see it as not following old ways. And when Jesus said:

Mark 16:15
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

No one believes that he didn't mean that the OT isn't part of his Gospel. When Jesus went town to town preaching the Gospel for three years, it had nothing to do with the OT. Yet three hundred years after he died, it shows up as part of his Gospel.

I read the Christian writings of the other disciples for continual wisdom, rather than returning to ways that even confused the Jews.

 

[drstevej]

I think "ANT CRACKER" might be better in light of CF rules. [WORD]

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

No one believes that he didn't mean that the OT isn't part of his Gospel.

I adamantly and firmly believe that many, many Jews in the OT fervently worshiped Christ's Father as their God.

However, that being said, there are many passages in the OT that clearly show us that a significant number of Jews in OT days, perhaps even a majority, "went whoring" after other gods.

Over and over again, the OT God warns the people of Israel NOT to worship "the sun or the moon or the host of heaven." Those warnings can be found in Dt 17:3, 2Kings 23:5, Jer 8:2, and Ez 8:16-17, just to name a few.

Make no mistake about it, the passages that reference worship of "the sun or the moon or the host of heaven" are NOT talking any of the heavenly bodies in our solar system; those passages are talking about pagan gods and kings who were perceived to be "avatars" or incarnations of gods. Those passages speak very specifically about the pagan gods worshiped in Egypt, Sumer, Babylon, Persia, Cannon & Lebanon/Phoenicia.

All those gods used "totems" or symbols associated with Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and the sun and the moon, i.e "the sun and the moon and the host of heaven."

Today, thanks to the hard work of some very dedicated scholars, we know the many, many different names used by those gods and we know their edicts and acts.

Based upon what is written in many parts of the Old Testament, we absolutely know beyond any shadow of a doubt, that many OT Jews were NOT following Jesus' father; they had clearly CHOSEN to follow "other gods."

Then, in acts that are clearly defined as ABOMINATIONS, they took the words, edicts and deeds of those "other gods," and cleverly inserted them into the OT as if they were the edicts and deeds of GOD.

Jesus accused the scribes and Pharisees of "sitting in Moses' seat." Clearly then, Jesus KNEW that the scribes and Pharisees had DARED to tamper with the Five Books of Moses. (Mt 23:2)

Trust me, I'm furious about it. And if I am this angry over what they did to the Old Testament, EVEN the Books of Moses, just how furious do you think Our Father in Heaven is over what was done?

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

I deleted a copy of the previous post. Sorry. I have a hard drive that is failing and weird things are happening. I have to send my computer in to be fixed AGAIN for the third time in as many months.
ARGHHHHHH!

 

[Der Alte]

Here is part of an article I pulled off a Christian blog site and I cannot provide the link to the article because I'm still a newbie here. Sorry…

The following was written by a person that had been teaching that "ahayah asher ahayah" was the true name of God. Then he was presented with evidence that changed his mind.

He writes…

"Trying to discover the true name of the Most High has been a toiling task. Time after time I have come across a name which I have thought to be true only to discover later that , that name also is false and a deception. Up until recently I have been teaching that the name of the Most High in the Hebrew is ahayah asher ahayah, however in light of information that has been brought to my attention, I must regrettably conclude that ahayah asher ahayah IS NOT the name of the Most High power. I apologize to everybody for teaching this error and I am currently adjusting my blogs in which this name has been mentioned and subsequently erasing the name and the teachings thereof. A two hour plus conversation with a close friend of mine in which we both went through the evidence together clearly shows that the name ahayah asher ahayah is in fact linked to the Kabbalah, JewISH mysticism, black magic, the forces of darkness and evil. Once again, I apologise for this prior teaching of error but this simply shows everybody here that man is not infallible and that he does make mistakes. The important thing here is to rectify the mistake when discovered. We simply move along with the information we are presented with at any particular time, this world is full of deceit and lies and it is undoubtably the case that we are all going to be continually discovering new information and making changes as per the new information until Christ returns, none the less this must be done. What, are we to find out truths but still choose to remain with the lies?"

The article then goes on to discuss some of the evidence he found.

Evidently, I am not alone in my conclusions.

So there is a blog site somewhere, where some anonymous person claims to present evidence that Yahweh, Yeshua, etc. are the names of pagan idols, etc. etc. etc. And you claim there is evidence at this unidentified site but I am still waiting for credible, verifiable, historical evidence. Just because some ancient scrolls or clay tablets were found buried in the desert, somewhere ,that does not make them credible or reliable.

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

"Just because some ancient scrolls or clay tablets were found buried in the desert, somewhere, that does not make them credible or reliable."

Evidently, ancient history is not your forte'. That's okay. I know most Christians don't follow ancient history. But it's a good thing to do, particularly if one of your goals is developing a good sense of discernment.

Thousands upon thousands of Mesopotamian clay scrolls cylinder seals have been dug out of the sands around the known sites of Babylon, Ur (Abraham's original home town), Nineveh, Nipper and countless other sites. Those tablets, for the most part, sit in the most famous and renown museums of the world. They have been documented, photographed, and translated countless times by some of the best archaeological scholars this earth has ever produced.

Everything we know about ancient Near Eastern history, aside from what is written in the Bible, has been deduced from those clay tablets along with artifacts from archaeological digs.

In relation to my statement that the Books of Moses had evidently been tampered with, I was referring to the fact that passages in Exodus attributed to GOD are passages copied from the Law code of Hammurabi, who was a known king in Babylon. My reference books say he was the ruling king of Babylon from 1728-1686 BC. You can look up the "Code of Hammurabi" at Wikipedia; it's absolutely famous.

There is a full copy of Hammurabi's Law code at (I'm a newbie here, so let's see if I can get you to the site without posting a link…)

http //) eawc (.) evansville (.) edu (/) antholaogy (/) hammurabi (.) htm

If you sit down with your Bible and open it up to Exodus 21:22 ("the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth passage) and read on down clear into chapter 22, you will find it to be a copy taken from Hammurabi's law code, beginning with rule #195. Compare the two and you will see it for yourself. We aren't talking here about just one verse. The bulk of Exodus 21 and a significant part of Chapter 22 are copied from Hammurabi's code.

So, either GOD quoted from the laws of man to Moses and claimed them as his own laws, (doubtful) OR some Jewish scribe living in Babylon deceitfully copied from the Babylonian Law Code, put them into the Book of Exodus and attributed them to GOD.

Hammurabi's god was Marduk (Merodach in the Bible), and Marduk was the son of VERY FAMOUS pagan Babylonian god, Ea.

Ea had a number of similar names through out the Near and Middle East. His name was written and pronounced in a number of ways. Phonetically, AAA, AAA-uh, eh-yah, AAA-us, eh-yus, AAA-yush. Eh-yush (etc.) were all pronouncements of his name.

There are several very famous "Creation of Man" texts that tell the story of Ea apparently in the act of manipulating human DNA in Eden in order to make slaves for the pagan gods. Many of those texts are thousands of years older than the OT. Clearly the Pharisees and scribes living in Babylon were familiar with those texts and either copied or rewrote some of them and inserted them into the OT books.

Ea's well-known symbol was two intertwined serpents. He was known as the god of magic. Much of the magic and mysticism found in the Kabbalah was evidently learned from the Babylonian priesthood.

And it's a name I would refrain from ever uttering out loud, because the kind of magic Ea was known for was Satanic. He was NOT the God of our faith, nor was he the god of those Jews that remained loyal to the Old Testament God.

Like I said, I would certainly NEVER equate any word that sounded even remotely like Ea's name with the God of our Christian faith.

But Ea WAS the god of many Jews, and a significant number of those that followed Ea were evidently scribes and members of the Jewish priesthoods.

Ea was also known as Ptah-Tannin in Egypt. 'Tannin' is the Hebrew word for Dragon. Look it up in your Concordance.

Ea was also identified as the Vedic god "Ayus" in the Hurrian texts which shows us that Ea-Ayus was also known in ancient India. The Vedic texts document that Ayus (also called Ayu or Aila in their records) was the father of 'Nahusha,' who was one of the most famous serpent (Naga) kings of ancient India. Strong's Concordance states that the Hebrew word for 'serpent' is Nahush. Look it up.

I'd say it's fairly clear that Jewish scribes were VERY aware of who "Ehyah" was…

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

"Behold, I give you the power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you." Luke 10:19

 

[Der Alte]

Evidently, ancient history is not your forte'. That's okay. I know most Christians don't follow ancient history. But it's a good thing to do, particularly if one of your goals is developing a good sense of discernment.

Thousands upon thousands of Mesopotamian clay scrolls cylinder seals have been dug out of the sands around the known sites of Babylon, Ur (Abraham's original home town), Nineveh, Nipper and countless other sites. Those tablets, for the most part, sit in the most famous and renown museums of the world. They have been documented, photographed, and translated countless times by some of the best archaeological scholars this earth has ever produced.

Everything we know about ancient Near Eastern history, aside from what is written in the Bible, has been deduced from those clay tablets along with artifacts from archaeological digs.

In relation to my statement that the Books of Moses had evidently been tampered with, I was referring to the fact that passages in Exodus attributed to GOD are passages copied from the Law code of Hammurabi, who was a known king in Babylon. My reference books say he was the ruling king of Babylon from 1728-1686 BC. You can look up the "Code of Hammurabi" at Wikipedia; it's absolutely famous.

There is a full copy of Hammurabi's Law code at (I'm a newbie here, so let's see if I can get you to the site without posting a link…)

http //) eawc (.) evansville (.) edu (/) antholaogy (/) hammurabi (.) htm

I know all this.

If you sit down with your Bible and open it up to Exodus 21:22 ("the eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth passage) and read on down clear into chapter 22, you will find it to be a copy taken from Hammurabi's law code, beginning with rule #195. Compare the two and you will see it for yourself. We aren't talking here about just one verse. The bulk of Exodus 21 and a significant part of Chapter 22 are copied from Hammurabi's code.

So, either GOD quoted from the laws of man to Moses and claimed them as his own laws, (doubtful) OR some Jewish scribe living in Babylon deceitfully copied from the Babylonian Law Code, put them into the Book of Exodus and attributed them to GOD.

This is basically false. I will not find that the part of the OT you are talking about was copied from anything.

Here is a part of a chart which shows differences between the Hammurabi code and the Bible.

Comparison Between the Code of Hammurabi and the Mosaic Law Crime

........................................Code of Hammurabi3........Mosaic Law
One man ensnare another.... Death penalty1 ...............Not addressed
False accusation of theft......Death penalty11..............Monetary fine4
Stealing.............................Death penalty.................Five-fold fine5
Receiving stolen property......Death penalty6, 9...........Two-fold fine6
Inability to pay back stolen...Death penalty.................Sold as slave
property
Receiving a runaway slave.....Must return to master......Must not return slave
.........................................else death penalty
False accusation...................Death penalty.................Penalty same as for
...............................................................................crime accused9
Kidnapping..........................Death penalty14...............Death penalty10
Merchant kills debtor.............Death penalty for son........Death penalty for
.........................................of merchant......................for merchant
Adultery..............................Death penalty...................Death penalty
Incest.................................Death penalty...................Death penalty
Bestiality.............................Not addressed..................Death penalty
Rape...................................Not addressed..................Death penalty
Man kills pregnant woman......Death penalty for..............Death penalty
..........................................daughter of killer...............for killer
Murder.................................Death penalty...................Death penalty
Builders house collapses........Death penalty for builder.....No penalty
& kills owner
Builders house collapses........Death penalty for................No penalty
& kills owners son..................builder's son
Hiring a personal....................Death penalty.................Not adressed.
mercenary and not
paying him
* * *
Knock out another's teeth........Knock out teeth...............Knock out teeth
Slave strike freed man.............Cut off ear......................Not addressed
Fractures another's bone..........Break bone......................Break bone
Barber illegally marks slave......Cut off hands...................Slaves not
..................................................................................marked

Code of Hammurabi
===============================================

Hammurabi's god was Marduk (Merodach in the Bible), and Marduk was the son of VERY FAMOUS pagan Babylonian god, Ea.

Ea had a number of similar names through out the Near and Middle East. His name was written and pronounced in a number of ways. Phonetically, AAA, AAA-uh, eh-yah, AAA-us, eh-yus, AAA-yush. Eh-yush (etc.) were all pronouncements of his name.

There are several very famous "Creation of Man" texts that tell the story of Ea apparently in the act of manipulating human DNA in Eden in order to make slaves for the pagan gods. Many of those texts are thousands of years older than the OT. Clearly the Pharisees and scribes living in Babylon were familiar with those texts and either copied or rewrote some of them and inserted them into the OT books.

Ea's well-known symbol was two intertwined serpents. He was known as the god of magic. Much of the magic and mysticism found in the Kabbalah was evidently learned from the Babylonian priesthood.

Highlighted in red, is nothing but your speculation.

And it's a name I would refrain from ever uttering out loud, because the kind of magic Ea was known for was Satanic. He was NOT the God of our faith, nor was he the god of those Jews that remained loyal to the Old Testament God.

Like I said, I would certainly NEVER equate any word that sounded even remotely like Ea's name with the God of our Christian faith.

But Ea WAS the god of many Jews, and a significant number of those that followed Ea were evidently scribes and members of the Jewish priesthoods.

Ea was also known as Ptah-Tannin in Egypt. 'Tannin' is the Hebrew word for Dragon. Look it up in your Concordance.

Ea was also identified as the Vedic god "Ayus" in the Hurrian texts which shows us that Ea-Ayus was also known in ancient India. The Vedic texts document that Ayus (also called Ayu or Aila in their records) was the father of 'Nahusha,' who was one of the most famous serpent (Naga) kings of ancient India. Strong's Concordance states that the Hebrew word for 'serpent' is Nahush. Look it up.

I'd say it's fairly clear that Jewish scribes were VERY aware of who "Ehyah" was…

Even if true it is irrelevant. In the OT testament, God did not say "Ehyah" to Moses He said "ehyeh." It is not a name, in Hebrew, it is the first person, singular of the verb "to be," "I am." I would be surprised if there were not some words in any language that do not sound like words in another language. A few years ago, in the far east, my wife's native country, I was driving with my wife, she said "Yahweh yong hwa kuk jang." I asked her what she said, she repeated it. So I asked her what it meant, she said "Drive in theater" The word "Yahweh," although it is God's covenant name in Hebrew, in her language it means "outdoor." Similarity does not prove derivation!

Now again I ask do you have any credible, verifiable, historical, evidence for your claims

 

[drstevej]

A few years ago, in the far east, my wife's native country, I was driving with my wife, she said "Yahweh yong hwa kuk jang." I asked her what she said, she repeated it. So I asked her what it meant, she said "Drive in theater" The word "Yahweh," although it is God's covenant name in Hebrew, in her language it means "outdoor." Similarity does not prove derivation!/QUOTE]

For the Win!

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

God did not say "Ehyah" to Moses He said "ehyeh."

Dr. Steve, you are quibbling about an 'e' and an 'a,' written in a language that originally contained no vowels. The vowels used in the texts that finally became canon were obviously subject to scribal interpretation.

Truth be known, I don't care which Middle Eastern language one looks at, there are multiple spellings for nearly all words and proper names, and which vowels were used in antiquity can be best described as a "crap shoot."

I don't think I ever stated that the entire Code of Hammurabi was contained in the bible however significant portions of it are a match.

And of course I realize (and have for years) that we are given the interpretation of "I am." Never-the-less, the "I am" philosophy was used throughout the Near and Middle East by man-kings to justify the fact that they declared themselves gods. These so called "gods" can be traced directly back to India and the Indus Valley civilization. The "I am" philosophy is STILL being taught by the Hindus, the theosophists and oodles of New Age groups.

The words "God," "Lord," "holy," "righteous" and "most high" were freely used in countless texts in reference to deified kings and totally pagan entities.

As an example, today we know that there is still a "House of Lords" in England. If a law or an edict is written (for example) by "Lord Goldschmidt" and duly entered into the records, everyone in our own day and age realizes that Lord Goldschmidt is not a "god" but is just a man.

However, if those laws and edicts are found 300 years from now, and someone translates those laws, depending on the religious philosophy of the day, those manmade laws might be interpreted as laws "written by GOD."

The Jewish priests and scribes living in Babylon doubtless had some form of written text they attributed to Moses, but Moses lived hundreds of years before their time. If those same Jewish priests adhered to the belief that God was responsible for ALL that happens on this Earth, then maybe they looked at the ancient Babylonian texts and actually believed they were written by God, rather than men.

On the other hand, there is much historical evidence that states that the bulk of the Jews exiled in Babylon turned their backs on the God of Israel, never returned even after Cyrus the Great freed them, and they made themselves subject to the gods of Babylon and ancient Persia.

There is a rather famous online history available (for free) over the Internet called "A Crash Course in Jewish History." You can find it at

aish (.)com (/) jl (/) h (/) cc (/)

It's written by Rabbi Ken Spiro who "is a Senior Lecturer and Researcher for Aish HaTorah's Discovery Seminars and the Jerusalem Online University. In addition, he is a licensed tour guide from the Israel Ministry of Tourism. Rabbi Spiro graduated from Vassar College with a BA in Russian Language and Literature and did graduate studies at the Pushkin Institute in Moscow."

In Chapter 24 of the Crash Course, Spiro writes that when Cyrus the Great released the Jews from exile in Babylon…

"You would think that the Jews would jump up, pack up and go. But that’s not what happens. Of what is probably a million Jews living in the empire, only 42,000 go back ― only about 5% of those that went into exile 70 years earlier go back and the remaining 95% stays put."

I personally think those numbers stand as a testimony that 95% of the Jews turned their backs on the God of Israel.

The vast majority of Jews (over 95%!) spent fully 1600 years living in Babylon and did not leave until the Muslims invaded about 1000 AD.

Maybe they felt at home in Babylon, since it's a place located not far from the ancient site of Ur, where Abraham was raised. The region surrounding Babylon would have certainly been viewed as the homeland of their Akkadian ancestors.

I didn't reach my so called "speculations" easily. I've spent years of study and my conclusions are based upon a significant body of fact.

And by the way, anything that Moses wrote would have likely been written in Egyptian, because that was the language he was raised in. The Egyptian language didn't have vowels either...

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honourth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men. Mt 15:8-9

Then the Lord said unto me, the prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spoke unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart. Jer 14:14

The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, but do not ye after their works, for they say, and do not. Mt 23: 2-3

 

[OneThatGotAway]

Question: "Did Moses copy the Law from the Code of Hammurabi?"

"Answer: Hammurabi was a Babylonian king who reigned from 1795 to 1750 B.C. He is remembered today for promoting and enforcing an organized code of laws. The Code of Hammurabi, discovered on a stele in 1901, is one of the best preserved and comprehensive of ancient writings of significant length ever found. The Hammurabian Code is divided into 12 sections and consists of 282 laws, 34 of which are unreadable. The Code is primarily a case-by-case formula of customary law covering administrative, civil, and criminal issues. The complexity of the laws and their subject matter reveal much about ancient Babylonian culture.

About 300 years after Hammurabi, in 1440 B.C., Moses recorded the Law for the Israelites. Because the Mosaic Law contains some similarities to Hammurabi’s Code, some critics of the Bible believe that Moses copied from the Hammurabian Code. If they’re right, and Moses simply stole from the Babylonians, then the whole episode at Mount Sinai is false (Exodus 34), and the inspiration of Scripture is suspect.

Both Levitical law and Hammurabi’s Code impose the death penalty in cases of adultery and kidnapping (Leviticus 20:10; Exodus 21:16; cf. Statutes 129 and 14). Also, there are similarities in the law of retaliation, such as “an eye for an eye” (Leviticus 21:23-25; cf. Statute 196). Statute 206 of the Hammurabian Code says, “If during a quarrel one man strike another and wound him, then he shall swear, ‘I did not injure him wittingly,’ and pay the physicians.” The Law of Moses is comparable: “If people quarrel and one person hits another with a stone or with their fist and the victim does not die but is confined to bed, the one who struck the blow will not be held liable if the other can get up and walk around outside with a staff; however, the guilty party must pay the injured person for any loss of time and see that the victim is completely healed” (Exodus 21:18-19).

There are other examples, but in all truth, such resemblances do not demonstrate that Moses plagiarized Hammurabi’s Code. What the similarities do show is that murder, theft, adultery, and kidnapping are problems in every society and must be addressed. Even today, countries throughout the world have similar laws. Such parallels certainly don’t prove plagiarism.

Similarity in penal codes should be expected in civil societies. Both Babylon and Israel had laws against murder, but it doesn’t follow that one stole the idea from the other. Should one country not prosecute a crime simply because another country has a similar law?

The differences between Mosaic Law and the Hammurabian Code are equally significant. For example, the Law of Moses went far beyond the Code of Hammurabi in that it was rooted in the worship of one God, supreme over all (Deuteronomy 6:4-5). The moral principles of the Old Testament are based on a righteous God who demanded that mankind, created in His image, live righteously. The Law of Moses is more than a legal code; it speaks of sin and responsibility to God. The Hammurabian Code and other ancient laws do not do this.

The Code of Hammurabi focused exclusively on criminal and civil laws and meted out harsh, and sometimes brutal, punishments. In this way, Hammurabi has more in common with Draco than with Moses. The Law of Moses provided justice, but it also dealt with spiritual laws and personal and national holiness. As a result, the Mosaic Law dealt with the cause of crime, not just its effects. The Mosaic Law elevates the value of human life, and its whole tenor is more compassionate than that of the Hammurabian Code. The spiritual dimension is what makes the Law of Moses unique.

In his book Highlights of Archaeology in Bible Lands, Fred Wight writes, “The Mosaic Law gives strong emphasis to the recognition of sin as being the cause of the downfall of a nation. Such a thought is entirely lacking in Hammurabi’s Code. . . . The great fundamental principle of the laws of God in the Hebrew Bible may be summed up in the words: ‘Be ye holy, for I am holy’ [Leviticus 11:45]. Such a principle as this was utterly unknown to the Babylonians as seen in their law code.”

There is a dramatic difference in perspective between Hammurabi and Moses. One’s focus is horizontal, while the other’s is vertical. Archaeologist Alfred Hoerth, author of Archaeology and the Old Testament, says, “The Old Testament law code is religiously oriented, while others are civil. The Mesopotamians believed the god Shamash gave Hammurabi his law code so people could get along with one another. In the Bible, the law code was given primarily so people could get along with God.”

This is what sets the Mosaic Law apart from all the other law codes of antiquity: its strong emphasis on spiritual matters. The closest the Hammurabian Code comes to effect such spirituality is its proclamation that those who stole from the gods would be put to death. Unlike the Mosaic Law, Hammurabi’s Code had no provision for forgiveness.

The theory that Moses’ Law is simply a rewording of Hammurabi’s has largely been abandoned today, due to the fact that similar law codes, even older than Hammurabi’s, have been found in various other places. These would include the Cuneiform laws, written as early as 2350 B.C.; the Code of Urukagina, 2380 B.C.; the Code of Ur-Nammu, 2050 B.C.; and others.

Most critics accede to the fact that the Babylonian laws were probably well-known to the Hebrews of Moses’ day. When God communicated His Law, He used language that the Israelites were already familiar with, and this would explain similar wording for similar laws.

Both Hammurabi and Moses recorded a complex system of laws which were unique to their times. Hammurabi claimed to receive his code from the Babylonian god of justice, Shamash. Moses received God’s Law atop Mount Sinai directly from Jehovah, the God of the Israelites. There are some similarities between the Mosaic Law and the Code of Hammurabi, as would be expected from two legislative systems. However, their significant differences demonstrate the baselessness of the charge that Moses copied from the Code of Hammurabi."


Recommended Resources: Logos Bible Software and The Ten Commandments: Ethics for the Twenty-first Century by Mark F. Rooker.

Read more: Did Moses copy the Law from the Code of Hammurabi?

The Ten Commandments: Ethics for the Twenty-first Century
By: Mark Rooker

While he is not the author of every article on GotQuestions.org, for citation purposes, you may reference our CEO, S. Michael Houdmann."

And may I add that you cannot compare Hammurabi's Code with the oldest surviving Torah because the laws has been handed down from Adam to Noah to Abraham to Moses.

 

[OneThatGotAway]

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honourth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrine the commandments of men. Mt 15:8-9

Yahshua referred to the sons of Yishrael who ignored the very Torah you suspect is tainted with pagan influences. Yet, Yahshua and his servants followed that same Torah without question:

Jesus Rejected at Nazareth
...and the book of the prophet YeshoYahu was handed to Him. And He opened the book and found the place where it was written, "THE SPIRIT OF YAHWEH IS UPON ME, BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOOD NEWS TO THE POOR. HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES, AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND, TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED, TO PROCLAIM THE FAVORABLE YEAR OF YAHWEH."… (Luke 4:18-19)

This would have been a perfect time for Yahshuo to correct the scribes by saying that Isaiah 61:1 has been corrupted and therefore I cannot speak his name. Corrupt men does not mean that the holy men will entrust the Holy Scriptures to them. Otherwise, how can Yahweh be true to his promise of preserving his remnant if they are unable to read his Torah and Holy Name?

Then the Lord said unto me, the prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spoke unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart. Jer 14:14

And yet Yahweh entrusted holy prophets like YermiYahu to write the name Yahweh several times in the book of YermiYahu with preservation by the remnant.

The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, but do not ye after their works, for they say, and do not. Mt 23: 2-3

Yahshuo spoken correctly: OBEY them as far as the Torah is concern; because it is not corrupt. However, do not WALK as the Pharisees because their works are hypocritical and anti-Torah. This too would have been a perfect time for Yahshuo to reveal any alleged corruption of scriptures. But, alas none existed even then because of the true remnant of Yahweh preserving the truth.

 

[Phantasman]

I adamantly and firmly believe that many, many Jews in the OT fervently worshiped Christ's Father as their God.

However, that being said, there are many passages in the OT that clearly show us that a significant number of Jews in OT days, perhaps even a majority, "went whoring" after other gods.

Over and over again, the OT God warns the people of Israel NOT to worship "the sun or the moon or the host of heaven." Those warnings can be found in Dt 17:3, 2Kings 23:5, Jer 8:2, and Ez 8:16-17, just to name a few.

Make no mistake about it, the passages that reference worship of "the sun or the moon or the host of heaven" are NOT talking any of the heavenly bodies in our solar system; those passages are talking about pagan gods and kings who were perceived to be "avatars" or incarnations of gods. Those passages speak very specifically about the pagan gods worshiped in Egypt, Sumer, Babylon, Persia, Cannon & Lebanon/Phoenicia.

All those gods used "totems" or symbols associated with Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and the sun and the moon, i.e "the sun and the moon and the host of heaven."

Today, thanks to the hard work of some very dedicated scholars, we know the many, many different names used by those gods and we know their edicts and acts.

Based upon what is written in many parts of the Old Testament, we absolutely know beyond any shadow of a doubt, that many OT Jews were NOT following Jesus' father; they had clearly CHOSEN to follow "other gods."

Then, in acts that are clearly defined as ABOMINATIONS, they took the words, edicts and deeds of those "other gods," and cleverly inserted them into the OT as if they were the edicts and deeds of GOD.

Jesus accused the scribes and Pharisees of "sitting in Moses' seat." Clearly then, Jesus KNEW that the scribes and Pharisees had DARED to tamper with the Five Books of Moses. (Mt 23:2)

Trust me, I'm furious about it. And if I am this angry over what they did to the Old Testament, EVEN the Books of Moses, just how furious do you think Our Father in Heaven is over what was done?

You have hit the nail on the head. Jesus showed us that HIS God was so much different by being spiritual, something other false Gods weren't. Yet when we drag the OT God into the wisdom Christ brought, we seem to get an impression of a God who has still the physical characteristics of some of the false Gods (being old with a beard, residing in space somewhere looking down, using lightning to kill, etc.). Some just don't understand the parables and rely on the OT to get their impressions.

 

[Pluckiy Pilgrim]

One that got away, I see that you are in full support of orthodox doctrine in an unorthodox thread.

Many scholars would disagree with you. This is what they say:

"The biblical manuscripts from Qumran, which include at least fragments from every book of the Old Testament, except perhaps for the Book of Esther, provide a far older cross section of scriptural tradition than that available to scholars before. While some of the Qumran biblical manuscripts are nearly identical to the Masoretic, or traditional, Hebrew text of the Old Testament, some manuscripts of the books of Exodus and Samuel found in Cave Four exhibit dramatic differences in both language and content. In their astonishing range of textual variants, the Qumran biblical discoveries have prompted scholars to reconsider the once-accepted theories of the development of the modern biblical text from only three manuscript families: of the Masoretic text, of the Hebrew original of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around A.D. 100. "

(Source: Fagan, Brian M., and Charlotte Beck, The Oxford Companion to Archeology, entry on the "Dead sea scrolls", Oxford University Press, 1996.)

If Old Testament scripture was not canonized until roughly 100 AD, then how can you be certain that the scripture supported by Yeshua was the version we see in the bible today?

The Jewish people who returned to Israel after the Babylonian exile evidently believed in Yeshua's Father as their God. However, the Babylonian Jews did not nor did they obey him and it was the Babylonian Jews that ran the priesthood in Jerusalem.

There is no doubt in my mind that it was the Pharisees and scribes, backed by the Jews in Babylon that decided which version of scripture was "officially" canonized.

I would sincerely love to see the full scriptures that Yeshua supported but I honestly do not believe they were the scriptures that were canonized.

I would like to discuss this further, but I have a very busy day ahead of me and don't have the time to post more.

 

[childofdust]

Dr. Steve, you are quibbling about an 'e' and an 'a,' written in a language that originally contained no vowels.

Wow. Did I just read that? Let me check again. Yep. I did. You just said the language originally contained no vowels. Let me triple-check. Yep. You said that.



Your ignorance is mind-boggling.

Hebrew, like all Semitic languages, had vowels. At all times. Going back as far as we can trace. Vowels have ALWAYS been part of the Hebrew language. Always and forever.

They have not, however, always been WRITTEN because some SCRIPTS do not have vowels. But that doesn't mean THE LANGUAGE doesn't have vowels.



And your morphological and phonological ignorance is equally baffling. You disregard the importance of an “e” or an “a” as if THE RULES OF LANGUAGE were of no consequence.



"You should have seen my ren today."

Read it again.

"You should have seen my ren today."

Do you understand what I just said? You probably didn't, because what I just said is NONSENSE.

The difference between an “e” (ren) and a “u” (run) is the difference between me speaking NONSENSE and me speaking ENGLISH. It is not quibbling to care about whether one is speaking NONSENSE versus whether one is speaking a coherent language that operates according to morphological and phonological rules, which you, obviously, have no clue about.

“Eyey” has an “e” there, not an “a,” because of the RULES OF THE HEBREW LANGUAGE. You stick an “a” there, and instead of Hebrew, you have NONSENSE.

And we know what the vowels were in the Hebrew language going far, far back into time because we can chart how it changes. We have GREEK TRANSCRIPTIONS from Origen (and many others), in which the Hebrew consonants and vowels were transcribed into their corresponding Greek consonants and vowels.

And if we want to go even further back in time, we have the Amarna Letters, many of which were from ancient Semites in and around the land of Israel--some of which even came from an official of Jerusalem before the time of King David! These letters were written in the Akkadian script, which has vowels, but were in the Canaanite language (Hebrew is a Canaanite dialect). So it preserved the vowels of that language! So we can see exactly what vowels looked like in the language before it became distinctly Hebrew and exactly what the vowels looked like after they were distinctly Hebrew. And we can trace the RULES OF THE LANGUAGE that operated in order to make it so.

And if we want to go back even further, we can head up to Ugarit! And there, we find a language extremely similar to both ancient Hebrew and ancient Canaanite! And it ALSO had vowels. And those vowels were ALSO written down for us in its script!

I think you get the idea. We know what the vowels are because we have evidence of those vowels stretching back through time even beyond the existence of the Hebrew language itself. So we know where it came from. Why it developed. And how it developed.

And you would disregard the facts of a language itself by calling our insistence of those facts "quibbling"????

 

[granpa]

Dr. Steve, you are quibbling about an 'e' and an 'a,' written in a language that originally contained no vowels. The vowels used in the texts that finally became canon were obviously subject to scribal interpretation.

Truth be known, I don't care which Middle Eastern language one looks at, there are multiple spellings for nearly all words and proper names, and which vowels were used in antiquity can be best described as a "crap shoot."

Wow. Did I just read that? Let me check again. Yep. I did. You just said the language originally contained no vowels. Let me triple-check. Yep. You said that.



Your ignorance is mind-boggling.

Hebrew, like all Semitic languages, had vowels. At all times. Going back as far as we can trace. Vowels have ALWAYS been part of the Hebrew language. Always and forever.

Please note the part in red

 

[Der Alte]

God did not say "Ehyah" to Moses He said "ehyeh."

Dr. Steve, you are quibbling about an 'e' and an 'a,' written in a language that originally contained no vowels. The vowels used in the texts that finally became canon were obviously subject to scribal interpretation.

How can you even begin to claim any knowledge of ancient middle east [AME] languages when you can't even keep track of who you are talking to. I, Der Alter, not Dr. Steve, posted the comment above.

Notice you use the term "were obviously subject to." That is speculation, guessing, assuming, etc. What kind of positive facts do you have?

Now take everything that you are arguing about ancient Hebrew and apply it to ancient Babylonian, or any other AME language. How do you know that the pronunciation of any word in any AME language was what you claim it was? You cannot eat your cake and have it too. You do not have any evidence whatsoever that the name of any king or any pagan deity was pronounced as you are claiming they were. Therefore, you cannot claim that any name/word in one language was copied from any word in any other language.

Truth be known, I don't care which Middle Eastern language one looks at, there are multiple spellings for nearly all words and proper names, and which vowels were used in antiquity can be best described as a "crap shoot."

Therefore you cannot claim that any name/word in Hebrew, or any other language was copied from any word/name in any other language. As you said it is a "crap shoot." Notice how your own explanation just blew your argument out of the water?

I don't think I ever stated that the entire Code of Hammurabi was contained in the bible however significant portions of it are a match.

Since I have presented evidence to the contrary you will have to prove your assertion.

And of course I realize (and have for years) that we are given the interpretation of "I am." Never-the-less, the "I am" philosophy was used throughout the Near and Middle East by man-kings to justify the fact that they declared themselves gods. These so called "gods" can be traced directly back to India and the Indus Valley civilization. The "I am" philosophy is STILL being taught by the Hindus, the theosophists and oodles of New Age groups.

Nonsense! Just more empty anti-Bible rhetoric with no, zero, none evidence.

The words "God," "Lord," "holy," "righteous" and "most high" were freely used in countless texts in reference to deified kings and totally pagan entities.

As an example, today we know that there is still a "House of Lords" in England. If a law or an edict is written (for example) by "Lord Goldschmidt" and duly entered into the records, everyone in our own day and age realizes that Lord Goldschmidt is not a "god" but is just a man.

As you have just shown there are just so many words of honor and respect which can be used to address a monarch or a deity.

However, if those laws and edicts are found 300 years from now, and someone translates those laws, depending on the religious philosophy of the day, those manmade laws might be interpreted as laws "written by GOD."

More anti-Bible rhetoric. Does the code of Hammurabi make any claim to having been written by a deity?

The Jewish priests and scribes living in Babylon doubtless had some form of written text they attributed to Moses, but Moses lived hundreds of years before their time. If those same Jewish priests adhered to the belief that God was responsible for ALL that happens on this Earth, then maybe they looked at the ancient Babylonian texts and actually believed they were written by God, rather than men.

Sorry I am not the least bit interested in your guesses and speculation.

On the other hand, there is much historical evidence that states that the bulk of the Jews exiled in Babylon turned their backs on the God of Israel, never returned even after Cyrus the Great freed them, and they made themselves subject to the gods of Babylon and ancient Persia.

There is a rather famous online history available (for free) over the Internet called "A Crash Course in Jewish History." You can find it at

aish (.)com (/) jl (/) h (/) cc (/)

It's written by Rabbi Ken Spiro who "is a Senior Lecturer and Researcher for Aish HaTorah's Discovery Seminars and the Jerusalem Online University. In addition, he is a licensed tour guide from the Israel Ministry of Tourism. Rabbi Spiro graduated from Vassar College with a BA in Russian Language and Literature and did graduate studies at the Pushkin Institute in Moscow."

In Chapter 24 of the Crash Course, Spiro writes that when Cyrus the Great released the Jews from exile in Babylon…

"You would think that the Jews would jump up, pack up and go. But that’s not what happens. Of what is probably a million Jews living in the empire, only 42,000 go back ― only about 5% of those that went into exile 70 years earlier go back and the remaining 95% stays put."

I personally think those numbers stand as a testimony that 95% of the Jews turned their backs on the God of Israel.

The vast majority of Jews (over 95%!) spent fully 1600 years living in Babylon and did not leave until the Muslims invaded about 1000 AD.

Maybe they felt at home in Babylon, since it's a place located not far from the ancient site of Ur, where Abraham was raised. The region surrounding Babylon would have certainly been viewed as the homeland of their Akkadian ancestors.

Somewhat interesting but it does not appear to be relevant to this discussion.

I didn't reach my so called "speculations" easily. I've spent years of study and my conclusions are based upon a significant body of fact.

See my comments above. How much formal study have you done, in a classroom and your work reviewed

And by the way, anything that Moses wrote would have likely been written in Egyptian, because that was the language he was raised in. The Egyptian language didn't have vowels either...

More of your guessing and speculation.

 

[Anto9us]

I couldn't get into this site for hours.

Someone must have pronounced God's name wrong.