Page 4 of 7
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:10 pm
by kbs2244
Bear with me, this is my first post with a new system. New OS and new hardware.
For sure I am getting a different keyboard.
And a spelling checker.
Now, to the point:
Nowhere in the Bible does it claim that that the people that it degrades are socialty or civil engering wise infior to the Heberews.
The Bablyons, the Phohenieans, the Egypetians, etc, etc, were looked down on for their reglious beliefs.
It is a religious book!
Not a civil engenerring history book.
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:04 pm
by daybrown
No, scripture is social engineering; unfortunately, without scientific double blind studies to back it up.
Nietzsche, 1883, "The Birth of Tragedy", chap VII
"It is a sure sign of the death of a religion when its mythic presuppositions become systematized, under the severe, rational eyes of an orthodox dogmatism, into a ready sum of historical events, and when people begin timidly defending the veracity of myth but at the same time resist its natural continuance- when the feeling for myth withers and its place is taken by a religion claiming historical foundations."
IIRC, it was Campbell who said that the Torah, like Homer, was a propaganda piece designed to unify Israel rather than Greece in the face of the threat they both faced- Persian hegemony. It worked for Greeks but not Hebrews.
In both cases snippets of earlier myth were woven together into a more coherent narrative, altho, Homer was a lot better at it. Campbell also noted that whereas Greek paganism, ie, Dionysianism, was based on works of theater claiming allegorical truth, the Levantine religions were based on works of literature claiming literal truth.
And of course, if you are so lacking in insight that you dont get it, then its only natural to prefer a Levantine religion. Curiously too, Homer's Trojan opposition was never denigrated, and indeed their humanity and heroism is obvious, compared to the Levantine habit of slandering all their enemies with being, as we now say, "philistines".
And now, in the 21st century, I look back with some curiosity as to how it is that Americans have become so much more racist and philistine Since Nixon. Carter was right, there was an "American Malaise" and it has gotten a lot worse since. The increase in religious fundamentalism since him, is not the cause, but a symptom.
We here, in archeology keep seeing more data dug up to refute the claims of literal truth in scripture, but I guess we know you cant argue with neurotic fanatics. I feel cassandrine, understanding the problem, but not being able to do anything significant about it. Its worse than Greeks bearing gifts; people dont even know what they want, or why they want it.
Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 10:47 pm
by Minimalist
The Philistine anachronism is one of the key torpedoes in the hull of bible inerrancy. Archaeology and history (Egyptian) combine to tell us that the Philistines reached the Canaanite coast sometime around 1150 BC. Much like the dueling birthdates of Jesus in the NT, there is simply no way to reconcile the bible stories which have the Philistines in the area prior to that.
It is one of the main reasons for the growing belief that the OT was not written until the late 7th century BC.
And, as kb notes, by then the Philistine culture was quite advanced in relation to the Judaeans.
Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 3:26 am
by daybrown
<It is one of the main reasons for the growing belief that the OT was not written until the late 7th century BC.>
IIRC, it was Campbell who pointed out that it was written in contemporary Hebrew. Kinda like claiming you found a Shakespearian play, written hundreds of years before... in modern English.
And yet, there are all these fools who buy into it. Its like they are Turing machines, or Androids, only able to think the way they were programmed to. The phrase "The Untied States of Denial" comes to mind. Trying to explain to them what's going on is like arguing with the cast of a "Truman Show".
Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 9:11 am
by Minimalist
The earliest example of a written part of the OT is an artifact called the Silver Scroll found in a tomb. It's a tiny roll of silver with a prayer from the OT and dated to around c. 600BC.
AS far as actual documents, the oldest version of the OT was the Septuagint written in Greek in Alexandria sometime after 300 BC.
Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 3:45 pm
by Barracuda
Thanks for pulling this up, again Beag! I thought of it when I read the article.
And I was half sleeping, and half watching History Channel last night when someone mentioned that one of the most anti Philistine Hebrew leaders actually had two Philistine wives.
People are people, and the fact that the Hebrews hated the Philistines so much makes me think that the Philistiines actually had the upper hand at the time. People always hate the "others" most when the others have the advantage
Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 4:25 pm
by Beagle
Howdy Barracuda.
The Philistines were an interesting people, and probably very representative of the Sea People as a whole. Some info and a map:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philistines
Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 6:44 pm
by Minimalist
Wives, particularly royal princesses, were always married off for political reasons. It was the most common means of cementing an alliance.
Gives it the personal touch!
Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:48 am
by Digit
And keeps the women in their place!

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:09 pm
by Leona Conner
[quote="Digit"]And keeps the women in their place!

[/quote]
Didn't know women back then ever had the opportunity to get out of their "place." Whatever that was. They were born in their place, raised in their place, lived their lives in their place and then died there.

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 5:10 pm
by Minimalist
The good old days?
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:47 am
by Digit
Recently the the idiots of the Young Farmers Union over here voted the cell phone as the greatest invention of the 20C! I strongly suspect that women would have voted the washing machine somewhat higher.
The 20C was a period of great change and much blood letting, but one good thing that arose from it was the general emancipation of women. In the western world at least.
Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 10:06 am
by Minimalist
In the Western World, mainly.
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:19 am
by Barracuda
Thanks, Beagle!
That was an interesting link. There is just so much history in that Little corner of the world
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 10:51 am
by Leona Conner
Minimalist wrote:The good old days?
Now Bin Laden wants Americans to convert to Islam. HA!!!!! My grandmother and aunts didn't go to jail marching for women's rights for me or my daughters to give them up and wear black sacks. He better watch his ass because if he gets enough of us red-blooded American females pissed, we'll find him for Bush Baby, and they won't have to worry about a trial after.
