← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Franco
Thread ID: 17807 | Posts: 21 | Started: 2005-04-16
2005-04-16 16:07 | User Profile
[B]Bolshevism From Moses To Lenin[/B]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/mosestolenin/mostolentoc.htm[/url]
2005-04-16 16:23 | User Profile
Thanks, Franco.
Interesting that Eckart made his financial fortune with his Norse-to-German translations of Ibsen's plays--still the best available.
2005-04-16 17:12 | User Profile
This looks like rather half-educated stuff to me - like childish attempts to blame all unappealing traits of Roman Catholicism to Jewish infiltrators: [COLOR=Sienna]
[I]"Everything remains as of old," he nodded. "There have been popes of Jewish blood. {NOTE: Anacletus II (1130-1138), Innocent II (1130-1143), Calixtus III (1168-1178), Clement Vlll (1424-1428), Alexander Vl (1492-1503), and even Pius Xl (1922-1939). In addition, Gregory Vl (1045-1046) and others may have been Jews or part-Jews. Anacletus Il, Calixtus III, and Clement VIII are generally classified as antipopes. [Translator]} Also there has seldom or never been a shortage of other dignitaries of the same descent in the Church. Was that which they stood for Catholicism? No, it was Judaism. Let's take just one thing: the selling of indulgences. The very essence of the Jewish spirit. We are both Catholics, but dare we not say that? Are we really supposed to believe that there has never been anything in the Church with which one can find fault? Just because we are Catholics, we say it. That has nothing to do with Catholicism. We know that Catholicism would have remained intact even if half the hierarchy had consisted of Jews. A number of sincere men always held it high, though often only secretly, many times even against the pope. Sometimes there were many such men, sometimes few.
"The investigation of the Jew and his activities should have been the alpha and the omega of our historians. Instead, they investigate the bowel movements of the past.
"Karl the Great favored the Jews at every turn. It seems to me that his slaughter of the 4500 Saxons at Verden -- the best German blood -- and his Jewish advisers had something to do with one another.
"The notorious insanity of the Crusades bled the German people of six million men. Finally the Hohenstaufen, Frederick II, succeeded through mere negotiation, without striking a blow in securing the Holy Land for Christendom. What did the curia do? Full of hatred, they hurled the ban of excommunication on Frederick and refused to recognize his treaty with the sultan, thus neutralizing his great success. It seems that, to those pulling the strings, the incidental bloodletting was more important than the avowed objective of the Crusades.
"At last came the Children's Crusade. Tens of thousands of children sent against the victorious Turkish army, all to be destroyed. I can't believe that the idea for that absurdity originated in a non-Jewish mind. I am always reminded of the murder of the children of Bethlehem and the slaughter of the Egyptian firstborn. I would give anything for a photograph of the priest who preached that Crusade, and his flunkeys."[/I][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/mosestolenin/moses6.htm[/url]
There is also a very clear neo-Marcionite tendency - attempt to get rid of the Old Testament, while still showing respect to Jesus.
The only difference is that the original heresiarch Marcion venerated the writings of Apostle Paul, whereas Eckart and Hitler seem to be very anti-Paulian indeed...
Petr
2005-04-16 17:44 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr] There is also a very clear neo-Marcionite tendency - attempt to get rid of the Old Testament, while still showing respect to Jesus.[/QUOTE] Half a loaf is better than none.
2005-04-16 19:37 | User Profile
Actually, German liberal Protestants such as von Harnack also held the Old Testament in low esteem for a variety of reasons. This distate for the Old Testament and, conversely, a high regard for Jesus was a staple of positive Christians who were themselves deeply influenced by liberal Protestants.
I must say that I sort of enjoyed [I]Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin[/I], but I thought that it was on the whole somewhat short and ill developed. In sum, a good [B]start[/B] but only that.
[QUOTE=Petr]This looks like rather half-educated stuff to me - like childish attempts to blame all unappealing traits of Roman Catholicism to Jewish infiltrators: [COLOR=Sienna]
[I]"Everything remains as of old," he nodded. "There have been popes of Jewish blood. {NOTE: Anacletus II (1130-1138), Innocent II (1130-1143), Calixtus III (1168-1178), Clement Vlll (1424-1428), Alexander Vl (1492-1503), and even Pius Xl (1922-1939). In addition, Gregory Vl (1045-1046) and others may have been Jews or part-Jews. Anacletus Il, Calixtus III, and Clement VIII are generally classified as antipopes. [Translator]} Also there has seldom or never been a shortage of other dignitaries of the same descent in the Church. Was that which they stood for Catholicism? No, it was Judaism. Let's take just one thing: the selling of indulgences. The very essence of the Jewish spirit. We are both Catholics, but dare we not say that? Are we really supposed to believe that there has never been anything in the Church with which one can find fault? Just because we are Catholics, we say it. That has nothing to do with Catholicism. We know that Catholicism would have remained intact even if half the hierarchy had consisted of Jews. A number of sincere men always held it high, though often only secretly, many times even against the pope. Sometimes there were many such men, sometimes few.
"The investigation of the Jew and his activities should have been the alpha and the omega of our historians. Instead, they investigate the bowel movements of the past.
"Karl the Great favored the Jews at every turn. It seems to me that his slaughter of the 4500 Saxons at Verden -- the best German blood -- and his Jewish advisers had something to do with one another.
"The notorious insanity of the Crusades bled the German people of six million men. Finally the Hohenstaufen, Frederick II, succeeded through mere negotiation, without striking a blow in securing the Holy Land for Christendom. What did the curia do? Full of hatred, they hurled the ban of excommunication on Frederick and refused to recognize his treaty with the sultan, thus neutralizing his great success. It seems that, to those pulling the strings, the incidental bloodletting was more important than the avowed objective of the Crusades.
"At last came the Children's Crusade. Tens of thousands of children sent against the victorious Turkish army, all to be destroyed. I can't believe that the idea for that absurdity originated in a non-Jewish mind. I am always reminded of the murder of the children of Bethlehem and the slaughter of the Egyptian firstborn. I would give anything for a photograph of the priest who preached that Crusade, and his flunkeys."[/I][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/mosestolenin/moses6.htm[/url]
There is also a very clear neo-Marcionite tendency - attempt to get rid of the Old Testament, while still showing respect to Jesus.
The only difference is that the original heresiarch Marcion venerated the writings of Apostle Paul, whereas Eckart and Hitler seem to be very anti-Paulian indeed...
Petr[/QUOTE]
2005-04-16 19:48 | User Profile
Another example of the lackadaisical attitude these guys had towards historical events: they ridiculously romanticize the Canaanite culture that Israelites swept away when they invaded Palestine:
[COLOR=DarkRed]"And what good-natured peoples they were who, one after another, were completely exterminated! [B]Delitzsch, who has thoroughly investigated that period, writes, for example, about the Canaanites: on all the hills, under every shady tree, they rendered adoration and reverence to the sun god and to the salutary goddess Aschera; and he compares this beautiful, poetic custom with the pious way of our Catholic villagers, serving the Almighty in remote mountain chapels[/B]."
[I]{NOTE: Friedrich Delitzsch, Die Grosse Täuschung: Kritische Betrachfungen zu den alttestamentlichen Berichten über Israels Eindringen in Kanaan, Die Gottesoffenbarung vom Sinai, und die Wirksamkeit der Propheten (Stuttgart, 1920).}"[/I][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.ety.com/HRP/booksonline/mosestolenin/moses2.htm[/url]
Yup - ritual pederasty and human sacrifices, that's what Catholic villagers usually do, huh? [COLOR=Sienna][B] "By 1400 B.C. the Canaanite civilization and religion had become one of the weakest, most decadent, and most immoral cultures of the civilized world. Many of its repulsive practices were prohibited to Israel in Leviticus 18." [/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.christian-thinktank.com/qamorite.html[/url]
Besides, Israelites didn't do to Canaanites anything worse than what noble Vedic Aryans did to Dravidians when they invaded the Indus Valley - compare Rig-Veda and the book of Joshua to each other...:
[url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16476&page=2&pp=15&highlight=rig-veda[/url]
Petr
2005-04-16 20:14 | User Profile
There is of course no archeological evidence for any Israelite invasion. In fact the Israelites were idol worshiping pagans right up until the point the Persian/Parsee/Farsi/Pharisee priests "returned" from Babylon, under the sponsorship of Cyrus, to impose the new Persian monotheism. Indeed the ancient polytheism persisted for a long time, and it wasn't a "foreign" import. All those Asherah archeologists keep finding, right up to the Maccabean period, are rather dead giveaways. Monotheism came rather late to the Jews, who were simply the same people as the ancient Canaanites, under a new name.
Your point about the Rig Veda might upset the applecarts of liberal Christians (though probaby not), but it won't phase White Nationalists. It's not the barbarity of the OT as such that concerns us, as the fact that it is alien and largely irrelevent to us. We don't base anything on the Rig Veda either, so no big deal. That's a problem for Hindus, not us. We have moved on since then. However, if one is serious about Christianity, then yes, an emphasis on Jesus and the NT makes a lot more sense than an emphasis on the OT.
[edit: I don't have time to stick around and defend the above, in case what I have posted gives Petr apoplexy, but if anyone is interested, Google around a bit for things like "elephantine papyri", asherah, Pharisee/Farsi, etc., and you will find interesting reading. This isn't something that's going to be decided by a web forum argument; you have to do your own research and reading and honestly decide for yourself.]
2005-04-16 20:38 | User Profile
[I][B] - "There is of course no archeological evidence for any Israelite invasion."[/B][/I]
And this is of course just nonsense peddled by pseudo-scholars like Israel Finkelstein and Neal Silberman:
[url]http://www.tektonics.org/books/bibleunrvw.html[/url]
[url]http://www.tektonics.org/gk/jericho.html[/url]
[url]http://www.tektonics.org/books/rohlpakrvw.html[/url]
[B][I] - "In fact the Israelites were idol worshiping pagans right up until the point the Persian/Parsee/Farsi/Pharisee priests "returned" from Babylon, under the sponsorship of Cyrus, to impose the new Persian monotheism."[/I][/B]
Are you aware that hardly any mainstream scholar no longer believes in such a simplistic anti-Bible propaganda?
This is what the latest [U]serious[/U] scholarship says about the relationship between Israelite and Persian religions:
[COLOR=Purple] "A reader has alerted us to a recent book called The Rise and Fall of the Afterlife by Jan N. Bremmer (New York: Routledge 2002). I have not seen this book, but our reader sent me some quotes which I have confirmed by using the "Look Inside" feature at Amazon Books. Bremmer reflects the latest scholarship on the issue of alleged "borrowing" from Zoroastrianism, and the news here does not bode well for Carrier, and makes him look especially incompetent, given that he is obviously not aware of these findings when, as an alleged scholar-to-be in this critical field, he ought to have been. On page 50, Bremmer says: [I] "The nature and chronology of Iranian apocalypticism has recently been hotly debated.[B] For many years it was virtually dogma that the genre went back to the earliest period, but it has been recently argued that the whole genre of Iranian apocalypticism is actually a fairly late genre - at least postdating Christian times[/B]." [/I]
He sums up his conclusion, that though an open mind needs to be kept, there is [B]"little reason to derive Jewish ideas about resurrection from Persian sources. Their origin(s) may well lie within intra-Jewish developments[/B]." He also critices those (like Boyce) who argued for a Jewish-borrowing thesis [48]: [I] " Moreover, we should not presume that that every Zoroastrian doctrine can be read back into the Zoroastrian Urzeit. Zoroastrianism was a living religion subject to internal disputes and thus changed over the centuries. Nevertheless, its leading comtemporary scholar, Mary Boyce, has consistently presented a static view - against all evidence and common sense." [/I]
His conclusion in sum is: "...In fact, it is virtually certain that Zoroastrian belief in resurrection does not belong to its earliest stages." [/COLOR]
[url]http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nwjcarr3.html[/url]
[COLOR=Sienna] [I]"[B]Looking back even further, B argues that rather than early Jews inheriting resurrection from Zoroastrianism, later Zoroastrians adopt the notion from Christianity[/B]. In a similar vein he argues for the likelihood that a number of pagan cults in late antiquity develop their interest in resurrection from the Christians as well."[/I][/COLOR]
[url]http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2002/2002-07-04.html[/url]
[I][B] - "It's not the barbarity of the OT as such that concerns us, as the fact that it is alien and largely irrelevent to us." [/B][/I] [COLOR=Blue][B] "I am human and let nothing human be alien to me." - Terence [/B][/COLOR]
[I][B] - "However, if one is serious about Christianity, then yes, an emphasis on Jesus and the NT makes a lot more sense than an emphasis on the OT."[/B][/I]
And if one wants to take Jesus Christ Himself seriously, then one must give to the Old Testament the same respect that He did - like every time He was tempted in the desert by the devil, He answered by quoting the books of Moses.
Petr
2005-04-16 20:49 | User Profile
[COLOR=DarkRed][I][B] - "if anyone is interested, Google around a bit for things like "elephantine papyri", asherah, Pharisee/Farsi, etc., and you will find interesting reading."[/B][/I] [/COLOR]
This is what all amateurish skeptics do - they [B]Google around a bit[/B]. This is how [B]half[/B]-educated opinions are born.
I have gathered lots of material on this subject onto this thread:
[url]http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12844&page=2&pp=15&highlight=isaiah[/url]
[COLOR=Indigo][COLOR=DarkRed][I]- ââ¬ÅIndeed, many have observed that Pharisee is uncannily close to Parsee, that is, Persian.ââ¬Â[/I][/COLOR][/COLOR]
[COLOR=Sienna]"Laughably amateurish interpretation. [B]In fact, it comes form the Hebrew word of P'rushim. The entymology is based on the semitic root prsh, vocalized parash, "to separate[/B]".
[B]That is, they were separated from the filth of common people [/B]whom those elitist Pharisees saw as tainted by their non-performance of all their Talmudic rites - thus they were separatists."[/COLOR]
Petr
2005-04-16 21:20 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr]There is also a very clear neo-Marcionite tendency - attempt to get rid of the Old Testament, while still showing respect to Jesus.[/QUOTE]
"The cardinal feature of Marcion's position is that in place of the concept of a fallen world (original sin) he substitutes the idea of an alien God. The creator of this world is alien to the true God and alien to spiritual man. He is the Yahweh of the Old Testament, a wild god, one who can rage, make mistakes, and repent, one who knows nothing of grace, but only strict justice. This God is responsible for the misery of man; and he gave us the Old Testament with all its features, including the Messiah. Christ himself is not the Messiah; he did not fulfill the predictions of the Old Testament, but came to save us from the God of wrath, in whose clutches we presently languish. Although Marcion relegated the God of the Old Testament to an inferior role, he did not consider his prophecies--in the Jewish Scriptures--to be false. Those who try to keep his Law in the present-age are good, but cannot be saved unless they are taken out of the domain of his Law through Christ, the manifestation of the unknown God of love. The Messiah promised by the God of the Jews is yet to come. In Marcion's eyes, then, the church of Christ is a means of freeing spiritual people from the ongoing course of worldly existence, dominated by the God of the Jews, by the Jews themselves, and by their God's promised Messiah. Marcion's idea that the church really is not part of world history appears again, centuries later, in a more orthodox form, in the view of J.N. Darby (1800-1882). Darby and the dispensationalists who follow him consider the church to be in a kind of parenthesis that really is not part of world history." - Harold O.J. Brown "Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church" Pg. 61
2005-04-16 21:28 | User Profile
"Gnosticism not only opposed the idea that God could have been involved in an act of creating a material world, but it also denied that the material world is meaningful in itself. There is no creation order, as Christian theology teaches. The material world, if not totally illusory, is meaningless, and no true wisdom can be gleaned by studying it. Presumably, if Gnosticism had triumphed, it could not have produced experimental natural science as Christianity did, for the simple reason that it looked on the material world as meaningless.
While Gnosticism repudiated Creation, it accepted Christ, although it gave him a drastically different interpretation from that of developing orthodox theology. Christianity might conceivably have accepted a gnostic Christology, for the Christ of orthodoxy also has a cosmic dimension. If it had done so, it would have lost its roots in history, for the Christ of Gnosticism was not the real, human Jesus of Nazareth and did not die under Pontius Pilate." - Harold O.J. Brown "Heresies: Heresy and Orthodoxy in the History of the Church, pgs. 49-50
2005-04-16 21:38 | User Profile
[B][I] - "While Gnosticism repudiated Creation, it accepted Christ, although it gave him a drastically different interpretation from that of developing orthodox theology."[/I][/B]
This "acceptance" actually meant that Gnostics mutilated the teachings of Christ and transformed Him simply into one of their many "inspired teachers" - just like Buddhists have myriads of illuminated [I]bodhisattvas[/I] - Jesus included among them!
Petr
2005-04-17 11:43 | User Profile
[B]And this is of course just nonsense peddled by pseudo-scholars like Israel Finkelstein and Neal Silberman[/B]
Letââ¬â¢s look at their credentials:
Israel Finkelstein, director of the Institute of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University
If theyââ¬â¢re ââ¬Åpseudo-scholarsââ¬Â Iââ¬â¢d like to know 1) what qualifies someone in Petrââ¬â¢s eyes as a real scholar (besides theological agreement) and 2) what are Petrââ¬â¢s academic and professional qualifications to pass judgment on others.
[email]ink2@post.tau.ac.il[/email]
Professor of Archaeology
Education BA - Tel Aviv University, 1974 MA - Tel Aviv University, 1978 Ph.D. - Tel Aviv University, 1983 Ph.D. Dissertation: The Izbet Sartah Excavations and the Israelite Settlement in the Hill Country Archaeological Field Work 1971 Educational excavation at Tel Beer-sheba, under Prof. Y. Aharoni 1972-74 Archaeological surveys in Sinai, under Dr. Z. Meshel 1973-78 Area Supervisor, Aphek excavations 1976-78 Field Director, the Izbet Sartah excavations 1976-78 Director of the archaeological survey of Byzantine monastic remains in Southern Sinai 1977 Director of the rescue excavations at the mound of ancient Bene-Beraq 1979-80 Co-director of the Tel Ira excavations 1980-87 Director of the Land of Ephraim Survey 1981-84 Director of the Shiloh excavations 1985-86 Director of the Kh. ed-Dawwara excavations 1987 Director of the Dhahr Mirzbaneh excavation 1992-present Co-director, the Megiddo Excavations 1995, 1999 Co-director, the Megiddo Regional Survey Current Projects÷ Co-director of the Megiddo Expedition ÷ Mineralogical and Chemical Study of the Amarna Tablets Selected Publications Books. Finkelstein, I., and Silberman N.A. 2001. The Bible Unearthed, Archaeolgy's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origins of Its Sacred Texts. New York. ÷Finkelstein, I., Ussishkin, D. and Halpern, B. (eds.). 2000. Megiddo III: The 1992ââ¬â1996 Seasons. (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) Tel Aviv. ÷ Finkelstein, I. 1995. Living on the Fringe: The Archaeology and History of the Negev, Sinai and Neighbouring Regions in Bronze and Iron Ages. (Monographs in Mediterranean Archaeology 6). Sheffield. Finkelstein, I. and Na'aman, N. eds. 1994. From Nomadism to Monarchy: Archaeological and Historical Aspects of Early Israel. Jerusalem. ÷Finkelstein, I., Lederman, Z. and Bunimovitz, S.1993. Highlands of Many Cultures The Southern Sumaria Survey: The Sites. (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University) Tel Aviv. ÷ Finkelstein I. ed. 1993. Archaeological Survey in the Hill Country of Benjamin. Jerusalem. ÷Finkelstein, I. ed. 1993. Shiloh: The Archaeology of a Biblical Site . (Monograph Series of the Institute of Archaeology, Tel Aviv University No. 10). Tel Aviv. Finkelstein, I. 1988. The Archaeology of the Israelite Settlement. Jerusalem. Finkelstein, I. 1986. Izbet Sartah: An Early Iron Age Site Near Rosh Haayin, Israel. (BAR International Series 299). Oxford. Selected Recent ArticlesY. Goren, I. Finkelstein and N. Naââ¬â¢aman, The Expansion of the Kingdom of Amurru according to the Petrographic Investigation of the Amarna Tablets. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 329 (2003), pp. 2-11. Y. Goren, Sh. Bunimovitz, I. Finkelstein and N. Naaman, The Location of Alashiya: New Evidence from Petrographic Investigation of Alashiyan Tablets, American Journal of Archaeology 107 (2003), pp. 233-255. I. Finkelstein and N.A. Silberman, The Bible Unearthed: A Rejoinder. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research 327 (2002), pp. 63-73. I. Finkelstein, The Rise of Jerusalem and Judah: The Missing Link. Levant 33 (2001), pp. 105-115. I. Finkelstein, The Campaign of Shoshenq I to Palestine: A Guide to the 10th Century BCE Polity. Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palästina-Vereins 118 (2002), pp. 109-135. ÷Y. Goren, I. Finkelstein and N. Naââ¬â¢aman, The Seat of Three Disputed Canaanite Rulers according to Petrographic Investigation of the Amarna Tablets, Tel Aviv 29 (2002), pp. 221-237. I. Finkelstein, Gezer Revisited and Revised, Tel Aviv 29 (2002), pp. 262-296. Finkelstein, I. 2002. The Philistines in the Bible: A Late Monarchic Perspective. JSOT 27:131-167 I. Finkelstein and Lily Singer Avitz, Ashdod Revisited. Tel Aviv 28 (2001), pp. 231-259. I. Finkelstein, Archaeology and Text in the Third Millennium: A View from the Center, Congress Volume Basel 2001 (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum 92), Leiden 2002, pp. 323-342. Finkelstein, I. 2000. Omride Architecture, ZDPV 116:114-138. Finkelstein, I. forthcoming. The Rise of Jerusalem and Judah: The Missing Link. Levant. Finkelstein, I. 1999. Hazor and the North in the Iron Age: A Low Chronology Perspective. BASOR 314:55-70. Finkelstein, I. 1999. State Formation in Israel and Judah, A Contrast in Context, A Contrast in Trajectory. NEA 62(1):35-52. Finkelstein, I. 1998. The Rise of Early Israel: Archaeology and Long-Term History. In: Ahituv, S. and Oren, E.D. (eds.). The Origin of Early Israel - Current Debate, Biblical, Historical and Archaeological Perspectives (Beer-Sheva 12). Beer-Sheva: 7-39. Finkelstein, I. 1998. Bible Archaeology or Archaeology of Palestine in the Iron Age? A Rejoinder. Levant 30:167-174. Finkelstein, I. 1997. Pots and People Revisited: Ethnic Boundaries in the Iron Age I. In: Silberman, N.A. and Small, D. eds. The Archaeology of Israel: Constructing the Past, Interpreting the Present. Sheffield: 216-237. Finkelstein, I. 1996. The Territorio-Political System of Canaan in the Late Bronze Age. Ugarit-Forschungen 28:221-255. Finkelstein, I. 1996. Toward a New Periodization and Nomenclature of the Archaeology of the Southern Levant. In: Cooper, J.S. and Schwartz, G.M. eds. The Study of the Ancient Near East in the Twenty-First Century. Winona Lake: 103-123. Finkelstein, I. 1996. The Stratigraphy and Chronology of Megiddo and Beth-shan in the 12th-11th Centuries B.C.E. Tel Aviv 23:170-184. Finkelstein, I. 1996. The Philistine Countryside. IEJ 46:225-242. ÷Finkelstein, I. 1996. Ethnicity and Origin of the Iron I Settlers in the Highlands of Canaan: Can the Real Israel Stand Up? BA 59:198-212. Finkelstein, I. 1996. The Archaeology of the United Monarchy: An Alternative View, Levant 28:177-187. ÷ Finkelstein, I. 1995. The Date of the Philistine Settlement in Canaan. Tel Aviv 22:213-239. Finkelstein, I. 1995. The Great Transformation: The 'Conquest' of the Highlands Frontiers and the Rise of the Territorial States. In: Levy, T.E. ed. The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land. Leicester:349-365. MA thesesAlon Shavit, 1992. The Ayalon Valley and its Vicinity during the Bronze and Iron AgesDan Gazit, 1995. The Besor Region in the Iron Age I According to Analysis of the Pottery from Stratum VIII at Tel Sera'.Aharon Sasson, 1996. The Pastoral Element in the Economy in Intermediate Bronze and Iron I Sites in the Highlands: An Archaeological-Ethnographic Perspective.Edtal Levi, 1998. Geographical Information System for Analysis of Spatial Distribution of Sites: Development, Programming and Application in Archaeological Data (co-supervisor - Itzhak Benenson).Yuval Gadot, 1999. The Wadi 'Ara Pass as an International Highway during the Bronze Age, Iron Age and the Persian Period, in the Light of the Settlement Patterns (co-supervisor - David Ussishkin). Alexander Fantalkin, 2000. Mesad Hashaviahu: Analysis of the Material Culture and its Contribution to Historical Reconstruction at the end of the Iron Age (co-supervisor - Nadav Na'aman).Yifat Thareani Sussely, 2002. Core and Periphery--A Case Study: The Arad Beersheba Valley at the End of the Iron Age. (co-supervisor - Nadav Na'aman).Eyal Buzaglo, in preparation. Petrographic Investigation of Iron Age Pottery Assemblages from Megiddo and the North (co-supervisor - Yuval Goren). Ph.D. StudentsYitzhak Meitlis, 1997. The Judean Hill Country in the Middle Bronze Age. David Ilan, 1999. Northeastern Israel in the Iron Age I: Cultural, Economic and Political Structures and Transformations. Norma Franklin, in preparation. State Formation in the Northern Kingdom of Israel: Some Tangible Symbols of Statehood (co-supervisor - Nadav Na'aman).Liora Kolska-Horwitz, in preparation. A Diachronic Study of Patterns of Animal Exploitation in the Sinai Peninsula (co-supervisor - Eitan Tchernow). Alon Shavit, in preparation. Settlement Patterns in the Southern Coastal Plain in the Iron II. Asaf Yasur Landau, 2003. Social Aspects of Aegean Settlement in the Southern Levant at the End of the Second Millennium BCE (co-supervisors - Shlomo Bunimovitz and Irad Malkin). Aharon Sasson, in preparation. The Faunal Assemblage from Iron II Beer-sheba (co-supervisors - Tamar Dayan and Ze'ev Herzog). Alexander Fantalkin, in preparation. The Contacts between the Greek World and the Southern Levant, ca. 1000-538 BCE (co-supervisor - Irad Malkin).Yuval Gadot, in preparation. Tel Aphek at the End of the Late Bronze Age and the Beginning of the Iron Age: Typological, Chronological and Cultural Implications. (co-supervisor - Moshe Kochavi).
[url]http://www.tau.ac.il/humanities/archaeology/faculty/finkelcv.html[/url]
[url]http://www.aetheronline.com/mario/Heretic/non-divine_origins_of_the_bible.htm[/url]
2005-04-17 14:14 | User Profile
C'mon, friedrich -- you don't really think that puny amount of so-called "scholarship" can stand up to the world-renowned, groundbreaking works of J.P. Holding at Tektonics, do you? :lol:
2005-04-17 14:31 | User Profile
[B][I] - "C'mon, friedrich -- you don't really think that puny amount of so-called "scholarship" can stand up to the world-renowned, groundbreaking works of J.P. Holding at Tektonics, do you?"[/I][/B]
Empty snobbery.
The biasedness of Finkelstein and Silberman against the Bible is glaringly obvious. You cannot regard them as inpartial scholars in any sense.
Petr
2005-04-17 14:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][B][I] - "C'mon, friedrich -- you don't really think that puny amount of so-called "scholarship" can stand up to the world-renowned, groundbreaking works of J.P. Holding at Tektonics, do you?"[/I][/B]
Empty snobbery.
Well, at least I wasn't "stereotypical" this time. :rolleyes:
The biasedness of Finkelstein and Silberman against the Bible is glaringly obvious. You cannot regard them as inpartial scholars in any sense.[/QUOTE]Anybody whose work doesn't support the Bible must be biased against it, right?
2005-04-17 14:44 | User Profile
And besides, Finkelstein's case rests entirely upon the increasingly challenged "[I]old chronology[/I]" of the ancient world that relies very heavily upon Egyptian priest Manetho and presupposes that Israel left Egypt around 1200 BC:
[COLOR=Blue]"The reason for this blindness (the uncritical acceptance of Manetho's information) is not hard to discern. [B]It lies in the presuppositional hostility of secular scholarship for the Bible. If Manetho cannot be trusted, scholarship must rely much more heavily on the Bible, and that is not regarded as acceptable[/B]." [/COLOR]
[url]http://www.biblicalhorizons.com/ch/ch6_01.htm[/url]
[COLOR=Indigo] [SIZE=4]CONCLUSION[/SIZE]
The reader has two choices:
[B]The oppression of Israel occurred during the New Kingdom under Thutmose III or Rameses II while Egypt was at the pinnacle of its empire. After his death the Exodus occurred. Egypt was little affected by the plagues and Israel leaving. [/B]Israel entered the Negev and left no remains in their forty-year stay. There were no cities in the Transjordan for Moses to destroy. The evidence for the destruction of Jericho is confusing. If the walls did fall, there is no evidence for destruction by fire and the city was promptly re-inhabited. Of the conquest of Ai and Arad, there is no evidence. The conquest of the rest of Canaan occurred over many generations probably by a peasant revolt and the story later embellished. Israel adopted the culture of the Canaanites. The culture and population declined until the time of Solomon when Israel was a poor and backward nation. The kingdom recovers in the succeeding generations.
[SIZE=5]Or[/SIZE]
[B]The oppression occurred during the last years of the Old Kingdom under Pepi II. The plagues and the Exodus of Israel devastated Egypt and the Old Kingdom collapsed.[/B] Then Israel appears and left abundant evidence of their nomadic presence in the desert. Animal pens, pottery pieces, and drawings marked their stay. They disappear as suddenly as they appeared. The walled cities in Edom and Moab were flourishing at the time Israel went around these countries. Jericho was a flourishing city with a wall that was reinforced shortly before it fell outward and the city destroyed by fire. All the cities of the Northern Transjordan and all the cities in Canaan were destroyed at this time. During the conquest, Israel camped in the desert along the Jordan especially in the region of Jericho. After a time Israel settled in the cities of Canaan. The culture remained at least until the Babylonian captivity.
These are two very different views. One follows the archaeological interpretation presuming the Bible "embellishes" what actually happened. The other follows the Bible and discovers a matching archaeology. You decide which is correct.[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.scripturescholar.com/BibleArchaeology.htm[/url]
Petr
2005-04-17 15:19 | User Profile
"The reason for this blindness (the uncritical acceptance of Manetho's information) is not hard to discern. It lies in the presuppositional hostility of secular scholarship for the Bible. If Manetho cannot be trusted, scholarship must rely much more heavily on the Bible, and that is not regarded as acceptable."
I suppose the reason scientists haven't found the "firmament" in the sky that separates the waters above the earth from those down here is because they're all "biased."
Wait a minute...I know! When satellites are launched into space, rocket engineers secretly send them through open floodgates so they don't crash into the firmament! They just don't reveal to the public that the firmament is there because they don't want the public to accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior!
See -- I can be an apologist, too!
Seriously, I find it incredible that fundamentalists can accuse secular people of bias.
Fundamentalists start from the absurd assumption that the Bible is completely correct. From there, they accept only those facts (however few) that tend to support that assumption, throwing out or twisting all others as needed. And then they accuse unbiased, dispassionate secular scholars of doing the same thing they do!
I don't think it's deliberate hypocrisy -- just desperation. Fundamentalists' minds are trapped inside a box, and they CANNOT think outside of that box. To them, there is no "outside the box."
2005-04-17 15:24 | User Profile
Oh, by the way, I'm just curious: Why is Manetho not trustworthy?
Please note that "because he contradicts the Bible" is not a valid answer, since the Bible could be wrong. Maybe there are other reasons having nothing to do with the Bible. Can you elaborate?
2005-04-17 16:01 | User Profile
[COLOR=Sienna][I][B] - "I suppose the reason scientists haven't found the "firmament" in the sky that separates the waters above the earth from those down here is because they're all "biased." Wait a minute...I know! When satellites are launched into space, rocket engineers secretly send them through open floodgates so they don't crash into the firmament! They just don't reveal to the public that the firmament is there because they don't want the public to accept Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior!"[/B][/I][/COLOR]
That's right, blow out all the flimsy strawmen comparisons that you can come up with. Maybe that makes you feel better about yourself.
[COLOR=Sienna] [B][I] - "Seriously, I find it incredible that fundamentalists can accuse secular people of bias."[/I][/B][/COLOR]
And I find it incredible that Bible-bashers are so often completely blind to their own biases. EVERY viewpoint is biased in one way or another, it's only the question of whose biases are best supported by the evidence at hand.
The circular, childish conceit that "freethinkers" (what a self-congratulatory title!) automatically connect the ideas of "reason" and "unbiasedness" to their own viewpoint with is quite nauseating.
Every unbeliever is deeply troubled by the idea that what Bible says might actually be true - they don't even want to [B]consider[/B] the possibility, and drive it away from their consciousness.
Petr
2005-04-17 16:08 | User Profile
[COLOR=Sienna][B][I] - "Why is Manetho not trustworthy?"[/I][/B][/COLOR]
How about reading that article by James Jordan that I linked to?
[COLOR=Blue]"When the Greek politician Solon visited Egypt in the 6th century BC, he was chided as a citizen of such a youthful culture, and was told that Egyptian history ran back 8000 years. Herodotus was told a century later that Egyptian history ran back 11,340 years before his time (p. 292).
"The Babylonian priest Berossus presents us a dynasty of 86 kings who reigned for no less than 33,091 years. His contemporary, Manetho, produced a similar claim regarding the earliest, divine rulers of Egypt. Manetho expert W. G. Waddell suggests that
[I] "The works of Manetho and Berossus may be interpreted as an expression of the rivalry of the two kings, Ptolemy and Antiochus, each seeking to proclaim the great antiquity of his land" (p. 292). [Loeb edition: Manetho, p. x.] [/I] [B]"Everyone admits that these are fictional exaggerations, but when it comes to Manetho's dynasties, the admission is not so forthcoming.[/B] [B]Moreover, no such skepticism is found concerning the Assyrian King List, on which so much of ancient near eastern chronology currently depends.[/B] [/COLOR] [url]http://www.biblicalhorizons.com/ch/ch6_01.htm[/url]
Studying the "Manetho problem" is quite instructive in discovering on how flimsy foundations so much of the secular history of the Middle East lies upon.
Petr