OFFICIAL: Biblical/Theology Discussion thread

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Actually, that link follows a "literalist" perspective of the Bible, but makes the point that what we think it says when we read a translation in plain (i.e. no context) English is not actually what is being said. It also deals with the issue of Paul's dating that you mention.

I gave it the quick once over, I'll look at it closer soon, hopefully tonight, but yeah, I saw that it does appear to address the issue I was concerned about.

 

[muffler dragon]

So, are the Hyksos and the Hebrew at all related? Wiki I suppose the answer is "maybe" (though there does appear to be some serious division on the issue among those who are interested in this stuff.) But, consider also, the word Hebrew.

I just sent you a PM with some information. The second link that discusses some Mishnaic thoughts on this are rather interesting.

 

[muffler dragon]

I was looking at the early Genesis texts where polytheism is implied "3:22Then the LORD God said, "See, the man has become like one of us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever.

If you're interested, Gator; then some time we (learning for me included) we can delve into the Judaic understanding of the different names used for G-d in the Torah.

 

[muffler dragon]

See Luke 4 17-21: Jesus reading from the scroll of Isaiah reads what is now known as Isaiah 61. He reads all of vs 1 but He stops half way thru vs 2. Jesus then states that what He has read He is fulfilling.

In plain English, Jesus was saying He was the fulfillment of prophesy of the suffering servant. What He stopped short of reading was He was the vengeance of God to comfort those who mourned (under Roman rule). The implacation is when He returns He will fulfill that part of the prophesy.

Would you be interested in having a debate specifically about Jesus and the Suffering Servant?

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I just sent you a PM with some information. The second link that discusses some Mishnaic thoughts on this are rather interesting.

Yes, thanks!

 

[muffler dragon]

Richard Friedman's excellent "Who Wrote The Bible?" is a great read for an understanding of what modern biblical scholars think about the authorship and date of the various Old Testament Chapters and verses.

See the link below for a quick synopsis.

Documentary hypothesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Yes, I am aware of all that. Consider:

Documentary Hypothesis

This may delve into the already stated possibility regarding the names of G-d in the Torah. In the meantime, I'll simply state that I'm of the opinion that DH doesn't hold a candle ONCE a person investigates the Judaic POV. JMHO.

 

[Bleed S & G]

Yes, I am aware of all that. Consider:

Documentary Hypothesis

I am aware of this theory too My bad BKB, was just giving you what the traditonal reponse to your thought was.

 

[Gatorubet]

I gave it the quick once over, I'll look at it closer soon, hopefully tonight, but yeah, I saw that it does appear to address the issue I was concerned about.

On a related note, it is interesting to note the use of Egyptian words and phrases in the earliest preserved Torahs, which obviously leads one to a premise looking favorably on the validity of the Bible as it details the years in bondage. There are few other reasons why Egyptian terminology would be used save long use and exposure to the language, and a decision to use language to describe places, things (wizards, for example) and events during the exile in Egypt.

 

[muffler dragon]

For those so interested, this is what I found on the internet that discusses Moses, Ahmose, Torah and so forth:

Mail-Jewish Volume 41 Number 96

Leo Koppel writes:
> A long time ago when I studied ancient Greek, I studied some of the
> anti-Judaism polemic as well as the apologia in ancient (actually mostly
> koine) Greek. One source remarked on the similarity between Moses and a
> common Egyptian name like Ahmoses and between Aaron and a common
> Egyptian name that I have forgotten.

Interesting you should mention this.

The footnotes in the chumash we use at shul every Shabbos (sorry, I
forget the title) mention some of this. I was able to find the same
footnotes on-line (probably the same chumash or based on a common
source, but as I said, I don't remember the title). They are:

http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=2&CHAPTER=1

1:8 A new king(*) who did not know of Joseph ...

* A new king
Or, 'regime' or 'dynasty.' According to tradition, this
occurred around the time of Miriam's birth, which was 2361
(1400 b.c.e.). Hence, the name Miriam denotes bitterness (Seder
Olam Rabbah 3). The 'new king' would then be Thutmose IV, who
reigned 1411-1397 b.c.e.

If we accept the 163 year discrepancy (see note on Genesis
12:15), then this occurred around what would be considered 1563
b.c.e. The New Kingdom, starting with the 18th Dynasty, is
known to have begun in 1575 b.c.e. This started with Ahmose
(Ach-moshe), who drove the Hyksos out of Egypt. Although the
Israelites were not driven out at this time, the Hyksos were a
Semitic tribe, and therefore the changed political climate
would have adversely affected the Israelites. A new surge of
nationalism would also have resulted in prejudice against
foreign elements. (cf. Josephus, Contra Apion 1:14,26. Also see
Yov'loth 46:11).

http://bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=displaypage&BOOK=2&CHAPTER=2

2:10 ... She adopted him as her own son, and named him Moses(*)
(Moshe). 'I bore(*) (mashe) him from the water,' she said.

* Moses
In Egyptian, Moshe means a son. Thus, his naming is prefaced by
a phrase that is literally translated, 'he became to her as a
son' (cf. Ibn Ezra; Hadar Zekenim). Significantly, the suffix
moshe is found (and exclusively so) in the names of many
Pharaohs of the 18th Dynasty, such as Ka-moshe ('son of [Ra's]
majesty'), Ach-moshe (Ahmose; 'son of the moon,' or 'the moon
is born') and Toth-moshe (Thutmose; 'son of Toth'). The word
moshe may indeed be of Semitic origin (see next note, this
verse, 'bore'), introduced by the Semitic Hyksos.

According to other ancient sources, the name Moses comes from
the Egyptian mo (water) and uses (drawn from) (Josephus,
Antiquities 2:9:6, Contra Apion 1:31; Philo De Vita Moses 2:17;
Malbim).

Some sources state that Moses' Egyptian name was Monius (Ibn
Ezra; cf. Abarbanel; Josephus, Contra Apion 1:26, 28). Other
ancient sources claim that Moses' name was preserved among the
Gentiles as the legendary Musaeus, teacher of Orpheus, from
whom the Muses obtained their name (Artapanus, in Eusebius,
Preparatio Evangelica 9:27).

* bore
See 2 Samuel 22:17, Psalms 18:12; note on Genesis 47:11. In
Egyptian, mase or mashe means to give birth. Others see the
word as related to the Hebraic mush, and of Semitic origin
(Rashi; Chizzkuni; Tur; see note, this verse, 'Moses').

I found it particularly interesting that this states that the Hyskos WERE a SEMITIC tribe; however, they were different than the Israelites.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

This may delve into the already stated possibility regarding the names of G-d in the Torah. In the meantime, I'll simply state that I'm of the opinion that DH doesn't hold a candle ONCE a person investigates the Judaic POV. JMHO.

For me, I'm not really worried about it. I mean, authorship is not a cornerstone of my faith so it doesn't much matter to me if Moses wrote it, or it is a compilation of several sources or whatever. I'd be interested in hearing your argument in favor of the Judiac point of view, though.

I am aware of this theory too My bad BKB, was just giving you what the traditonal reponse to your thought was.

No worries. Didn't mean to come across as argumentative or whatever.

On a related note, it is interesting to note the use of Egyptian words and phrases in the earliest preserved Torahs, which obviously leads one to a premise looking favorably on the validity of the Bible as it details the years in bondage. There are few other reasons why Egyptian terminology would be used save long use and exposure to the language, and a decision to use language to describe places, things (wizards, for example) and events during the exile in Egypt.

Good point. Maybe not where you were headed, but one of the issues regards the mention of the cities of Pithos and Pi-Ramses. The reasoning I've seen is that useage of these terms for cities which did not exist (by name) at the time of the Exodus is due to editors at later dates. It would be the same as me referring to Leningrad instead of Petrograd, or Saint Petersburg instead of either Leningrad or Petrograd. Same place, different name in time.

Of course, the issue of editing the Bible calls in to question the literalism aspects of it. But... still worth consideration in my view.

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

I found it particularly interesting that this states that the Hyskos WERE a SEMITIC tribe; however, they were different than the Israelites.

I began to wonder a little bit about this last night, and hinted at it in an earlier post here today. I wonder if we can identify historical peoples as one of the 12 tribes of Israel. Perhaps this issue is well documented, I haven't looked yet... Anyway, it might be pretty interesting to know what ancient "ites" were the 12 tribes.

 

[muffler dragon]

You may be interested in reading the following article that argues the Bible actually does teach a 215 year period in Egypt though it does not explicitly state it as such.

Apologetics Press - How Long Was the Israelites? Egyptian Bondage?

I have also heard that Jewish sages often numbered the years in Egypt to 210. I don't have a source to back this one up, but I will look for it.

How many years did the Jews spend in Egypt? - Latest Questions

Question:
During the Passover Seder we read that G‑d told Abraham that his descendents would be in Egypt for four hundred years. But from what I understand, the Israelites were actually in Egypt for little more than two hundred years. Surely G‑d did not error when He decreed four hundred years of exile. There must be a great explanation. Could you enlighten me?
Answer:
Indeed, G‑d foretold four hundred years of exile. During the Covenant Between the Parts G‑d told Abraham:1 "You shall surely know that your seed will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and they will enslave them and oppress them, for four hundred years." Nevertheless, a calculation of the years spent in Egypt reveals that they spent far less time there.2
Our sages explain that the countdown of 400 years began with Isaac's birth. G‑d's promise does not refer to Egypt by name, rather to a "land that is not theirs." As soon as Abraham had a child, his seed were subjected to living in lands that were not theirs?including Canaan which wasn't "theirs" at the time.
Isaac was sixty years old when Jacob was born,3 and Jacob was 130 years old when he went down to Egypt.4 This means that 190 of the 400 years elapsed before the Israelites arrived in Egypt. So the Israelites were in Egypt for a total of 210 years.
Interestingly, when Jacob first instructed his sons to descend to Egypt, he said,5 "Go down ("רדו") there and buy [food]." The numerical value of the Hebrew letters of the word "רדו" ("redu," "go down") is exactly 210!6

 

[stowfan]

Would you be interested in having a debate specifically about Jesus and the Suffering Servant?

Considering I only type maybe 6 words per minute, and I can't figure out how to get the spell check through the pop up blocker I'm afaid that would be painful for me. That being said, I'd love some enlightenment. I'm interested in what your religous background is, could you please PM me?

 

[AKAK]

It would be the same as me referring to Leningrad instead of Petrograd, or Saint Petersburg instead of either Leningrad or Petrograd. Same place, different name in time.

Incorrect...

The "according to Hoyle" example would be:

"Istanbul was Constantinople, now it's Istanbul not Constantinople. Been a long time gone for Constantinople."

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

How many years did the Jews spend in Egypt? - Latest Questions

I've also seen it argued that the time proceeds after the date of the exodus, in that even if we believe (and I do) that the destination was Canaan, Canaan was under Egyptian control post Exodus.

Incorrect...

The "according to Hoyle" example would be:

"Istanbul was Constantinople, now it's Istanbul not Constantinople. Been a long time gone for Constantinople."

You should write a song about that.