• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

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

New Evidence Confirms The Burning Of Jerusalem By Babylonians Described In The Bible

blü 2

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
"Archaeologists excavating the City of David in Jerusalem have discovered evidence that a passage of the Bible is historically accurate."
​
"Real Whitehall discovered in London as described in James Bond novels!"

We know that a fair portion of the Tanakh is devoted to folk history, and that these reports may be basically historical, like this, or basically folklore, like the Exodus, or often enough a mix of both.

The real benefit of the discovery is that it fills in another small part of our understanding of the past, and another small part of our understanding of the Tanakh.
 
Last edited:
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Jayhawker Soule said:
Really? Well. ...

First, thanks for answering, and kudos for having an answer.

While I have not read the Ben-Tor collection, I have read (and, in fact, owned) the Mazar and Redford texts. Both are fine albeit dated texts.

In my opinion your minimalism does both authors a disservice.
Click to expand...

Any recommendations for more recent texts? It *has* been a while since I have updated my collection in that area.
 
InquisitiveScholar

InquisitiveScholar

Wanting to learn it all..
I am curious, why is this a question? The land of Judah has been the site of many battles all throughout history. As the crossroads between Africa, Europe, and the Middle east, it was one of the richest trading hubs for most of the ancient world. Thus it has also be the site of many ancient wars, between Babylonians, Assyrians, Hittites, Egyptians, Romans, Persians, Arabs..... so again, why was this even a question in peoples minds?
 
Magus

Magus

Active Member
Why does the Babylonian chronicle put 'Judea' into a different geography and it seems no one is capable of answering it and they still keep paraphrasing the chronicles, 'Judea', was never an ancient trading hub, those Hubs where always located on the Coasts of the Mediterranean and where known as Phoenicians, the hubs where in Sidon and Tyre .

'Judea' only became a trading hub, when it was founded by Persian colonists (the Hebrew word for Colonist is Yahad) in the 4th Century BCE , they built a treasury that collected taxes, so they were tax collectors.

Israel Museum obtains world’s ‘first Jewish coin’

"American donor gives Jerusalem institution collection of 1,200 silver 'Persian' coins, including 4th century BCE drachm with 'earliest' mention of Judea"

Why do they ignore history like that?
 
InquisitiveScholar

InquisitiveScholar

Wanting to learn it all..
Magus said:
Why does the Babylonian chronicle put 'Judea' into a different geography and it seems no one is capable of answering it and they still keep paraphrasing the chronicles, 'Judea', was never an ancient trading hub, those Hubs where always located on the Coasts of the Mediterranean and where known as Phoenicians, the hubs where in Sidon and Tyre .

'Judea' only became a trading hub, when it was founded by Persian colonists (the Hebrew word for Colonist is Yahad) in the 4th Century BCE , they built a treasury that collected taxes, so they were tax collectors.

Israel Museum obtains world’s ‘first Jewish coin’

"American donor gives Jerusalem institution collection of 1,200 silver 'Persian' coins, including 4th century BCE drachm with 'earliest' mention of Judea"

Why do they ignore history like that?
Click to expand...
This does not discount what I said. I called it the land of Judah, although I know that name comes from a later time period than the Sacking of Jerusalem. Needless to say, you are nitpicking details. I am just wondering why this is a question for people. While the place which was later called Judah had been little more than a hamlet for most of the history, when I said the land of Judah I was referring to the Levant in general, mostly focusing on the modern day lands of Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank.
 
Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Polymath257 said:
Any recommendations for more recent texts? It *has* been a while since I have updated my collection in that area.
Click to expand...
Mazar and Redford are excellent although the former can be pretty dry. The works by Dever are lighter and more readable. I would also strongly recommend the relevant works by Frank Moore Cross (and, of course, Israel Finkelstein).

Also, specifically ...

On overview:
Pre-Exilic Israel, The Hebrew Bible, and Archaeology, Integrating Text and Artifact
by Anthony J. Frendo​
On the archaeology:
Israel's Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion and Resistance
by Avraham Faust​
On the text:
How the Bible Became Book
by William M. Schniedewind​
On the histiography:
Biblical History and Israel's Past
by Megan Bishop Moore and Brad E. Kelly​

If you read only one of the above, read Faust (but note that I say this in large part because the works confirms my biases).
 
Last edited:
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Jayhawker Soule said:
Mazar and Redford are excellent although the former can be pretty dry. The works by Dever are lighter and more readable. I would also strongly recommend the relevant works by Frank Moore Cross (and, of course, Israel Finkelstein).

Also, specifically ...

On overview:
Pre-Exilic Israel, The Hebrew Bible, and Archaeology, Integrating Text and Artifact
by Anthony J. Frendo​
On the archaeology:
Israel's Ethnogenesis: Settlement, Interaction, Expansion and Resistance
by Avraham Faust​
On the text:
How the Bible Became Book
by William M. Schniedewind​
On the histiography:
Biblical History and Israel's Past
by Megan Bishop Moore and Brad E. Kelly​

If you read only one of the above, read Faust (but note that I say this in large part because the works confirms my biases).
Click to expand...


Thank you. I will look into these.
 
Magus

Magus

Active Member
Jayhawker Soule said:
  1. reread post 32
  2. focus on the hprase "and after he had invaded the land of Hatti (Syria/Palestine) he laid siege to the city of Judah."
  3. pay special attention to the word "after"
  4. think
Click to expand...

I have read through the entire chronicle

'marched to the Hatti-land and besieged the city of Judah;

There was in fact a city in Hatti-Land called Judah. ( the RED Dot )


Is that why 'Judith ' was a Hittite and Ezekiel claims the Matriarch of the Hebrews was a Hittite.

If Jews believe Matrilineal descent defines a 'Jew' , then Judith, not Judah must be the matriarch.
 
Jayhawker Soule

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Magus said:
... There was in fact a city in Hatti-Land called Judah.
Click to expand...
Can you reference a single piece of peer-reviewed scholarship that supports you? I'll wait.

Magus said:
If Jews believe Matrilineal descent defines a 'Jew' , then Judith, not Judah must be the matriarch.
Click to expand...
Please stop polluting the thread by embarrassing yourself. So, for example, from Wiki:

The Mishnah (Kiddushin 3:12) states that, to be a Jew, one must be either the child of a Jewish mother or a convert to Judaism, (ger tzedek, "righteous convert"). Orthodox opinion regards this rule as dating from receipt of the Torah at Mount Sinai, but most non-Orthodox scholars regard it as originating either at the time of Ezra (4th Century BCE) or during the period of Roman rule in the 1st–2nd centuries CE, as patrilineal descent is known to have been the standard of Judaism prior to that time.

In the Hellenistic period of the 4th Century BCE – 1st Century CE some evidence may be interpreted to indicate that the offspring of intermarriages between Jewish men and non-Jewish women were considered Jewish;[2] as is usual in prerabbinic texts, there is no mention of conversion on the part of the Gentile spouse. On the other hand, Philo of Alexandria calls the child of a Jew and a non-Jew a nothos (*******), regardless of whether the non-Jewish parent is the father or the mother.[3]​
 
rosends

rosends

Well-Known Member
Magus said:
Hatti in Hebrew is -חִתִּי- one of whom appear in Genesis 26:34 called Judith -יְהוּדִית- ( Jewess ) , before Judah/
Click to expand...
I'm not clear on your logic here. There were other nations around, one which was the Chitim (not the "Hatti" -- to be "of the Chitim" was to be a "Chiti"). Judith was a person from that lineage. She married Esav. According to the lineage presented in 36:2, she did not have any children. Interestingly, Esav, seeing that his father was aggrieved by his having married Canaanite women (28:8) married Machalat. This would make the Chiti women Canaanites (as the Chitim are listed as one of the nations resident in Canaan as Chet was a son of Canaan -- 10:15). Efron, another Chiti (23:10) lived in Chevron.

The fact that a son of Yaacov was named similarly has no bearing on this. His lineage is traced and the land was called after the kingdom that sprung from that tribe. Yehudit was not a "Jewess" though the letters of her name are the same as those letters in the name of the person after whom the tribe/kingdom/land was named.
 
Magus

Magus

Active Member
rosends said:
I'm not clear on your logic here. There were other nations around, one which was the Chitim (not the "Hatti" -- to be "of the Chitim" was to be a "Chiti"). Judith was a person from that lineage. She married Esav. According to the lineage presented in 36:2, she did not have any children. Interestingly, Esav, seeing that his father was aggrieved by his having married Canaanite women (28:8) married Machalat. This would make the Chiti women Canaanites (as the Chitim are listed as one of the nations resident in Canaan as Chet was a son of Canaan -- 10:15). Efron, another Chiti (23:10) lived in Chevron.

The fact that a son of Yaacov was named similarly has no bearing on this. His lineage is traced and the land was called after the kingdom that sprung from that tribe. Yehudit was not a "Jewess" though the letters of her name are the same as those letters in the name of the person after whom the tribe/kingdom/land was named.
Click to expand...


Her name, - יְהוּדִית - means 'Jew' , Also used in Nehemiah 13:24, is it a name or a title, is it anachronistic and concerning the wives of Esau, they are listed twice, in 26:34 & 36:2-3

26:34
Judith (daughter of Beeri)
Basemath (daughter of Elon)
Mahalath (daughter of Ishmael) (sister of Nĕbayowth)

36:2-3
Adah (daughter of Elon )
Aholibamah (daughter of Zibeon)
Basemath (daughter of Ishmael) (sister of Nĕbayowth)

Ezekiel 16:3
thy father was an Amorite, and thy mother an Hittite.

Jacob and Esau are twins, that represent Israel & Edom, also in the NImrud slab, these correspond to 'Humri and Edom' and are written as the son of Canaan (10:5) as 'Amorah and Cedom ' ( Sodom & Gomorrah) and in Kings, they are 'Israel and Judah' . Edom is Judah, Edom married Judith, that i have equated with Aholibamah, the Hivite
or 'Edom and Hivite' also known as 'Adam and Eve'.

Can you please show me some context for this? My books are packed away so I can't check for places textually where this is supported. Thanks.
Click to expand...

יַחַד
-union, unitedness, together, altogether, all together, alike, dwell together. gathering.
 
rosends

rosends

Well-Known Member
Magus said:
Ezekiel claims the Matriarch of the Hebrews was a Hittite.

If Jews believe Matrilineal descent defines a 'Jew' , then Judith, not Judah must be the matriarch.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. Ezekiel 16 makes mention of a number of ideas -- one is that the children of Israel came from the nations of Canaan. If you believe that he is referencing Judith then the problem you encounter is that she did not marry an Emorite (16:3 says "your father was an Emorite"). You also would have to take literally that the umbilical cord was never cut (verse 4). Verse 2, which states "proclaim Jerusalem’s abominations to her" is not speaking to a literal city. Once the literary voice is invoked, why try to limit meaning to the literal?

It seems that the text is actually referring to the fact that the patriarch and matriarch established themselves (mechorotayich is the same as "megurotayich" often which means "settled") in the land of Canaan, the father in the land of the Emorites and the mother, Sarah in the land of the Chiti, as she is buried there. The more common understanding is that this section is admonition, pointing out the sinfulness of the people and equating them to the undesirable nations of Canaan.
 
rosends

rosends

Well-Known Member
Magus said:
Her name, - יְהוּדִית - means 'Jew' ,
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. A Jewess is a yehudiyah.
Magus said:
Also used in Nehemiah 13:24, is it a name or a title,
Click to expand...
It is in Nechemiah as the name of a language.
Magus said:
36:2-3
Adah (daughter of Elon )
Aholibamah (daughter of Zibeon)
Basemath (daughter of Ishmael) (sister of Nĕbayowth)
Click to expand...

The second version tells of the wives who had children. Judith is not there. She had no children.

Magus said:
Jacob and Esau are twins, that represent Israel & Edom, also in the NImrud slab, these correspond to 'Humri and Edom' and are written as the son of Canaan (10:5) as 'Amorah and Cedom ' ( Sodom & Gomorrah) and in Kings, they are 'Israel and Judah' . Edom is Judah, Edom married Judith, that i have equated with Aholibamah, the Hivite
or 'Edom and Hivite' also known as 'Adam and Eve'.
Click to expand...
Ah, so you are not really citing what the biblical text says, but making equivalences based on other texts and what you surmise. Gen 10:15 lists the sons of Canaan as Tzidon, Yevus, Emor, Girgash, Chev, Arak and Sin (in addition to Chet), plus Arvad, Tzamar, Chamat. The next verse, which mentions Sdom and Amorah does so as mentions of cities that established the border of these families.
 
Magus

Magus

Active Member
rosends said:
No, it doesn't. A Jewess is a yehudiyah.

It is in Nechemiah as the name of a language.

The second version tells of the wives who had children. Judith is not there. She had no children.


Ah, so you are not really citing what the biblical text says, but making equivalences based on other texts and what you surmise. Gen 10:15 lists the sons of Canaan as Tzidon, Yevus, Emor, Girgash, Chev, Arak and Sin (in addition to Chet), plus Arvad, Tzamar, Chamat. The next verse, which mentions Sdom and Amorah does so as mentions of cities that established the border of these families.
Click to expand...

-יְהוּדִית- ( Jewess ) is the feminine form of -יְהוּדִי- ( Jew)
( Phoenician dialect )

Hebrew is a Canaanite Language, אֵל and יְהֹוָה are Canaanite gods , Ethnic as defined, sharing a homeland and language, so 'Judah and Israel' are then listed as the sons of Canaan, Sodom and Gomorrah.

Nimrud Slab ( 800 BCE )
[I subdued] from the bank of the Euphrates, the land of Hatti, the land of Amurru in its entirety, the land of Tyre, the land of Sidon, the land of Humri, the land of Edom, the land of Palastu

Hatti - Amurru - Tyre - Sidon - Humri - Edom - Palastu


The second version tells of the wives who had children. Judith is not there. She had no children.
Click to expand...

A . Mahalath (daughter of Ishmael) (sister of Nĕbayowth)
B . Basemath (daughter of Ishmael) (sister of Nĕbayowth)
 
Q

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
DavidFirth said:
But.. but... I thought that the Bible was just a mythological book with no truth in it whatsoever... isn't it?
Click to expand...

Nope, it's a book that at times actually mentions real places and events, but is filled with all sorts of fantastical mumbo-jumbo. Kind of like Harry Potter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top