Tracing Jewish Ancestry

Originally posted by IamJoseph Not all bibles and scriptures are based on 'belief'. One is absolutely historical and contemporary: where else can you find the routes to canaan via uncharted deserts, naming contemporary nations enroute which don't exist anymore - with the names of their kings? Or the distance between the cities of Goshen and Rameses? One has to be fair, honest and logical in a history thread or it recoils into a meaningless charade: David was a 3000 year old historical figure proven by archeology - where is your proof of Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed who came uch later?

The fact that all the cities mentioned in the Iliad are real ones and that Troy was destroyed doesn't prove the existance of Achilles. Regarding David, I'd be very curious to know which acheological findings support his existance since the so-called palace found in Jerusalem has been named after him with no evidence of links between David and the palace (which anyway is 1 century too young to be David's).

Besides it is no secret that the bible is a collection of books written at different periods so it may also be that some parts have more historical values than others. Moreover, it would be foolish to solely rely on a single written source on a given question when there are no archeological elements to back it. On top of that it is important to remember that the Jewish religion is not an history-oreinted one, the number of history books written by Jewish people before the 18th century is minimal (the only significant exception being Flavius Joseph), unlike Christians who wrote plenty of chronicals. Time and the world have only a limited interest in the traditional Jewish way of thinking which is way more oriented toward the re-living of the tradition (for instance there is no original account of the expulsion of 70AD to the point that many now think that it did not take place).

Finally, I don't see how the fact that there is no hard evidence for the existance of Jesus proves that David existed for real, the way the bible describes him.

I don't understand why you have to cite Britannica again. Britannica didn't claim that Phonician alphabet is derived from Hebrew it claims the thesis which I referred to above.

The fact that all the cities mentioned in the Iliad are real ones and that Troy was destroyed doesn't prove the existance of Achilles.

THE BOOK written in Greek ALPHABET earlier than any copy of Greek Septugiant.

You can say what ever you want but a guy opening the sea and then closing it is somehow not that different in my view from a warrior god fighting along human warriors... Anyway still waiting for your compelling evidence and the fact that it doesn't contradict itself is hardly proof of anything. After all rabbis have been re-writing the thing for ever so taking some dating mistakes off just makes sense.Besides, I'd say there is no limit to our ancesters' imagination (or you'd have to admit that say Oedipus' story is kind of true). And adding a few details to a real story is even funnier, you know at the bottom of every joke there is something real. Considering traditional story-tellers were able to memorize three days worth of epics with only minimal changes from one another, writting down a few hundreds years of history is no big feat. Besides, remember Herodotus, what is said was "real" and yet he often made mistakes, would be incredible that the rabbis got everything right.

You can say what ever you want but a guy opening the sea and then closing it is somehow not that different in my view from a warrior god fighting along human warriors...

Originally posted by IamJoseph Palestina was used before 70CE, but not officially, because there was no province to be called that until the aftermath of the war.   Usually, this jargon is seen in Islamist forums, to spin a lie into truth. Fact is, while Greeks did call the entire region, including Assyria, as Palestinea - this referred to the original Philistines - not to the later Palestinian accorded to the Jews by Rome. IOW, today's Arab muslims are claiming the name Palestinian since the 60's - but what they wish to promote is not that they were related to the Philistines, but the Palestinians which the Jews were called for 2000 years - this is meant to negate Jewish connection to the Jewish homeland. Everyone knows this - no one wants to say they do.

Have you any evidence of that, other than Josephus, who says nearly that number were killed in Jerusalem alone. If that were true then Jerusalem would have been the largest city in the whole Roman empire, bigger than Rome itself. Which makes it rather a suspect figure.

Originally posted by IamJoseph Have you any evidence of that, other than Josephus, who says nearly that number were killed in Jerusalem alone. If that were true then Jerusalem would have been the largest city in the whole Roman empire, bigger than Rome itself. Which makes it rather a suspect figure.   The tmple was also an impregnable refuge, and it was also the passover festival - these factors made the Jews flock to safety behind the temple's 3 outer walls, as well as to assume spiritual protection there. The jewish population was less than 10% of that of Rome [Josephus], namely 3 million contained themselves against the Roman high teck army and weapons.

Obviously MrThinksHe'sJoseph has ranted a lot and made claims of dubious quality. Aside from the hyperbole you also attempt to portray your views as historical fact. In doing so you have made a critique I would like to see you back up with proof.

Edited by Seko - 22-Sep-2008 at 14:29