Its all a total crock

[Deleted]

Hugely inductive leap there Buzzo. I recall one major embarrassment for the skeptics when it would loudly pronounced that the Hittites never existed ( ergo the Bible must be 'all a total crock' ). Unfortunately for the skeptics it was their pronouncement which turned out to be crock and you can now do a Phd in Hittite Studies.

You'd imagine the skeptics would have learned just a little more modesty but alas no.

[Occam's Spork]

Actually, you're confused. The Chaldeans were an older empire than the Babylonians. (Although Babylon is generally referred to as Chaldea, it mainly refers to the southern portion of Babylon)

The mistake is understandable, however. Prior to the development of scientific archeology it was commonly believed the Abraham story was legend and Ur did not exist. --Imagine what else we'll discover if we let go of our presuppositions, and allow science to follow the evidence where it leads.

[Deleted]

If you consult scholarship on this matter your assertion Buzzo is by no means as powerful as you claim, indeed it looks very shaky. Please consider reading fontes.lstc.edu/~rklein/Documents/Ur.htm
'Where Was Abraham's Ur? Alan R. Millard'

The conclusion of the above website article states -

Thus, there is no insurmountable objection to the southern Ur, Ur of the Chaldees, being Abraham’s birthplace—as the Bible describes it.

See also members.bib-arch.org/search.asp?PubID=BSBA&Volume=3&Issue=2&ArticleID=5&UserID=0&

See www.bibleandscience.com/bible/books/genesis/ur.htm

Genesis 11-12 - Where was Abraham's Ur?
Abraham was from the city of Ur according to Genesis 11:31. The problem is that there are several places called Ur. It is identified as "Ur of the Chaldeans." The problem with "Chaldeans" is that it is a late word used in the Neo-Babylonian times. It is either anachronistic, or this part of Genesis was written after the Exile.

There is no debate over where Haran is located, 10 miles north of the Syrian border in Turkey along the Balikh River, a tributary of the Euphrates River. Haran is an important Hurrian center, mentioned in the Nuzi tablets. The moon god, Sin was worshiped here. If Ur were located in Southern Iraq, why would Abraham travel 60 miles way out of his way to go to Haran?

There are two cities not far from Haran; Ura and Urfa. Local tradition says that Abraham was born in Urfa. Northern Ur is mentioned in tablets at Ugarit, Nuzi, and Ebla, which refers to Ur, URA, and Urau (See BAR January 2000, page 16).

The names of several of Abraham's relatives like Peleg, Serug, Nahor and Terah, appear as names of cities in the region of Haran (Harper's Bible Dictionary, page 373). Abraham sent his servant back to the region of Haran to find a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24:10).

After working for Laban, Jacob fled across the Euphrates River back to Canaan (Genesis 31:21). If Ur were in Southern Mesopotamia, then Jacob would not need to cross the Euphrates. Laban is said to live in Paddan-Aram, which is in the region of Haran (Genesis 28:5-7), which seems to be the same area as Aram-Naharaim, Abraham's homeland (Genesis 24:10).

All this evidence taken together seems to indicate that the Ur of Abraham was in the same region as Haran in Northern Mesopotamia, and not the famous Ur in Southern Mesopotamia.

There seems to be perfectly reasonable explanations that profoundly rebut you "Its all a total crock" assertion.

[Deleted]

Which part of the debate in my post don't you understand?

There are plausible explanations for your point - take the trouble to read them and your difficulty will be relieved.

[fat]

So you say Buzz. Many more disagree.

[Occam's Spork]

"until 1993 there was no proof of the existence of King David or even of Israel as a nation prior to Solomon. Then in 1993 archeologists found proof of King David's existence outside the Bible. At an ancient mound called Tel Dan, in the north of Israel, words carved into a chunk of basalt were translated as "House of David" and "King of Israel" proving that he was more than just a legend...."

...R.D. Wilson wrote “A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament” pointed out that the names of 29 Kings from ten nations (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon and more) are mentioned not only in the Bible but are also found on monuments of their own time. Every single name is transliterated in the Old Testament exactly as it appears on the archaeological artifact – syllable for syllable, consonant for consonant. The chronological order of the kings is correct.

agards-bible-timeline.com/q9_historical_proof_bible.html

Yep. No proof at all. (To the casual eye)

[Occam's Spork]

Bible doesn't need to explain it.
You are the critic--unless you have something more than an appeal from silence to go by, your protestations are invalid.

Credentials make the scholars, not your opinions.

[Occam's Spork]

So what? That is still an argument from silence.
History doesn't record when Solomon took a crap either, so I imagine you must think he was perpetually constipated.

[Occam's Spork]

Wow...I'm not going to waste any more of my time trying to reason with you.
You are beyond reason.

[Occam's Spork]

Nov 11, 2012 11:00:14 GMT 10 @buzzock said:

Abraham coming from "Ur of the Chaldeans", when the Babylonians were not known as Chaldeans until a much later time.

Really? Then I suppose you can explain why Chaldea is mentioned in the annals of the Assyrian king Ashurnasirpal II who just so happened to reign 884/883–859 BC?

Or why the Encyclopedia Britanica claims "Evidence indicates that forms of fortune-telling were practiced in ancient China, Egypt, Chaldea, and Babylonia as long ago as 4000 BC"

www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/214326/fortune-telling

(I hope you didn't include that little golden nugget in that tabloid you call a book. But even if you had, I don't expect you'd retract it.)

the reference to Abimelech "King of the Philistines", when the Philistines had not settled in Palestine until the later end of the millennium.

You'll have to be more specific. Abimelech was a common name of Philistine Kings. Which one were you referring to?

Laban identified as an Aramean, when Arameans did not become a known political entity before the 12th century BCE.

That's not quite true, either.

"The origin of the Arameans is still uncertain, arising from the limited amount of evidence regarding the mention of Arameans in Mesopotamian inscriptions.

The toponym A-ra-mu appears in an inscription at Ebla listing geographical names, and the term Armi, which is the Eblaite term for nearby Aleppo, occurs frequently in the Ebla tablets (ca. 2300 BC). One of the annals of Naram-Sin of Akkad (c. 2250 BC) mentions that he captured "Dubul, the ensi of A-ra-me" (Arame is seemingly a genitive form), in the course of a campaign against Simurrum in the northern mountains.[2] Other early references to a place or people of "Aram" have appeared at the archives of Mari (c. 1900 BC) and at Ugarit (c. 1300 BC). There is little agreement concerning what, if any, relationship there was between these places, or if the Aramu were actually Arameans; the earliest undisputed mention of Arameans as a people is in the inscriptions of Tiglath Pileser I (c. 1100 BC).[3]

Nomadic pastoralists have always been a feature of the Middle East, but their numbers seem to vary according to climatic conditions and the force of neighbouring states inducing permanent settlement. The period of the Late Bronze Age seems to have been one of increasing aridity, weakening neighbouring states, and inducing transhumance pastoralists to spend longer and longer periods with their flocks. Urban settlements diminished in size, until eventually fully nomadic pastoralist lifestyles came to dominate the region. These highly mobile, competitive tribesmen with their sudden raids were a continued threat to long distance trade and interfered with the collection of taxes and tribute. In the early 14th century BC, much of Israel was under Arameans rule for eight years according to the Biblical Book of Judges, until Othniel defeated the forces led by Chushan-Rishathaim, the King of Aram-Naharaim. Other entities mentioned in the Hebrew Bible include Aram Damascus and Aram Rehob.

The Ahlamû (= wanderers) are first mentioned in the el-Amarna letters alluding to the king of Babylon; the presence of the Ahlamû are also attested in Assyria, Nippur and even at Dilmun (Bahrain); Shalmaneser I (1274-1245 BC) defeated the Shattuara, King of Mitanni and his Hittite and Ahlamû mercenaries are mentioned in the Jazirah. The term appears equivalent to the Egyptian term Shasu (Shsw = wanderer), who replaced the outlaw 'Apiru (cuneiform SA.GAZ) as the major source of instability in the Egyptian Levantine empire from the reign of Tutankhamun onwards. In the following century, the Ahlamû cut the road from Babylon to Hattusas, and Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244-1208 BC) claims that he conquered Mari, Hana[disambiguation needed] and Rapiqum on the Euphrates and "the mountain of the Ahlamû", apparently the region of Jebel Bishri"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramean


Oh la la, c'est dommage, everybody eat fromage! ;D

[Occam's Spork]

Nov 11, 2012 11:00:14 GMT 10 @buzzock said:

there is no reasoning with reality

Wow.... Did you actually just say that?

[pim]

Gawd Buzz, you're becoming as predictable and tendentious as Piers Akerman on Insiders or Q & A

[Occam's Spork]

See that? His challenge was answered.
But he's only read half of it, when he responds. (He never even glanced at the part where it provided evidence for Chaldea in 4000 BC.)

No point talking this man off his ledge.
At this point, I might even suggest giving a gentle 'push'.