Dating the Pentateuch

Discussion about the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, pseudepigrapha, Philo, Josephus, Talmud, Dead Sea Scrolls, archaeology, etc.
User avatar
spin
Posts: 2146
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by spin »

Mental flatliner wrote:
spin wrote: Ambiguity in the Sumerian language explains the rib connection, an ambiguity not available in Hebrew, so you get the ultimately tenuous creation of Eve from the rib without any justifiable reason in the Jewish version. What's the wind doing in the story in Gen 1:2?? You can't understand from the Jewish story. You have to return to the Enuma Elish to get the significance. For the sons of angels who are of daughters of men, you have to turn to 2 Enoch to help you understand.
Since you don't speak Hebrew,
Nice gambit, but I've already called you out for your ignorance of Hebrew.
Mental flatliner wrote:you're not aware of the ambiguity in the Hebrew language as used in Genesis 1.
Umm, Whaddayha know another unsupp[orted assertion from Mental Flatliner!!.
Mental flatliner wrote:Since you've never studied Sumerian history, you're not aware that the ambiguity you claim for Sumerian had disappeared by the time this myth was written.
When you've got nothing to say all we get is contentless spew. I've been waiting for substance from you and nothing at all has come. Do better or fuck off.
Mental flatliner wrote:But your biggest error here is that you forgot to read Genesis 2-3, which clearly states the meaning of the name of Eve: "woman", because she was taken from the rib of man, and "Eve", meaning "mother of all mankind".
Still don't get the issue, do you? Why rib? You cannot say. It comes from Sumerian, duffer. Hebrew cannot explain it. Her name in Sumerian is "lady of the rib" in one sense.
Mental flatliner wrote:Because of these errors, you failed to notice that Genesis 2-3 likely predates the Sumerian myth due to the ambiguity in Hebrew and lack of in Sumerian.

(Other errors you make here: My connection between the two pieces of literature is hardly tenuous if I can name all 18 similarities and show that they appear in both texts in the same consecutive order of appearance.
Yet you don't know the similarities with the Enuma Elish. Telling, very telling.
Mental flatliner wrote:Genesis 1 and Genesis 2-3 are not Jewish stories. The Enuma Elish has nothing in common with either text.
Why bellow your ignorance, when if you'd actually read the Enuma Elish you'd know how Marduk killed tiamat, the Akkadian cognate for the Hebrew word תהום (tehom). The Hebrew story teller has substituted the Hebrew god for Marduk and kept the divine wind that was used to bring Tiamat down.
Mental flatliner wrote:Sons of angels is mentioned nowhere in Genesis, and the book of Enoch was written too many centuries later to have any bearing.)
The nephilim, from the "sons of god". Don't be pedantic merely to avoid your responsibilities.
Mental flatliner wrote:These are the errors I found in your first paragraph. No need to read further. You have a habit of altering the text you're studying, so the best you can ever hope to achieve is fiction of your own tastes.
You have shown an utter ignorance of the material, so why read more, which might rob you of that ignorance?
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes
semiopen
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by semiopen »

Mental flatliner wrote:
semiopen wrote: You gave examples that allegedly show some vague similarities with parts of Genesis but not with Genesis 1.

The link you give for Genesis 11 - (Tower of Babel) is titled How grain came to Sumer. This is crap, it's nothing like the story, but who cares its not what we were discussing.

You claimed that Genesis 1 was written in Sumerian before the 31st century BCE.
Mistakes made in your post:
1--You didn't read the examples I gave, therefore you can't call them "vague"
2--I gave examples of almost all of the first 11 chapters represented (I even named the chapters so you could follow along)
3--The link I gave for Chapter 11 was for Genesis 11:1 (and said so)
4--I claimed that Genesis 1 as written before 3000 BC, not "in the 31st century BC"
5--I never claimed it was written in Sumerian, I said it preserved the elements of the language (therefore Genesis 1 is likely older)

You're not qualified to respond to my posts when you make this many errors.

Now for the big purple gorilla hiding in plain sight:

Nothing in Genesis 1-11 is of Hebrew origin. (I'm sure it never occurred to you that the obvious names never appear: Jerusalem, Israel, lengthy prophecies, names beginning with "je" or ending in "iah", you know, ethnic Jewish giveaways like that.)

There has to be quite a vortex between your ears to allow the obvious to escape like this.
I see the problem, you are also making near identical posts in the Genesis 1&2 thread and God only knows where else.

You haven't made any posts on Genesis 1 here yet you claim it was written "before 3000 BC". I took the liberty of adjusting that to before the 31st century BCE since I didn't think that a range of 3100-3001 can be defended but have it your way. You still haven't given any evidence.

You have repeatedly said Genesis 1-11. You have given nothing of Genesis 1, and you are also missing other chapters. The chapters you claim to cover are vague.

Your best example seems to be the flood which everyone knows and your Genesis 2/3 thing with ribs, talking animals, and eating plant based stuff - which I guess everyone also knows.
Everyone on earth had the same language and the same words. (Gen 11:1 TNK)
You have not said Genesis 11:1 in this thread and I think this is the only thread that you posted the five pitiful examples. I think you just made a mistake when you posted these to this thread. The link you give has nothing to do with Genesis 11:1.
Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by Mental flatliner »

semiopen wrote: You have not said Genesis 11:1 in this thread and I think this is the only thread that you posted the five pitiful examples. I think you just made a mistake when you posted these to this thread. The link you give has nothing to do with Genesis 11:1.
This is 2-dimensional thinking.

I gave you a link and called it the Sumerian version of the original migration into Shinar, referring to this verse:

"Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As men moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there."

The comparison is self-evident, and there was no mention of the Tower of Babel. If you read things into my posts and create your own confusion, that's your problem. You need to learn to deal with these things on your own. I'm not here to baby sit you.
semiopen
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by semiopen »

Mental flatliner wrote:
semiopen wrote: You have not said Genesis 11:1 in this thread and I think this is the only thread that you posted the five pitiful examples. I think you just made a mistake when you posted these to this thread. The link you give has nothing to do with Genesis 11:1.
This is 2-dimensional thinking.

I gave you a link and called it the Sumerian version of the original migration into Shinar, referring to this verse:

"Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As men moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there."

The comparison is self-evident, and there was no mention of the Tower of Babel. If you read things into my posts and create your own confusion, that's your problem. You need to learn to deal with these things on your own. I'm not here to baby sit you.
If you love the bible so much, why not show it a little respect and take a little time to be more clear.

Everyone on earth had the same language and the same words. (Gen 11:1 TNK)
And as they migrated from the east, they came upon a valley in the land of Shinar and settled there. (Gen 11:2 TNK)

Genesis 11:1 has nothing to do with your link, Genesis 11:2 is a vague similarity to your example.

Genesis 11, which you claim is Sumerian, however has 32 verses. The whole point of Genesis 11 is the Tower of Babel.

When you say Genesis 1-11, you are implying that there is a clear parallel betweenthe stories in both. Yet you don't produce anything at all for Genesis 1, and probably nothing at all for over half the chapters - and that's giving you credit for Genesis 11.
Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by Mental flatliner »

semiopen wrote:
If you love the bible so much, why not show it a little respect and take a little time to be more clear.

Everyone on earth had the same language and the same words. (Gen 11:1 TNK)
And as they migrated from the east, they came upon a valley in the land of Shinar and settled there. (Gen 11:2 TNK)

Genesis 11:1 has nothing to do with your link, Genesis 11:2 is a vague similarity to your example.

Genesis 11, which you claim is Sumerian, however has 32 verses. The whole point of Genesis 11 is the Tower of Babel.

When you say Genesis 1-11, you are implying that there is a clear parallel betweenthe stories in both. Yet you don't produce anything at all for Genesis 1, and probably nothing at all for over half the chapters - and that's giving you credit for Genesis 11.
I'm not your mommy. It's my job to write the post, it's your job to read it.

When I say "Genesis 1-11 are Sumerian in origin", I alone have the authority to tell you my meaning. You read Babel into my post, so it's no wonder you'd attempt to alter other portions.

It's no wonder you're confused.
semiopen
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by semiopen »

Mommy Flatulence - I read Babel into your post because Genesis 11 is the Tower of Babel.

If the Sumerian thing isn't about Babel, you have a little problem.

Your position isn't convincing.

What next? Maybe you are going to claim that your absurd claim about Genesis 1 is also proven by this because 11 has a 1 in it.
Mental flatliner
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 9:50 am

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by Mental flatliner »

semiopen wrote:Mommy Flatulence - I read Babel into your post because Genesis 11 is the Tower of Babel.

If the Sumerian thing isn't about Babel, you have a little problem.

Your position isn't convincing.

What next? Maybe you are going to claim that your absurd claim about Genesis 1 is also proven by this because 11 has a 1 in it.
No, you read Babel into the text because you failed to read the link, failed to read the Genesis passage given, failed to make the obvious comparison (and failed to read what I plainly said I was comparing).

Babel was a Sumerian city, so I don't see a problem. My claim is that Genesis 1-11 are of Sumerian origin. I expect Sumerian cities to be discussed.

(Wouldn't you?)

But while we're on the topic, there's a book called "The Uruk World System" where an author I believe is atheist exhaustively demonstrates that the Babel empire mentioned in Genesis 10 and 11 existed from about 4000-3500, and the empire itself was Sumerian in ethnicity based on architecture, pottery samples, pottery materials, cylinder seals and other material culture.

This is evidence that (not only is Genesis 1-11 Sumerian) Genesis preserves (accurately) what had to be an oral tradition from 4000-2800 BC when writing was advanced enough to tell the story.
User avatar
spin
Posts: 2146
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by spin »

Mental flatliner wrote:
semiopen wrote:Mommy Flatulence - I read Babel into your post because Genesis 11 is the Tower of Babel.

If the Sumerian thing isn't about Babel, you have a little problem.

Your position isn't convincing.

What next? Maybe you are going to claim that your absurd claim about Genesis 1 is also proven by this because 11 has a 1 in it.
No, you read Babel into the text because you failed to read the link, failed to read the Genesis passage given, failed to make the obvious comparison (and failed to read what I plainly said I was comparing).

Babel was a Sumerian city, so I don't see a problem. My claim is that Genesis 1-11 are of Sumerian origin. I expect Sumerian cities to be discussed.

(Wouldn't you?)

But while we're on the topic, there's a book called "The Uruk World System" where an author I believe is atheist exhaustively demonstrates that the Babel empire mentioned in Genesis 10 and 11 existed from about 4000-3500, and the empire itself was Sumerian in ethnicity based on architecture, pottery samples, pottery materials, cylinder seals and other material culture.

This is evidence that (not only is Genesis 1-11 Sumerian) Genesis preserves (accurately) what had to be an oral tradition from 4000-2800 BC when writing was advanced enough to tell the story.
Babylon, we are told in a Babylonian text known as the Weidner Chronicle (line 51, in AK Grayson. Assyrian & Babylonian Chronicles, 1975), was built by Sargon of Akkad. That's 2300BCE. Babylon was not in fact Sumerian at all.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes
srd44
Posts: 47
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 4:16 am
Contact:

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by srd44 »

Mental flatliner wrote:
spin wrote: Ambiguity in the Sumerian language explains the rib connection, an ambiguity not available in Hebrew, so you get the ultimately tenuous creation of Eve from the rib without any justifiable reason in the Jewish version. What's the wind doing in the story in Gen 1:2?? You can't understand from the Jewish story. You have to return to the Enuma Elish to get the significance. For the sons of angels who are of daughters of men, you have to turn to 2 Enoch to help you understand.
Genesis 1 and Genesis 2-3 are not Jewish stories. The Enuma Elish has nothing in common with either text.
Oh the freedom to be ignorant, I can perhaps tolerate, a wee bit, but the arrogance in allowing this ignorance to trump centuries of real scholarship, learned individuals in their respected fields, 100s and 100s of laboriously and meticulously written scholarship just ignorantly and arrogantly ignored, disdained --- this I cannot tolerate.

The 1963 work by Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis is still unparalleled --- so your stuck, intellectually, in the pre-60s, well that might be too much of a compliment for you. Here's a summation of the parallels between, in broad strokes; I'm not going to do your work for you; you'll have to read.
The old Babylonian creation account, the Enuma Elish, for example, which predates the Genesis accounts by at least a millennium, exhibits many parallels, both structurally and thematically, with the younger creation account of Genesis 1:1-2:3. Even noting its highly mythological content and polytheistic nature, the Babylonian Enuma Elish narrates the creation of the sky, earth, and mankind in similar terms to those of Genesis 1:1-2:3 and in the same order. For example, in the older Babylonian creation account the creator deity initially subdues and conquers an original state of watery chaos personified as the goddess Tiamat, and then proceeds to divide her in two, that is separate the primordial waters into the waters above and the waters below. These waters are then kept apart by the creation of a firmament or the sky, effectively separating the waters above from the waters below. Next, the abode of the gods are attributed to the heavens together with the creation of the luminaries, stars, sun, and moon, to divide the years into months and days—indeed to create our 7-day week! The creation of the earth, that is dry habitable land, from the waters below then occurs, and finally mankind is created. Lastly, like the ending of Genesis 1:1-2:3, the Enuma Elish also ends by assigning rest for the god(s), and both speak of a divine counsel of some sort (Gen 1:26).

Biblical scholars now realize that this older mythic narrative must have served as a template for the author of Genesis 1:1-2:3, the Priestly writer. In other words, Genesis 1:1-2:3 was not a free composition of its author. This author obviously had literary precursors, one of which was the old Babylonian creation account the Enuma Elish, which the Israelites would have come into direct contact with during their captivity in Babylon in the 6th century BCE.

It needs to be stressed that it was less the direct influence of an older text that shaped the ideas and beliefs of the creation account in Genesis 1:1-2:3, and more so the worlview and beliefs of a shared cultural heritage that extended throughout the larger Mediterranean basin. In other words, the similarities between the Enuma Elish and Genesis 1:1-2:3 represent shared cultural perspectives and beliefs about the nature of the world and its origins. The Israelite scribes inherited these cultural perspectives and beliefs, adopted them, and freely modified them to suit their own purposes and monotheistic religious convictions. Many of the ideas and beliefs about the origins of the world expressed above in the Enuma Elish, and, as we shall see, similarly in the creation account of Genesis 1:1-2:3, were also present in other creation myths from the ancient Near East. Nearly every surviving creation account from Egypt, for example, presents an original preexisting state of darkness, watery chaos, and a yet unformed landmass prior to creation. This is especially so in the case of the Egyptian cosmogony from Hermopolis, whose primordial state prior to creation is near identical to that presented in Genesis 1:2. Personified as preexisting gods, this particular cosmogony speaks of a primeval darkness, a primordial formless earth mass or hill, and the primordial surging waters, through whose separation the earth and heavens were formed and named.

Thus, one of the ideas that the author of Genesis 1:1-2:3 inherited from his larger cultural and literary world about the nature of his world and its origin was that the creation of the earth and the skies, of ordered life in general, was the result of separating light from primordial darkness (1:4), of separating a primordial surging water mass (tehôm) into the waters above and the waters below (1:6-7) to form a space in its midst (1:6), wherein the heavens were named (1:8) and the luminaries by which the cosmos progressed in an orderly fashion were created (1:14), and finally by forming habitable land from a primordial formless and empty (tohû wabohû) earth mass and separating it out from the waters below and naming it “earth” (1:9).
Source: http://contradictionsinthebible.com/gen ... ex-nihilo/

Interesting thing about this tohû wabohû as well --- it only appears elsewhere in the Bible in literature written in the 6th c. BCE, like Genesis 1, and it is an image of the land of Judah after it had been disseminated by the Babylonians in 587 BCE. See the source above, further down, or M. Smith, The Priestly Vision of Genesis 1, 2010.
semiopen
Posts: 471
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 6:27 pm

Re: Dating the Pentateuch

Post by semiopen »

Mommy flatulence wrote:
semiopen wrote:Mommy Flatulence - I read Babel into your post because Genesis 11 is the Tower of Babel.

If the Sumerian thing isn't about Babel, you have a little problem.

Your position isn't convincing.

What next? Maybe you are going to claim that your absurd claim about Genesis 1 is also proven by this because 11 has a 1 in it.
No, you read Babel into the text because you failed to read the link, failed to read the Genesis passage given, failed to make the obvious comparison (and failed to read what I plainly said I was comparing).

Babel was a Sumerian city, so I don't see a problem. My claim is that Genesis 1-11 are of Sumerian origin. I expect Sumerian cities to be discussed.

(Wouldn't you?)

But while we're on the topic, there's a book called "The Uruk World System" where an author I believe is atheist exhaustively demonstrates that the Babel empire mentioned in Genesis 10 and 11 existed from about 4000-3500, and the empire itself was Sumerian in ethnicity based on architecture, pottery samples, pottery materials, cylinder seals and other material culture.

This is evidence that (not only is Genesis 1-11 Sumerian) Genesis preserves (accurately) what had to be an oral tradition from 4000-2800 BC when writing was advanced enough to tell the story.
The Uruk World System: The Dynamics of Expansion of Early Mesopotamian Civilization, Second Edition - http://www.amazon.com/The-Uruk-World-Sy ... rld+system

I don't know this book, it is discussed here http://www.sumerian.org/An%20Uruk%20World-System.htm I don't see anything that would advance your theories.

http://www.sumerian.org seems like a serious web site that discusses the Sumerian language. One of the FAQs goes -

Is Hebrew a daughter language of Sumerian?

No. Hebrew belongs to the Afro-Asiatic language family. Sumerian is a different language family.
>How different are the following languages. Akkadian, Phoenician, Egyptian
>It is believed that Jesus (on the cross) said, Eli eli lama shabatani ( I
>think this to be Aramaic) in Hebrew it would be Eli Eli lama azaftani,
>consequently could I assume that Hebrew is a branch of Aramaic.?

The languages mentioned are all sister languages, spoken simultaneously in different places. Egyptian is related to Semitic languages such as Akkadian, Aramaic, Hebrew, and Phoenician.
I'm not sure what conclusions we can jump to here, except that the questioner is a novice and Sumerian and Hebrew are in different zip codes. We do know, that the cultures got intimately acquainted during the Babylonian exile.

Regarding the Tower of Babel, I've always loved that story because it is so strange and pointless.

Jeremiah 51, I'm sure you know, is famous for having the only two Atbash found in the bible.
Atbash is a simple substitution cipher for the Hebrew alphabet. It consists in substituting aleph (the first letter) for tav (the last), beth (the second) for shin (one before last), and so on, reversing the alphabet. Hence the name, Aleph-Tav-Beth-Shin (אתבש). In the Book of Jeremiah, לב קמי Lev Kamai (51:1) is Atbash for כשדים Kasdim (Chaldeans), and ששך Sheshakh (25:26; 51:41) is Atbash for בבל Bavel (Babylon).
כֹּ֚ה אָמַ֣ר יְהוָ֔ה הִנְנִי֙ מֵעִ֣יר עַל־בָּבֶ֔ל וְאֶל־יֹשְׁבֵ֖י לֵ֣ב קָמָ֑י ר֖וּחַ מַשְׁחִֽית׃


Thus said the LORD: See, I am rousing a destructive wind Against Babylon and the inhabitants of Leb-kamai.
(Jer 51:1 TNK)

אֵ֚יךְ נִלְכְּדָ֣ה שֵׁשַׁ֔ךְ וַתִּתָּפֵ֖שׂ תְּהִלַּ֣ת כָּל־הָאָ֑רֶץ אֵ֣יךְ הָיְתָ֧ה לְשַׁמָּ֛ה בָּבֶ֖ל בַּגּוֹיִֽם׃


How has Sheshach been captured, The praise of the whole earth been taken! How has Babylon become A horror to the nations! (Jer 51:41 TNK)

We tried to cure Babylon But she was incurable. Let us leave her and go, Each to his own land; For her punishment reaches to heaven, It is as high as the sky. (Jer 51:9 TNK)

http://biblehub.com/commentaries/jeremiah/51-9.htm
Possibly there may be an allusive reference to the tower of Babel, “reaching unto heaven,” as the type of Babylonian greatness
Jer 51:20-26 is linguistically similar to Genesis 11:3-9

מַפֵּץ־אַתָּ֣ה לִ֔י כְּלֵ֖י מִלְחָמָ֑ה וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ גּוֹיִ֔ם וְהִשְׁחַתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ מַמְלָכֽוֹת׃ 21 וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ ס֖וּס וְרֹֽכְב֑וֹ וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ רֶ֖כֶב וְרֹכְבֽוֹ׃ 22 וְנִפַּצְתִּ֤י בְךָ֙ אִ֣ישׁ וְאִשָּׁ֔ה וְנִפַּצְתִּ֥י בְךָ֖ זָקֵ֣ן וָנָ֑עַר וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י בְךָ֔ בָּח֖וּר וּבְתוּלָֽה׃

You are My war club, My weapons of battle; With you I clubbed nations, With you I destroyed kingdoms; 21 With you I clubbed horse and rider, With you I clubbed chariot and driver, 22 With you I clubbed man and woman, With you I clubbed graybeard and boy, With you I clubbed youth and maiden; (Jer 51:20-22 TNK)

This is a little poem where each line starts with וְנִפַּצְתִּ֣י - with you I clubbed - but this word can also mean smash and scatter

Genesis 4-9 is very similar, with references to scatter.

And they said, "Come, let us build us a city, and a tower with its top in the sky, to make a name for ourselves; else we shall be scattered all over the world." (Gen 11:4 TNK) נָפ֖וּץ

Thus the LORD scattered them from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city.
(Gen 11:8 TNK) וַיָּ֙פֶץ

That is why it was called Babel, because there the LORD confounded the speech of the whole earth; and from there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.
(Gen 11:9 TNK) הֱפִיצָ֣ם

This is sort of pulled from a paper by Jonathan Kline of Harvard at the Dec 2013 AJS convention.

I don't think anyone else talks about the Tower of Babel until Jeremiah. The language is very similar between Genesis 11 and Jeremiah 51. My wild guess is that Jeremiah 51 was written first, but the two passages are most likely only a small amount of time apart whoever wrote them.

I have to admit my self perception of myself as a human being is not really tied up in this. But why not believe something reasonable instead of looking for the outrageous. Here we see the exiles (scattered) wishing for a similar fate for the Babylonians.
Post Reply