Date: Fri Feb 21 2003 - 12:26:52 EST
In a message dated 2/21/03 9:59:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, email@example.com
> Again, like I said in the past: you are trying to read the Bible as a
> scientific book, which it is not. Begin by trying to think like an
> Israelite 2000BC. Than consider how, even modern N.Americans read poetry
> without saying it has to contain "factual truth" (whatever that means), and
> those people usually realize that they have to take into account for which
> audience it was written. The Bible is not just a book of "facts" in our
> sense of the word. So to say that anything in the Bible is no longer
> relevant is throwing the Bible out of our life, except maybe on Sunday when
> we are in a "holy" mood. That does not mean that we now have to read the
> Bible as a scientific book.
> Jan de Koning
I am not trying to read the Bible as a scientific book. Pastoralism began in
Anatolia (Asia minor) around 7000 bc. Harran, where jacob went to get his
wife is in Anatolia. The reputed location of the garden of eden is in
northeast anatolia. The Bible was probably last assembled and edited by Ezra,
that's at the return from exile in 539 BC, not 2000 BC. Abraham is reported
by the Historical atlas of the jewish people to have lived around 1800BC,
Moses in the same book around 1300BC. There were no Israelites in 2000BC. It
was Ezra who re-architected the Law and brought it back to Israel from
Babylon where he was a priest and scribe around 590BC.
The Israelites aided Cyrus in weakening babylon for persian conquest
(olmstead's history of the persian empire) which supports the often made
remark that the priestly caste in Babylon were at their origin zoroastrian
and the source for that religion (zoroastriansim) is certainly the rg veda of
the Indus Valley. The ancient priests of the indus valley sacrificed cattle.
They were not shepherds. It is a bull that is the customary sacrifice of the
priestly class in the Temple at Jerusalem, and not sheep, suggesting a direct
line from the most ancient priestly class in the world (source of all the
world's major religions) to the Levites of ancient Israel. Even today, among
orthodox Jews, it is the Babylonian talmud that is most respected, not the
It is magi who herald Jesus' birth. The magi were of the ancient priestly
class in Babylon as of 500 BC (see herodotus). Let's go back to anatolia
which is also mentioned as the possible origin of the indo-aryans who brought
the rg veda to India and were indo european. The kassites (also indo european
and not semitic) in the 14th cent. BC conquered babylon and brought the
kudurru to mesopotamia. The kudurru is a stone tablet upon which land grants
were written (oxford companion to archeology) just like the tablets that the
ten commandments were written on, the convenant that gave Israel to the
Israelites (a land grant).
I never said anything in the Bible was no longer relevant. I say what you are
saying but you have come to the wrong conclusion. The Israelites were
That was their livelihood. To say pastoralism is not the relevant perspective
from which to view the torah is to deny all of the pastoralist symbols and
statements throughout the Bible and the very livelihood and means of survival
of the people who inspired it.
I could continue with the evidence., but my fingers are tired.
Look through the Bible through the eyes of the people who inspired it, not
scientific eyes or any other eyes, but their eyes. That's what I'm saying.
That perspective does not conflict with science, suggesting our religion is
scientific at its core and if that is true, then the source of our religion
is true religion! and that's the proposition I have been trying to share...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 21 2003 - 12:28:33 EST