The Construction of Judaism

[Nungali]

This thread will show articles papers and videos that relate to the  construction of Judaism as a medium for an historical  political takeover and examine elements of the 'Jewish story' (claimed history ) such as ; an examination of Gods, the appropriation of other cultures story and history being massaged into Judaism and the attempt to twist Egyptian history into their* own .

 

This threads focus is historical  and not related to 'religious or faith value'.

 

* certain political 'powers that be' and individuals , who will arise as these posts progress .

 

Lets start with two fronts ;  A comparison with 'King Solomon' and the  Egyptian records at that time   and an examination of one of the Jewish Gods

 

 

.The Biblical authors (compiled 700 AD onwards) were using records of some description when they wrote the stories that eventually wound up in a single book, but they clearly had no great historical record of these events, because we know that they were wrong/copied/altered to create a narrative about the discovery of a single god who created Israel after leaving Hebrews from Egypt. We know that story is not true, because we know the oldest sources of the story are not about this story at all, they were copied from other stories.

Let's unpack what we actually know based on archaeology.

Egypt was culturally dominant over the Levant during the bronze age, but was fought in the borderlands around modern Israel / Syria by the Hittites, then Assyrians, then Babylonians and then finally the Greeks.

a) The Canaanite cultures of the region, centred around city states, worshipped a pantheon of gods including El, Yahweh, Asherah etc, but were also reliant on Egypt for military support from at least the Amenhoteps onwards (1500ish) as evidenced by the Amarna letters.

 Temples to both Egyptian and local gods can be found in Canaan (modern areas of Israel, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt etc), while Egyptian religious iconography and temple worship continued until about 600 AD.

c) The region was repeatedly invaded by Egyptians to restore control whenever bandits or foreigners incited rebellion against Egyptian rule. Monuments to Pharoahs such as Ramesses II which detail these great conquests, and it was also repeatedly invaded by Hittites, Amurites etc, leaving a border around Syria as mentioned above.

d) We can shoot down the 'revelation' of Yahweh pretty easily - he was worshipped very clearly long before the period of the mythical exodus, as evidenced even by personal names in Egypt, and at that point was also quite separate to El (who was also found in personal names in the Amarna period).

So when a series of stories about the Judean royal family begins to be written somewhere between 700-500 AD, a process interrupted by the Assyrian invasion, and the subsequent Babylonian takeover, and is then compiled into a book which creates a very anti-Egyptian narrative, we have to look at the sources for this, knowing they are then edited to make sense in a larger narrative.

'Exodus' which describes an Egyptian Royal taking an army to Canaan, with many religious preparations on the way, before fighting an army of charioteers is the story of Ramesses II invading Canaan and fighting the Hittites at Kadesh. He builds an Egyptian Altar with Isis and Nephthys on it (called the Ark in the Bible) which undermines any idea of fighting the Egyptian gods and a Uraeus (bronze serpent) to fight snakes - both of which are Egyptian religious icons, and the story of destroying the Pharoah's chariots in a sea is literally the Poem of Pentaur.

Proverbs is the 'Instruction of Amenemope' complete with a mistranslation of a reference to the 'thirty' instructions into 'three' rendering the sentence nonsensical.

Joseph - an Egyptian name - whose story follows the model of Egyptian fiction of the late Bronze Age, has an 'Egyptian' name given to him which is in fact a Hebrew name, a point the authors who added it clearly fail to understand.

So back to Solomon. We see no evidence of his existence. But we do see evidence of a king in exactly the same period, who does all the things Solomon does, but is actually a Pharoah - Siamun.

So it is likely on balance that the story of Solomon, is based on the story of Siamun.

 

Continuing with the blindly obvious parallels between Canaanite history as recorded in the Bible and the archaelogical records in Egypt, we can see that in the period 'Solomun' reigned over the kingdom of Judah and Israel, the Pharoah was 'Siamun'.

Siamun married the previous Pharoah's daughter, ruled over Canaan (including Israel and Judah) and was marked by his huge construction of temples. Siamun was enormously wealthy and powerful. He may have been from Canaan (his predecessor was from Libya) but his origins are not recorded in any artifacts found to date. There is a lot of historical evidence for him.

Solomun married the previous Pharoah's daughter, ruled over Canaan (including Israel and Judah) and was marked by his huge construction of temples. Solomun was enormously wealthy and powerful. He may have been from Canaan (his predecessor was a mysterious shepherd boy king) but his origins are only recorded in a book of mythology. There is no historical evidence for him.

Obvious points to add are that neither a) Israel or Judah were big enough to have the wealth ascribed to Solomun  the suffix 'amun' is that of an Egyptian god so the name appears Egyptian, Egypt had historically had many 'Yahweh' worshippers in its ranks and dominated Canaan culturally.

 

.

Edited July 20 by Nungali

[Nungali]

Who is the mysterious El Shaddai?

El Shaddai is often translated as 'God Almighty' but the etymology is so ancient that scholars do not agree on its meaning. Scholar Allbright argued that Shaddai has its phonetic equivalent in Akkadian šaddâʾû "mountaineer," and could therefore be read as "the one of the mountain(s). Cross furthered this argument, as he posited that Hebrew šadday and Akkadian šadû derived from the Proto-Semitic root ṯdw/ṯdy, "breast. Other scholars propose 'El of the fields', 'El the spirit' (from Akkadian šēdu, spirit) or a non-Semitic root like Shaddai deriving from the Egyptian verb šdj, meaning "save, rescue," and the noun šd, meaning savior.

Whatever the meaning, El Shaddai plays an important role as he announces the covenant with Abraham: "I am El Shaddai. Live in my presence, be perfect, and I shall grant a covenant between myself and you, and make you very numerous. And Abram bowed to the ground (Genesis 17:2-3)". So what can be learned from the relationship between El Shaddai and Abraham?
 

1. According to Exodus 6:2-3 Shaddai was the name by which god was known to Abraham: "I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as 'El Shaddai,' but I did not make my name 'YHWH' known to them." The name Shaddai appears 44 times outside of Genesis and Exodus, but the full form El Shaddai is only attested one other time, in Ezekiel 10:5 in the phrase kĕqôl ʾēl šadday, "like the voice/sound of El Shaddai." The Book of Job contains approximately two-thirds of all occurrences of Shaddai in the Hebrew bible, with its 31 instances. These mentions will be used to create an intermediate profile of El Shaddai.
2. Where does Abraham settle in ancient Israel? According to Genesis (12:6–7) Abram "built an altar to the Lord [Yahweh/יהוה in the Hebrew text] who had appeared to him… and had given that land to his descendants" at Shechem. Following the settlement of the Israelites in Canaan after their Exodus from Egypt, according to the biblical narrative, Joshua assembled the Israelites at Shechem and asked them to choose between serving the god of Abraham who had delivered them from Egypt, or the false gods which their ancestors had served on the other side of the Euphrates river.
3. What do external sources say about the religion of Shechem in the days of Abraham? According to ancient texts from Ebla (c. 2400 – 1600 BC) Semitic deity Resheph is the patron of Shechem. Shechem first appears in the Hebrew bible in Genesis 12:6–8, which says that Abraham reached the "great tree of Moreh" at Shechem and offered sacrifice nearby.

So is El Shaddai an epithet for or perhaps a manifestation of Resheph-Nergal? Let's build an intermediate profile and compare both deities. From 'I Appeared as El Shaddai: Exploring the Mountain Motif as an Element for the Equation Between Yahweh and El Shaddai', A. Krogevoll, University of Toronto, 2022:

"Although the occurrences of Shaddai in Job are too multifaceted to be reduced to a simple scheme, scholars have attempted to systematize the meaning of the divine name in the book. Shaddai often appears in relation to the motif of blessing in Job, like when Job tells how Shaddai was with him and his children in his days of prosperity (29:5) and Eliphaz tells of how Shaddai can fill a house with good things (22:17-18). This imagery is further developed when Elihu equates "spirit of God" with the "breath of Shaddai" in Job 33:4, indicating that Shaddai is the source of human life. Shaddai is also portrayed positively when Eliphaz urges Job to turn to Shaddai as his instructor in the search for wisdom (22:21-30). Conversely, Shaddai is also strongly connected to plagues in Job, most notably in the words of Job who depicts Shaddai in similar manner as the deity Resheph, god of plague and war, in the references to Shaddai, the Archer (cf. 6:4; 16:9-14), and the "Arrows of Shaddai." It is clear that for Job, Shaddai has become his enemy not his friend (cf. 6:4; 7:12, 20; 16:11-14; 19:6-12; 30:21), as Shaddai is the one who inflicts pain. The dispute over Shaddai's nature is never fully resolved in Job, and to this Moore points out, "the most fundamental point about which Job and Eliphaz disagree is that of the essential characteristics of this mysterious deity both men call Šadday."

Some may argue that the dispute between Job and Eliphaz simply relates to to the complex, multifaced characteristics of a single deity. But Job is not only occurrence in the Hebrew Scriptures where El Saddai possibly has a different role; Yahweh or have a different role. Another example comes from Ruth 1:20-21 where character Naomi exclaims: "Call me no longer Naomi, call me Mara, for Shaddai has dealt very bitterly with me. I left full, but YHWH has brought me back empty; why call me Naomi? YHWH has testified against me and Shaddai has brought disaster upon me."

Scholar Krogevoll notices that Job depicts El Shaddai in a similar as Semitic deity Resheph-Nergal. Resheph-Nergal, a complex and ancient deity, is the god of the plague and the underworld, a war god and venerated in the entire Fertile Crescent through millennia. He was depicted as a bearded man, brandishing an ax or holding a shield and his most important symbol was the gazelle.

 

But is it possible to relate the context of Abraham with Resheph? The biblical record tells that Abraham started his epic journey in Ur, thought to be in Mesopotamia before moving on to Harran. Abraham traveled through the lands of the Hurrians, a people who lived throughout northern Syria, upper Mesopotamia and southeastern Anatolia. By the Early Iron Age, the Hurrians had been assimilated with other peoples. The Hurrian equivalent of Resheph is Iršappa (or Aršappa; eršp in the alphabetic Ugaritic script) and was, in Hittite texts, referred to as damkarassi, a Sumerian loanword meaning "of commerce. Like Iršappa West-Semitic deity Resheph is a god of commerce and was associated with the marketplace in Emar in Syria.

So what has Abraham to with commerce? Everything. Abraham was a big businessman in modern terminology whose sales territory reached from Harran to Egypt, but he concentrated especially on three areas: Palestine south of Shechem, Egypt and Arabia. It is not known which items he sold but scholars speculate that these would include luxury goods and cheap copper from the mines in Edom or Sinai which would be used for manufacturing in Phoenicia and Syria. According to legend Abraham concentrated on the Palestine-Egypt trade. Abraham operated from Shechem which was a Hurrian business center related to Harran with good trade routes in all directions. He took over grazing rights in the virgin territory on the mountain ridge between Shechem and Hebron. Genesis 13:2 mentions cattle along with Abraham's capital funds in silver and gold. In summary, Abraham connected the early great manufacturing civilizations in the Near East as his father Terah ran the trade routes from Ur to Haran and Abraham carried it on from there to Egypt with a major banking office in Damascus under Eliezer.

It's logical that a businessman like him would venerate a god linked to commerce. But Abraham had more ambitions as God had promised Canaan to Abraham and his progeny; a promise that a deity like Resheph-Nergal couldn't support. So it's not El Shaddai that makes this promise as in Genesis 17:3, the Hebrew word used for "God" is proper noun אֱלֹהִים (Elohim): "... As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations.. " In Genesis 17:9 the Hebrew word used for "God" is again אֱלֹהִים or Elohim: "Then Elohim said to Abraham: As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come."

Alternatively El Shaddai may be an epithet for ancient Sumerian Enlil. This was one of the most important deities of Mesopotamia, patron of Nippur and son of root god Anu. To a certain extent Enlil matches with commerce as he was known as 'The merchant of the Kiur', 'The lord who tips the scales' and 'The lord who places his egg-shaped stones on it'. But as he not directly associated with plagues – he delegated this type of job to Nergal-Resheph – the association with El Shaddai is not that likely.

Conclusion
El Shaddai appears to be Semitic deity Resheph-Nergal in the Hebrew Scriptures. This could be either his Hurrian form Iršappa (eršp) or his West-Semitic form Resheph-Nergal (ršp). Both Iršappa - messenger for Teššub/Ba'al Hadad in the Hurrian cosmogony - and Resheph-Nergal - mentioned in a dyad with Enki at Ebla - can considered to be important helper deities. Finally, Resheph-Nergal is specifically mentioned as the attendant of Yahweh/Eloah in Habakkuk 3:5 and, as his nature is compatible with that of El Shaddai, the latter should be identified as Resheph-Nergal.

[Nungali]

 

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

This thread will show articles papers and videos

 

Cool.  Will you be prepared to discuss those articles?  In other words, will you be preaching anti-Judaism?  Or will this be a discussion?

[Daniel]

11 hours ago, Nungali said:

 Video titled:  "The Jews Changed King David's Story ..."

 

Have you watched this video?  Are you prepared to discuss its content?  Why do you believe it is true?  Have you fact checked it?

 

Edited July 21 by Daniel

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

Lets start with two fronts ;  A comparison with 'King Solomon' and the  Egyptian records at that time   and an examination of one of the Jewish Gods

 

Great!  Nungali?  Do you have articles or videos on this?  You said you would bring them.  Where are they?  I see you did plenty of typing, but you did not deliver the articles or the videos.

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

El Shaddai appears to be Semitic deity Resheph-Nergal

 

Did you know that El is an improper pronunciation?  "El" is a preposition in Hebrew.

 

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

It's logical that a businessman like him would venerate a god linked to commerce. But Abraham had more ambitions as God had promised Canaan to Abraham and his progeny; a promise that a deity like Resheph-Nergal couldn't support. So it's not El Shaddai that makes this promise as in Genesis 17:3, the Hebrew word used for "God" is proper noun אֱלֹהִים (Elohim): "... As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations.. " In Genesis 17:9 the Hebrew word used for "God" is again אֱלֹהִים or Elohim: "Then Elohim said to Abraham: As for you, you must keep my covenant, you and your descendants after you for the generations to come."

 

You left out the ineffable tetragrammaton.  Why is that?  It is central to the entire narrative of Abraham.

 

Edited July 21 by Daniel

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

Abraham was a big businessman in modern terminology whose sales territory reached from Harran to Egypt

 

No.  He was an innkeeper at the crossroads.

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

is it possible to relate the context of Abraham with Resheph?

 

Of course!  These are stories with cross cultural appeal that have stood the test of time.  The reason for this is that the characters represent common archetypes which show up in many popular stories and myths in geo-diverse cultures.

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

Scholar Krogevoll notices

 

Please post the article, as promised, for rational enquiry and examination.

Edited July 21 by Daniel

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

"Call me no longer Naomi, call me Mara, for Shaddai has dealt very bitterly with me. I left full, but YHWH has brought me back empty; why call me Naomi? YHWH has testified against me and Shaddai has brought disaster upon me."

 

Have you read the book of Ruth?  What is at the very beginning of the story?  How does the story begin? 

[Daniel]

12 hours ago, Nungali said:

El Shaddai is often translated as 'God Almighty' but the etymology is so ancient that scholars do not agree on its meaning. Scholar Allbright argued that Shaddai has its phonetic equivalent in Akkadian šaddâʾû "mountaineer," and could therefore be read as "the one of the mountain(s). Cross furthered this argument, as he posited that Hebrew šadday and Akkadian šadû derived from the Proto-Semitic root ṯdw/ṯdy, "breast. Other scholars propose 'El of the fields', 'El the spirit' (from Akkadian šēdu, spirit) or a non-Semitic root like Shaddai deriving from the Egyptian verb šdj, meaning "save, rescue," and the noun šd, meaning savior.

 

Why didn't you bring any Jewish commentary on this?  Rabbi Hirsch explains the Jewish perspective well.  Are you ignoring all that moderate or conflict with your point of view?  That would be a very poor method for investigating anything.

 

Edited July 21 by Daniel

[Nungali]

I think many people now realize that the stories of Judaism,  regarding 'creation'. patriarchs , travels and events are often 'lifted ' from other sources .  This is not uncommon when constructing a religion .  Some are easily  identified as coming from another earlier source . Mostly this occurred  due to invasion ( people bringing their history with them )  and  'deportation' where they lived in foreign lands in Mesopotamia  and where exposed to  Sumerian, Assyrian, Persian , etc religions .

 

For those that   dont know this and might want to know more I will list some main basic ones .   There is plenty of subsequent material on the internet for those that want to pursue these ( and other ) influences  further . This is just a simple and general introduction .

 

+  The Book of Genesis, both Adam and the Garden of Eden are drawn from alternative and older religious traditions.

 

 

Created by God from “the dust of the ground”, with life subsequently breathed into him, according to the Bible Adam was the first man. Provided with the Garden of Eden, a “paradise of pleasure”, in which to live, the consumption of the forbidden fruit results in Adam, along with his wife Eve, being expelled from the Garden. Once more, the Judeo-Christian tradition is not original, but instead appropriates significantly from the Epic of Gilgamesh which includes the tale of Enkidu. Formed from clay and water by Aruru, the goddess of creation, Enkidu lives among the animals in a natural paradise until he is tempted by a woman, Shamhat, who tricks him into leaving his sanctuary naked.

Unable to return, Enkidu is condemned to walk the Earth among other humans until his eventual death by illness – a condition non-existent in his previous paradise. Demonstrating how interconnected the ancient Near East religions truly are, the Persian religion of Zoroastrianism equally contains a similar creation story to the younger Christian narrative. The Avesta – the primary collection of religious scriptures in Zoroastrianism – depicts a story of creation by Ormuzd. Taking six days, and resting upon the seventh, the 10th century BCE text also includes reference to the creation of the first two humans, named Adama and Evah.

 

+ The story of the Tower of Babel, an important historical construction in the Old Testament, contains noteworthy similarities to an ancient Sumerian legend

 

The Tower of Babel, appearing in the Book of Genesis, serves as an origin myth to explain the different languages of the world. In the aftermath of the Great Flood, a united mankind embarks on a project to construct a great tower to reach heaven. Thwarting this effort, God confuses their speech and scatters humanity throughout the world to preclude future attempts. Believed to have been inspired, at least in part, by the Etemenanki – an ancient ziggurat dedicated to the Mesopotamian god Marduk – in Babylon, which would have been observed by the Israelites during the Babylonian Exile, the biblical narrative also draws considerably from a Sumerian legend.

Composed in the 21st century BCE, more than a millennium before the Bible, Enmerkar and the Lord of Aratta is was an ancient Sumerian account of a series of conflicts between Enmerkar, King of Uruk, and an unnamed ruler of Aratta. The motivation behind the conflict, according to the story, was the demand by Enmerkar of tribute from Aratta to aid with the construction of a gigantic ziggurat in Eridu designed to reach the divine Enlil. Imploring the god Enki to restore the linguistic unity of mankind so that they might once again cooperate in peace, the Uruks are refused and a great war ensues among the nations of man.

 

+ The Book of Proverbs, allegedly written by King Solomon, replicates the earlier Egyptian Instruction of Amenemope virtually word for word

 

The Book of Proverbs, a collection of biblical wisdom regarding moral behavior and the meaning of life, was allegedly written by Solomon and later compiled during the reign of Hezekiah in the late-9th century BCE. Despite claiming to be unique insights offered to the Israelites of God’s will, this entire chapter of the Bible borrows heavily from already existing non-Judeo-Christian religious sources, most notably the Instruction of Amenemope. Written in the 13th century BCE, the Instruction was a literary work of Ancient Egypt, composed during the Ramesside Period, and contains thirty chapters of advice for proper living.

Exemplifying these derivations, whilst Proverbs encourages one to “rob not the poor, for he is poor, neither oppress the lowly in the gate”, Amenemope stipulates to “beware of robbing the poor, and oppressing the afflicted. Equally, Proverbs incites one to “remove not the widow’s landmark; And enter not into the field of the fatherless”, whilst Amenemope commands “remove not the landmark from the bounds of the field…and violate not the widow’s boundary”. Although these incredible similarities, among dozens of others, were initially contested, by the 1960s biblical scholars reached a near-unanimous consensus regarding the primacy of the Instruction over Proverbs and declared a “direct connection” between the two historical treatises.

 

+ The biblical story of Noah’s ark is copied almost exactly from a far older Mesopotamian legend found in the Epic of Gilgamesh

 

The story of Noah forms a central component of the early Christian tradition. In perhaps the most blatant act of religious plagiarism, the biblical narrative, however, is almost identical to the flood story found in the Epic of Gilgamesh written almost 1500 years earlier. In the ancient Mesopotamian text, Utnapishtim is tasked by Enki to create a giant ship, named Preserver of Life, onto which he would bring his relatives and baby animals to survive an impending flood that would wipe out all life not on the vessel. Made from timber and two hundred feet in length, Utnapishtim’s ark had seven floors and was, in true Christian fashion, completed on the seventh day.

After many days aboard the ark, Utnapishtim sends out a dove to check whether the waters had receded. Discovering they had, Utnapishtim released the animals and Enki rewards his devotion, making a covenant with his future generations. Scholarly opinion has concluded that since the biblical story follows the older Gilgamesh version “point by point and in the same order”, “few doubt that it derives from a Mesopotamian account”. This copying does not, however, undermine either tales’ potential veracity, with the story of Utnapishtim believed to have been influenced by a real-life flood in Mesopotamia approximately 7000 years ago.

 

+ The story of Abraham and the binding of Isaac bears noteworthy story parallels to the older Hindu legend of King Harishchandra

 

Abraham, a common patriarch of all three Abrahamic religions, is an ancient figure within the Judeo-Christian narrative who is called upon by God to abandon his home and settle new lands. Commanded by God to offer up his son as a sacrifice, Abraham was about to murder his son, Isaac, when an angel interrupted and rewarded him for his obedience to the divine will. However, predating the earliest known references to Abraham by at least a couple of centuries, the Hindu legend of Harishchandra – a tale in which a father must prove his worth through great familial sacrifice, bears notable comparisons to the biblical counterpart.

Harishchandra, a king, through varying accounts of how or why, came to owe Vishwamitra, a sage, the rights to his kingdom. Willingly parting with his worldly possessions and title, Vishwamitra still demanded an additional fee and so Harishchandra sold his wife and son to raise more funds. Taking a job at a crematorium – a low-class position within ancient Hindu culture – at a later date Harishchandra’s son was killed by a snake bite. Brought to him by his wife for cremation, Harishchandra refused to do so until his wife paid the requisite fee. Impressed by Harishchandra’s strict adherence to the rules and his duty, Vishnu elevated Harishchandra and his wife to divinity and resurrected his son.

 

+ Appearing in cultures and civilizations around the world, the biblical story of Jonah is merely a regurgitation of an existing and common story trope

 

The eponymous lead character of the Book of Jonah (Hebrew Bible), in punishment for defying God, Jonah is swallowed by a giant fish until he consents to perform the task assigned. Appearing in the mythologies of countless preexisting civilizations, the story of Jonah is widely accepted as being unoriginal and derivative. Commonalities can be found, in particular, with the Hindu legend of Saktideva. Saktideva, wishing to marry the Princess of Vardhamanapura, embarks upon a journey to discover the Golden City to win her hand in marriage. During this adventure, Saktideva is devoured by a giant fish before being eventually freed unharmed.

Examining the biblical story more broadly, narrative parallels containing a hero being swallowed by a giant fish appear in almost all known civilizations as a metaphorical representation of rebirth. In ancient Babylon, the Whale of Der swallows and subsequently gives birth to Oannes; the Finnish hero Ilmarinen is swallowed in order to, likewise, be reborn; and Heracles, copied once again, is swallowed in the course of fighting a sea monster before defeating the beast from the inside. Significantly, and suggesting heavy influence, Heracles is swallowed near the port of Jaffa – the place of nautical departure in the biblical story of Jonah.

 

+ The story of Samson, one of the most popular legends from the Old Testament, is a near-exact replication of the Greek legend of Heracles

 

Samson, the last of the judges of the ancient Israelites, was a Nazirite granted immense strength on the provision that his long hair was not cut. Among the superhuman deeds performed by Samson in the Bible are the slaying of a lion with his bare hands, the defeat of a Philistine army using only the jawbone of a donkey, and the collapsing of the Temple of Dagon upon himself. Possessing noteworthy similarities to already existing figures of religious folklore, including the Sumerian Enkidu and the Greek Heracles, contemporary interpretation views Samson as a Jewish interpretation of an already existing legendary narrative.

Dated to the 13th century BCE, thus preceding the Book of Judges by 500 years, in spite of assertions by biblical traditionalists that Samson was a genuine individual, the stories of Heracles and Samson are so similar they warrant accusations of plagiarism. Heracles, like Samson, slew a lion bare-handed, both men tore down the gates of a city, both were betrayed by untrustworthy women who were ultimately responsible for their downfall, and both died at their own hands in an act of martyrdom. Likewise, Enkidu, along with Gilgamesh, were men of great strength who joined forces to defeat the Bull of Heaven in defiance of Ishtar and who died as a result of his own hubris.

 

+ The Ten Commandments – the foundational moral principles of the Old Testament – were largely borrowed from Ancient Egyptian and Mesopotamian religious traditions

The Ten Commandments, brought down by Moses from Mount Sinai, are a composite set of religious principles which form the ethical fundamentals of the Judeo-Christian tradition. However, despite this centrality to both Christianity and Judaism, the Ten Commandments are not unique to these world religions, nor, in fact, do they originate with them. Predating the incident with Moses, which supposedly occurred in 1490 BCE, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, dating from approximately 2600 BCE, bears noteworthy similarities. Whereas Exodus 20:7 proclaims: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain”, the Book of the Dead stipulates: “I have not blasphemed”.

Other transparent parallels with the Egyptian religious text include “I have not committed adultery” and “I have not stolen”, mirroring Exodus 20:14 – “Thou shalt not commit adultery” – and Exodus 20:15: “Thou shalt not steal”. Not merely borrowed from the Egyptians, the Ten Commandments also draw inspiration from the Code of Hammurabi dating from 1772 BCE. Inscribed on a stone stele in a manner similar to that of the Commandments, these rigidly enforced laws from ancient Mesopotamia have been suggested as likewise transitioning beliefs from abstract concepts into solid laws mandating obedience.

 

Some reference material and further reading :

 

“Ancient Egyptian Book of the Dead: Journey Through the Afterlife”, John H. Taylor, British Museum Press (2010)

“The Roman Festivals of the Period of the Republic”, William Warde Fowler, Nabu Press (2010, reprint)

“A History of Zoroastrianism, Vol. 1”, Mary Boyce, Leiden Brill (1996)

“Zoroastrians: Their Religious Beliefs and Practices”, Mary Boyce, Routledge & Kegan Paul (1979)

“Samson and the Liminal Hero in the Ancient Near East”, Gregory Mobley, T & T Clark (2006)

“The Great Fish in Ancient and Medieval Story”, Cornelia Catlin Coulter, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association (1926)

“Fishing for Jonah (anew)”, Louis Jonker and Douglas Lawrie, Stellenbosch University (2005)

“Mythology: An Illustrated Encyclopaedia”, Richard Cavendish and Trevor Oswald Ling, Rizzoli Publishing (1980)

“God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything”, Christopher Hitchens, Twelve Books Publishing (2007)

“Athena”, Susan Deacy, Routledge (2008)

“Asian Mythologies”, Yves Bonnefoy and Wendy Doniger, University of Chicago Press (1993)

“World Mythology: An Anthology of the Great Myths and Epics”, Donna Rosenberg, National Textbook Company (1994)

“The Alleged Semitic Origin of the Wisdom of Amenemope”, Ronald J. Williams, Journal of Egyptian Archaeology (1961)

“The Teachings of Amenemope and Proverbs XXII 17-XXIV 22: Further Reflections on a Long-standing Problem”, J.A. Emerton, Vetus Testamentum (2001)

“The ‘Babel of Tongues’: A Sumerian Version”, Samuel Noah Kramer, Journal of the American Oriental Society (1968)

“Cross-Cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-Modern Times”, Jerry H. Bentley, Oxford University Press (1992)

“The Epic of Gilgamesh”, Benjamin R. Foster, W.W. Norton & Company (2001)

 

 

We can see  that rather than a product of original teachings and divine inspiration, significant portions and many vital moments of the  narrative,  are, in fact, drawn from far older religious traditions including the beliefs of Mesopotamia.

 

Edited July 21 by Nungali

[Nungali]

Some further background about when the 'retro re-writing'  happened , the construction of the narrative and its effect on creating the 'new religion'  ;

 

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1097/ancient-israelite--judean-religion/

 

eg :  " ...Outside of the Hebrew Bible, one of the best examples of ancient Israelite and Judean religion comes from an archaeological site called Kuntillet 'Ajrud, possibly dating as early as the 10th century BCE. One inscription from this site reads, "to YHWH of Samaria and to Asherata." Another inscription reads, "To YHWH of Teman and to Asherata" (Na'aman, 305). Both of these inscriptions demonstrate that some ancient Israelites and Judeans were not monotheistic in how they practiced religion; rather, they were henotheistic. YHWH, which may be read as Yahweh, was the primary tribal deity. He is best known from the Hebrew Bible. Asherata, also known as Asherah, was a deity within the Ugaritic pantheon. She is also a common figure in the Hebrew Bible. Therefore, we can confidently say that among the spectrums of how people in ancient Israel and Judah practiced religion, Asherah and Yahweh were both honored in cults. Priority, though, tended to be given to Yahweh.

 

...

 

And as the previous inscriptions demonstrate, worship of deities other than Yahweh seems to have been a regular part of life for people. Throughout the Hebrew Bible, it suggests that Yahweh has always been the deity that people should worship. Based on these inscriptions, Psalms, Kings, Deuteronomy, and other unmentioned evidence, though, we know this is not the case; rather, henotheism was likely the norm for ancient Israelites and Judeans.

One scholar suggests that "whatever the biblical authors may have tried to convey, may not have been… the primary form of belief or religious exercise" (Gilmour, 100). In other words, the Hebrew Bible does not accurately represent how people actually practiced religion in the ancient world

 

this because the Hebrew Bible itself was likely edited and compiled between the 7th and 3rd centuries BCE. So, although the Hebrew Bible preserves traditions going back as far as the 11th century BCE, the theological and cultural positions between the 7th and 3rd centuries BCE were likely read into the past and, among these, was monotheism. "

 

When we look deeper into this we see the emergence of a 'supreme and alone' Yahweh and a 'people practicing a devotion to one God' purported to go back through patriarchs, journeys, descendants , etc .  but basically a concocted story of other events and myths and cultures , massaged together to make a 'story'   that gives validity behind a political movement for a cult * to gain supremacy .

 

* in the old religious sense of the term .

 

 

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1139/early-judaism/

 

 

The practices of Yahwism included festivals, ritual sacrifices, vow-making, private rituals, and the religious adjudication of legal disputes.^[7] For most of its history, the Temple in Jerusalem was not the sole or central place of worship dedicated to Yahweh, with many locations throughout Israel, Judah, and Samaria.^[8][9] However, it was still significant to the Israelite king, who effectively led the national religion as the national god's worldly viceroy.^[10]

 

Yahwism underwent several redevelopments and recontextualizations as the notion of divinities aside from or comparable to Yahweh was gradually degraded by new religious currents and ideas. Possibly beginning with the hypothesized United Kingdom of Israel, the northern Kingdom of Israel and the southern Kingdom of Judah had a joint religious tradition comprising cultic worship of Yahweh.

Later theological changes concerning the evolution of Yahweh's status initially remained largely confined to small groups,^[11] only spreading to the population at large during the general political turbulence of the 7th and 6th centuries BCE. By the end of the Babylonian captivity, Yahwism began turning away from polytheism (or, by some accounts, Yahweh-centric monolatry) and transitioned towards monotheism, where Yahweh was proclaimed as the creator deity and the only entity worthy of worship.^[12]

 

Following the end of the Babylonian captivity and the subsequent establishment of Yehud Medinata in the 4th century BCE, Yahwism coalesced into what is known as Second Temple Judaism,^[13][14] from which the modern ethnic religions of Judaism ...  would  emerge.

 

It was during the national crisis of the Babylonian Exile that the followers of Yahweh went a step further and denied that any deities aside from Yahweh even existed—marking the transition from monolatrism to monotheism, and, by extension, from Yahwism to Judaism."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yahwism

 

In many academic circles  this is  fairly basic knowledge .   As I posted earlier  at least one Rabbi  acknowledges it is a story , a constructed religion , reverse engineered  back to 'creation' .    .... not that there is anything wrong with that .

 

What is 'wrong' is when someone claims it is actually the source of everything else !   And then goes on to criticize those things as invalid or incorrect  ( or rubbish with added insults ) because the 'original' lies solely  within the ' Judaism story ' .

 

 

 

[Daniel]

4 hours ago, Nungali said:

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1097/ancient-israelite--judean-religion/

 

eg :  " ...Outside of the Hebrew Bible, one of the best examples of ancient Israelite and Judean religion comes from an archaeological site called Kuntillet 'Ajrud, possibly dating as early as the 10th century BCE. One inscription from this site reads, "to YHWH of Samaria and to Asherata." Another inscription reads, "To YHWH of Teman and to Asherata" (Na'aman, 305). Both of these inscriptions demonstrate that some ancient Israelites and Judeans were not monotheistic in how they practiced religion; rather, they were henotheistic. YHWH, which may be read as Yahweh, was the primary tribal deity. He is best known from the Hebrew Bible. Asherata, also known as Asherah, was a deity within the Ugaritic pantheon. She is also a common figure in the Hebrew Bible. Therefore, we can confidently say that among the spectrums of how people in ancient Israel and Judah practiced religion, Asherah and Yahweh were both honored in cults. Priority, though, tended to be given to Yahweh.

 

Yes.  The deity whom you are referring to as YHWH was included in the pantheon of other religions and cultures. 

 

 

 

The inscription though which you have included as Asheratah, cannot be a deity.  Hebrew grammar doesn't work that way.  If the inscription were referring to Asherah as a proper name, it would read Asherah Shel YHWH.  This is because proper names, "Asherah" do not get conjugated.  This makes good sense.

 

If proper names are conjugated then the original name is not written and the inscription ( in this case a prayer or benediction ) becomes ambiguous.  For example:  

 

4 hours ago, Nungali said:

Asherata, also known as Asherah

 

Is her name Asherah or Asherata?  If one is making a prayer or benediction to a deity the name needs to be correct.  This is simple.  I am surprised that your esoteric education and work in Hermetics is not being applied here.

 

Is the Egyptian god's named Rah or Rahta?  Is Rah the same name as Rahta?  No, of course not.  And this is the underlying fault for the majority of what you have posted.  The attention to detail is reduced or removed entirely in order to force the conclusion which you desire.  And the authors of these articles are doing the same thing.

 

[Daniel]

4 hours ago, Nungali said:

One inscription from this site reads, "to YHWH of Samaria and to Asherata.

 

Nungali, this is simply false.  The inscription does not read that way.  You need to see the inscription for yourself.  Please see academic research linked below.

 

Asheratah is a conjugation of asherah with a pronominal suffix "Tav".  Also, the vowels have been added.  The original inscription does not include vowels.  Because of this, the word could be, and probably is Astarte.  It is spelled exactly the same way.  There is no difference between the letters phonics "S" and "SH" in paleo-cannaite script.  Astarte is an egyptian goddess.  A feminine warrior.  Associated with cats.  Astarte was found on what is known as an Asherah "pole" in a cultic site in and around the temple complex in one of the border regions.

 

Here is the most complete academic research available on the Asherah inscriptions.  All of the inscriptions are listed.  The analysis is performed by a native hebrew speaker.  The conclusion is very simple:  gramatically it cannot be referring to Asherah the goddess.  It must be something else.  It's simply process of elimination.

 

"A New Analysis of YHWH’s asherah"  - LINK

 

From the link:

 

While we currently lack information to clarify the precise meaning of asherah in the inscriptions, the identification of the term as a common noun has important religio-historical implications and may point us toward a possible answer. We have already seen above that because asherah in the inscriptions is declined with a pronominal suffix, it cannot refer to the goddess Asherah. This asherah is by definition distinguished from all other asherahs, including perhaps especially the goddess whose proper name was Asherah.

 

And:

 

... the interpretation of ʾšrt as a reference to the goddess Asherah can account for evidence that the inscription has in view a female deity paired with YHWH as an object of blessing but at the same time is unable to decisively explain the significance of the attached pronominal suffix, while the interpretation of ʾšrt as a cult object/shrine belonging to YHWH resolves the pronominal suffix and yet downplays evidence that the blessing is directed toward a deity.

This line of thinking takes its point of departure from the fact that the h- on ʾšrth is most easily analyzed as a pronominal suffix with YHWH as the antecedent and therefore as a declined substantive ʾšrt must represent a common noun rather than a proper name. According to the syntactic context, ʾšrt cannot refer to the goddess Asherah, but must signify something else.

in the final analysis the theoretical argument that a proper name such as Asherah could carry a pronominal suffix is beset by a number of problems. First, although from a materialist perspective deities in the ancient Near East typically had properties of both common and proper nouns, they were nevertheless treated in practice as quasi-distinct persons, i.e. unitary entities. For example, within the immediate context of worship at local cult centers such as Samaria, Teman, and Jerusalem YHWH was not regarded primarily as a member of a class of deities but as the YHWH relevant to the worshipping community. Consequently, we would not expect the discourse surrounding divine names to completely upend conventional norms of the spoken language for distinguishing common vs. proper nouns (cf. Wiggins 1993: 188; Tropper 2001: 100; Smith 2002: 119-20; Irsigler 2011: 142-43). As a matter of linguistic function, the lexeme asherah cannot simultaneously inhabit both determined and indeterminate categories. If ʾšrth is correctly interpreted as the substantive asherah with an attached pronominal suffix it cannot refer to the goddess Asherah. By definition the suffix distinguishes this asherah from every other asherah: this asherah is YHWH’s asherah.

 

 

[Daniel]

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

Asherata, also known as Asherah,

 

There are several reasons why it makes much more sense for the inscription to be read as referring to Astarte rather a miss-spelled version of Asherah.  

 

First grammar.  Grammatically the possessive suffix is not applied correctly.  No one wrote that way, no one spoke that way.  No one speaks that way in any language.  My father's name is Meir.  No one would ever bless us:  Meir V' L' DanielTah.  That is the form in which the inscription is written.

 

Here is the actual inscription:

 

lyhwh. šmrn. wlʾšrth

 

Inscription 3.1, Aḥituv, Eshel, and Meshel 2012: 87-91. Cf. Renz 1995a: 61; Zevit 2001: 390-392; Dobbs-Allsopp et al. 2005: 289-292; Naʾaman 2011: 302.

 

 

Edited July 21 by Daniel

[Daniel]

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

rchaeological site called Kuntillet 'Ajrud

 

Good.  Here is more information:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuntillet_Ajrud_inscriptions

 

That leads to my second point.

 

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

Asherata, also known as Asherah

 

The second reason that it makes more sense that the inscription is referring to Astarte rather than Asherah comes from the location where the inscriptions were found.  The inscriptions were found in a sort of shared worship facility where travelers would come to make offerings and petition various gods from various religions.  It makes sense, here, in this location that a traveler would be bringing together two deities from two regions, hedging their bets, so to speak by offering devotion to both.

 

There is strong academic inertia behind this idea.  Many consider the divine feminine in the region in this time to all belong to a sort of general category which is being labeled "Asherah" even though each region had its own version.  See below.   Although there is resistance and multiple theories regarding this.

 

https://therealsamizdat.com/2015/06/25/asherah-astarte-anat-athirat-in-ancient-ugarit/

https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/eascfa/dinner_party/heritage_floor/ashtoreth

 

 

[Daniel]

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

What is 'wrong' is when someone claims it is actually the source of everything else ! 

 

Nungali, that's a straw-man argument.  No one says that.  This is what we, Jews, say:

 

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

the foundational moral principles of the Old Testament – were largely borrowed from

 

We Jews say:  "The direction of influence is being assumed."

We Jews say:  "You don't know the moral principles of our Torah, because you cannot read the language, and you do not study it like we do."

 

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

The biblical story of Noah’s ark is copied almost exactly from a far older Mesopotamian legend found in the Epic of Gilgamesh

 

That is not true.  It is not almost exactly like it.  There are 3-4 examples of very close, almost exact wording.  But, the rest of it is completely different.  Further.  There are multiple versions of the Epic.  That is very very important.  As time went on, each version of the Epic became closer and closer to the story in the bible.  Think about that.  The first version, the original had no similarity at ALL to the bible story.  The next version was closer.  And then the later version had some eerie near copies of phrases.

 

The version of the epic which includes matching phrases to the bible is dated 1100BCE on tablet 11.  1100BCE was a chaotic period in the region.  It is following as the 2nd iron age collapse.  Several empires were vying fro power.  There was a lot of mixing and scattering of people.  It is at least as likely that the Jewish myths were being borrowed as it is likely the that the Jewish myths were borrowing.  

 

We Jews say:  "The direction of influence is assumed."

 

If we look to the source of the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Atra-Hasis ( see wiki link above ) There is virtually no correspondence what so ever with the Noh's ark bible story.  This indicates that the other nations were adapting their myths.  If they were adapting their myths, then there is good reason to consider that the Jewish stories were being borrowed, not the other way around.

 

 

[Daniel]

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

Throughout the Hebrew Bible, it suggests that Yahweh has always been the deity that people should worship. Based on these inscriptions, Psalms, Kings, Deuteronomy, and other unmentioned evidence, though, we know this is not the case; rather, henotheism was likely the norm for ancient Israelites and Judeans.

 

Nungali, you're conflating the common Jewish individual with the leaders / founders of the religion.  This happens all the time with self-taught internet researchers.  The common folk did a lot of things.  They worshiped many gods.  They were polytheists.  Certainly.  They, the common folk, also couldn't read much less write. 

 

The scripture is teaching an ideal.  The archaeological evidence shows the practices of the common people.  

 

I think if you can keep this in mind it will render a much more accurate picture of the "construction" of Judaism as an ideal.  It is an aspiration of a scribal community and their religious/political leaders.  This ideal became a way of life during the babylonian exile.  Why?  Because the Jews had motive and opportunity to do so.  After the return to what is now known as Israel, it took about 4 generations for the Jewish way of life to become popular among the common people such that there is archeological evidence of the practice in that way:  200BCE.

 

However, there is very good archeological evidence that there was a monotheistic YHVH religion which matches the bible narrative.  It is the Temple at Tel Arad.  The Temple is dated to approx 1000BCE.  The emergence of the religion which would produce such a large temple complex and infrastructure supporting is would have predated the temple's construction by at least several hundred years.  And this places the date of Judaism's emergence, not construction, in line with the bible's narrative.

 

https://madainproject.com/tel_arad_temple

https://www.jstor.org/stable/27925035

https://www.jstor.org/stable/1356269

 

https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/article/arad-an-ancient-israelite-fortress-with-a-temple-to-yahweh/

[Daniel]

6 hours ago, Nungali said:

is a near-exact replication of the Greek legend of Heracles

 

I doubt that.  Your attention to detail is lacking.  Perhaps tomorrow or the next day I will locate the legend of hercules to see if it is indeed a near exact replica or if you are exaggerating and/or remembering wrong.

[Daniel]

6 hours ago, Nungali said:

The story of Abraham and the binding of Isaac bears noteworthy story parallels to the older Hindu legend of King Harishchandra

 

I doubt that.  Your attention to detail is lacking.  Perhaps tomorrow or the next day I will locate the legend of King Harishchandra to see if it is indeed a near exact replica or if you are exaggerating and/or remembering wrong.

[Daniel]

And I suppose I'll mention as well, many point to the Emuna Elish as the source for the Jewish creation myth/metaphor.  It also adapted over time.  the original from 2000BCE has zero correspondence to the Hebrew bible.  The version from around 1300BCE starts showing some similarities.  Then there's a later version from around 300CE written in Greek with quite a few significant similarities.

 

The self-taught internet researcher, or perhaps someone who "took comparative religion at uni", almost always assumes that the version of the Emuna Elish they are reading is the oldest version from 2000BCE.  But it's not.  It's the version from the the 2nd iron age collapse when there was political and social pressure to establish legitimacy among the mixed cultures for the purpose of creating a unified empire.

[Nungali]

Here is a summary of themes related to Shadday  and adopted for  the book of Job and Genesis;

• blessings, Genesis49:25, 28:3, 28:1
• heaven, Genesis 49:25
• the deep, abyss, Genesis 49:25
• fertility, Genesis 49:25, 28:3,28:1 - Shadday brings blessings of the breasts and womb
• progeny, Genesis 28:3. 35:11, Job 29:5
• kingship, Genesis 35:11, "kings shall come out of thy loins "
• circumcision, Genesis 17:1-17:14
• covenant, Genesis 17:1
• divine breath, Job 33:4,
• wisdom, Job 22-21:30 - Shadday as instructor of wisdom
• plagues, Job6:4; 7:12, 20; 16:11-14; 19:6-12; 30:21
• archery, bow, arrows, Job 6:4; 16:9-14
• mountain - through association with epithets Elohim and Yahweh or etymology of shadday
• divine sonship, birth, Isaiah9:6, "For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God/El Shaddai, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. "

Unfortunately it is not possible to link Shadday to a specific Near Eastern deity as

1. no archeological or historiographical evidence exists for a deity that either matches with or develops towards the profile of El Shadday in the Hebrew Bible. Blocking themes are circumcision, covenant and divine sonship (Isaiah 9:6)
2. exiled polyistic Yehudite or Yahwist communities were not familiar with Mosaic law, Abrahamic tradition or the Pentateuch before 300 to 400 BC.
3. archaic feminine suffix -ay is not expected in the Canaanite or Hebrew language but is attested in Berber and successors of proto-Arabic such as Saifatic and Hismaic.

Therefore it is likely that El Shaddai is a composite deity based upon either Resheph-Nergal or, if Shadday refers to a female divinity, goddess Inanna. Resheph-Nergal is a suitable candidate as the addition of circumcision in Genesis can be explained through the fusion of Egyptian Seth with Resheph-Nergal. Yet Inanna is probably the strongest candidate as she was, as Nanaya - a byform of Inanna - was venerated between 600 and 400 BC in the exiled Yehudite community of Al-Yahudu (Mesopotamia) and (regular) Elephantine community in Egypt. On top of that Inanna-Nanaya merged with Isis around 500 BC as was as such venerated in Canaan.

And if Shadday is a composite deity the timeline of Genesis is likely a composition too.