#Deuteronomical | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

jeannereames · 10 months

Text

WHY YOUR MORALITY IS MY PROBLEM: modern holdovers from ancient theology

James Dobson, founder of the ultra-conservative Focus on the Family organization, reputedly said of the 2012 Sandy Hook mass shooting, “I think we have turned our back on the Scripture and on God Almighty and I think He has allowed judgment to fall upon us.”

As heartless as that sentiment sounds today when addressing the murder of 20 first-graders (and 6 adults) at an elementary school, it reflects a once-common theology that emerged about four thousand years ago in the ancient near east (ANE*), then bled into the Mediterranean basin and developed an astonishingly long half-life. It’s why some Christians (et al.) are so, so concerned with what their neighbors are doing behind closed doors. Or on their front lawns with all those Pride flags.

In some ways, ANE and Mediterranean religion had a lot in common, being traditional and focused largely on sacrifice/action (orthopraxic). Over time, some orthodoxic religions also arose in that area. So, first, let’s do some quick defining.

Orthopraxic religions focus on what one DOES, not what one believes. Performing the sacrifice correctly, honoring the gods/ancestors appropriately…that’s how one shows piety. Infringing against purity laws or other affronts to the gods (impious actions) can result in expulsion from the community. Fights over correct practice can lead to schism in a community.

Orthodoxic religions focus on what one BELIEVES. Thus, they need some form of authoritative text to determine what IS right belief, resulting in the emergence of a canon (e.g., Zoroastrian Avesta, Jewish Tanakh, Christian New Testament, or Muslim Qur’an). In Orthodoxic religions, wrong beliefs (heresy) can result in expulsion from the community. Fights over correct belief can lead to schism in a community.

(There’s yet a third focus, orthopathic, but that largely doesn’t apply here. “Orthopraxic” can also apply to ethics-based religions, but here, it applies to ritual/cultic behavior.)

Most religions have elements of all three, but it matters where the weight falls. Yes, religions can emphasize two sides of the triangle more heavily, less on the third, but even then, one point will be the chief measurement of devoutness among followers. This also helps us understand why two religions might not understand each other very well sometimes. They’re trying to impose one set of “What religion is for” ideas on another, with entirely different assumptions.

The religions of the ANE and Mediterranean had much in common in terms of the purpose of religion: to maintain the health of a community. This depended on the piety of that communities’ members. Their gods weren’t moral in the modern sense, but could be jealous, fickle, and petty.

Why were they gods then?

Because they were immortal and more powerful.

Yet an important difference between (many) ANE and Mediterranean religions were the concepts of sin and “mesharum” (divine justice/equilibrium). If the latter existed (sorta) in Mediterranean society, “sin” really didn’t. Impiety differs as it can include ritual matters too. So, if murder (especially kin murder) created uncleanness anywhere and is a moral/civil matter, menstruation and sex also created uncleanness, but were not moral/civil matters defined as “bad.” So “unclean” ≠ “sin.”

To be unclean is a matter of cultic purity, different from moral purity. Yes, ANE religions also had ritual uncleanness, to be sure. And yes, some things that make one unclean also have intimations of “badness” without being so extreme as murdering someone. Yet I want to underscore the difference because it’s very real and too often ignored/misunderstood/unfairly conflated.

Many Mediterranean religions did not have “sin,” just unclean and impious. MORAL/ETHICAL matters were dictated by civil law and later, philosophic discussion. Not religion. Yet in the ANE, moral infractions were affronts to mesharum (divine order) and were therefore a religious matter. This oversimplifies, but smash-and-grab works for now. We find actions (like iconoclasm) in the ANE that didn’t often apply in the Mediterranean. (Iconoclasm is the deliberate theft, or in extreme cases, destruction of religious icons or structures.)

Yet what both groups shared was a sense that the gods had, well, “bad aim.” If people in a community were impious and/or sinful, that might draw the ire of the gods. Plagues were often seen as divine retribution for the impiety and/or sin of one or more members of that community, but not necessarily all of them. This led to the exile of impious individuals, as well as the ANE “scapegoat” ritual, et al. (If you’re familiar with the plot of the Iliad, Apollo punished the entire Greek army for the impious actions of Agamemnon.)

I could DIE from your impiety/sin committed in my town/community.

That makes your morality my business.

In addition, especially in the ANE, war on earth was believed to reflect war in heaven. Gods had cities and peoples, not the other way around. They chose you, you didn’t god-shop—hence Israel as a “chosen people.” Well, yeah, pretty much every ethnic group was chosen by some god(s). But as a result, if your side lost in a war, then—theoretically—your gods were weaker. Maybe you should go over and start worshiping their gods. Yet that didn’t sit well with most groups, so by the Middle/Late Bronze Age, we see an emerging idea that my god isn’t “weaker” than yours, rather my general “set forth without the gods’ consent,” or my god permitted the other god(s) to win for whatever reason…usually due to sin or a lack of piety among his (or her) people. Of course we find this in the prophetic literature of the Hebrew Bible, but it’s in a lot of other ANE literature too. Nabû or Marduk didn’t lose, they “went to live with” Ashur for however many years—although the winning side will portray the victory as Nabû and Marduk traveling to Nineveh to bow before (e.g., submit to) Assur.

Again, this is simplified, but we don’t see this sort of language used in Greece where Hera would bow to Athena because the city-state of Athens defeated Argos, even if, as promachos (foremost in battle), Athena might be expected to win in any conflict between the two (as in Euripides’ Children of Herakles). Hera is still queen of the gods, and—even more—these are shared deities. We also don’t see it because notions of “sin” don’t apply and only a handful of wars were ever called “sacred”—all of them concerning Delphi and cultic purity. At least one of those is mythical, the second probably didn’t happen, and the third (which certainly did happen) was labeled “sacred” only by one side. Greek gods just weren’t seen to uphold justice in the same way. Roman gods were more concerned with such things, but still not as we find in the ANE.

Ergo, the ANE faced the problem of theodicy: if god/the gods are good/just, why does tragedy happen?

Early explanations for tragedy were simple: those who suffer must have earned their suffering, sometimes referred to as Deuteronomic Theology: “good things happen to good people”/“bad things happen to bad people” (and maybe their neighbors too, by chance).

Pushback against this notion emerged around the same time a more nuanced view of loss in war emerged. People began to ask the corollary: “Why do bad things happen to good people?”

The (c. 1700 BCE) Mesopotamian Ludlul bēl nēmeqi (The Poem of the Righteous Sufferer) attempted an answer. About a thousand years later (600s-500s BCE), the Jewish Book of Job took it on as well. In both, the protagonist asks, “Why does Marduk/Yahweh punish me when I’ve been a faithful servant?” Both protagonists were previously wealthy/powerful, which was seen as divine approval. Losing that wealth/health suggested they had offended their god (and are being punished). Yet each one claims he did not sin—so why?

The answer in both works is similar: there’s not really an answer. Marduk restores Šubši-mašrâ-Šakkan, who ends the poem with a prayer of thanksgiving. Job has a chat with Yahweh, who essentially tells him, “You’re a measly mortal, don’t question me.”

The KEY element in both, however, isn’t the answer, but the assertion that a good person can suffer. They didn’t earn it; it just happened. They remained good and, eventually, their god restored them to their prior station, and then some.

Ergo, if you’re suffering, just be patient. Don’t curse God and die. (As Job is advised to do.)

Today, we may find such an answer wanting but need to recognize it for an advancement on the theology of tragedy.

Some, however, get stuck in these time-locked answers because they can’t allow their religion to grow. Or rather, they can’t acknowledge that their religion/theology evolves over time, because if it evolves, it wasn’t perfect from the beginning. And that challenges their understanding of their god.

Yet the real fly in the ointment is the notion of a perfect and infallible canon.

This brings me back around to what a canon is. It just means “an authoritative text,” but how that text is understood has nuances. INSPIRED ≠ INFALLIBLE. Most all followers of a canonical text believe it’s inspired by God, but not all (or even most) believe it’s infallible. (Islam is its own category here, note.) That creates some problematic GRAYS.

If it’s only inspired, written by humans with human foibles and history-locked understandings, interpreting it becomes complicated and can lead to disagreements. Taking a literalist view sweeps away the messiness. “God said it; I believe it; that settles it!” Black-and-white.

Those who believe in Biblical literalism/inerrancy (which includes a good chunk of conservative Christian Evangelicals and all Fundamentalists**) will argue ALL the Bible is true. If it’s written by God, it must be perfect from the get-go. Thus, a clash is created between simpler versus more nuanced views: Deuteronomy vs. Job. If an earlier view must be as true as any later one, that reduces everything to the most elementary version. It can’t evolve/grow up, yielding what feels to most like a very archaic (and often harsh) worldview.

In any case, both the traditional orthopraxic and orthodoxic religions of the ANE/Med Basin believed God/gods punished people who offended them. AND these punishments might “spill over” onto family and neighbors.

Ancient divine collateral damage.

Ironically, this is WHY early Christians were prosecuted by the pagan (e.g., traditional) Roman and Greek religious establishments. Christian failure to participate in common civic religious cult could earn divine ire. For their first two/two-and-a-half centuries, Christianity was labeled a religio illicta (illegal religion)—in part for “failure to play well with others.” E.g., make sacrifices to the appropriate Greco-Roman deities. Thus, when disaster struck, a scapegoat was sought. Those antisocial Christians are to blame! They don’t sacrifice to the gods and so, offended XXX god, who is now punishing ALL of us with YYY.

Classic ancient religious thinking, but it’s one reason I find current conservative Christian opposition to Teh Gays, trans folks, etc., enormously ironic. The persecuted have become the persecuting.

I want to emphasize that large sub-groups of Jews, Christians, and Muslims have evolved past such theologies. Yet others have not and stubbornly cling to ancient mindsets. That’s why they argue the mere presence of LGBTQI+ people will bring down the wrath of God on ALL.

Talk of “grooming” and “protecting children” is just an attempt to make palatable a belief they know won’t fly with most people, who they consider deluded by The World (e.g., the devil). Trickery is therefore required. As they’re deeply afraid themselves, they understand fear and use it to motivate others. Many are perfectly happy to make their beds with “unbelievers” long enough to get their agendas passed. God will forgive them.

This, too, is rooted in ancient ideas (discussed above) whereby a people’s own god might employ the enemy to punish them (or others). Thus, a sinful person can be utilized on the way to righteous ends because the victory of God wipes away all else. Using the enemy to effect God’s will just proves that God is in final charge of everything after all. It’s the ultimate PWN.

I hope this helps to explain where these ideas come from, how they originally emerged, and why a subgroup of people still cling to them.

————-

* While Egypt influenced the ANE, as well as Greece and Rome, and is often shoehorned into the ANE, I consider Egypt as NE Africa. It deserves to be treated on its own, or in relation to neighbors such as Kush.

** Fundamentalists and Evangelicals tend to be equated but are not the same. Also, not all Evangelicals are conservatives (although all Fundamentalists are, by definition). Enormous variation exists between Christian denominations, which range from ultra-conservative to (surprise!) ultra-liberal. There is as much of a hard Christian Left as there is a hard Christian Right. We just tend to hear far less about them.

#iconoclasm #mesharum #deuteronomic theology #book of job #poem of the righteous sufferer #ancient theology of tragedy #theodicy #ANE theology #ancient Mediterranean theology #Classics #ancient near east #ancient religion

25 notes · View notes

now-go-study · 1 year

Text

I think my mistake in Jewish study groups is always assuming that everyone else is way more down with the documentary hypothesis of the authorship of the Torah than they actually are, so I’ll say something about something being reinterpreted between Exodus and Deuteronomy because in my head I’m thinking about the Deuteronomic historian, but then my very nice rabbi will go, “Well, I wouldn’t go so far as saying the Torah interprets itself! That’s our job” and I’m just like 🧍🏼‍♀️ duh Kyra this is not a history class

#deuteronomic historian my beloved……..#but i know i need to Stop #i just. forget. i don’t know #the documentary hypothesis means so much to me #to me the editing the redacting the piecing together of the torah: it’s an act of love #but i know it’s like. a bit blasphemous?#anyway #personal #torah study

3 notes · View notes

ciochinaflorin · 2 months

Text

80 I 2024. CONSTRUIREA ÎNCREDERII ÎN DUMNEZEU [Deuteronom 8.2–5] 20 Martie 2024

80 I 2024. CONSTRUIREA ÎNCREDERII ÎN DUMNEZEU I Podcast I Pasaj Biblic : Deuteronom 8 : 2 – 5 I Meditaţii din Cuvânt I Cezareea I Reşiţa I 20 Martie 2024 I Construirea încrederii în Dumnezeu. Încrederea în Dumnezeu poate fi asemănată cu o casă. Încrederea în Domnul Isus se învață prin lecții pe care le primim treptat deoarece scopul Lui Dumnezeu este ca noi să trăim prin credință și să avem…

View On WordPress

#20 Martie 2024 #80 I 2024. CONSTRUIREA INCREDERII IN DUMNEZEU #Deuteronom 8.2–5 #dovezi ale dragostei Lui Dumnezeu #Increderea in Domnul Isus se invata prin lectii pe care le primim treptat deoarece scopul Lui Dumnezeu este ca noi sa traim prin credinta si #un model al dezvoltarii spirituale

0 notes

quordleona03 · 1 year

Text

M*A*S*H goes to Pride

In 1970, the world's first Pride march was held in New York City. Virtually all of our MASH friends would have lived long enough to see or to attend that first march. Which of them would have gone (assuming them to be in New York City in June 1970)? And would they have gone as ally or because they were LGBTQ? Maxwell Q. Klinger Of course. This is the most easiest answer of them all. Klinger would have dressed up to go. He would have accessorized. He would have checked with the organisers, designed multiple placards for the occasion, distributed them at the start, and walked the march in heels, a lovely dress, and a huge smile. Ally or LGBTQ? Klinger would have let you guess. Sherman T. Potter This is almost as easy to answer. Potter would have dressed up smartly and got Mildred or someone to make him a placard that said PROUD OF MY GAY GRANDSON (or LESBIAN GRANDDAUGHTER - maybe Cheryl Pershing Potter, whom we heard about in S04E14 ) and he would walk the route holding the placard high and his back military-straight, looking dead serious all the way. He would have been startled at the number of tearful handshakes and requests for hugs he got. Ally or LGBTQ? Ally. Charles Emerson Winchester III I am afraid this is the next-easiest answer: Winchester would not have gone. Not as an ally, and definitely not as a gay or bi man. As an ally, he'd have donated money to the cause, and if LGBTQ, he'd have made sure it was anonymous. Ally or LGBTQ? Wouldn't matter. Margaret Houlihan As an ally, she'd go. As a lesbian, I think she'd stay home, afraid of being outed and fired. Sorry. I'd like to think otherwise, but I think Margaret would be braver about standing up for others than she would for herself. As a straight woman, she'd march for lesbian nurses kicked out of the army whom she knew to be good nurses and good officers. Ally or LGBTQ? Ally.

Frank Burns Would never go and would spit venom at those who did. Never an ally. Could be he's gay, but I doubt it. Ally or LGBTQ? Neither.

Sidney Freedman Wouldn't go but would wish very much he could. Still active as a psychoanalyst, Sidney decides it is more important for him to be a gay and LGBTQ-friendly practicing analyst, providing psychiatric care without condemnation, than it is to march for Pride. Ally or LGBTQ? Gay as a goose.

Radar O'Reilly Would go. Wouldn't think to make a placard in advance, but would scrounge cardboard and a marker-pen from somewhere and make one on the spot that said LOVE KINDNESS. Would be very happy to be in the middle of so many happy people, and when his gay best friend hugs him and thanks him for showing up he's all afluster because what else could he do? Ally or LGBTQ? Ally. Trapper John McIntyre Would go. Wouldn't carry a placard. Would keep an eye out for homophobes threatening marchers and appear, six foot three, in a looming kind of way, and inquire if the homophobe doesn't have somewhere else he'd rather be. Ally or LGBTQ? Either way - he'd be a daddy. BJ Hunnicutt Would definitely decide he wasn't going because who needs to make that kind of display, people should keep themselves to themselves, no one should be punished for loving but no one needs to go on a march for it, and then he'd show up anyway with a hastily-made placard that said SOMEWHERE OVER THE RAINBOW and get into a long conversation with some lesbian bikers about which is the best bike. Ally or LGBTQ? Ally. Though if he were gay, I fear he'd really do the same as lesbian Margaret Houlihan - stay home. Francis Mulcahy Would decide he should go, after much prayer and thought. Would carry a carefully-made placard saying REPEAL THE DEUTERONOMIC CODE. Would be mortally embarrassed all the way but desperately trying not to show it, especially when he got kissed in public. Ally or LGBTQ? Gay. Hawkeye Pierce Gleefully shows up, having been looking forward to going ever since he heard. Carries a placard whose message he has thought and rethought and rewritten at least a hundred times. It now says LOVE IS LOVE IS LOVE. Tries to catch the eye of every glaring homophobe they march passes in order to give them a big grin and a wave. Hugs everyone he recognises, especially Radar, and kisses Francis Mulcahy in public at the end of the march. Ally or LGBTQ? Flamboyant pansexual.

#lgbtq pride #after mash #Pride 1970 #Max Klinger #charles emerson winchester #margaret houlihan #sherman potter #frank burns #sidney freedman #radar o'reilly #trapper john mcintyre #bj hunnicutt #Francis Mulcahy #Hawkeye Pierce #mashposting #mash being surprisingly gay in 1970 #m*a*s*h 4077 #m*a*s*h

125 notes · View notes

kemetic-dreams · 3 months

Text

Goliath (/ɡəˈlaɪəθ/ gə-LY-əth)[a] is a Philistine warrior in the Book of Samuel. Descriptions of Goliath's immense stature vary among biblical sources, with the Masoretic Text describing him as 9 feet 9 inches (2.97 m) tall. Goliath issued a challenge to the Israelites, daring them to send forth a champion to engage him in single combat; he was ultimately defeated by the young shepherd David, employing a sling and stone as a weapon. The narrative signified King Saul's unfitness to rule, as Saul himself should have fought for Israel.

Modern scholars believe that the original slayer of Goliath may have been Elhanan, son of Jair, who features in 2 Samuel 21:19, in which Elhanan kills Goliath the Gittite, and that the authors of the Deuteronomic history changed the original text to credit the victory to the more famous character David.

The phrase "David and Goliath" has taken on a more popular meaning denoting an underdog situation, a contest wherein a smaller, weaker opponent faces a much bigger, stronger adversary

Goliath's name

Tell es-Safi, the biblical Gath and traditional home of Goliath, has been the subject of extensive excavations by Israel's Bar-Ilan University. The archaeologists have established that this was one of the largest of the Philistine cities until destroyed in the ninth century BC, an event from which it never recovered. The Tell es-Safi inscription, a potsherd discovered at the site, and reliably dated to between the tenth to mid-ninth centuries BC, is inscribed with the two names ʾLWT and WLT. While the names are not directly connected with the biblical Goliath (גלית‎, GLYT), they are etymologically related and demonstrate that the name fits with the context of the late tenth- to early ninth-century BC Philistine culture. The name "Goliath" itself is non-Semitic and has been linked with the Lydian king Alyattes, which also fits the Philistine context of the biblical Goliath story. A similar name, Uliat, is also attested in Carian inscriptions. Aren Maeir, director of the excavation, comments: "Here we have very nice evidence [that] the name Goliath appearing in the Bible in the context of the story of David and Goliath… is not some later literary creation."

Based on the southwest Anatolian onomastic considerations, Roger D. Woodard proposed *Walwatta as a reconstruction of the form ancestral to both Hebrew Goliath and Lydian Alyattes. In this case, the original meaning of Goliath's name would be "Lion-man," thus placing him within the realm of Indo-European warrior-beast mythology.

The Babylonian Talmud explains the name "Goliath, son of Gath" through a reference to his mother's promiscuity, based on the Aramaic גַּת (gat, winepress), as everyone threshed his mother like people do to grapes in a winepress (Sotah, 42b).

The name sometimes appears in English as Goliah

Elhanan, son of Jaare-Oregim the Bethlehemite (Hebrew: אֶלְחָנָן בֶּן־יַעְרֵי אֹרְגִים בֵּית הַלַּחְמִי‎ ʾElḥānān ben-Yaʿrē ʾŌrəgīm Bēṯ halLaḥmī) is a character in 2 Samuel 21:19, where he is credited with killing Goliath:

"There was another battle with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam."[1]

In 1 Chronicles 20:5, he is called Elhanan son of Jair (אֶלְחָנָן בֶּן־יָעִיר‎ ʾElḥānān ben-Yāʿīr), indicating that Jaare-oregim is a garbled corruption of the name Jair and the word for "beam" used in the verse (ʾōrəgīm). The passage in 2 Samuel 21:19 poses difficulties when compared with the story of David and Goliath in 1 Samuel 17, leading scholars to conclude "that the attribution of Goliath's slaying to David may not be original," but rather "an elaboration and reworking of" an earlier Elhanan story, "attributing the victory to the better-known David.

#kemetic dreams #david and goliath #david #philistines #elhanan #son of jaare #bible story #bible stories

14 notes · View notes

eesirachs · 2 months

Note

Could you explain the significance of Deut. 22:5. Why does it matter that people “cross dressed”?

deut 12-26 is the deuteronomic code, written by the dh during josiah's cultic, religious, and social reformation of judah ca. 622. all biblical laws (not only these but also those on diet, sacrifice, penetration, etc.) can only be accessed across a rubric of difference. and yet, despite that difference, these laws remain legible as attempts to limit borderspaces and boundaries. deut 22:5, specifically, seems to be about keeping bodies from becoming too unruly (especially necessary because under a one-sex model, how a body was performed had everything to do with its sexual status). this is not god telling you not to cross-dress. this is a judahite king claiming to have found scrolls in a temple that tell ancient bodies not to cross-dress

#ask

11 notes · View notes

bijoumikhawal · 2 months

Text

In the Book of Proverbs, Wisdom (Chochmah) is a semi-divine female figure who appears as a woman standing at the crossroads. In ancient Greece, the crossroads was a place sacred to Hecate, crone-goddess of magic. Indeed, the Talmud tells us that two women sitting opposite one another at a crossroad are surely doing magic. According to William Denver, the gates of the city were once places of worship for a number of deities, before the monotheistic reforms of King Josiah and the Deuteronomic school. Wisdom has a shrine at the gates, where she calls to the masses, inviting them to learn. She does not suffer fools.

As we noted in chapter 2, the Lady Wisdom figure has much in common with Asherah: Proverbs calls her a tree of life, which is a title of Asherah, and her followers ate frequently described as happy: one Hebrew root for happiness, aleph-shin-reish, sounds very similar to Asherah. The Lady Wisdom who cries at the crossroads may represent the goddess in her new biblical form. She may also represent a human priestess- a priestess of knowledge.

Pg 160, the Hebrew Priestess

#cipher talk #Kohenet Judaism

3 notes · View notes

aboutanancientenquiry · 1 month

Note

Also — I once wrote to an Old Testament scholar who studied at Oxford about Gmirkin’s Plato book, and feel you might be interested in the response that I received:

“Biblical laws are by far closer to Mesopotamian laws than anything else (ask Tarah — her PhD dealt with much of this, albeit in the Psalms!). Although it is entirely plausible that the final form of the Pentateuchal books as we have it today was reached around 270, the constant references in the rest of the Hebrew bible to (for example) Deuteronomic laws and Torah, suggests that parts of it were certainly extant much earlier than the 3rd century BCE. Archaeologically speaking there are also the silver scrolls from Ketef Hinnom to contend with — which are 2 silver scrolls found in a tomb with an extract from the book of Numbers on it that date to the 7th century BCE. Practically all the Hebrew bible scholars I know would date the core of the Pentateuchal laws somewhere between the 9th century (at the earliest) and the 4th century at the absolute latest. Most would probably suggest there was a process of development from around the 8th century-5th century and then a couple (or multiple) late redactions in the 4th and 3rd centuries."

Very informative text. I think that the Mesopotamian influence on the Bible is something obvious, although I think also that the Egyptian influence too was non negligible. It seems for instance that circumcision and alimentary taboos were of Egyptian origin, as both Egyptian sources and Herodotus concur about their widespread observance in the Egypt of Late Period and before (moreover, Herodotus reports explicitly that the "Syrians of Palestine" took from the Egyptians the custom of circumcision). And of course, if the final version of most of the Hebrew Bible could be placed in the 3d century BCE, the question of a Greek influence on it is totally legitimate. But I believe that all these very real or at least plausible influences should not make us forget that there is also much originality and new beginnings in the Bible. On the other hand, it is undeniable that Greek philosophy and culture played a role in the translation of the Bible from Hebrew to Greek and more generally in the understanding of the Bible, as it is shown above all in the "Ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν" reply of God to Moses in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible.

#the bible #ancient mesopotamia #ancient egypt #ancient greek literature #herodotus

3 notes · View notes

cheerfullycatholic · 2 months

Text

Biblical Revelation teaches that all human beings possess inherent dignity because they are created in the image and likeness of God: “God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness’ […] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:26-27). With this, humanity has a specific quality that means it is not reducible to purely material elements. Moreover, the “image” does not define the soul or its intellectual abilities but the dignity of man and woman.

In their relationship of equality and mutual love, both the man and the woman represent God in the world and are also called to cherish and nurture the world. Because of this, to be created in the image of God means to possess a sacred value that transcends every distinction of a sexual, social, political, cultural, and religious nature. Our dignity is bestowed upon us by God; it is neither claimed nor deserved. Every human being is loved and willed by God and, thus, has an inviolable dignity. In Exodus, at the heart of the Old Testament, God shows himself to be the one who hears the cry of the poor, sees the misery of his people, and cares for those who are least and for the oppressed (cf. Ex. 3:7; 22:20-26). The same teaching can be found in the Deuteronomic Code (cf. Dt. 12-26); here, the teaching on rights is transformed into a manifesto of human dignity, particularly in favor of the threefold category of the orphan, the widow, and the stranger (cf. Dt. 24:17). The ancient precepts of Exodus are recalled and applied to the moment in the preaching of the prophets, who represent the critical conscience of Israel. The prophets Amos, Hosea, Isaiah, Micah, and Jeremiah have entire chapters denouncing injustice. Amos bitterly decries the oppression of the poor and his listeners’ failure to recognize any fundamental human dignity in the destitute (cf. Am. 2:6-7; 4:1; 5:11-12). Isaiah pronounces a curse against those who trample on the rights of the poor, denying them all justice: “Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice” (Is. 10:1-2). This prophetic teaching is echoed in Wisdom Literature. For example, Sirach equates the oppression of the poor with murder: “To take away a neighbor’s living is to murder him; to deprive an employee of his wages is to shed blood” (Sir. 34:22). In the Psalms, the religious relationship with God comes through the defense of the weak and needy: “Do justice for the weak and the orphan; give justice to the poor and afflicted. Rescue the weak and the needy; set them free from the hand of the wicked” (Ps. 82:3-4).

Dignitas Infinita, paragraph 11

#catholicism #catholic chuch #church document #dignitas infinita #human dignity #pope francis #biblical revelation

5 notes · View notes

fideidefenswhore · 1 year

Quote

If these cases are taken seriously, however, as they should have been in an impartial and knowledgable tribunal, Julius II's 1503 grant would thus seem to have moved into new territory-- dispensing from a perfectly clear and explicit Levitical command as well as ignoring Innocent III's insistence that the Deuteronomical exception could definitely not apply to baptised Christians.

Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Henry VIII (JF Hadwin)

#not to mention that deuteronomy only applied to brothers that had 'lived together'...#dusting off thee old theological niche compartment in brain #starting to think the 'but it would contravene/contradict papal authority' is load of wash.#so like...but it already had?#the great matter files

1 note · View note

christophe76460 · 7 days

Text

Si l’Éternel marche devant nous, nous sommes en sûreté derrière lui. Qui peut s’opposer à notre marche, quand le Seigneur est à notre avant-garde ? Compagnons d’armes, avancez bravement ! Pourquoi hésitez-vous, quand la victoire vous appartient ? Le Seigneur, non seulement nous précède, mais nous accompagne. Au-dessus et au-dessous, au dehors et au dedans ; partout, sa toute présence et sa toute puissance se font sentir.

Lire la suite...https://www.chretiens.com/vie-chretienne/versets-bibliques/leternel-marchera-lui-meme-devant-toi-il-sera-lui-meme-avec-toi-il-ne-te-delaissera-point-il-ne-tabandonnera-point-ne-crains-point-et-ne-teffraie-point-deuteronome-318/2022/04/28/10/41/

0 notes

biblenewsprophecy · 30 days

Text

Could Goliath Have Been 9 Feet Tall?

The Bible says that Goliath of Gath was six cubits and a span (1 Samuel 17:4, Masoretic Text). Various ones put that to be between 8 feet 6 inches to 9 feet 9 inches? Skeptics say that was not possible, and that his height grew because of exaggerations. Could Wikipedia or Daniel Hays be right that the wrong height has been pushed? Is there skeletal evidence that points to people being that tall 3,000 or so years ago? Did David kill Goliath? Is there any archaeological evidence that the Philistines even used names like 'Goliath' three thousand years ago? What about the so-called 'Goliath Ostracon'? Were David and Goliath real or just myths? What about the ‘Qeiyafa Ostracon’? Do scholars know true facts that contradict the Bible? What about the Exodus? Steve Dupuie and Dr. Thiel go over these matters.

A written article of related interest is available titled 'Goliath and 10 foot tall people?'

Goliath and 10 foot tall people?

COGwriter

The Bible teaches:

4 And a champion went out from the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, from Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. (1 Samuel 17:4)

Though there are debates about the length of that cubit, Goliath could have been about 9 feet, 9 inches, tall.

Skeptics argue that there is no archaeological evidence that giants of this size existed in the ancient Near East. (Williams A. How Tall Was Goliath In The Bible? January 14, 2024 https://www.christianwebsite.com/how-tall-was-goliath-in-the-bible-kjv/)

But those skeptics are wrong. Furthermore, it has been asserted that:

Many giant skeletons ranging from 7 feet to over 9 feet tall have been unearthed across the Middle East. In 1833, for example, soldiers discovered a jawbone in Lompock Rancho, California that measured an incredible 9.8 inches from the lower jaw to the back molar, nearly 3 times larger than an average human’s. The skull it came from would have had to be over 12 feet tall! Other skeletons of incredible height have been found in places like Catalonia, France and throughout the Middle East. (Ibid)

Yet, some have claimed that since the average height of an adult male 3000 years ago was about 5 feet, 3 inches, that the Bible is not reliable as it supposedly exaggerates Goliath’s height.

Notice for example the following from Wikipedia:

Goliath (/ɡəˈlaɪəθ/ gə-LY-əth)[a] is a Philistine warrior in the Book of Samuel. Descriptions of Goliath’s immense stature vary among biblical sources, with the Masoretic Text describing him as 9 feet 9 inches (2.97 m) tall. …

Modern scholars believe that the original slayer of Goliath may have been Elhanan, son of Jair, who features in 2 Samuel 21:19, in which Elhanan kills Goliath the Gittite,[3] and that the authors of the Deuteronomic history changed the original text to credit the victory to the more famous character David. …

The oldest manuscripts, namely the Dead Sea Scrolls text of Samuel from the late 1st century BCE, the 1st-century CE historian Josephus, and the major Septuagint manuscripts, all give Goliath’s height as “four cubits and a span” (6 feet 9 inches or 2.06 metres), whereas the Masoretic Text has “six cubits and a span” (9 feet 9 inches or 2.97 metres).[13][1] Many scholars have suggested that the smaller number grew in the course of transmission … (Goliath. Wikipedia, accessed 04/26/24)

Wikipedia’s anti-biblical bias is clear in many of its religious articles. Instead of accepting what the Bible says, it often looks to get OPINIONS OF MEN as opposed to it. Let me add that the ‘Masoretic Text’ is what we call the Hebrew Bible or the Old Testament. The Septuagint, which has Goliath as shorter, was a translation of that text into Greek, and hence not the original text.

One such man who Wikipedia paid attention to was Daniel Hays. Here is something about his research from a researcher who disagrees:

Daniel Hays, in his article “Reconsidering the Height of Goliath” in the December 2005 issue of the Journal, argued that the giant Goliath, who was killed by David, was only 6 feet 9 inches tall and not 9 feet 9 inches. … Hays in his article argues that there is a textual error, made by a sloppy or exaggerating scribe, in the height of Goliath as given in the mt. He correctly notes that one Hebrew text [4QSama] from the dss and most versions of the lxx give Goliath’s height as 4 cubits and a span instead of 6 cubits and a span. According to Hays, this 4-cubits reading should be adopted; this means that Goliath was only 6 feet 9 inches and not 9 feet 9 inches tall …

In his article, Hays correctly notes that the average Jewish male was between 5 feet and 5 feet 3 inches tall at that time. …

The 6 cubits and a span given for the height of Goliath in the Hebrew mt is the original reading; it is not a textual error. (Billington CE. GOLIATH AND THE EXODUS GIANTS: HOW TALL WERE THEY? Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 50/3 (September 2007) 489–508 https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/files_JETS-PDFs_50_50-3_JETS_50-3_489-508_Billington.pdf)

Of course, we should believe the Bible.

And the Bible points to 9 feet, 9 inches, and even if a shorter cubit was used, some have concluded that Goliath would have been 8 foot 8 or perhaps 8 foot 7 (Ibid, pp. 494, 508).

Whenever you hear some ‘expert’ claim something in the word of God is in error, remember that the Bible teaches:

4 … Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. (Romans 3:4)

The Bible also warns:

20 … Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge — 21 by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith. (1 Timothy 6:20-21)

Do not be one who loses faith from things falsely considered as knowledge by various ones in the world.

That said, it is not blind faith to believe that a man could be over 9 feet tall.

Yesterday, a reader sent me a link to the following:

April 25, 2024

Mythology, folklore and even the Bible tell us that giants once roamed the Earth. And, it turns out, there’s evidence to back this claim.

Extraordinary human remains have been found in the US state of Nevada, with some of the skeletons measuring up to 10 feet tall.

Alongside their jaw-dropping size, the bodies – some of which were said to have been mummified – were found to have had red hair. …

These remains measured 8.5 and 10 feet in height respectively, and were mummified in a manner similar to that employed by the Ancient Egyptians. …

Furthermore, high up in the Andes, between Peru and Bolivia, skeletons with elongated skulls have been found.

The remains are said to be around 3,000 years old and much larger than normal human ones.

Intriguingly, some of them were also found to have red hair.

According to Archaeology World, some scientists attribute this reddish colour to the environment in which the bodies were buried. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/10-foot-tall-people-discovered-by-archaeologists-in-nevada-cave/ar-AA1mHpiU?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=dfc2876a3b6e44e9956f58775d0a7292&ei=73

There were also other tall ancient people like the Shashu:

American biblical scholars have for so long largely ignored these references to the Shasu of Yahweh. Egyptian texts that suggest that the Egyptians classified all Apiru, Amorites, Amalekites, Moabites, Ammonites, Kenites, Edomites, and Midianites as Shasu … Shasu giants are mentioned in an ancient Egyptian text titled The Craft of the Scribe, which is found in Papyrus Anastasi I and which dates to ca. 1250 bc. … James P. Allen, who translated The Craft of the Scribe in the three-volume set The Context of Scripture, states in a footnote that “4 and 5 cubits” means that these Shasu ranged from “6 feet 8 inches to 8 feet 6” inches tall. … (Billington, pp. 504-506)

Let me add that Goliath was killed c. 1000 BC. So, there are accounts of people in the Middle East and the Americas about the time of Goliath who were near his height.

Some have wondered if Goliath and even David actually existed or were simply myths as very moderens have asserted.

Well, there are a couple of pieces of pottery that are consistent with the existence of Goliath that have been found. In 2005, researchers (Aren M. Maeir, Stefan J. Wimmer, Alexander Zukerman, Aaron Demsky A Late Iron Age I/Early Iron Age II Old Canaanite Inscription from Tell eṣ-Ṣâfī/Gath, Israel: Palaeography, Dating, and Historical-Cultural Significance. Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 351, Aug., 2008,, pp. 39-71) reported about what others have called ‘Goliath Ostracon.’

An ostracon is a piece of pottery that people write on.

Related to that ancient piece of pottery, the chief investigator, Aren M. Maeir, later posted:

Bottom line: 1) the inscription demonstrates that ca. the 10th/9th cent. BCE, names very similar to Goliath were in use at Philistine Gath. This does provide some cultural background for the David/Goliath story; 2) that already early in Iron IIA, the Philistines adopted the Semitic writing systems. https://gath.wordpress.com/2006/02/16/comment-on-the-news-item-in-bar-on-the-goliath-inscription/

While that does not prove the existence of the biblical Goliath, it is proof that the name Goliath existed at around the right time.

That said that there is also other archeological evidence that relates to the fact that David slew Goliath of Gath. Here is a report from back in 2008 about something called now called the ‘Qeiyafa Ostracon’:

‘Proof’ David slew Goliath found as Israeli archaeologists unearth ‘oldest ever Hebrew text’

Daily Mail, UK – Oct 30, 2008

Astounding new evidence has been unearthed in Israel that could confirm the biblical story of King David.

Until now, almost nothing has been found that would prove the biblical account of a shepherd boy from the 10th century BC who slew the giant Goliath and went on to become the King of Israel who founded Jerusalem.

But today Hebrew University archaeology professor Yosef Garfinkel announced the discovery of a tiny, but potentially invaluable, piece of pottery at the site of the ruins of an ancient fortified city south-west of Jerusalem dated to the time of King David.

Garfinkel said that it carried the earliest-known Hebrew inscription, some 850 years earlier than the Dead Sea Scrolls. …

The pottery fragment was inscribed with five rows of text in black ink divided by black lines written in an early Hebrew-Canaanite script…

Detailed excavations began only earlier this year.

The fortress would have controlled the ancient trading route from Jerusalem to the coast and overlooks the plain where David engaged in his legendary mortal combat with Goliath, giant champion of the rival Philistines.

Goliath’s home town of Gath was unearthed just a few miles away to the south.

“The chronology and geography of Elah Fortress create a unique meeting point between the history, historiography and origins of the early Davidic Kingdom,” said Garfinkel.

Additional Photos, source at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1081850/Proof-David-slew-Goliath-Israeli-archaeologists-unearth-oldest-Hebrew-text.html

While we who believe the Bible do not need additional proof, it is always nice when archeologists provide additional support for the biblical accounts–especially since many who dismiss the Bible have indicated that its stories (such as the one that David slew Goliath) were myths and not based upon reality.

Hopefully those who have discounted the accuracy of the Bible will re-examine their positions and take the Bible as seriously as it should be taken.

As far as evidence for King David goes, we put together the following video on our Bible News Prophecy:

youtube

14:53

King David: Any Archaeological Proof?

The Bible talks a lot about King David of Israel–he is mentioned in books in the Hebrews scriptures and the New Testament. Is there any physical proof, archaeological evidence that he existed? Or, as some at Wikipedia put it, is he only a legend like King Arthur or Homer’s epic tales? Did Professor Yosef Garfinkel of Hebrew University conclude that King David ruled over fortified cities like the Bible points out? Do ancient tablets found at Mari point to the rule of King David? Does the Mesha Stele help prove that King David was real? What about the Tel Dan Stele? Does the Bible warn about false knowledge, false science, and deceiving people who will not hold to scripture? Was there really a town of Ziglag that David fled to? Could there be a successor to King David alive today? Dr. Thiel and Steve Dupuie go over these matters and discuss archaeological proofs related to King David.

Here is a link to our video: King David: Any Archaeological Proof?

UPDATE 04/28/24: Regarding Goliath, we just uploaded the following video:

youtube

14:35

Could Goliath Have Been 9 Feet Tall?

he Bible says that Goliath of Gath was six cubits and a span (1 Samuel 17:4, Masoretic Text). Various ones put that to be between 8 feet 6 inches to 9 feet 9 inches? Skeptics say that was not possible, and that his height grew because of exaggerations. Could Wikipedia or Daniel Hays be right that the wrong height has been pushed? Is there skeletal evidence that points to people being that tall 3,000 or so years ago? Did David kill Goliath? Is there any archaeological evidence that the Philistines even used names like ‘Goliath’ three thousand years ago? What about the so-called ‘Goliath Ostracon’? Were David and Goliath real or just myths? What about the ‘Qeiyafa Ostracon’? Do scholars know true facts that contradict the Bible? What about the Exodus? Steve Dupuie and Dr. Thiel go over these matters.

Here is a link to our video: Could Goliath Have Been 9 Feet Tall?

As I have written before, over time, properly understood archaeological evidence always will support the biblical account.