Dear reader,
All of the Old Testament Introduction articles have been re-posted on my new personal web site:
https://www.swrktec.org/
Nearly all of these articles have been rewritten. Chapter numbers have been added for convenience in following sequence. New chapters on Josiah, Babylon, and Judaism were finished and posted. There is a tribute to Dr. Bruce Waltke. Several links lead to contemporary articles that I found to be informative and balanced. I sincerely hope that this makes your research and reading simpler and better.
Either access the Old Testament Introduction page directly:
https://www.swrktec.org/old-testament-introduction
Or select the Old Testament Introduction tab at the top of any page.
If you would prefer to access the cloud files more directly an "Old Testament Introduction Cloud Link" button is provided on the home page.
https://www.swrktec.org/
The older articles will remain in place so that access to what was previously written can be found. The intense research required for writing such articles means that there is always a wealth, a flood of new information. In the interests of truth, I've had to revise my opinion several times: I hope you find this degree of honesty and openness refreshing. In a very real sense, these are not my articles; these are our articles. My hope is that these articles will challenge you in your own studies, drive you to hard thinking, and thus you will find new discoveries in the ways we think about these materials. The future is yours, dear reader, not mine.
Since many of the files are very large, you may have trouble downloading with older hardware and software. I tested one *.pdf file, it is larger than the original, and I have no idea which method provides easiest access. As always, your feedback would be greatly appreciated.
Be well. Be very well.
Sincerely,
Herb Swanson
Tuesday, February 27, 2018
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
BBS Assyria
BBS Assyria
Introduction
Once again we are confronted by The
Bibles Buried Secrets (BBS) in its inattention to detail and its
oversimplification of complicated problems.
We will show how BBS fails to use either biblical or scientific evidence
correctly, and thus fails of a neutral point of view. Specifically, the biblical evidence is
repeatedly distorted by forcing that evidence into the service of an antiquated
and outmoded theory, the Documentary Hypothesis. The scientific evidence fairs no better, mountains
of Assyrian, Egyptian, Nuhašše-Hittite,
and other evidence simply go unmentioned.
What is mentioned is so repositioned from its historical context as to
be inside-out, topsy-turvy, and twisted-around meaninglessness. Our treatment of this evidence is not
exhaustive by any means, yet we have made every effort to get readers started
on a better path of study. BBS is simply
a nonstarter.
Assyria
(time 1:24:50)
N: Events seemed to fulfil the Prophets’ dire
predictions.[2] Soon after Solomon’s[3] death,[4] the ten northern tribes
rebelled and formed the northern kingdom of Israel.[5] Then a powerful new enemy storms out of
Mesopotamia[6] to create the largest
empire the near east had ever known, the Assyrians.[7]
Machinist: The Assyrians were the overpowering
military force and Israel and Judah, the two states that the Bible talks about
as the states making up the people Israel, fell under the sway of the Assyrian
juggernaut.[8]
N: Numerous Assyrian texts in relief, vividly
document their domination of Israel and Judah.[9] In 722 BC the Assyrian army crushes the
northern kingdom. Those who escaped
capture or exile to Assyria[10] fled south into Jerusalem,
where the descendants of David and Solomon continued to reign. One of them, Josiah, according to the Bible,
finally sees what the Prophets prescribed.[11]
Background
Assyria
Only a perverted view of history
allows us to leap from Samaritan worship directly to the Assyrians and the
kingdom of Josiah as BBS does. Rather,
we must proceed from David (1010-970), Solomon (970-930), the opening of Solomon’s
temple for worship (946), to the division of the kingdom under Jeroboam and
Rehoboam (circa 930), both influenced by Shishak (925). Then, and only then, may we work our way
through the “Hebrew” kings; interacting along the way with ongoing Egyptian
influences, as well as Nuhašše-Hittite
influences arising from the northern Levant and from Anatolia, plus invasions
from far northern tribal entities which are still not clearly understood,[12] when we finally arrive at
the Assyrian Empire and the causes that delayed Assyrian development. The kingdom of Israel is not toppled by the
Assyrians until 722. This is our normal
stopping point; we only continue because of the out-of-place intrusion of
Samaritan worship in the previous section of video.
Babylon
Josiah (640-609) comes after all of that. The Neo-Babylonian Empire[13] arises around 626,
primarily because of a shifting of political alliances, such as the Medes and
others, who sacked Nineveh in 612, displacing Assyria as the leading world
power. Babylon crushes Judah in 586;
afterword, suppressing a series of at least two additional Judean rebellions. This results in the destruction of Solomon’s
Temple, razing the walls of Jerusalem, loss of the scrolls archived in the Oracle,
as well as the disappearance of Ark, Ephod, Urim, Thummim, and all other priestly
garb.
Medo-Persia
In 539 a fresh political alliance
between the Medes and the Persians shifts the Mesopotamian balance of power
back to the north, ending Neo-Babylonia forever. This new Achaemenid (Medo-Persian) Empire[14] (550-330), sweeps from
the Indus River in the east, westward over Babylon, over all of Mesopotamia,
over the culturally developed eastern Mediterranean to the borders of Macedonia;
from the boundaries of Cush in the south, north over eastern Europe, as far as
the Balkans, surrounding the Black Sea, enveloping the south half of the
Caspian Sea, embracing Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan,
reaching even the Aral Sea at its northeast corner, thence along the Syr Darya[15] toward its source and
back toward the Indus. This Achaemenid
Empire is responsible for blessing the return of the Jews to Jerusalem in
516. The Second Temple is built, and
ritual animal sacrifice is restored, at least in part; yet, still strictly
forbidden in any other location.[16]
Samaria
Samaritan worship develops long
after this, in a forbidden location, and thus has no relationship either with
Torah, or with other developing Jewish practices. The Herodian Temple (20-19) ultimately
replaces the Second Temple. From 516
onward, the Jews and the Samaritans remained bitter enemies: the only Good
Samaritan is a dead Samaritan as far as the Jews are concerned.[17]
We have now come a long way past our
focal point (930-722) just to demonstrate the absurdity of making any
connection of Solomon’s Temple and worship with Samaritan worship, on the one
hand; or of Samaritan worship with surviving Judaism in the fifth century and
beyond, on the other hand. Samaritan
relationships are so far distant in both space and time from other forms of
Israelite worship as to be mythological to non-existent; they are mostly akin
to the Samaritan idolatry of Jeroboam I.
It should be clear that Jeroboam I’s system of worship was directly
adversarial and antithetical to genuine Yahweh worship in Jerusalem.
Trivialization
I can’t believe that BBS has
compressed the importance of all Mesopotamian civilizations into three brief
paragraphs, less than 412 words. Until
now we have spent the bulk of our focus on Egypt. Because Egypt was the international world
empire of the period, we began to learn about other regions: the Levant,
Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and even to the north and east of Mesopotamia. We began to dig into the names that Egyptians
had for various ancient peoples in an earnest and honest effort to get to meet
and understand, even become friends with these ancient peoples. It is far too easy, and far too commonly practiced,
to blend all these ancient peoples together into one seething mass of sameness,
without giving them the respect that they deserve.[18]
Disassociation
All of this fits in before the
development of Samaritan worship, which BBS has crudely thrust ahead, to force
an unwarranted illogical association with Solomon’s Temple. Now we have drifted far beyond our intended
course and must return to the time period of our present interest: namely,
930-722.
Levant
Homogenization
There is a tendency among some
modern scholars to call and consider all the peoples of the Levant, Canaanites,
making them all Hamitic subcultures. Many
of these peoples were actually from Semitic subcultures.
The basic Levantine language may
actually be Semitic rather than Hamitic; possibly being more strongly reliant
on Akkadian influences than on Egyptian influences, as the Amarna letters (circa
1351) suggest. The Amarna letters also
attest that a substantial threat to Canaanite civilization has developed in
this era.[19]
We have observed that the Mizraim (Egyptians)
at least drew distinctions between the inhabitants of the Levant: Kinaḫḫu (Canaanites), Israelites, Nuhašše
(Syrians), Peleset (Philistines), Sidon (Phoenicians); as well as others
about which we are not so sure: Retenu, Sand Dwellers, Sea Peoples, and Shasu. The Bible specifies Midianites, Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites,
Hivites, Jebusites, and possibly others.[20]
Ugarit
One place that was largely
overlooked in our Levant exploration was Ugarit, mentioned only for Amenhotep
III (1396-1359), and Horemheb (1327-1300).
Ugarit has several tangencies with the biblical record. Several claims have been made that portions
of the Bible are actually direct adaptations from Ugaritic literature: yet, claims
of copying may be somewhat exaggerated. Without
doubt there are linguistic tangencies here.[21]
“On
excavation of the site, several deposits of cuneiform clay tablets were found;
all dating from the last phase of Ugarit, around 1200 BC. These represented a palace library, a temple
library and — apparently unique in the world at the time — two private
libraries, one belonging to a diplomat named Rapanu. The libraries at Ugarit contained diplomatic,
legal, economic, administrative, scholastic, literary and religious texts. The
tablets are written in Sumerian, Hurrian, Akkadian (the language of diplomacy
at this time in the ancient Near East), and Ugaritic (a previously unknown
language). No less than seven different scripts were in use at Ugarit: Egyptian
and Luwian hieroglyphs, and Cypro-Minoan, Sumerian, Akkadian, Hurrian, and
Ugaritic cuneiform.”[22]
What excites us about Ugarit is that
it serves up a potpourri of Levantine languages extant around 1200, none of
which resembles paleo-Hebrew. Some texts
resemble biblical literary writing and style, yet not paleo-Hebrew alphabetic
script. The clearly Semitic language in
this list is Akkadian. Hence, we look
for biblical writings, such as Torah-Samuel to be found in Sumero-Akkadian or some other mix from such a
linguistic basket full, and not in paleo-Hebrew. Moreover, we have firm evidence that people
did not retain important evidentiary information via oral tradition: such kinds
of evidence reach far back into Mesopotamian history.
Differences
The development of alphabetic Phoenician,
Canaanite, and paleo-Hebrew may all be the same language. That being said, a common language base and a
common worship base are not the same thing.
The evidence of living relationship with Yahweh, repeatedly testified in
the Shəkinah, is not so easily set aside: this is the difference
between knowing about God and knowing God; this is the difference between Lex
Orandi and “will worship”. Both parties
use similar language, sometimes even identical language, but their worship is
radically different. Those who have
never experienced a relationship with God cannot possibly understand this
difference: yet, this is exactly the claim of Noah, Abraham, Moses, and David.[23]
We may know the existence of
another; that does not mean we have become friends. There is no doubt that all of the children of
Noah knew about God; increasingly, few of them wished to walk with God in the way
that Noah walked with God, as companion and friend. Eventually, even the factual knowledge of God
disappeared from among them, as they turned away to other gods.
Peoples
We leave the discussion of the
Levant with the claim that the biblical, Table of Nations, distinctions must be
maintained; this is still the oldest, clearest archaeological record of
international relationships of which we can make sense: it is illogical to
ignore it. Mizraim and Kinaḫḫu are Hamitic brothers. Peleset are grandchildren of
Mizraim. Sidon is a Kinaḫḫu child.
The Nuhašše are a distinct ethnic group, possibly descended from or
synonymous with Aram, a Semitic people. The
Arameans are distinct from the Assyrians, another Semitic people, though they
are often confused. We wish we knew more
about these peoples and their ethnic development.[24]
What we do know is that just because a common language seems to be shared,
does not mean that these are all the same ethnic people: everyone who lives in
Canaan is not, by definition, a Canaanite.
Anatolia
We think of Anatolia as a
rectangular box shape embracing modern Turkey as far east as the Euphrates; it provides
the northern border limit for the Levant.
We have already encountered several tribal groups in Anatolia: from west
to east — Arzawa, Hatti, Mitanni,
Naharin. Clearly, we also need to learn
more about these peoples, their cultures, and their languages.[25]
Nuhašše-Hittite
States
We know very little about the Syro-Hittite
states, or rather Nuhašše-Hittite
states.[26] Since this is far outside of our subject
matter abilities, we do hope that real knowledgeable subject matter experts,
such as John David Hawkins will continue boosting this study along for many
years to come.
At present, we are sure that this Nuhašše-Hittite complex existed;
that it crossed Anatolian and Levantine borders; that it dominated Levantine
geography as far south as Hazor, and Megiddo, from time-to-time including both
Hazor, and Megiddo as member city-states; that they repeatedly engaged the
Egyptians, giving them as good as they got; that it thrived between 1078 and 912.[27]
The Hittite Empire (1600-1178) was
disrupted by specific actions on the part of the Kaskians, not to any
theoretical generic Bronze Age collapse. We believe that such Bronze Age collapse theories
arise because significant details were previously unknown, so there was no
better way to describe the phenomenon.
The Kaskian invasion resulted in the breakdown into independent city-states,
as well as the destruction of many of these.
The Egyptians were also adversaries in Nuhašše-Hittite affairs. Even
so, Nuhašše-Hittite states
continued to exert considerable power until absorbed by the Assyrians.[28]
LB
Collapse
The theory of a widespread Late Bronze Age collapse rests on little
evidence, and mostly accidental coincidence.
Theories built around the Santorini (Thera) volcanic eruption (Minoan)
date very specifically to 1628, well within the Middle Bronze Age. Other evidence for such a general collapse in
1628 is sparse. Theories built around
the Hekla 3 volcanic eruption have no certain date, spanning from 1265 to 895. So, our hypothesis is that there is no Late
Bronze Age collapse: the term collapse is excessive, similar events in Egypt or
Mesopotamia would be identified as intermediate periods between dynasty
changes. At most this transition period
lasted fifty years. Major Nuhašše-Hittite
city-states remained relatively strong throughout the period, although Hattusa
seems to have been abandoned.[29]
Transition
What really happened in the
transition period? Nuhašše-Hittite culture was weakened by
scavenging invaders, such as the Kaska. The
Assyrians of the Middle Assyrian period, possibly beginning with Tiglath-Pileser
I (1115-1076) conquered the Kaska, and turned the Nuhašše-Hittite culture into Assyrian
client or vassal states. Iron was
replacing bronze as the metal of choice because of production costs and
eventually superior strength. Egypt had
been undermining Nuhašše-Hittite
politics for centuries: primarily by playing off Hatti and Mitanni peoples against each other. The Syro-Hittite States (1078-912) emerge as an
Anatolian-northern Levant powerhouse, speaking the Akkadian, and Aramaic (and
probably Sumerian) languages, whose kings seem to have several Sumerian,
Akkadian, or Assyrian sounding names.
Carchemish
The Neo-Hittite, Syro-Hittite, or Nuhašše-Hittite kingdom of Carchemish (1175-975) is one such surviving state: continuing in influence
until around 712. Carchemish remains a
center of power as an Assyrian vassal: paying tribute to Ashurnasirpal II
(883-859), and Shalmaneser III (859-824), until finally being conquered by
Sargon II (722-705) in 712. The primary
biblical interest concerns the Battle of Carchemish (605).[30]
Melid
Melid was “the center of an independent Luwian Neo-Hittite state of
Kammanu;” and evidently paid tribute to Tiglath-Pileser I (1115-1077). Neither Melid nor Kammanu is known to have
much significance to biblical archaeology.[31]
Palistin
Palistin or Walistin is short lived city-state of interest primarily
because of its potential for confusion with Philistia or Palestine. It does surface the problem of naming
conventions in the ancient world.[32]
Aleppo
I appears that Aleppo has been continuously occupied since around 5000 or
earlier: this is a rare event for ancient cities. Aleppo was part of the kingdom of Palistin in
the eleventh century, became part of Bit Agusi in the tenth century, then a
vassal of the Kingdom of Urartu, finally falling to the Assyrians around 743. Aleppo may be mentioned in the Bible, under the
name Zobah. The primary deity appears to
be Hadad, a well attested biblical name.
Its archaeology is complicated by continuous occupation which places
excavation in the difficult to impossible to accomplish category.[33]
Damascus
Damascus may have been occupied earlier, possibly since 6300. However Damascus did not attain prominence
until the arrival of the Arameans around the twelfth century. The Damascus’ kings for our period of focus
(930-722) include: Rezon I (950), Tabrimmon, Ben-Hadad I (886-865), Hadadezer
(865-842), Hazael (842-796), Ben-Hadad III (796), Tab-El (c. 770), and Rezon II
(c. 740). Damascus fell to Assyria
around 732. As Kitchen shows us, Hazael
is especially important as a chronological dating control: for on the Tel Dan
Stela he claims credit for the executions which Jehu (841-813) actually
accomplishes, even though Jehu is already an Assyrian vassal according to
Shalmaneser III (859-824).[34]
Assyria
Why did it take the Assyrians so long to gain and maintain control? Obviously, they had longstanding interest in
Anatolian and Levantine politics. Still
they delayed in taking expedite action, so we must ask why? It was not for any fear of Anatolian or
Levantine power. They were in constant
contention with Babylon! That is the
only thing that retarded their progress toward world domination. Ascending nations and empires did not simply
take over new territories by winning wars.
The takeover was lasting and successful because the new regime appeared
superior to the old one; wide segments of the populace were won over,
especially the enemy armies; peace and prosperity likely improved; irritant
factors (the Kaska, for example) were removed. Now we must press on with our objective of
evaluating the Israelite history of 930-722.
Even so, we leave much of the Anatolian-northern Levant puzzle unresolved.
Egypt
Dynasty 22
After Shoshenq I (943-922) the
twenty-second dynasty is characterized as mostly peaceful and uneventful,
gradually losing control of Thebes. Osorkon
I (922-887), Shoshenq II (887-885), and Takelot I (885-872) were evidently happy to let their Israelite vassal
state control things in the north: even so Israel is forced to juggle ascending
Assyrian power with strange political alliances. By the time that Osorkon II (872-837),
allied with Israel and Byblos, and possibly
helped engage Shalmaneser
III at the Battle of Qarqar (853), it is evidently too late to halt Assyrian
aggression, even though the battle itself ends in a standoff. Israel becomes an Assyrian vassal.
Shoshenq III (837-798) loses control of Thebes. Shoshenq IV (798-785), and Pami (785-778) are
uneventful. Shoshenq V (778-740) ends
the twenty-second dynasty which now breaks down in separate city-states under Pedubast
II (740-730), and Osorkon IV (730-716).
If the festival of Bubastis
is any indication of the spirit of the age, the Meshwesh were more interested
in living life in joy, peace, and quiet than they were in international
conquest, domination, and intrigue.[35]
Dynasties 23-24
The twenty-third dynasty (837-728)
appears to be an independent Theban dynasty, yet still largely Meshwesh in
influence and makeup. Similarly the
twenty-forth dynasty (732-720) is an independent Sais dynasty, controlling little
more than Sais in the western Nile delta.[36]
Dynasty 25
The real power of the period is the
twenty-fifth dynasty (732-653), a Nubian-Kushite dynasty that takes control of
all of Egypt except for a handful of Nile delta city-states like Sais. The Kushites restore and rebuild much of the
culture, monuments, and tombs of places like Thebes. It appears that Sais ceased to be a center of
power under Kushite rule.[37]
Dynasty 26
So who is Pharaoh Necho II
(610-595)? The twenty-sixth dynasty (672-525)
returns power to Sais. Pharaoh Necho II
will join Ashur-uballit II at the Battle of Carchemish in their war against the
rising common scourge of the Neo-Babylonian Empire (626-539). Yet we are now ahead of ourselves once again,
and will need to return to an earlier date to pick up events in Israel and
Judah, as well as the development and rise of the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911-609).[38]
Kitchen
After much research, we are unable
to produce a decent chronology, summary, or biblical review of the kings of
Israel and Judah. Moreover, it may
require of us a decade, or decades of additional research to absorb and digest
the growing, vast mountain of available information. That’s the bad news.[39] The good news is that we have found in Kenneth
A. Kitchen’s, On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Eerdmans,
Grand Rapids, 2003, paperback 2006: 662 pages), which Kitchen lovingly dubs, O!
Rot!, a better summary than we could ever hope to write. Chapters 1 through 4 of O! Rot!
provide the summary for the “Hebrew” kings (930-722).[40]
Israel
Israel, as evil as it turned out to
be, was not entirely evil.
Jeroboam I (930-910) had a chance to
return Israel to the sincere worship of Yahweh, and put a stop to Solomon’s
oppressive policies: he failed to seize the opportunity that Yahweh had offered
him. As a result, Jeroboam’s dynasty
ended with the death of his son Nadab.
Baasha and Elah, likewise had an
opportunity to turn the tide; yet, did not.
Then the power struggle between
Zimri, Tibni, and Omri, ended with Omri in control. His son Ahab had the opportunity to be the
next big thing; yet, he married Jezebel instead. He was killed by an “accidental” arrow shot
in a battle at Ramoth-Gilead. His son, Ahaziah of Israel died after a
serious accident. Ahaziah’s little
brother, Jehoram of Israel died in 841 at the hand of Jehu.
The highlight of Israelite affairs
came when Elijah anointed Hazael as king of Syria, Jehu as
king of Israel, and Elisha as the next prophet.
This set the great Israelite purge in motion.
Jehu (841-814) cleaned house in
fulfilment of his mission. He ended the
dynasty of Omri by slaying Jehoram of Israel, Ahaziah of Judah, Jezebel, all
seventy of the other sons of Ahab, and all forty-two of the brothers of Ahaziah
of Judah, as well as numerous Baal worshipers in rapid succession in 841. Only those who were slain by Athaliah of
Judah escaped his hand. Jehu had the
royal opportunity to make things right with Yahweh; yet, fell short by not
destroying the idols of Jeroboam I at Bethel and Dan, which had been torn down
and replaced at least once before. Still,
these events in 841 provided a cardinal turning point for both Israel and
Judah. Then, Jehu became an Assyria
vassal.
From this point on Assyrian
dominance over Israel steadily increases, while Israel steadily declines until
it collapses in 722.[41]
Judah
It is easy to blame Rehoboam (930-914)
and Jeroboam I (930-910) for the great schism of the Israelite monarchy. However, this is not where God places the
fundamental cause. Instead He lays blame
at the feet of David.
“Specifically:
a. war would never depart from David’s house until the empire was destroyed; b.
four of David’s sons would die for Uriah’s death; c. David’s wives would commit
adultery with Absalom in open public view, to avenge David’s secret adultery with
Bathsheba. David’s sin is the root
cause, but parental failure with Amnon and Absalom are the instruments. Even David’s absolution does not stop the
wrath and vengeance of God from working out its inexorable completion. Even the Davidic Covenant appears to be
destroyed because of these sins, but God has a better plan in resurrection.”
No secular historian is likely to
find the first cause of Israel’s demise here in the life of David.
Josiah is not the only righteous
king in Judea, or even the first. Asa (912-872),
Jehoshaphat (872-848), Uzziah (772-749), Jotham (749-734), Hezekiah (719-691),
Josiah (636-606) were all considered righteous kings, even though less than
perfect. Joash (835-796) remained
faithful as long as he had moral support.
Amaziah (796-772) was morally righteous, but disobedient.[42]
Mesopotamia
Mesopotamia has an ancient and
varied history reaching back as far as 10,000.
Had BBS not begun with 1208 we would have no doubt started here.
Little is known about the
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A (10,000-8700), Pre-Pottery Neolithic B (8700-6800),
Hassuna-Samarra-Halaf (circa 6000), Ubaid (5900-4400), Uruk (4400-3100), or
Jemdet Nasr (3100-2900) periods and cultures.
If we understand the biblical record correctly these would all refer to Antediluvian
civilizations. Since floods were a
common occurrence in Mesopotamia, as Kitchen points out, a flood worth writing
about must have been truly extraordinary.
For the gainsayers, who deny historicity to Genesis, there is no
shortage of flood stories outside of Genesis.
According to the present limits of
our knowledge, Sumerian written language first emerges around 3350, which also
appears to be Antediluvian. Semitic, Subartu, Hurro-Urartian, and Akkadian follow
relatively rapidly. Within the limits of
our knowledge, Sumerian and Akkadian seem to dominate the literary scene. Eventually, Aramaic became the language of
the region.
Early (2900-1900), Middle
(1900-1600), and Late Bronze (1600-1100) Ages follow rapidly. It really is a shame that we shall have to
skip these periods without comment.
Tiglath-Pileser I (1114-1076) is the Assyrian king who finally puts the Kaskians
out of business and stabilizes Anatolia.
The Iron Age (1100-600) is our focal
interest, and really only the late middle and last half of that (930-722). The first iron known was probably from a
meteor. Casting iron is difficult
compared to bronze, wrought iron would develop from that, and steel would form
during hammering as carbon burns away from heat. Such a discovery may have originated among
the Hittites. Damascus steel is well
known. This information would have been
a valuable military and trade secret; because, ultimately iron was cheaper and
steel was stronger than bonze. So
control of steel meant power.
This emphasizes once more the
importance of the Syro-Hittite
states (1178-912). For David to overcome
the technological advantage of such states indicates better archery, better
strategy, a lot of luck, and much, much more.[43]
Neo-Assyria
While the Neo-Assyrian Empire (911-609) is on the rise, they
still cannot bring much military influence on cis-Jordan.[44]
Sargon of Akkad (2334-2279) first unites the Sumerians and Akkadians. His empire maintains theoretical control over
Syria. However, given the practical
limits of population and transportation around 2300, his realistic control over
Syria must be in some doubt: perhaps some honorary taxes were paid, possibly
some raiding parties swept into the west, with a unity of language being the
most likely civilizing influence.[45]
With Adad-nirari II (911-891) Assyria reemerges as a separate empire. He may have led raids as far north as Haran,
possibly into Tyre, and definitely against Babylon. His major impact appears to be economic, as
he opens up trade routes into Syria and Egypt, restoring prosperity to the
region. However, we should be aware that
he possibly receives credit for the accomplishments of Israelite kings (930-841). Tukulti-Ninurta II (891-884), follows; yet
seems to have done little more than consolidate his father’s accomplishments.[46]
Ashurnasirpal II (883-859) continued
expansion and exacted tribute from cities such as Carchemish.[47]
Shalmaneser III (859-824) is still
occupied with Babylonian affairs; yet finds time to continue exacting tribute
from Carchemish, and engage in the less than decisive Battle of Qarqar (853). Most notably, He convinces Israel that it is
more prudent to grovel a little than to maintain the war.[48]
Shamshi-Adad V (824-811) introduces
a period of weakness as the throne is contested by his brother, Assur-danin-pal. We would connect the prophet Jonah with Shamshi-Adad
V; or at least prior to 793. Adad-nirari
III (811-783) is not reported to have a powerful reign. Shalmaneser IV (783-773) was also a weak and
unknown king. Shalmaneser IV’s brother, Ashur-dan
III (772-755) was marked by internal revolt and a plague. A third brother, Ashur-nirari V (755-745) was
limited by further revolt.[49]
Tiglath-Pileser III, King of Assyria
(745-727), King of Babylon (729-727), who may be initiating a new, secret,
dynasty, brings Assyrian affairs under control with massive reform, organizes
an already highly developed army, subjugates Babylon and Arabia farther south,
and invades Israel (738); thus surrounding Judea on all sides. Shalmaneser V (727-722) is less than
spectacular; yet gets credit for the conquest.
Sargon II (722-705) gets credit for the mop-up; yet manages to lose
control of Babylon to Marduk-apla-iddina II (722-710) until he regains control
in 710. Assyria possibly reaches the
peak of its power under Sargon. However,
Babylon is ascending, and Sennacherib
(705-681) is unable to maintain control of Babylon. Tiglath-Pileser III has done all the
heavy lifting.[50]
Ashurbanipal (668-627), the last strong king of Assyria is perhaps best
remembered for his remarkable library.
After the death of Ashurbanipal, Assyria quickly wilts and then
evaporates (605). Nineveh fell in 612. Two major battles in 609, one at Megiddo, and
one at Harran, spelled the end. The Assyrians
retreated from Nineveh to Harran to Carchemish, where the final battle took
place (605), with the Babylonians in hot pursuit. A minor rebellion arose (482). Still for all intents and purposes, it was
all over in 605.[52]
Rise of Neo-Babylon
We already noted that since Tiglath-Pileser
III, Assyrians claimed the title, King of Babylon (729-727). Then Shalmaneser V (727-722) was followed by Marduk-apla-iddina II (722-710),
Sargon II (710-705), Sennacherib (705-703) Marduk-zakir-shumi II (703),
Marduk-apla-iddina II (703-702), Bel-ibni (703-700), Ashur-nadin-shumi (700-694),
Nergal-ushezib (694-693), Mushezib-Marduk (693-689), Sennacherib (689-681),
Esarhaddon (681-669), Shamash-shum-ukin (668-648), Kandalanu (648-627),
Nabopolassar (626-605), Nebuchadnezzar II (605-562). Ironically, both Nabopolassar and his son,
Nebuchadnezzar are ethnic Assyrians.
Since all of these Babylonians fall outside of our time target
(930-722), we will address them in another place. It is sufficient to show the great difficulty
that Assyria had in keeping the lid on things in the south.[53]
Convergence
Kitchen provides a detailed
explanation of archaeological and biblical convergence for Assyrian,
Israelite-Judean, and Nuhašše-Hittite
affairs.[54]
Especially, Tiglath-Pileser III, Shalmaneser
V, Sargon II, Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon
of Assyria are all named in the Bible; as are also the Babylonians, Merodach-Baladan
(Marduk-apla-iddina II),
Nebuchadnezzar II, and Evil-Merodach (Amel-Marduk, 562-560).
Several biblical events and names
are also referenced in Assyrian and Babylonian records: Ahab, Jehu, Jehoash,
Menahem, Pekah, Ahaz, Hoshea, the Fall of Samaria, Hezekiah, Manasseh, and
Jehoiachin.
Also of interest is that the fact
that the Mizraim commonly referenced their enemies in terms of pejorative epithets. Hence, we do not expect Egyptian monuments to
record Israelite distinction and honor by name.
With the rise of Meshwesh dominance, this practice changed
somewhat. Assyria also had considerable
influence on Egyptian styles of record keeping.
Conclusion
Development factors for Israel-Judah
are seen, on the one hand, in Egyptian, Hittite, Nuhašše-Hittite, and Libyan conflicts; on
the other hand, in Assyrian, Babylonian, Elamite, Median, and Persian
conflicts. Israelite-Judean adversaries
were always too busy with bigger fish to fry, to take much interest with
minuscule Israel-Judah.
David starts an avalanche in his sin
with Bathsheba, and Uriah; this avalanche upsets the regional balance of power,
resulting in division, and ultimately annihilation of the kingdom of the flesh. Solomon is no remedy for this: so we look for
another, greater Solomon.[55] As a result Israel and Judah form separate
kingdoms, which the biblical record characterizes as being constantly at war
with each other.
In these incessant internecine wars,
Israel seeks alliance with Egypt, while Judea seeks help from Syria. Inevitably these deals of desperation
backfire, as the power players seek a bigger hand in affairs. Eventually, both Assyria and Babylon become
involved.
Increasingly, if only intermittently,
the Assyrians resolve their many internal Mesopotamian conflicts. At first this was a good deal: Assyria
brought peace, trade, and wealth to the whole region. However, as the money ran out, Assyria turned
more and more to military oppression to enforce its will on others. Suddenly, Babylon looked like a better deal,
albeit short lived. When Babylon failed
to secure popular needs, the Achaemenid Empire immediately became the only game
in town.
No one: not the Hittites, nor the
Syrians; not Israel-Judah; not even Egypt were any match for Assyrian military
might, the most powerful in the ancient world.
Once the Assyrians got their act together, they picked up all the chips:
only Babylon retained sufficient influence to really threaten. However, a new force is arising in the south
in the form of the Nubian-Kushite dynasty.[56]
In 722 Israel as a national entity
is gone.
[1]
What is for the most part an exact copy of the script, follows. There are a few places where individual
speakers could neither be heard nor understood: for this we apologize. Every effort was made to be precise: there
were just spots that defeated us. Since
this is a quote in its entirety it seemed unnecessary to mark it with quotation
marks. The notation for each speaker is
tedious enough: Narrator, Reader, etc.
If you discover bothersome errors please reply to this Blog and point
them out. You may verify the script more
easily by starting to replay it where the “time” stamps indicate discussion
begins. The second of these links is
free from advertising and thus easier to use.
This blog is found at:
http://swantec-oti.blogspot.com/
[2] We
must not now lose sight of BBS objectives.
BBS has set out to prove that the Israelites are a people who sprang up
as repentant Canaanites from within the Canaanite culture; Torah is a set of
books that developed as distinguishable proto-documents in stages: J (950), E
(850), D (600), P (500); other biblical books are not significant enough to
discuss, and may not even exist according to the BBS hypothesis. So, according to BBS, D and P have not even
been written yet, and Torah is an unfinished document. Since the latter prophets, according to this
line of reasoning, have not yet been written, they are records of the disaster
written after the fact, not prophecies of disaster written before the fact:
hence, they merely “seemed to fulfil.”
On the morrow after Solomon’s death (930) it is indeed ironic
for BBS to say something as ludicrous as, “Events seemed to fulfil the
Prophets’ dire predictions.” What dire
predictions? According to the BBS
revival of the antiquated and outlandish Documentary Hypothesis, the first
thing penned just before the opening of Solomon’s Temple (946) is J (950). J, according to Wellhausen, is the only
Scripture that will exist for another hundred years. J itself is ostensibly a collection of mostly
secular narrative, having little or no historic reliability, containing the
supposed mythology or superstitions of Canaanites who called deity by the name
YHWH. If these legends have any
prophetic content whatsoever it would be on the order of no more world floods,
murder is bad, Abraham will have a big family, Israel will journey into Egypt,
and the like. The dire cosmic predictions
of D (600) will not arise for another 330 years after Solomon’s death; the
writing prophets must come after that.
So, when BBS claims, “Events seemed to fulfil the Prophets’ dire
predictions,” BBS is just blowing smoke: for BBS, by its own admission, does
not believe that any dire predictions exist in 930. According to BBS, dire predictions will not
arise until the reign of Jehoiakim (606-596), well after it’s too late to do
anything about it: for destruction is already banging on the door. By that time, the Assyrians will have come
and gone. BBS has created a very garbled
view of History: it doesn’t even fit the Assyrian record: nor the Hittite,
Babylonian, or Egyptian records for that matter.
“It is obvious to the discerning student” that BBS intends to
teach that there is no such thing as prophetic prediction at all, dire or
otherwise. To claim that Babylon will
destroy Jerusalem, when they are battering down the door with rams, is no
prophecy at all. This is like warning
your wife that you invited a dozen guests to dinner as they pull their bus into
the driveway. So let’s end this
senseless discussion right now. You
either believe in the existence of predictive prophecy or you do not…. If, a priori, you do not allow or recognize
the existence of predictive prophecy you need some sort of ridiculous alibi
like JEDP to cover up your denial and rejection of the evidence as it
stands. On the other hand, if you claim
to accept the evidence as it stands, you are deceiving yourself if you have no
concept of predictive prophecy whatsoever.
If we put up with the fallacious method of BBS that runs all
the evidence, both archaeological and biblical, through a paper shredder, then
reassembles it in accordance with its own hypothesis; we may prove any
hypothesis we wish. This is not the
rational treatment of evidence in accordance with the scientific, or any other
logical method. Nor is it the neutral
point of view.
[3] It
is not Solomon who is pivotal here; rather specific prophesies for the life of
David form the cardinal points. The
prophesies concerning David are built on the foundation of Deuteronomic code,
not the other way around.
[4] A
reasonable person would begin here with Shishak in 925 and trace the Egyptian
chronology (timeline) through to 722 and the defeat of Israel. Then other national chronologies, especially
the Syro-Hittite states, and the
Assyrian development leading up to 722 and beyond would be weaved into the
historic tapestry.
So far we have
observed the Nuhašše-Hittite (Syro-Hittite) states from the Egyptian perspective: they need to be
analyzed from the Nuhašše-Hittite perspective. Unfortunately, little
is known about the Nuhašše-Hittite states, or about the workings of the Anatolian complex, let alone
activities from farther north. The vast
majority of Egyptian campaigns were directed against the Nuhašše-Hittite states.
The rest of Egyptian campaigns were against Libya. The first real Egyptian campaigns into
Israel-Judah began with the rise of Meshwesh (Libyan) dominance in Egypt: Shishak
was a Meshwesh who was raised in Egypt.
This jumping to
Assyria, without considering the background material, leads to oversimplified
conclusions. The farther one moves away
from an accurate historic timeline, the more difficult it becomes to fit the
puzzle pieces together. BBS has no
interest in the discovery of an accurate historic timeline: it doesn’t fit
their agenda.
[5]
The northern rebellion was brewing long before Solomon’s death. We can find the seeds of division as far back
as the tensions between Leah and Rachael; the tribes were at first lining up
behind their mothers. Later we see a
tension develop between Ruben and Judah over the treatment of Joseph: Judah
prevails in freeing Joseph. During the
famine, Judah again prevails over Ruben in the plan to protect Benjamin. In Egypt, now powerful Joseph contests with
Judah over Benjamin. When Joseph
receives the tribal inheritance of the double portion the scales seem tipped in
Joseph’s favor; but Jacob/Israel does not fail to note that “Judah is a lion’s
whelp.” When the smoke clears, half of
Leah’s family, and the concubines are aligned behind Joseph. Judah is left as the protector of Simeon,
Levi, and Benjamin. Had it not been for
Saul’s abysmal failure, the kingdom would never have passed to Judah. Now, because of sin, it is rent from Israel
forever. Salvation history now requires
that to be saved, an Israelite must become a Jew. Israel in unbelief is now pitted against
Israel struggling to cling to the shreds of faith. Joshua’s dilemma now rules both day and
night, “Choose whom you will serve.”
[7] Long
before Assyria came, Israel had to contend with the Syro-Hittite states.
[8]
While this is not untrue, Machinist seems to have already forgotten that
Shishak did what he wished in Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:40; 14:25; 2 Chronicles
12:2, 5, 7, 9); the Syrians took Jerusalem as well (2 Chronicles 24:23-25);
Jehoash king of Israel also had his way there (2 Kings 14:8, 11, 13; 2
Chronicles 25:23). Syria also had a
regular practice of raiding Israel (1 Kings 20:1; 2 Kings 5:1-9; 6:8-33).
[9]
While it is true that thousands upon thousands of cuneiform tablets have been
found, as well as many monuments, and numerous inscriptions; many of these
refer to civilizations that predate Assyrian, or even Syrian by many
decades. The Black Obelisk of
Shalmaneser (858-824) is the particular monument featured in the video.
[10]
This is an inaccurate statement of Assyrian policy. Exile for the Assyrians, did not mean
relocating the conquered peoples to central Assyria itself; rather, it meant
dispersion to the farthest reaches and throughout the empire. Its function served as far more than an
exile. Through dispersion,
interspersion, intermarriage, and survival, the conquered people would lose all
historical identity and cease to exist as a distinct people: they would be
obliterated. Only the poorest of the
poor were left in Israel; these were diluted with foreigners to obliterate
their racial identity as well; they evolved into a people called
Samaritans. There is no reason to
believe that they had any continuity with Yahweh worship in 722. In 516 the Samaritans acted out of jealousy
against the returning Jews: the Pentateuch may have become reestablished among
them as a result of this jealousy. Of
course, it is possible that a handful of Samaritans had escaped the wrath of
their own kings, the Assyrians, and ethnic dilution, remaining faithful to
Yahweh from 722 to 516. However, this
does not explain their vehement opposition to the returning Jews. When Jesus encounters the “Woman at the Well”
we see the first real indication of the restoration of Yahweh worship in
Samaria. Samaritan worship today is
totally other than Yahweh worship of any age.
Animal sacrifices were only permitted in Jerusalem. Drawing parallels from modern Samaritan
worship is an absurdity. On the other
hand, the Samaritan Pentateuch might have value for text criticism, especially
where it may support Septuagint, Vulgate, or other readings.
[11]
How is it possible for “Josiah … to … finally see what the Prophets
prescribed,” since, according to BBS, the prophets did not write until at least
nine years after Josiah’s death?
There are many obvious errors of assumption being made here:
one such error of assumption is that we know what this document was and why it
was lost to begin with. We do not know
what documents were read. We do know
what documents were available. We do
know why they were “lost” to begin with.
Another less obvious error of assumption is that BBS is
suggesting that the document was Deuteronomy, and that it was written in 600,
just in time to get the kingdom straightened out under Josiah (640-609). Of course, if we are to press these dates for
precision, we would have to say that Deuteronomy was not found: for it would
have been written nine years after Josiah’s death, if this were the reality of
the matter. If this could possibly be
the case, then Deuteronomy would be the result of Josiah’s reform rather than
the cause of it.
This means that other documents would have had to be found,
unless Josiah pressed for reform without cause and only concocted the story as
a justification for his own agenda.
This, then, would not be made into the only historical period where
false religion was used to prop up imperial ambition.
Let us rather assume that the account is an accurate reality
as it stands. So perhaps the discovered
documents were J and E, which would amount to the bulk of Genesis-Numbers
without their prophetic component, which according to this guess would not be
written until 500. Yet, without the
prophetic component, what motivation would Josiah have to act on the merely
secular history remaining? In addition,
without the prophetic component of Torah, about what topic did the later
prophets write? So we have uncovered
another error of assumption.
We can continue to refute false assumptions until we conclude
that the only thing left is that all of Torah was available to Josiah, and that
it was necessarily written in its entirety quite a while prior to 640, the
earliest date at which it could have been found. (For example: since P is not written until
500, how is it that documents are found in Solomon’s Temple when priestly
worship does not yet exist, so no temple would have been built: else Solomon’s
Temple exists without priestly functions for 446 or more years, from 946 to
500? None of the possible combinations
and permutations of the Documentary Hypothesis result in a sensible reality:
logical contradictions multiply until the whole theory breaks down into dust
and sand.)
How was the document lost?
We know that it was found because Josiah ordered repairs and cleanup of
Solomon’s Temple (2 Kings 22:1-10) around the years 622/621, when he was
twenty-five or twenty-six years old.
These documents were archived in the Oracle. During the evil reign of Manasseh (687-642)
and his equally wicked son, Amon (642-640); people stopped attending Temple
services; priests and Levites found it best not to be visible; no one entered
the Oracle; the Scripture was not read for Manasseh’s 55 years, Amon’s 2 years,
and Josiah’s first 18 years, an aggregate of around 72 or more years. Thus a whole generation lived and died without
hearing any of Scripture at all, while the overlapping generations heard very
little Scripture. Even those of the
Levites who were tasked with scribal duties fell out of Scripture practice and
into safer secular pursuits. Torah
wasn’t lost, it was simply disused. Thus
the discovery comes as no surprise: that’s what normally happens when people
dust off old books and begin to read them.
This means that the entire Torah corpus necessarily existed since 687,
the start of Manasseh’s evil reign.
This being said, Josiah wasn’t the only king who reformed
Judah. The narrative lists a whole slew
of reforming Judean kings, all of whom were motivated by Scripture. There is no rational reason to accept the
evidence of any one in preference over any other. Hence, if Josiah has a credible historic
record, then so must Asa (912-870) have a credible historic record; and if Asa,
then David (1010-970), whose love of Torah in Psalms is unmistakable (Psalm
1:1-2; 37:22, 30; 119:9, 12). So now we
have demonstrated with very little doubt that the whole corpus of Torah was
extant prior to 1040 (David’s birth) and that the whole Documentary Hypothesis
is fallacious. Those who will continue
to cling to the Documentary Hypothesis owe at least two things to reason: one,
they must now rewrite the whole theory as taking place prior to 1040; two, they
must show evidence that documents such as J and E, existed in reality, rather
than as mere figments of Wellhausen’s
fertile imagination. We are just getting
started, these are not the only problems with the JEDP recipe for disaster. (For example: if Canaanites migrating
from Egypt discover YHWH, then mingle with other indigenous Canaanites, finally
convincing them to all become Israelites because of the name YHWH; then J and E
are backwards. This pseudo-history
presupposes that E becomes J: hence E (950), J (850), becomes the corrected
necessary hypothesis. This is no good
either: for now David and Solomon are made into E worshippers. Hence, a second correction must be made to
the basic hypothesis: E (1150), J (1050).
This is still no good: for Merneptah knows of Israel in 1208. So a third correction must now be made: E (1350),
J (1250). Now we have arrived at the
doorstep of Moses’ death or disappearance (1366-1364); so that anyone falsely
claiming that Moses wrote certain documents would surely be caught in the lie:
since it was a mere sixteen years from “hot off the press.” At the very least, we have made a fairly
convincing demonstration that Moses I, an indigenous Canaanite, wrote E. Within one hundred years or so, Moses II,
wanders into camp with J, claiming to have just defeated both Sihon and Og
(Numbers, Chapters 21 and following), which is pretty hard to fabricate when
you think about it. Within a little more
than 300 years, these “Canaanite-Israelite” conquests form the basis of a
territorial claim in Judges, Chapters 11 and 12. But, wait, all of these narratives mix E and
J in the same sentence: Genesis, 42 times; Exodus, 54; Leviticus, 38; Numbers,
13; Deuteronomy, 284; Old Testament, 1525 times. That’s a lot of scribal stitching just to
explain something that never really happened, according to BBS. Occam’s Razor must be applied: this silly
hypothesis needs a shave. It is simpler
to believe that Moses wrote Torah, possibly in Akkadian cuneiform, except for a
few minor notations, finishing around 1366-1364, exactly as the narrative
claims.)
On the other hand,
there are good reasons for believing that Josiah would have focused his
attention on the book of Deuteronomy, extant from at least 1040; and in all
likelihood, since Moses in 1366-1364.
Deuteronomy specifically applies the law to the Rest of Yahweh, that
Rest into which they must now enter (Psalm 95:11; Hebrews 3:11, 18). Genesis is explanatory introduction; Exodus-Numbers
are set in the context of a yet-not-fully-realized salvation history, which
began with the first Pesah. In 1366
Pesah was an historic reality, as were also Shavuot, and now, a few days
previous to Jordan, Sukkot. Entry into
the Rest of Yahweh is immediately ahead and Deuteronomy is the Covenant renewal
document delivered in preparation for that event, that Rest, for Jordan and
Jericho lie directly ahead. Josiah is
especially brought to grief as he realizes all that Judah and Israel have
thrown away: even as we must also realize all that Christendom has thrown
away. Nevertheless, nothing in the
narrative specifies exactly what Josiah heard.
We know for a fact that the originals of canonical books were archived
in the Oracle since circa 1366-1040, our knowledge ends there: this is what we
have demonstrated thus far.
[12]
New discoveries are continually found; old discoveries are eventually
deciphered and published; finally we hope that each discovery, new or old is
fitted into its proper place in the great puzzle of history. Not long ago, nobody believed or knew that
the Hittite Empire or the Nuhašše-Hittite
states even existed. Israelite history
cannot be correctly explained as a tiny kingdom caught between the jaws of
Egypt and Assyria, or even Egypt and Mesopotamia.
[16] Achaemenid
policy involves more than a mere permission to return: it was a blessing of the
work. Evidently the Achaemenids saw it
as in their best interests to support foreign nationals, requesting their
prayers for the good of the empire.
Doubtless, this resulted in considerable good will, gratitude, and
loyalty.
There is no certainty about the number or extent of remodeling
or repair sequences that took place between the Second Temple and Herod’s
Temple. Solomon’s Temple stood for at
least 373 years; the Second Temple might have lasted nearly 496 years.
In John 4:22, Jesus draws a clear distinction between His
acceptance of the Samaritan woman as a person, and His disapproval of Samaritan
worship. The ongoing thread of Yahweh’s
monotheism as a world religion will develop from Jerusalem worship, outside of
any association with Samaritan worship, which is clearly apostate and
heretical. However, it should be equally
clear that ritual Judaism also later rejected the ongoing thread of Yahweh’s
monotheism as a world religion, and ceased to be part of it: hence Judaism is
not Yahweh’s monotheism in any form.
Ritual Judaism ceased to exist in 70 AD.
[18] In
reality it only seems as if Egypt is the only show in town. Because our attention was focused on
Egyptian-Israelite developments and interactions in the south, and growing Nuhašše-Hittite relationships in the
north, we had been oblivious to Mesopotamian empirical developments. Still the Sumerian, and Akkadian Empires had
both come and gone. The Old-Babylonian
power center had passed. The Assyrian
Empire had risen, but was unable to exert influence in the west, because
Old-Babylon still contested for Mesopotamian supremacy. The Elamites have drifted east of the Tigris;
mostly in some sort of state as Mesopotamian (Sumerian?) vassals. The principal thing coming out of Mesopotamia
into the west appears to be the migration of Arameans, with whom Abram may have
been drifting as he left Ur. Even our
awareness of Nuhašše-Hittite
affairs was dimmed by the brightness of Egypt’s glory, and by our ignorance of
archeological reality elsewhere.
This is not a statement crowing about how much we now know;
rather, it is a confession of how little we truly do know. It is our very ignorance with which we must
persist to grapple. Egypt merely looks
like the only game in town. Even as our
scope extends, we still remain largely unaware of how world expansion had
flowed into India and China, north into Russia, south into Africa, around the
globe into the Americas, and elsewhere wherever man had gone. Because we have a focus on Egypt and
developments in the southern Levant, we must not overlook the fact that God’s
creation has a far larger scope. Empire
development is going on in many central locations.
The Levant is an excessively generic term that can include
pretty much anything east of Rome. We
have much preferred the terms Promised Land, or cis-Jordan and
trans-Jordan. However, depending on how
you understand Promised Land, it may be smaller or much larger than the
Levant. Neither do we like the term
Syria-Palestine: for Palestine is the land of the Philistines, and Syria
appears to be a relatively modern term; terms which also neglect modern Jordan,
the Negev, and the like.
Now we would like to restrict our use of Levant to the
geographical space bounded by a straight line from Aqaba north by northwest to
the southern end of the Gaza Strip, northward along the Mediterranean shore,
excluding Cyprus, past Tartus to approximately Osmaniye, then due east to
Carchemish and the Euphrates head waters, down the Euphrates River to
Abu-Kamal, southwest along the Syrian border to the Jordan border, south along
the Jordan border, and west to the Jordan rift, at Aqaba. Our Levant excludes
Islands, anything west of the Mediterranean shore, anything east of the
Euphrates; it borders exactly on Anatolia to the north, and includes the Negev
Desert in the south, cis-Jordan, as well as trans-Jordan.
[19]
For a peek at the profundity of the linguistic problem see:
Anyone proposing a simple solution to this problem is simply
not attending to the mountain of evidence, which is still growing according to
groups like Wycliffe Bible Translators.
Anyone limiting the search for document origins to
paleo-Hebrew or some variation of it, is simply looking with the eyes closed,
and other senses turned off.
We have dated Joshua’s raids to 1364-1354; the settlement
movements of Judges to 1354-1064; and the Philistine influence on the western
front running from around 1291 to after 1003, with its peak dominance occurring
between 1064 and 1010. After 1003 the
Philistines continue, possibly as a vassal nation under Solomon, but with
greatly reduced strength and influence.
Thus the Amarna letters (circa 1351) seem to center on or immediately
follow Joshua’s raids and introduce the Judges corpus. If these Israelites are converted Canaanites
it seems strange that the Amarna letters cannot identify them more
specifically. On the other hand, if
these Israelites are, as they claim to be, Semites; seemingly appearing out of
nowhere in the Canaanite perspective of things; it is not so strange that some
Canaanite city-states would find them difficult to identify by their name,
Israel.
[20]
This is merely the list from Exodus 3:1, 8.
Diligent search might discover others.
[21]
Our adjusted dates for Egypt, ANET: page 243
Psalms and Proverbs always were collections of
literature. Doctrines of Revelation,
Inspiration, Canonicity, and Authority do not require that every piece in the
collection come from an Israelite prophet, or that Israelite prophets may never
quote a pagan source.
Some folks expect God to have the first word in every
matter. This is rarely the case. God usually reserves His comments for the
last word. This is the process we see in
Job. It is also the reality we seen in
Noah: mankind has had its say; now it is gone; start over. Similarly, Abraham represents the end of a
process; start over. Moses terminates a
whole empire; start over. One may argue
that Egypt continued, Mesopotamia continued: nevertheless, the historic reality
is that things did not go very well for Mesopotamia or Egypt between 1406 and
925. David marks the end of the Judges;
start over. Now we have reached the
termination of Israel as a nation. It
makes no difference that the first words seem to come from Ugarit, or the first
laws came from Hammurabi. God is now
having the last word. It makes no
difference, who said what, when. It only
matters who is walking in conversation with Yahweh: this is the real voice of
prophecy. Human knowledge comes through
a variety of paths, all possibly valid, all potentially true. Life comes only from one path. Ugarit does not change reality.
[22] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugarit#Archaeology
[23] The
incessant quest for Torah written in paleo-Hebrew in 1366 is a nonstarter. Documents from this period may just as easily
be written in cuneiform or alphabetic cuneiform. We have no evidence for the existence of
paleo-Hebrew prior to circa 1000 from the Zayit Stone discovery at Tel Zayit (2005), and from similar earlier
discoveries. The search for earlier
Hebrew script is very possibly barking up the wrong tree. What comparison between Amarna and Tel Zayit
may very well demonstrate is that paleo-Hebrew is now in its early
developmental stage, and we are witnessing a major breakthrough in the
technology of writing: a breakthrough in which paleo-Hebrew (Tel Zayit, 1000) is eclipsing Akkadian (Amarna,
1351).
Will worship is dependent on the exercise of the human will,
and nothing more. Much of the evidential
record, Israelite, Egyptian, Nuhašše-Hittite,
or Mesopotamian, mixes physical, tangible narrative with spiritual, intangible
narrative. The spiritual, intangible
narrative cannot be excised from the whole narrative without damaging the
evidence. Such spiritual, intangible
narrative may express demonism, idolatry, superstition, the genuine worship of
the living God, or something else.
Whatever it is, it is what ancient peoples believed. It may explain ancient motivations, it may
reveal ancient methods of spinning reality: whatever it is, it may not be discarded
or removed, it is still evidence. It is
evidence; work with it: this is the neutral point of view.
Philosophically, one either worships another, God; or one
worships one’s self. There is either an
authority outside of self, or there is not.
It is not essential to this study that the reader hold such religious views. What is absolutely essential is that the
reader recognize that ancient people held such religious views and mixed them
with the secular historic narrative.
Ancient civilizations simply did not draw any distinction between
secular and spiritual as modern people do….
Even in dualism, the two aspects are invariably treated
together.
It is likely that the Greeks are the first to posit a
distinction or separation between the phenomenal and the noumenal, Plato (428-347).
[24]
Table of Nations (Genesis 10) is a bit of a misnomer. The table itself uses the term, nations;
however, the Table is nothing more than a list where the idea of nations is
never fully developed. Clearly the
meaning of such claims is that the nations which may later exist will develop
from this list; still, nothing is said about how such nations form. The list itself is nothing more than a
partial family genealogy. The implication
is that nationality or nation formation is nothing more than an extended
genealogical development, which is pretty obviously true.
We say that it is a partial family genealogy. One has only to play with modern computer
genealogical searches for a few hours to realize how difficult this subject is,
and how frequently holes are discovered in one’s own genealogy. Such exploration also exposes the futility of
keeping such records orally.
We believe that someone accessed the official genealogical
record, kept in Sumerian, Akkadian, or some other cuneiform language on clay tablets,
and filed in a central repository at Ur; then brought along a copy of that
record as it was extant at that time, perhaps from the days of Peleg: for Peleg
seems to be used as a point of demarcation.
Other points of demarcation concern Nimrod (Genesis 10:8-12), who
provoked a massive migration of Semites away from Mesopotamia; and Babel
(11:9), where all the languages began to separate. Nothing prohibits these three demarcations
from being coterminous. The obvious copier
of such a record was Abram.
In any case, the evidence from the list itself, is that it
loses track of many branches of the familial genealogical record. Parts of such a record could have been extant
in Egypt circa 1806, so that corrections to the Hamitic branches could be made.
Most likely Abram or Terah could have
taken such a record with them in their journeys from Ur, and Abram added to it
as he left Haran, and wandered into Egypt.
Whatever the case may be, it is well-nigh unthinkable that such record
keeping was suddenly invented from out of nowhere in 1406: such records are
simply impossible to maintain and enforce without some written documentation. At a very minimum, kings would have kept such
records for taxation purposes.
That record ceased to be updatable for every branch of Noah’s
family; focuses on the Semitic branch; focuses further on the life and family
of Abram; and finally introduces the subject matter of Exodus. It does not provide a science of nation
formation; yet, it does survey some of the possibilities for such a science.
Nuhašše is
generally thought to specify a geographic area.
However this is somewhat disjointed in Nuhašše-Hittite, since
Hittite seems to be ethnic in the biblical record, and definitely sourced in
the ethnic Hatti. Since such geographic areas are frequently eponymous:
we find it difficult to deny the possible existence of a Nuhašše ethnic group:
for what else should we call them. This
means that the Nuhašše-Hittite state possibly consists of Arzawa, Hatti, Mitanni, Nuhašše, perhaps Arameans, and other tribes, none
of which appear to be Canaanites.
For Aram, see Genesis 10:22.
The Greek historians in particular were not able to
distinguish Arameans from Assyrians.
They were distinct “brother” nations, not identical, yet related: as was
also the case between Egyptians and Canaanites.
It is virtually impossible for us to visualize this
world. Evidently all of civilization first
lived in Mesopotamia. With eight people
for starters, this was a virgin wilderness.
By the time of Abraham, estimating from growth statistics, two million or
more people packed the space between the two rivers. By the time of Joseph, again using a
statistical estimate, 114 or more million people were spread around a
relatively crowded world. These
statistical estimates should not be treated like real census figures. They do, however, provide a crude idea of the
population scale differences between then and now. Contrasted with over seven billion today,
this appears as nothing. The social
interchanges were not anything like the modern world. When we attempt to analyze this ancient
world, we must try to think in terms of what is possible with such a reduced
scale.
The Mitanni and Naharin are thought to be identical. Even so, the Ramessides tend to see them as
distinct entities. If distinct, we
expect Naharin lay east of Mitanni.
[26]
Note that the Nuhašše-Hittite
states may not be united at this time (852-841), 2 Kings 7:6.
Hawkins, John David, Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian
Inscriptions: Volume I. Inscriptions of the Iron Age (Cambridge)
[28] The
distinction between city-states and empire may be excessive. The narrative of Joshua demonstrates that
such city-states could readily form armed coalitions whenever a military threat
arose. These may have been coordinated
by covenant treaty, without the need or presence of any imperial
administration. This also appears to be
the case in Egyptian campaigns into Anatolia and the northern Levant: the
trumpet blast summoned independent armies to battle.
[29] LB
Collapse –
[30] None
of the Carchemish kings appears to have influenced Israelite politics except
possibly in support of Damascus; nor are they known to be referenced in the
biblical record (still, the possibility of oversight exists due to differences
in naming conventions. The king’s names
are Suhi I (c. 975), Astuwalamanza (c. 950), Suhi II (c. 925), Katuwa (c. 900),
Sangara (c. 870-848), Astiru (c. 830), Yariri (regent) (c. 815), Kamani (c.
790), Sastura (c. 760), Astiru II (?), and Pisiri (c. 730).
Shalmaneser –
Conquest –
Battle –
Isaiah 10:9 (circa 750); Jeremiah 46:2 (circa 600)
Such confusion might explain why some authorities find a
reference to Hadad coming from the south.
This would tend to make such authorities mistaken by disclosing the
possibility that they have confused Palistin for Pelishtim.
[33] Aleppo –
The Silk Road was active over two millennia before Marco Polo
(1254-1324 AD) –
Zobah – 1
Samuel 14:47; 2 Samuel 8:3, 5, 12; 23:36; 1 Kings 11:23, 24; 1 Chronicles 18:3,
5, 9; 1 Chronicles 19:6; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zobah
Hadad – 2
Samuel 8:3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12; 1 Kings 11:14, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25; 20:12, 34; 1
Chronicles 1:30, 46, 47, 50, 51; Zechariah 12:11;
David’s wars with Hadadezer, put to the test
any assertion that David merely ruled over a “minor fiefdom, a cow-town”. Such rash denials of even partial evidence
are not scientific. If David did in fact
only rule over a cattle ranch, why would a later prophet know or invent such a
cock and bull story. The very detail of
the era specific events, speaks to its historic credibility. A prophet writing after 600 would not be
aware of such details, or realize their significance (2 Samuel 8, Chapter 8).
[34] Damascus – 2 Samuel 8:5, 6; 1 Kings
11:24; 15:18; 19:15; 20:34; 2 Kings 5:12; 8:7, 9; 14:28; 16:9, 10, 11, 12; 1
Chronicles 18:5; 2 Chronicles 16:2; 24:23; 28:5, 23; Song of Solomon 7:4;
Isaiah 7:8; 8:4; 10:9; 17:1, 3; Jeremiah 49:23, 24, 27; Ezekiel 27:18; 47:16,
17, 18; 48:1; Amos 1:3, 6; 3:12; 5:27; Zechariah 9:1;
Rezon I – 1
Kings 11:23;
Hadad – 1
Kings 20:12, 34;
Hadadezer – 2
Samuel 8:3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12; 11:23;
of Damascus,
of Zobah,
Hazael – 1
Kings 19:15, 17; 2 Kings 8:8, 9, 12, 13, 15, 28, 29; 9:14, 15; 10:32; 12:17,
18; 13:3, 22, 24, 25; 2 Chronicles 22:5, 6; Amos 1:4;
Ben-Hadad –
Rezon (Rezin) – 2 Kings 15:37; 16:5. 6, 9;
Isaiah 7:1, 4, 8; 8:6; 9:11;
Tel Dan Stela – 2
Kings 9:24; 27; Kitchen, pages 14, 27 f, 36 f;
Dynasty 22 –
Shalmaneser III –
Battle of Qarqar –
Israel an Assyrian
vassal –
Shoshenq III –
Shoshenq IV –
[36] Dynasty
23 –
Dynasty 24 –
[39]
Nevertheless, in spite of inadequacies, there are several principles to which
we must cling.
First, we do not believe that the same God, Who created the
Universe and started the conversation that produced the Bible, would ever give
us biblical and scientific evidence in conflict. Neither the real biblical evidence, nor the
real scientific evidence can ever be wrong.
On the other hand, our interpretations, studies, transmission, and
understanding can all be wrong, and often are wrong. We do not hold all of the vast evidence of
either the Bible or the Universe; weak minded as we are, we hold very little of
it clearly. The fault is always with us,
never with God.
We believe that the original Scripture as John pictures it in
Revelation 5 is absolutely errorless.
However, mere humans are unfit to touch this Scroll. We also believe that the “little book” in
Revelation 10, part of the Great Scroll of Revelation 5, that part of God’s
record which He is willing to share with mankind, is absolutely errorless, as
well. This is to say that what the angel
tells John to eat is without error; yet, as soon as John takes the “little book”
it immediately becomes subject to error and corruption because of the frailty
of man.
Thus we are compelled to reject any idea of a Received Text
(TR) being error free due to the protective providence of God. Such notions are contrary to fact and place
us dangerously close to bibliolatry. The
evidence is that we have many manuscripts, all of which do not agree. Resolution of these disagreements is the very
difficult study called Textual Criticism.
For the same reasons we also reject any notion of the primacy or
priority of the Masoretic Text (MT). As
far as Received Texts are concerned, about which Received Text are we
talking? For the sixteenth century
Protestant, MT is the TR. For the sixth
century Roman, the Vulgate is the TR.
For the first century Christian, the Septuagint is the TR. We are simply not free to make an idol out of
any age: if humans touched it, it is liable, even prone to human error.
These comments can most likely be applied to most
manuscripts. Very little of any
manuscript provenance survives. What we
have must be pieced together by a complex system of technology. Time has simply destroyed the Hebrew
manuscripts.
While we are thrilled to have what is left of the so-called
Dead Sea Scrolls, there is no guarantee that they are within the line of
evidence for a Jerusalem priestly recension: hence, they are utterly without
authority, and can at most clarify a dispute between recensions. They also provide evidence that certain
readings are in existence at such-and-such a period: yet, whose readings are
they?
As far as Masoretic Texts are concerned there is no certain
clear textual picture: for there is no such thing as a single standardized MT,
as Orlinsky has faithfully showed us (Ginsburg, Christian D., Introduction
to the Massoretico-Critical Edition of the Hebrew Bible; with a
Prolegomenon by Orlinsky, Harry M., The Masoretic Text: A Critical
Evaluation (KTAV, New York, 1966: 1028 pages), page xxxvi f).[39] So a Septuagint or Vulgate reading may very
well preserve a better Hebrew prototype than all of the Masoretic Texts
combined.
[40]
Kitchen, pages 1-158
[41] Ahab
– This highlights the conflict between politically centered thinking and
spiritually centered thinking. Judah and
Phoenicia had always been close. The
politicized marriage between Ahab and Jezebel, does at least two things: It blocks the maintenance of a Judean
political leverage in Phoenicia. It puts
Ahab under the direct control of his psychologically-stronger, manipulative
wife. Spiritually centered thinking all
but disappears in Israel. Ahab listens
to Elijah until Jezebel gets hold of his ear.
Ahab’s accidental death – 1 Kings 22
Jehu –
Assyrian dominance – Kitchen, pages 23 f
[42] The
Sword – The expression, “the sword shall never depart from
your house,” is a clear declaration of war.
David’s house, according to the common idiom, is David’s dynasty, not
his personal family. David’s house or dynasty is the united monarchy: hence, the
wars, especially, that will never depart from David’s house are the internecine
wars between Israel and Judah. The sword
speaks of far more than perpetual murders in David’s family. Very few of the Judean kings were actually
slain. However, one war after another,
especially the incessant wars between Israel and Judah, eventually reduced
Judea in a final Babylonian defeat.
Henceforth, Judea will always be enslaved; the Davidic dynasty seemingly
ends. Even when Jesus comes, the Jews
and the Samaritans are still at each other’s throats. 2 Samuel 12:10; Psalm 89:38-45.
The Sons Slaughtered – 2 Samuel 12:6, 18 (the child); 13:29
(Amnon); 18:14-15 (Absalom); 1 Kings 2:23-25 (Adonijah).
The Harem Defiled – 2 Samuel 12:11-12; 16:21-22.
The Covenant Broken – Psalm 89;
Dates – These dates are compromises between Kitchen, Thiele,
and our own calculations. They do need
perfecting.
[43] Mesopotamia
–
Pre-Pottery Neolithic A – Circular or oval (yurt like) houses,
flint tools,
Pre-Pottery Neolithic B – Naviform or rectangular houses
Hassuna-Samarra-Halaf – Pottery development
Jemdet Nasr –
Sumerian –
Semitic –
Hurro-Urartian –
Akkadian –
Aramaic – Since Aramaic does not arise until around 900, it
suggests that the dominant language of cis-Jordan may have been the remnant of
the Sumerian-Akkadian complex. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_language
Tiglath-Pileser I –
Technological Advantage
– 2 Samuel 8; 1 Kings 11; 1 Chronicles 18;
Tukulti-Ninurta II –
[49] Shamshi-Adad
V –
Assur-danin-pal –
Adad-nirari III –
Shalmaneser IV –
Ashur-dan III –
Ashur-nirari V –
[50] Tiglath-Pileser
III – 2 Kings 15:9; 1 Chronicles 5:6, 26; 2 Chronicles 28:20; Isaiah 66:19; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiglath-Pileser_III
Shalmaneser V – 2 Kings 17:3; 18:9;
Sargon II – Isaiah 20:1;
Marduk-apla-iddina II –
Sennacherib – So it is rather Tiglath-Pileser III, who “came down like a wolf
on the fold.” Yet it is Sennacherib who
retreats with his tail between his legs.
2 Kings 18:13; 19:16, 20, 36; 2 Chronicles 32:2, 9, 10, 22; Isaiah 36:1;
37:17, 21, 37
[51] 2
Kings 19:37; Ezra 4:2; Isaiah 37:38;
Megiddo – in the irony and mystery of life, Josiah, in league
with Babylon, moved to block Necho II, who had become an Assyrian ally. Josiah was killed for his troubles and Judah briefly
became an Egyptian vassal. 2 Kings
23:29, 30; 23:34; 2 Chronicles 35:20, 22; 36:4;
Carchemish –
[54]
Kitchen, pages 23-24, especially
[55]
Psalm 72
[57] Miscellaneous
References
[58] If you have been blessed or helped by any of these meditations,
please repost, share, or use any of them as you wish. No rights are reserved. They are designed and intended for your free
participation. They were freely
received, and are freely given. No other
permission is required for their use.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)