Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Message decoded: 3,000-year-old text sheds


  • Please log in to reply
4 replies to this topic

#1    docyabut2

docyabut2

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,540 posts
  • Joined:12 Aug 2011

Posted 31 July 2013 - 10:59 PM

A few characters on the side of a 3,000-year-old earthenware jug dating back to the time of King David has stumped archaeologists until now -- and a fresh translation may have profound ramifications for our understanding of the Bible.
Experts had suspected the fragmentary inscription was written in the language of the Canaanites, a biblical people who lived in the present-day Israel. Not so, says one expert who claims to have cracked the code: The mysterious language is actually the oldest form of written Hebrew, placing the ancient Israelites in Jerusalem earlier than previously believed.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz2afPZYX5t


#2    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    Lector Historiae

  • Member
  • 8,847 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 01 August 2013 - 04:00 AM

View Postdocyabut2, on 31 July 2013 - 10:59 PM, said:

A few characters on the side of a 3,000-year-old earthenware jug dating back to the time of King David has stumped archaeologists until now -- and a fresh translation may have profound ramifications for our understanding of the Bible.
Experts had suspected the fragmentary inscription was written in the language of the Canaanites, a biblical people who lived in the present-day Israel. Not so, says one expert who claims to have cracked the code: The mysterious language is actually the oldest form of written Hebrew, placing the ancient Israelites in Jerusalem earlier than previously believed.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz2afPZYX5t

Not that fundamentalist Christian Fox News would have /any/ motivation to shore up disproven versions of biblical history.

--Jaylemurph

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#3    Harte

Harte

    Supremely Educated Knower of Everything in Existence

  • Member
  • 9,045 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Memphis

  • Skeptic

Posted 01 August 2013 - 07:24 PM

From the link:

Quote


If Hebrew as a written language existed in the 10th century, as he says, the ancient Israelites were recording their history in real time as opposed to writing it down several hundred years later. That would make the Old Testament an historical account of real-life events.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.c.../#ixzz2akLlq7Tb


In fact, no it wouldn't, since we have no existing fragments of any writings from the Torah from that period.  It only opens up the possibility.

Also, that possibilitty was opened in 2008, so the above blurb from Fox is simply incorrect (Fox themselves even reported on this earlier finding at the time.)
Please note (from 2010):

Quote

Professor Gershon Galil of the department of biblical studies at the University of Haifa has deciphered an inscription dating from the 10th century BCE (the period of King David's reign), and has shown that this is a Hebrew inscription. The discovery makes this the earliest known Hebrew writing.
Source

Harte

I've consulted all the sages I could find in yellow pages but there aren't many of them. - The Alan Parsons Project
Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do so. - Bertrand Russell
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong. - Thomas Jefferson
Giorgio's dying Ancient Aliens internet forum

#4    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 35,415 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 01 August 2013 - 07:31 PM

View PostHarte, on 01 August 2013 - 07:24 PM, said:

From the link:

In fact, no it wouldn't, since we have no existing fragments of any writings from the Torah from that period.  It only opens up the possibility.

Also, that possibilitty was opened in 2008, so the above blurb from Fox is simply incorrect (Fox themselves even reported on this earlier finding at the time.)
Please note (from 2010):

Source

Harte

Just to add: as long as the esteemed prof does not show that the above shard actually contains a biblical verse concluding that the bible existed already at that time is slightly adventurous. It just proves that a language akin to Hebrew existed at the time (which could have been any of the regional dialects). And some scholars are not very convinced about that either.

Edited by questionmark, 01 August 2013 - 07:31 PM.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#5    kmt_sesh

kmt_sesh

    Telekinetic

  • 7,647 posts
  • Joined:08 Jul 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicago, Illinois

Posted 02 August 2013 - 02:16 AM

View Postquestionmark, on 01 August 2013 - 07:31 PM, said:

Just to add: as long as the esteemed prof does not show that the above shard actually contains a biblical verse concluding that the bible existed already at that time is slightly adventurous. It just proves that a language akin to Hebrew existed at the time (which could have been any of the regional dialects). And some scholars are not very convinced about that either.

"Akin to Hebrew" is the important point. Hebrew is just one dialect among many in the Semitic family. To prove beyond a doubt that the characters are Hebrew, it would have to demonstrate particular verb forms or other linguistic constructs that are identifiably ancient Hebrew. The article seems to relay that the characters might be a name, which would be plausible given the ceramic context, and a name alone would not establish the characters as Hebrew.

I'm not outright saying it's impossible, but I'm suggesting caution in how far to take the article as well as the professor himself.

A good chunk of the article also expresses obvious skepticism, which is a healthier route to take.

Maybe the characters are nothing more than a freshness date for olive oil. :w00t:

Posted Image
Words of wisdom from Richard Clopton:
For every credibility gap there is a gullibility fill.

Visit My Blog!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users