Evidence of the Babylonian conquest found

[Harte]

2 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

But HE loves you! And slaughter you to prove it!

Well, sometimes you have to destroy the village in order to save it.

Harte

[jaylemurph]

3 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

I do believe it was one of the Councils Of Nicea. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Biblical_canon

So far as I know ( and I can always be wrong), but there was only the one significant council at Nicaea, and it was not discussed formally there. 

—Jaylemurph 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

7 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Biblical_canon

So far as I know ( and I can always be wrong), but there was only the one significant council at Nicaea, and it was not discussed formally there. 

—Jaylemurph 

You’re right, I was thinking of one of the Councils of Rome, or was it Charlemagne Who codified what was to be “canon” books? Must check my files.

Edited September 10, 2019 by Sir Wearer of Hats

[docyabut2]

Babylonian did exist and the separation of languages.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

3 hours ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

But HE loves you! And slaughter you to prove it!

Love is built on friendship, friendship is built on laughter, and you can’t say slaughter without laughter.

[docyabut2]

 All Babylon did  was  the  separation of languages.

[cormac mac airt]

2 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

 All Babylon did  was  the  separation of languages.

Nope. The legendary tale of the separation of languages, likely inspired by the construction of the structure known as the Etemenanki Ziggurat, preceded the Babylonian Captivity by several centuries. Two entirely different events. 

cormac

[docyabut2]

16 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Nope. The legendary tale of the separation of languages, likely inspired by the construction of the structure known as the Etemenanki Ziggurat, preceded the Babylonian Captivity by several centuries. Two entirely different events. 

cormac

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

[cormac mac airt]

19 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

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

Read it again.

cormac

[jaylemurph]

2 hours ago, Harte said:

Still, there are orders of magnitude fewer changes when compared to similar stretches of time in other religions of the ancient past. The Babylonian religion for example.

The Hebrew scholars and scribes maintained what can only be called a remarkable consistency compared to the others.

Not giving that credit to Yahweh though, but to the priests and scholars.

Harte

“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.”

—Jaylemurph 

[jaylemurph]

1 minute ago, cormac mac airt said:

Read it again.

cormac

“Again”?

—Jaylemurph 

[Piney]

11 minutes ago, cormac mac airt said:

Read it again.

cormac

Quote

It is unclear when Etemenanki was originally constructed. Andrew R. George says that its builder may have reigned in the fourteenth, twelfth, eleventh or ninth century BC but argues that.

That's some awesome comparative archaeology there. 

 

[cormac mac airt]

1 hour ago, Piney said:

That's some awesome comparative archaeology there. 

Next lines down Piney:

Quote

The reference to a ziqqurrat at Babylon in the Creation Epic (Enûma Eliš· VI 63: George 1992: 301–2) is more solid evidence, however, for a Middle Assyrian piece of this poem survives [sic] to prove the long-held theory that it existed already in the second millennium BC. There is no reason to doubt that this ziqqurrat, described as ziqqurrat apsî elite, "the upper ziqqurrat of the Apsû", was E-temenanki.^[1]

cormac

Edited September 10, 2019 by cormac mac airt

[docyabut2]

The only reason why the building of a Babylon  of a long tall to a god collapsed, where that culture that came to the separations of languages

Edited September 10, 2019 by docyabut2

[cormac mac airt]

2 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

The only reason why the building of a Babylon  of a long tall to a god collapsed, where the culture that came to the separation of languages

There was no separation of languages in Babylon. IT WAS A STORY. Language had already separated many millenia before the Etemenanki Ziggurat was ever built.

cormac 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

14 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

The only reason why the building of a Babylon  of a long tall to a god collapsed, where that culture that came to the separations of languages

Do you actually read the thread you post in or do you just read the title and imagine what it’s about?

[Kenemet]

55 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

The only reason why the building of a Babylon  of a long tall to a god collapsed, where that culture that came to the separations of languages

Actually, you can see from written evidence that languages were very different (and not mutually understandable) long before the first zuggurat was built.

These towers were built by people who wrote and inscribed things... and thousands of miles away there were other cultures who also wrote in very different languages.

If a deity had suddenly scrambled the languages, we would find a bunch of languages the same age and that had no relationship to each other.  There would be no such thing as an "afroasiatic" language group.

[Peter Cox]

8 hours ago, Harte said:

Well, sometimes you have to destroy the village in order to save it.

Harte

That sounds like Thanos  

[Peter Cox]

4 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

The only reason why the building of a Babylon  of a long tall to a god collapsed, where that culture that came to the separations of languages

Just no.......

The wind did not blow and separate the races and gave each clan a new language.

Babylon has/ had nothing to do with the separation of languages. NOTHING.  

[larryp]

On 9/9/2019 at 6:20 PM, Harte said:

Still, there are orders of magnitude fewer changes when compared to similar stretches of time in other religions of the ancient past. The Babylonian religion for example.

The Hebrew scholars and scribes maintained what can only be called a remarkable consistency compared to the others.

Not giving that credit to Yahweh though, but to the priests and scholars.

Harte

YHWH 

I like how you tiptoed around that. Not too far left and not too far, right.

Edited September 11, 2019 by larryp
details

[larryp]

On 9/9/2019 at 11:27 AM, Kenemet said:

There isn't an "original text."

There are a lot of different books and each one has a lot of variations.  The earliest complete copy of Genesis, for example, dates from 900 AD and it's in Hebrew and has some variations from the King James Bible version . . ."

The "dead sea scrolls" is about as original as it gets because it dates back 4,000-years. The bible consists of many books, so many books were found-fragmented-four thousand years old. But that is not the point. The point is, when you compare the scrolls to our current bible, you'll find only minor changes. Also, from what they have pieced together, so far, including some books of the bible, that were 75% intact, with only minor errors. That by itself is a feat since the bible has been translated millions of times before.

[Piney]

1 hour ago, larryp said:

The "dead sea scrolls" is about as original as it gets because it dates back 4,000-years.

No they are not. They date to the Roman Occupation.

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

[cormac mac airt]

2 hours ago, larryp said:

The "dead sea scrolls" is about as original as it gets because it dates back 4,000-years. The bible consists of many books, so many books were found-fragmented-four thousand years old. But that is not the point. The point is, when you compare the scrolls to our current bible, you'll find only minor changes. Also, from what they have pieced together, so far, including some books of the bible, that were 75% intact, with only minor errors. That by itself is a feat since the bible has been translated millions of times before.

The problems with the above are that 1) NO Dead Sea Scrolls are 4000 years old and 2) 'minor changes' are not the same as 'has not changed' which was your original claim. 

cormac

[docyabut2]

On ‎9‎/‎10‎/‎2019 at 5:49 AM, Peter Cox said:

Just no.......

The wind did not blow and separate the races and gave each clan a new language.

Babylon has/ had nothing to do with the separation of languages. NOTHING.  

 Could  the tower of babel was in the city of Babylon,  the city was in Iraq ,they found one big one collapsed  building in Iraq . Some think it was the tower.

it just could be the story it was a building reaching  to God just, like all other buildings pyramids ect`s,  but when it collapsed a King of the city  banned all the languages and did not allow in any languages are difference from them  .  

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

Edited September 11, 2019 by docyabut2

[cormac mac airt]

4 minutes ago, docyabut2 said:

 Could  the tower of babel was in the city of Babylon,  the city was in Iraq ,they found one big one collapsed  building in Iraq . Some think it was the tower.

it just could be the story it was a building reaching  to God just, like all other buildings pyramids ect`s,  but when it collapsed a King of the city  banned all the languages and did not allow in any languages are difference from them  .   

None of which is in evidence of being true. 

cormac