I was going to refer to Alice Linsley blog and see if I can contribute in this thread. I had failed. I am to slow and I didn’t even answer 2 of the 3 questions. and now thread is closed. I did answer one of the questions and had to bring it to a private message, asking is it correct.
Does genesis reflect the beliefs of the horite Hebrews Abraham’s people does Judaism actually reject those beliefs
Thursday, December 23, 2021
About Alice C. Linsley
a Christian apologist with special training in Biblical Anthropology,
Her address to the International Catholic Congress of Anglicans is available here:
ICCA 2015: Alice Linsley - YouTube
She is a member of the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) and one of the founding members of Christian Women in Science (CWiS).
ICCA 2015: Alice Linsley
@Alice_Linsley says she’s a priest in this video
you can hear her say that she’s a priest. the video goes there. at 5:04
as I was listening to video, wow, again I learn Alice is a priest.
Alice Linsley claim she’s a priest in the video at about 5:04 or a min later. another proof, she’s a catholic priest. and she’s a christian.
Jacob L.Wright writes, “… our oldest sources for Israel’s history Akkadian and Egyptian texts, rather than Hebrew ones…” because “Hebrew writing, which presupposes the invention of the alphabet, did not yet exist.”
“The Bible was born in the Iron Age, and if Hebrew writing was not invented until the late tenth or early ninth century, we can understand why Moses and David were not its earliest authors.”
Why the Bible Began: An Alternative History of Scripture and its Origins (pp. 66-67 + 71). Cambridge University Press. Kindle Edition.
The Bible supports that in Genesis 4:22 where “ Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain, who forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. ”. Interesting that some things in scripture are up front and obvious, but get suppressed or rationalized away to fit our presuppositions of what we think it should be, not only here but elsewhere.
Genesis 4 is pre-Deluge, thus very early; archaeology finds no signs of iron use that far back. If this shows what you suggest, it only does so in that the writer knew of iron implements and projected them back into his account.
The article seems to be a mishmash of ideas of dubious provenance with some definite errors included, e.g. “Abraham’s ancestors came from the Nile region” which is plainly wrong since Abraham and his family came from the opposite direction, from Ur via Haran.
The Hebrew language is “known” after 9c BCE. That does not mean it did not exist. The The texts of Hebrews, Zoroastrians and others were carried orally from much earlier. The Aleppo Codex available from 9th c CE does not mean it was composed then.
I know that some cultures also used bog iron pretty far back, though mostly for ornaments since the purity of the iron varies widely depending on a number of factors. Some impurities could be literally beaten out of the iron by hammering it flat and letting quartz and inclusions be effectively squeezed out, but since much of the iron was in the form of compounds the material remained brittle.
I heard from video, even written on leaf. That would be a fragile way of writing because that doesn’t remain.
I wonder if any types of writing today are fragile and will not be seen in the future?
It seems that oral is fragile, while writing is not as fragile, yet the material is what matters.
Some tribes considered less fragile methods of communication in the hope that future generations would be aware, whereas other tribes only used fragile methods of communication.
I wonder what brings some tribes to think of reasons why they should use less fragile ways so their communications remain known for thousands of years later, compared to other tribes who use more fragile ways of communicating and so are not as known thousands years later.