Made in Alexandria: The Origin of the Yahweh Cult

[Aractus]

You are obviously totally and completely ignorant of radioactivity, how C14 dating is done, and how to present the results OR you are deliberately lying. Sorry. I have better things to do that attempt to either expose your lies or educate you.

Go away, dumb ass believer.

You are obviously totally and completely ignorant of radioactivity, how C14 dating is done, and how to present the results OR you are deliberately lying. Sorry. I have better things to do that attempt to either expose your lies or educate you.

Go away, dumb ass believer.

1. FUCK YOU. You have no right to speak to me that way, especially after you chose not to respond to my reply for TWO MONTHS. If I've made an error I'm always happy to hear it, you are so full of shit that all you can say is "I'm not debating you because you're too stupid". Sounds like what a fucking troll would say.

I'm IGNORANT about how C14 dating is done? I gave you an explicit explanation of how it is done - samples are taken of the ink (always, with any document to be carbon dated), and usually - but not always - they will cut some of the paper (I’m talking generally - in this instance I obviously mean parchment) from the edges of the document and use that as well. You think you know something about this process I don't - well why don't you fucking explain what you know instead of hurling insults at other forum members who have an established presence here and contribute to this online community which is more than I can say for you good sir.

---

In this regard the script/font of all "hebrew" is Aramaic. Why should an "ancient" language be written using Aramaic letters? And why are there NO examples of a precursor script for "hebrew" that differs from Aramaic? Again, I observe only the absence of evidence, the kind of evidence we would expect to find and do find in all other ancient cultures.

For the exact same reason that ENGLISH is written using LATIN letters; and conversely; LATIN is written using ENGLISH letters. Indeed we even say that English is written using Latin script. Yet English isn't Latin at all - it's a Germanic language - but it uses Latin script for the written form. I don't see why you find Hebrew and Aramaic being written using the same script to be a problem.

Yet if we look at bibleland there are ONLY religious texts produced by scribes. Bibleland is different from all the rest? That is not a permissible assertion.

Because religious texts were written on PARCHMENT which is expensive and durable. There would have been plenty of things written on papyrus that simply didn't survive through to today. Most likely the original autographs (ie the original 66 books) were written on papyrus originally before being copied and preserved onto parchment.

You can also go by analogy with the production of the bible before printing and its cost. The bible was chained to the pulpit not so the people could not read it but because of its value in terms of cost of replacement. It was no cheaper in bibleland.

Totally incorrect.

It is called that for no known reason. The best guess if the FORGERY, the Letter of Aristeas, has 72 as the number and that it was abbreviated. The point it the ONLY basis for claiming the Septuagint is a translation is a forgery dating from the same time the Septuagint appears. It is a forgery therefore the Septuagint is the original because there is no evidence to the contrary. Forgeries are not evidence.

You have to contend with all the evidence against you. The Samaritan Pentateuch, the Great Isaiah Scroll, the use of the Tetragrammaton and its absence in the LXX, the Hebrew/Aramaic/Hebrew structure of the book of Daniel, etc. All point to the LXX being translated from Hebrew, not Hebrew being translated from Greek. There's also transliteration of names and places.