Report Blog Entry
Preface: This topic deserves more research on my part, this was just some notes I took a while ago that I thought id add. I know there is much more to this topic, i just need to find time to write some quality notes on it. I plan to eventually go through each theory listed in-depth, and others that werent listed. These notes do go into some antisemitism focused concepts, im not endorsing it, but they are important to know about to help stop its repetition. Though taking a look at traditional narratives from a historical/objective perspective isnt antisemitic, i do that a lot in these notes as well. nonetheless its a interesting set of notes i took a while ago and i think it warrants sharing. Ill try and find the source material soon.
==========================
## Origin Of Jewish People:
There are many theories as to where they originated, the most common of which is that of **Abrahams** origin in **Ur**. Abraham was told that God had a promise land for him in the land of **Canaan**. God made a promise to Abraham he would be the father of many nations. Abraham and his wife **Sarah**, quite old, didnt believe Gods promise of children, and so Sarah tried to fulfill the promise on her own with her slave/servant, **Agar**. They bore a son named **Ishmael**. Though Abraham did have a son with Sarah, named **Issac**.
There was a lot of tension between these 2 parts of the family, so Sarah demanded Abraham kick Agar and Ishmael out of their tribe/group.
Agar and Ishmeal supposedly went into the **Arabian Peninsula**, making Ishmael the father of the **Arab people**.
After being almost sacrificed by his father, Issac would have his own son, **Jacob**. Who got renamed **Isreal**, who had **12 Children**, creating the **12 Tribes of Isreal**. One of these, **Joseph**, was Jacobs favorite, and got a **special cloak**, which was stolen by his brothers out of jealousy. Sold him into slavery and told Jacob, he was killed.
While a slave in **Egypt**, Joseph became second in command. His brothers has had to flee **Canaan** due to a famine, ending up in Egypt. After some trolling he revealed to his brothers he had be alive the whole time. He invited his family to live with him in Egypt.
## Skepticism:
One big issue with the Old Testament as a Historical source is its lack of cooperating sources.
This is a strong debate because on one hand, Abraham was just a average dude, why take note of him? On the other, if he became so important later on, why would other Nations not take him as a important figure as well?
The issue beyond just Judaism is that a lot of historical beginnings like this rely on historical accounts of individuals, during a time period when historical documentation was sparce in general. This same issue is seen with the founders of Rome, Romulus and Renus.
The story of Abraham is Non-Falsifiable, you cant prove it, but you also cant disprove it.
## External Theories/Technqiues:
#### Linguistic Approach (Habiru-Hebrew Theory):
One way of trying to find a people is by tracing their language and finding common roots with other languages.
In the latter half of the 19th Century, a group of researchers found a set of letters known as the **Amarna Letters**, belonging to the **Habiru**.
The Amarna Letters were a series of political messages being sent between Egypt and Canaanite kingdoms, leading researchers at the time to believe the Habiru were the ancestors of Hebrew people. In the Letters, the Habiru were described as a group of Nomadic outsiders who attacked and robbed cities. The letters mostly were Canaanite kings asking for help defending from the Habiru people. These were dated to around 15-14 BCE, around the time some scholars believe the Isrealites conqured Canaan.
**Problems:**
- The Habiru were not described as a ethnic or religious group, more as a rebellious social class whos people refused to follow the law of leaders in the region.
- Habiru were also seen all over the near east, making it hard for them to be tied to a specific people.
- Habiru and Hebrew, while sounding similar could be a false Cognat, meaning it has similar sound, but are from entirely different origin.
- At the time of this theories development, the Aryan Theory and belief of Aryan Superiority was ramping up. Creating a fuel for comparing a aggressive, rebellious and stealing people (Habiru), with a modern, lesser liked people (Jews), caused a lot of influence with the theories development and acceptance. This allowed people to push pre-conceived ideas of Jews, further and with more justification.
- Though these don't entirely discredit the idea of the Habiru as a potential ancestor.
#### Of the Canaanites:
A more commonly accepted origin story for the Jews is that they were apart of Canaan, who just saw themselves as different/special and/or separated themselves.
The "Proto-Isrealites", then went to conquer the land of Canaan, renaming it Isreal. Though for this to be true, you have to completely reject Exodus, causing pushback.
#### Isrealites vs Jews:
When speaking of Jewish ancestors, we often refer to the Isrealites. Some scholars argue we should separate these 2 people. Most historians date the beginning of the Isrealite people with the establishment of Isreal under **King David** and the building of the **Temple of Solomon**.
Before this, the Isrealite people tended to be nomad and leaned towards Polytheism on many occasions.
Some argue that once the City and Temple were established, it centralized the Isrealite religion into what we now consider Judaism. The Jews were created from the leaders, when they were banished from Isreal and forced to relocate to **Babylon**. Before then the Isrealite religion was based around living in the land God promised to Abraham and his descendants. After the Exile it switched too being centered around Doctrine and Social practices that differentiated themselves from the Pagans that surrounded them.
This theory is not universally accepted.
There are many theories as to where they originated, the most common of which is that of **Abrahams** origin in **Ur**. Abraham was told that God had a promise land for him in the land of **Canaan**. God made a promise to Abraham he would be the father of many nations. Abraham and his wife **Sarah**, quite old, didnt believe Gods promise of children, and so Sarah tried to fulfill the promise on her own with her slave/servant, **Agar**. They bore a son named **Ishmael**. Though Abraham did have a son with Sarah, named **Issac**.
There was a lot of tension between these 2 parts of the family, so Sarah demanded Abraham kick Agar and Ishmael out of their tribe/group.
Agar and Ishmeal supposedly went into the **Arabian Peninsula**, making Ishmael the father of the **Arab people**.
After being almost sacrificed by his father, Issac would have his own son, **Jacob**. Who got renamed **Isreal**, who had **12 Children**, creating the **12 Tribes of Isreal**. One of these, **Joseph**, was Jacobs favorite, and got a **special cloak**, which was stolen by his brothers out of jealousy. Sold him into slavery and told Jacob, he was killed.
While a slave in **Egypt**, Joseph became second in command. His brothers has had to flee **Canaan** due to a famine, ending up in Egypt. After some trolling he revealed to his brothers he had be alive the whole time. He invited his family to live with him in Egypt.
## Skepticism:
One big issue with the Old Testament as a Historical source is its lack of cooperating sources.
This is a strong debate because on one hand, Abraham was just a average dude, why take note of him? On the other, if he became so important later on, why would other Nations not take him as a important figure as well?
The issue beyond just Judaism is that a lot of historical beginnings like this rely on historical accounts of individuals, during a time period when historical documentation was sparce in general. This same issue is seen with the founders of Rome, Romulus and Renus.
The story of Abraham is Non-Falsifiable, you cant prove it, but you also cant disprove it.
## External Theories/Technqiues:
#### Linguistic Approach (Habiru-Hebrew Theory):
One way of trying to find a people is by tracing their language and finding common roots with other languages.
In the latter half of the 19th Century, a group of researchers found a set of letters known as the **Amarna Letters**, belonging to the **Habiru**.
The Amarna Letters were a series of political messages being sent between Egypt and Canaanite kingdoms, leading researchers at the time to believe the Habiru were the ancestors of Hebrew people. In the Letters, the Habiru were described as a group of Nomadic outsiders who attacked and robbed cities. The letters mostly were Canaanite kings asking for help defending from the Habiru people. These were dated to around 15-14 BCE, around the time some scholars believe the Isrealites conqured Canaan.
**Problems:**
- The Habiru were not described as a ethnic or religious group, more as a rebellious social class whos people refused to follow the law of leaders in the region.
- Habiru were also seen all over the near east, making it hard for them to be tied to a specific people.
- Habiru and Hebrew, while sounding similar could be a false Cognat, meaning it has similar sound, but are from entirely different origin.
- At the time of this theories development, the Aryan Theory and belief of Aryan Superiority was ramping up. Creating a fuel for comparing a aggressive, rebellious and stealing people (Habiru), with a modern, lesser liked people (Jews), caused a lot of influence with the theories development and acceptance. This allowed people to push pre-conceived ideas of Jews, further and with more justification.
- Though these don't entirely discredit the idea of the Habiru as a potential ancestor.
#### Of the Canaanites:
A more commonly accepted origin story for the Jews is that they were apart of Canaan, who just saw themselves as different/special and/or separated themselves.
The "Proto-Isrealites", then went to conquer the land of Canaan, renaming it Isreal. Though for this to be true, you have to completely reject Exodus, causing pushback.
#### Isrealites vs Jews:
When speaking of Jewish ancestors, we often refer to the Isrealites. Some scholars argue we should separate these 2 people. Most historians date the beginning of the Isrealite people with the establishment of Isreal under **King David** and the building of the **Temple of Solomon**.
Before this, the Isrealite people tended to be nomad and leaned towards Polytheism on many occasions.
Some argue that once the City and Temple were established, it centralized the Isrealite religion into what we now consider Judaism. The Jews were created from the leaders, when they were banished from Isreal and forced to relocate to **Babylon**. Before then the Isrealite religion was based around living in the land God promised to Abraham and his descendants. After the Exile it switched too being centered around Doctrine and Social practices that differentiated themselves from the Pagans that surrounded them.
This theory is not universally accepted.
## Reliability of Old Testamanet Sources Debate:
Within this debate there are 2 major overarching beliefs. Biblical Minimalists (Most of the Bible is Fiction) and Biblical Maximalists (Most of the Bible is based on Oral tradition of real events).
This argument is mostly held during the point before the Exile. Both sides leaning towards one side of the Non-Falsifiable nature of the period.
If you build on the idea that the Old Testamanet is not reliable at all, you come to a conclusion that even most Minimalists reject. That being that modern Jews are not connected to ancient Isrealites at all.
#### The Khazar Theory:
Schlomo Sand, a historian at University of Tel Aviv states that the Jews from Europe have no connection to the Isrealites of the Bible.
Its argued that the Modern Jew descents from a Turkish Tribe from around the area of the Black and Caspian Seas, that converted to Judiasm in the 8th Century BCE. It also argues the Zionist Movement of the Late 18th Century, Fabricated the history as a means to assert a claim to the land of **Palestine**.
He argues against the notion of a Jewish Ethnicity and classifies Judiasm as solely a religion.
This theory is not new and was around for a while before, growing in popularity around the same time as the Aryan and Habiru theories, making it ammunition for Anti-Semitic beliefs.
Though this isnt taken as seriously as there is little to no evidence for these claims at all. There is no evidence of any Turkish tribes converting to Judiasm.
This also is overshadowed by another theory that I'll cover later.
Within this debate there are 2 major overarching beliefs. Biblical Minimalists (Most of the Bible is Fiction) and Biblical Maximalists (Most of the Bible is based on Oral tradition of real events).
This argument is mostly held during the point before the Exile. Both sides leaning towards one side of the Non-Falsifiable nature of the period.
If you build on the idea that the Old Testamanet is not reliable at all, you come to a conclusion that even most Minimalists reject. That being that modern Jews are not connected to ancient Isrealites at all.
#### The Khazar Theory:
Schlomo Sand, a historian at University of Tel Aviv states that the Jews from Europe have no connection to the Isrealites of the Bible.
Its argued that the Modern Jew descents from a Turkish Tribe from around the area of the Black and Caspian Seas, that converted to Judiasm in the 8th Century BCE. It also argues the Zionist Movement of the Late 18th Century, Fabricated the history as a means to assert a claim to the land of **Palestine**.
He argues against the notion of a Jewish Ethnicity and classifies Judiasm as solely a religion.
This theory is not new and was around for a while before, growing in popularity around the same time as the Aryan and Habiru theories, making it ammunition for Anti-Semitic beliefs.
Though this isnt taken as seriously as there is little to no evidence for these claims at all. There is no evidence of any Turkish tribes converting to Judiasm.
This also is overshadowed by another theory that I'll cover later.
Comments
Displaying 0 of 0 comments ( View all | Add Comment )