Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×
User Journal

Chacham's Journal: Tablet found from First Temple Period (still being verified) 18

Journal by Chacham

This story is pretty neat. It's a tablet, which claims to be from the times of King Y'ho-uhsh (Judaen King).

As the story points out, it's ironic. As the Arabs are denying that a temple ever stood there, they are trying to remove any proof of them. Denying the second temple is nearly impossible, as the evidence is so great. However, the First Temple has little evidence (outside of the T'nach), so they have a better chance at denying that. And it was while destroying the temple mount that this tablet came to light.

Interestingly enough, it's written in Phoenician. I am still wondering at what point in history did the largest amount of people speak Hebrew. I assume when the Jews left Egypt. But I even wonder if then it was a primary laguage. Adam, Eve, and their offspring all spoke Hebrew, but the poplation as decimated during the Deluge. Then Hebrew rose with Noah, but slightly afterwards everyone split off "to their languages". By the time the Tower of Babel came along there were seventy different laguages (besides Hebrew). Everyone just also knew Hebrew (similar to English, or French, today). After the Tower of Babel most did not know Hebrew.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tablet found from First Temple Period (still being verified)

Comments Filter:

  • Theres no reason to think that Adam spoke Hebrew that I've seen. For instance, who's line preserved the pure language at Babel? Does tradition say? Whomever it was preserved through, does it say if they were descendants through ancestry or heritage of Abraham?

    As far as I've heard that the language history is so ambigious that the language Adam spoke is refered only "referencially" as the Adamic language (as in Adam certainly wouldn't have called it that).
    • Theres no reason to think that Adam spoke Hebrew that I've seen.

      G-d created Hebrew. G-d speaks in Hebrew. G-d writes books in Hebrew. The assumption when He created a speaking person, that it would be Hebrew. Why would G-d choose a language other than Hebrew?

      Further, the Bible says that Adam named all the animals. One would wonder about the significance of this if it wasn't in Hebrew.

      For instance, who's line preserved the pure language at Babel? Does tradition say?

      Everyone spoke it. The Bible is pretty clear on that.

      Whomever it was preserved through, does it say if they were descendants through ancestry or heritage of Abraham?

      Abraham came after the Tower of Babel.

      As far as I've heard that the language history is so ambigious that the language Adam spoke is refered only "referencially" as the Adamic language (as in Adam certainly wouldn't have called it that).

      The Bible says that people split off into other languages. I don't see how that is ambigous. I also don't see where there is reference that it was in Aramaic.
      • Chacham, I strongly think that your reply was the Jewish equivilent being blonde.

        G-d created Hebrew. G-d speaks in Hebrew. G-d writes books in Hebrew.

        While I can't argue that, I don't think you'll like why. God created all the languages, speaks all languages and can even write in all languages.

        Why would G-d choose a language other than Hebrew?

        I'm sure when he needs to speak to people that don't understand Hebrew, he chooses whatever other language is most natural to them.

        To argue that God's natural language is Hebrew is pretty arrogant, but not moreso then thinking that God needs servicing by your priests.

        >For instance, who's line preserved the pure language at Babel? Does tradition say?

        Everyone spoke it. The Bible is pretty clear on that.


        This coming from the person that also said...

        The Bible says that people split off into other languages.

        And...

        Abraham came after the Tower of Babel.

        Exactly. And you failed to point out any lineage between him and anyone at the Tower of Babel to establish how the pure language stayed unconfounded.

        Heck, you've shown me where the Hebrew language has changed in the past 400 years, let alone since Babel.
        • To argue that God's natural language is Hebrew is pretty arrogant,

          It would be arrogant if I said that the world evolved on its own, and then G-d chose a language, and that language just happened to be my language. However, that is not what I said. I said that G-d created Hebrew. Thus, it makes sense that is what G-d speaks.

          And you failed to point out any lineage between him and anyone at the Tower of Babel to establish how the pure language stayed unconfounded.

          Ah. I didn't understand what you were asking. Sorry.

          It is an assumption. It stayed pure because a few people who were not associated with the tower had it. Besides, through tradition, we know that is what he spoke, so *somebody* had to teach it to him.

          But--and you can argue this if you want--I think it takes more of a proof to show that he didn't speak Hebrew, than to say that he did.
        • I'm sure when he needs to speak to people that don't understand Hebrew, he chooses whatever other language is most natural to them.

          I don't think G-d ever spoke to anyone who didn't understand Hebrew.
      • Why would G-d choose a language other than Hebrew?

        I know many french that would argue this point...


        And then surrender.

        (hehe... just adding a bit of comedy for a dull tuesday)
        • ROTFLMHO

          Well, maybe not *that* hard. But, thanx for the humor. I always hit the French on things like that. Especially with them wanting their own GMT to run through Paris or something.
    • I think Hebrew *post deluvian* was a minor 2ndary or tertiary language...as Latin had taken over with the Romans..but prior to the Exodus, I'm pretty sure that the people were mainly speaking in 'egyptian'(sorry ignorance abounds here...dunno what they called their language if not egyptian)...and that it wasn't until the Exodus that Hebrew really caught on again for the slaves. You know..40 years of wandering around in a wilderness would tend to isolate your thoughts...(might be a good way to get back to God)*hrm..thought provoking*

      • I think Hebrew *post deluvian* was a minor 2ndary or tertiary language

        You bring up an interesting point, which I'm curious about. Was Hebrew ante-deluvian? What evidence do we have of that?

        I know Chacham will quote Oral Tradition to say that Hebrew was, but the earliest scripture for the Jews dates back to Moses's writings, and so would Oral Tradition date back to Moses.

        But aside from that, what have we to think that Hebrew existed before Abraham?
        • But aside from that, what have we to think that Hebrew existed before Abraham?

          We have a book written by an angel, given to Adam. It was written in Hebrew.
          • Which book is that, and how do you know it was origionaly written in Hebrew?
            • The name of the book is the angel who wrote it. R'zee-ayl Hah-mahl-uhch.

              I know it was originally in Hebrew, since that is what they speak in Heaven. However, I could also say that being it is in Hebrew, and noone says that it was translated, it is assumed to be originally in Hebrew.
              • I know it was originally in Hebrew, since that is what they speak in Heaven.

                That logic is a little circular for my tastes.

                R'zee-ayl Hah-mahl-uhch

                Got a transcript somewhere?

                I could also say that being it is in Hebrew, and noone says that it was translated, it is assumed to be originally in Hebrew.

                Your saying that Angels only know Hebrew?
                • >R'zee-ayl Hah-mahl-uhch

                  Got a transcript somewhere?


                  Jewish Bookstores should have them.

                  Your saying that Angels only know Hebrew?

                  No, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that is what the angels themselves speak in. We know (through the Oral Tradition) that angels do not understand Aramaic. I do not know about the other languages though.
        • but the earliest scripture for the Jews dates back to Moses's writings,

          Interestingly enough, where did the word "Hebrew" come from? Hebrew calls itself, "Luh-shone Hah-ko-desh", or, "The Holy Tongue". The word "Hebrew" seems to come from Abraham.

          Abraham can from the "other side" of the Jordan. Thus, everyone called him Abram "Huh-iv-ree", or "the one who passed over". The verse (Genesis 14:13) makes mention of it. Being he spoke a foreign tongue, they called the language after him, "iv-ree", or "Hebrew".

          We also know that Jacob and his sons spoke Hebrew, from a story of when they went to Egypt. Genesis 42:23 mentions that Joseph used a interpreter to speak with the brothers. Well, it certainly shows that they didn't speak Egyptian.

          Anyway, as to where Abraham got Hebrew from? Possibly Noah, his son Shem, or Eber. It could have been anyone, but those three were alive. As far as an actual meeting, the Oral Tradition teaches us that Malki-Tzedek was actually Shem, son of Noah.

      • I think Hebrew *post deluvian* was a minor 2ndary or tertiary language.

        As do I. This requires more research.
  • nice! I suspect it's fake, but hope it isn't. looking forward to reading the text.

    actually as far as inscriptions go Phenocian = Hebrew. inscriptions from Phonecia proper(the Lebanon coast) are not much different from Biblical Hebrew; in fact, without knowing the vowels or how the consonants sounded, there's no way of knowing whether they are from different languages or only different dialects. most likely what the article means to say is that the inscription was in something very close to Biblical Hebrew.

    • actually as far as inscriptions go Phenocian = Hebrew

      Well, they both have 22 letters, go from right to left, and have vowels separate from the letters. However, did it say that it was script and not cunieform?

      The Talmud mentions that during the First Temple period standard writing was not done in Ashuris letters. It seems that they used the Phonician letters for mundane purposes. But, the languages are different.

A committee is a group that keeps the minutes and loses hours. -- Milton Berle

Working...