The Buy-bull.

As a useful document, the Bible is close to being a total wreck with no insurance. Other ancient documents such as Herodotus, the Tao, the sayings of Confucius, and the Buddhist documents, are as fresh and relevant today as the day they were written. The Bible by contrast is a mess, its readability is poor and its relevance to modern day is almost non-existent.

A more readable version of the Bible is Josephus “The Antiquities of the Jews” https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm This is primarily a history so doesn’t include psalms, proverbs, song of Solomon, it misses parts of Isaiah, etc.

I got interested again in the Bible on learning that the biblical documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls were finally published and translated into English some 70 years after their discovery. For 40 years after discovery they were hidden away from everyone. The final serialised publication was in the year 2002. The discovery was in the year 1947. See https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/41/3/4
The biblical books of the dead sea scrolls are supposed to be available on the web, but I don’t have institutional access. By the way, the Dead Sea Scrolls were not all written at the same time, some are at least 300 years older than others.

I have to throw in the trash one idea I’ve had about the Bible, that the Yahweh/Jehovah name of God is better translated as “Nature” and that “El” and its variants represented different branches of government. If successful that would have completely removed religion from the Bible allowing it to be treated as a non-religious document. I came up with that idea without reading the Hebrew. On now reading the Hebrew, the idea falls apart. For the Bible in Hebrew with parallel English translation see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/1.htm The top line of the page allows you to jump through the chapters.

Why bother with the Bible at all? Basically, because it’s huge. Contemporary (700 BC) texts from other sources are tiny, typically a couple of typed pages long or shorter. Non-Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls are also that short. The other ancient documents that make sense today – Herodotus, the Tao, the sayings of Confucius, and the Buddhist documents – are more recent than the earliest parts of the Bible. The Vedas in Sanskrit are more ancient, circa 1500 to 1000 BC, but they are even more irrelevant and ridiculous than the Bible. For the Rig Veda in English, see https://www.globalgreyebooks.com/ebooks1/ralph-t-h-griffith/rig-veda/rig-veda.pdf

Bible vs archaeology. Nothing in the Bible prior to Solomon is historical. We know from archaeology that Noah’s flood is fiction (yes I’ve read Gilgamesh), that the Exodus never happened, and that Joshua never destroyed Jericho. Apart possibly from some of the Psalms (the dating of the Psalms is mired in controversy), the earliest biblical book is the first part of Isaiah, from about 700 BC. The earliest extant part of Isaiah is from the Dead Sea scrolls and may be as early as 400 BC.

I’m slowly adding to my collection of synonyms for demystifying the Bible. Latest ones have been:
hosts → armies
house → home (is seemingly innocuous but explains that “house of David” does not mean either a building or a genealogy)
tabernacle → tent
altar → barbecue (not as silly as it seems, the barbecue as a means of cooking goes back at least as far as the iron age, before 600 BC)
burnt offering → fuel tax (a levy where farmers have to supply fuel for the barbecue)
temple → museum (as a repository of donations)

One that has me wondering is google translate’s: spirit → wind. That tallies with my earlier translation of spirit → germs, because the wind disperses the germs into the cosmos (heaven) after death.

Earlier synonyms included
heaven → cosmos
angel → messenger (I’m not prepared to go as far as some Christians, who say that angel → spy).
messiah → benefactor
fishers of men → pirates
saved → enslaved (saved from capital punishment which includes death and amputation)
sinners → criminals
ark of the covenant → box with the contract

I’m abandoning my earlier synonym of “big fish” → slave-master because I’ve now read Jonah in the Hebrew transliteration.
I’m rethinking my earlier synonym of “holy spirit” → semen. That sort of works in the new testament but not in the old testament.

It is strange the “wisdom” from people thousands of years ago with little understanding of science mired in superstition/bias is at all relevant today.
Many seem to come out of harsh environments and could have been a survival manual and a means of social control to frighten people into being more civil, god will smite you if you are bad.
Plus whose to say they weren’t written by intolerant bigots nothing to with gods word and created hardship for many people since that day.

Cymek said:

It is strange the “wisdom” from people thousands of years ago with little understanding of science mired in superstition/bias is at all relevant today.
Many seem to come out of harsh environments and could have been a survival manual and a means of social control to frighten people into being more civil, god will smite you if you are bad.
Plus whose to say they weren’t written by intolerant bigots nothing to with gods word and created hardship for many people since that day.

No argument from me there.

Cymek said:

It is strange the “wisdom” from people thousands of years ago with little understanding of science mired in superstition/bias is at all relevant today.
Many seem to come out of harsh environments and could have been a survival manual and a means of social control to frighten people into being more civil, god will smite you if you are bad.
Plus whose to say they weren’t written by intolerant bigots nothing to with gods word and created hardship for many people since that day.

me 2 also

exactly the same conclusion I’d reached upon reading it 50+ years ago
I got tired of the same dozen fairytales since childhood and decided to
read the rest to explore the connective tissue holding them together,

a survival manual and a means of social control to frighten people into being more civil, god will smite you if you are bad.

that and they work hand in glove with The State (worldly governing body)
allowed to live Tax Free in luxury while taxing the sheeple through tithes.
iow a Holy Police Force via A Holy Ghost that watches every thing you do.

as George Carlin puts it “The Greatest Bull Shit Story Ever Told”

…or simply put… “HOLY SHIT!” O-8=

perhaps related

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics
“……….Cognitive archeology such as analysis of cave paintings and other pre-historic art and customs suggests that a form of perennial philosophy or Shamanic metaphysics may stretch back to the birth of behavioral modernity, all around the world………..”

A more recent take on the lost tribes of Israel

AussieDJ said:

A more recent take on the lost tribes of Israel

ROFL

sibeen said:

AussieDJ said:

A more recent take on the lost tribes of Israel

ROFL

Same commentary, for local consumption.

mollwollfumble said:

I have to throw in the trash one idea I’ve had about the Bible, that the Yahweh/Jehovah name of God is better translated as “Nature” and that “El” and its variants represented different branches of government. If successful that would have completely removed religion from the Bible allowing it to be treated as a non-religious document. I came up with that idea without reading the Hebrew. On now reading the Hebrew, the idea falls apart. For the Bible in Hebrew with parallel English translation see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/1.htm The top line of the page allows you to jump through the chapters.

Enough of the original beliefs can be reconstructed. From the Bible itself, and from religious writings discovered in other nearby places.

The original belief was polytheistic. The was a sort of council of gods. The supreme god, was El (or some variation of meaning the most high. He had a wife you know, and they had 70 sons. The sorts formed the sort of second tier. After the initial creation stories and the flood and populating the earth and all that, El decides to sort of retire from human affairs and divides up the nations. Each nation is assigned to one of the second tier gods. Yahew is one of the second tier gods and he is assigned to Israel. There is a passage in the Bible that says this quite bluntly but it is usually mistranslated into English and the meaning is lost. After that, each nation has its own patron diety. The story of Yahew leading his people out of bondage in Egypt is very much the tale of a local patron god with limited powers fighting for his people, not some supreme ruler of the universe. At this point in the bible there are frequent references to other nations serving their own gods. The monotheistic revolution later revised a lot of the texts, but they didn’t erase all of it.

mollwollfumble said:

I’m slowly adding to my collection of synonyms for demystifying the Bible. Latest ones have been:
hosts → armies
house → home (is seemingly innocuous but explains that “house of David” does not mean either a building or a genealogy)
tabernacle → tent
altar → barbecue (not as silly as it seems, the barbecue as a means of cooking goes back at least as far as the iron age, before 600 BC)
burnt offering → fuel tax (a levy where farmers have to supply fuel for the barbecue)
temple → museum (as a repository of donations)

One that has me wondering is google translate’s: spirit → wind. That tallies with my earlier translation of spirit → germs, because the wind disperses the germs into the cosmos (heaven) after death.

Earlier synonyms included
heaven → cosmos
angel → messenger (I’m not prepared to go as far as some Christians, who say that angel → spy).
messiah → benefactor
fishers of men → pirates
saved → enslaved (saved from capital punishment which includes death and amputation)
sinners → criminals
ark of the covenant → box with the contract

I’m abandoning my earlier synonym of “big fish” → slave-master because I’ve now read Jonah in the Hebrew transliteration.
I’m rethinking my earlier synonym of “holy spirit” → semen. That sort of works in the new testament but not in the old testament.

Why do you need to make up new definitions for common words? Do you really think you know more about ancient Hebrew, Latin and Greek than the people whose translations you are reading?

Witty Rejoinder said:

mollwollfumble said:

I’m slowly adding to my collection of synonyms for demystifying the Bible. Latest ones have been:
hosts → armies
house → home (is seemingly innocuous but explains that “house of David” does not mean either a building or a genealogy)
tabernacle → tent
altar → barbecue (not as silly as it seems, the barbecue as a means of cooking goes back at least as far as the iron age, before 600 BC)
burnt offering → fuel tax (a levy where farmers have to supply fuel for the barbecue)
temple → museum (as a repository of donations)

One that has me wondering is google translate’s: spirit → wind. That tallies with my earlier translation of spirit → germs, because the wind disperses the germs into the cosmos (heaven) after death.

Earlier synonyms included
heaven → cosmos
angel → messenger (I’m not prepared to go as far as some Christians, who say that angel → spy).
messiah → benefactor
fishers of men → pirates
saved → enslaved (saved from capital punishment which includes death and amputation)
sinners → criminals
ark of the covenant → box with the contract

I’m abandoning my earlier synonym of “big fish” → slave-master because I’ve now read Jonah in the Hebrew transliteration.
I’m rethinking my earlier synonym of “holy spirit” → semen. That sort of works in the new testament but not in the old testament.

Why do you need to make up new definitions for common words? Do you really think you know more about ancient Hebrew, Latin and Greek than the people whose translations you are reading?

So long as they don’t cause harm to others, I think moll should be free to engage in any strange hobies he wants.

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

I have to throw in the trash one idea I’ve had about the Bible, that the Yahweh/Jehovah name of God is better translated as “Nature” and that “El” and its variants represented different branches of government. If successful that would have completely removed religion from the Bible allowing it to be treated as a non-religious document. I came up with that idea without reading the Hebrew. On now reading the Hebrew, the idea falls apart. For the Bible in Hebrew with parallel English translation see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/1.htm The top line of the page allows you to jump through the chapters.

Enough of the original beliefs can be reconstructed. From the Bible itself, and from religious writings discovered in other nearby places.

The original belief was polytheistic. The was a sort of council of gods. The supreme god, was El (or some variation of meaning the most high. He had a wife you know, and they had 70 sons. The sorts formed the sort of second tier. After the initial creation stories and the flood and populating the earth and all that, El decides to sort of retire from human affairs and divides up the nations. Each nation is assigned to one of the second tier gods. Yahew is one of the second tier gods and he is assigned to Israel. There is a passage in the Bible that says this quite bluntly but it is usually mistranslated into English and the meaning is lost. After that, each nation has its own patron diety. The story of Yahew leading his people out of bondage in Egypt is very much the tale of a local patron god with limited powers fighting for his people, not some supreme ruler of the universe. At this point in the bible there are frequent references to other nations serving their own gods. The monotheistic revolution later revised a lot of the texts, but they didn’t erase all of it.

Wow. I like that.

> He had a wife you know, and they had 70 sons.

Wow.

I replace that “council of gods” with just “council”.
The children include – legal statutes, high court, police, leader of the army, secret service, messengers, head chef, museum workers.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Why do you need to make up new definitions for common words? Do you really think you know more about ancient Hebrew, Latin and Greek than the people whose translations you are reading?

So long as they don’t cause harm to others, I think moll should be free to engage in any strange hobies he wants.

Thank you Rev. D :-)

> Why?

Because for me, the religious aspect of the Bible is so ruthlessly pounded in church that it interferes seriously with the understanding of it as an ancient text.

How many atheist Bible translators have there been?

> think you know more about ancient Hebrew, Latin and Greek

Not in the least.

But the internet has made interpretation infinitely easier. Think of it like the human genome. An enormous amount of struggle was gone through to get that first draft but, as time goes on, making updates becomes easier and easier. I will have access to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which no standard Bible translation has so far included. I have access on the web to word for word transliterations of Hebrew and Greek versions. At the touch of a button I can bring up Bible commentaries on every contentious issue. I have web access to side by side translations. In addition, useful new words including cosmos and barbecue were not available when existing translations were made. Making a new draft of my own by mix and match is not an insurmountable obstacle.

You want a contentious issue? “thou shalt not commit adultery” – the original says fornication not adultery, but that can not be used to exonerate adulterers.

There are gaps. The Quran is a descendent of the Bible containing a more reliable pronunciation because the original Hebrew writing skipped the vowels. But if there’s a concordance linking the Bible to the Quran then I haven’t seen it. In addition, the written pronunciation of Quranic Arabic has not been standardised. Even the name of it, some write Q’ran, some Quran and some Qu’ran; at least everyone now agrees that it’s not ‘Koran’. Another lack of agreement is the Arabic pronunciation of Jesus, some use Yasue, Isa and ʿĪsā.

I’ve been lucky in the past to come across a couple of little-known books. One is “the translators Bible”, this eight(?) volume Bible analyses each Biblical sentence in turn giving alternative source documents and alternative interpretations. Another is a “Bible discordance”, which highlights each disagreement between Bible verses, eg. the disagreement between Gen 1:1 and Gen 6:1.

Am I ready to write an Atheist edition of the Bible?

No.
Not nearly.

The litmus test would be the Psalms. These are heavily religious, many are probably untranslatable through a non-religious filter.

PS.
Sheol / Hell → the grave

mollwollfumble said:

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

I have to throw in the trash one idea I’ve had about the Bible, that the Yahweh/Jehovah name of God is better translated as “Nature” and that “El” and its variants represented different branches of government. If successful that would have completely removed religion from the Bible allowing it to be treated as a non-religious document. I came up with that idea without reading the Hebrew.

<snip></snip>

The litmus test would be the Psalms. These are heavily religious, many are probably untranslatable through a non-religious filter.

PS.
Sheol / Hell → the grave

Oldest Hebrew and Samaritan Script & Language were nothing but Phoenician

As we learned early on in school, the Phoenicians were World-Class SAILORS
as well as Merchants by no small coincidence being situated at the far end of
the Mediterranean Sea which was quite literally, The Cross Roads of the World.

The PROVERBIAL “Land of Milk & Honey” coveted by those who not only laid
claim to it (by literally committing genocide upon every people native to the area.)
but to this day bomb Lebanon(Phoenicia) during the height of every tourist season.

So, with Florida the latest flashpoint in the culture wars, Stevens decided it was time to take up arms. His target: The Bible. “My objection to the Bible being in your public schools is based on the following seven points, offered for your learned consideration,” Stevens wrote.

Stevens proceeded to question whether the Bible is age-appropriate, pointing to its “casual” references to murder, adultery, sexual immorality, and fornication. “Do we really want to teach our youth about drunken orgies?”

He also took issue with the many Biblical references to rape, bestiality, cannibalism and infanticide. “In the end, if Jimmy and Susie are curious about any of the above, they can do what everyone else does – get a room at the Motel Six and grab the Gideons,” he wrote.

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/26/1094740651/florida-man-asks-schools-to-ban-the-bible-following-the-states-efforts-to-remove

sarahs mum said:

So, with Florida the latest flashpoint in the culture wars, Stevens decided it was time to take up arms. His target: The Bible. “My objection to the Bible being in your public schools is based on the following seven points, offered for your learned consideration,” Stevens wrote.

Stevens proceeded to question whether the Bible is age-appropriate, pointing to its “casual” references to murder, adultery, sexual immorality, and fornication. “Do we really want to teach our youth about drunken orgies?”

He also took issue with the many Biblical references to rape, bestiality, cannibalism and infanticide. “In the end, if Jimmy and Susie are curious about any of the above, they can do what everyone else does – get a room at the Motel Six and grab the Gideons,” he wrote.

https://www.npr.org/2022/04/26/1094740651/florida-man-asks-schools-to-ban-the-bible-following-the-states-efforts-to-remove

Can you get more hypocritical than that? Very clever come-back.

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

I have to throw in the trash one idea I’ve had about the Bible, that the Yahweh/Jehovah name of God is better translated as “Nature” and that “El” and its variants represented different branches of government. If successful that would have completely removed religion from the Bible allowing it to be treated as a non-religious document. I came up with that idea without reading the Hebrew. On now reading the Hebrew, the idea falls apart. For the Bible in Hebrew with parallel English translation see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/1.htm The top line of the page allows you to jump through the chapters.

Enough of the original beliefs can be reconstructed. From the Bible itself, and from religious writings discovered in other nearby places.

The original belief was polytheistic. The was a sort of council of gods. The supreme god, was El (or some variation of meaning the most high. He had a wife you know, and they had 70 sons. The sorts formed the sort of second tier. After the initial creation stories and the flood and populating the earth and all that, El decides to sort of retire from human affairs and divides up the nations. Each nation is assigned to one of the second tier gods. Yahew is one of the second tier gods and he is assigned to Israel. There is a passage in the Bible that says this quite bluntly but it is usually mistranslated into English and the meaning is lost. After that, each nation has its own patron diety. The story of Yahew leading his people out of bondage in Egypt is very much the tale of a local patron god with limited powers fighting for his people, not some supreme ruler of the universe. At this point in the bible there are frequent references to other nations serving their own gods. The monotheistic revolution later revised a lot of the texts, but they didn’t erase all of it.

Thinking more on what you said p_p.

What you said makes a lot more sense than what I was saying.

The “council of Gods” is elohim, which is both singular and plural.

“Yahew is one of the second tier gods and he is assigned to Israel” matches up with the “the Lord your God” which appears frequently throughout the Bible, and in particular untangles the Genesis 1:1 vs Genesis 2:4 discordance. Genesis 1 starts “In the beginning, elohim” which refers to the council of Gods. Genesis 2:4 and thereon continually refers to yahweh elohim, ie. the second tier God yahweh on the council elohim.

This “yahweh elohim” gets translated as “the lord your god” throughout the Bible.

From wikipedia. “ʾEl is a generic word for god that could be used for any god, including Hadad, Moloch, or Yahweh.”
Ēlîm is translated as gods, which fits.

From Exodus “I revealed myself to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob as Ēl Shaddāi, but was not known to them by my name, yahweh”.
From Psalm 89 “who can be likened to Yahweh among the sons of Gods”
Also from Exodus “Who is like you among the Gods (‘ēlim), Yahweh?”

It all fits, party_pants. Thank you.

Hello hello hello.

I thought that I couldn’t get this without institutional access.

https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Bt55DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP9&dq=qumran&ots=pkM7P9KNEl&sig=psYHOJU4×090tyfCajPWhAi4oLU#v=onepage&q=qumran&f=false

Oh, it’s only a preview, darn. Genesis, Exodus, the last page of 2 Kings and the first page of Isaiah

Can’t cut and paste Hebrew text. No eBook.
How’s your Hebrew?

mollwollfumble said:

How’s your Hebrew?

Non-existent! I used to be able to read Yiddish – which uses the same letters – after a fashion, but I think I’d be struggling now.

AussieDJ said:

mollwollfumble said:

How’s your Hebrew?

Non-existent! I used to be able to read Yiddish – which uses the same letters – after a fashion, but I think I’d be struggling now.

Struggling schmuggling, boychik.

Neophyte said:

AussieDJ said:

mollwollfumble said:

How’s your Hebrew?

Non-existent! I used to be able to read Yiddish – which uses the same letters – after a fashion, but I think I’d be struggling now.

Struggling schmuggling, boychik.

Eh. I do what I can.

AussieDJ said:

Neophyte said:

AussieDJ said:

Non-existent! I used to be able to read Yiddish – which uses the same letters – after a fashion, but I think I’d be struggling now.

Struggling schmuggling, boychik.

Eh. I do what I can.

Shouldn’t you have waved your hands around when you did that?

sibeen said:

AussieDJ said:

Neophyte said:

Struggling schmuggling, boychik.

Eh. I do what I can.

Shouldn’t you have waved your hands around when you did that?

A bit difficult in print, but I did bend forward a little, scrunch up my shoulders and hold my hands out, palms upwards.

AussieDJ said:

sibeen said:

AussieDJ said:

Eh. I do what I can.

Shouldn’t you have waved your hands around when you did that?

A bit difficult in print, but I did bend forward a little, scrunch up my shoulders and hold my hands out, palms upwards.

Oy vey :)

sibeen said:

AussieDJ said:

sibeen said:

Shouldn’t you have waved your hands around when you did that?

A bit difficult in print, but I did bend forward a little, scrunch up my shoulders and hold my hands out, palms upwards.

Oy vey :)

I don’t have a photo of it, unfortunately, but I’ve seen a car parked in a nearby suburb, with the rego plate reading “oyvey”. I’d hazard a guess it might belong to a member of the tribe.

AussieDJ said:

sibeen said:

AussieDJ said:

A bit difficult in print, but I did bend forward a little, scrunch up my shoulders and hold my hands out, palms upwards.

Oy vey :)

I don’t have a photo of it, unfortunately, but I’ve seen a car parked in a nearby suburb, with the rego plate reading “oyvey”. I’d hazard a guess it might belong to a member of the tribe.

I wouldn’t be jumping to any wild conclusions :)

sibeen said:

AussieDJ said:

sibeen said:

Oy vey :)

I don’t have a photo of it, unfortunately, but I’ve seen a car parked in a nearby suburb, with the rego plate reading “oyvey”. I’d hazard a guess it might belong to a member of the tribe.

I wouldn’t be jumping to any wild conclusions :)

:)

Good and nice to see you back as a regular, ADJ :)

sibeen said:

Good and nice to see you back as a regular, ADJ :)

Thank you, sibeen.

Moll,

You might be able to get institutional access if you join the National Library of Australia.

Michael V said:

Moll,

You might be able to get institutional access if you join the National Library of Australia.

Thanks :-) I used to be a member of the National Library of Australia but membership lapsed. It was quite useful.

I’m nowhere near being able to do a translation myself.

Three things I’m having trouble with are:

1. Priest. What? Public servant?

2. Spirit. Translations I’ve tried so far are: germs (evil spirit surviving after death), wind, enthusiasm, energy. They don’t quite fit.

3. Offering. An offering is a tax, levy or fee. There are more than four types of offering.

• A sin offering is money given in recompense for a crime, ie. a fine.

• A food offering is a rota/roster payment of food for a feast.

• A peace offering. I’m not 100% sure here. It’s either a way of gaining favour ie. a bribe. Or it’s a payment to settle civil disputes in court ie. damages.

• A burnt offering. This one has me stumped. ¿Is it a sign of government corruption, there are too many taxes so the excess has to be disposed of in fire. ¿Or is it a fuel levy, stuff to be burnt for cooking feasts. ¿Or is it for candles/lamps for lighting the government offices after sunset. ¿Or is it burnt to release narcotics, like incense. ¿Or is it burnt as an insect repellent.

Before the Hebrew script we are familiar with there was a kind of proto Hebrew script – hieroglyphic in nature

EL is represented by a bulls head imagine the letter A Upside down ( it’s where we get the letter A)

EL is the original God and referred to as “the mighty one”

They’ve found whole writings in this hieroglyphic language that mirror passages in the old testament – these writings are obviously MUCH older than any Hebrew script we are familiar with – scratched into rock.

wookiemeister said:

Before the Hebrew script we are familiar with there was a kind of proto Hebrew script – hieroglyphic in nature

EL is represented by a bulls head imagine the letter A Upside down ( it’s where we get the letter A)

EL is the original God and referred to as “the mighty one”

They’ve found whole writings in this hieroglyphic language that mirror passages in the old testament – these writings are obviously MUCH older than any Hebrew script we are familiar with – scratched into rock.

Hey, didn’t know that. Well spotted.
> They’ve found whole writings in this hieroglyphic language that mirror passages in the old testament

Not according to a book “Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament” by James B. Pritchard. I enjoyed reading it so much that I bought my own copy, and the sequel. There are various ancient texts in a wide variety of languages, Sumarian, Arcadian, Hittite, Egyptian, Caananite that tangentially help by containing a few words that are present in the Old Testament. For example the Gilgamesh flood, Baal, the god Marduk, the word Israel, etc. But there’s nothing even remotely like a mirror to any old testament passages.

(Checks wiki)

Cannanites did sometimes use a Paleo-Hebrew script. “Fewer than 2,000 inscriptions are known today, of which the vast majority comprise just a single letter or word”. The Sheba inscription is translated “This is … -iah, the royal steward. There is no silver or gold here only … and the bones of his maidservant with him. Cursed be the man who opens this”

Let’s have a look here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaanite_and_Aramaic_inscriptions That was no help.

Try again, here we are https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_inscriptions_in_biblical_archaeology#Canaanite_and_Aramaic There’s nothing significant in paleo-Hebrew, but the Mesha Stele in the Moabite language is important as the oldest extra-biblical reference to Yahweh, circa 850 BC.

————————

Here’s what I’ve written.

I have doubts about the accuracy of that Marco Polo quote. That’s come from the web version (Gutenberg) which doesn’t tally with the book version that I read earlier.

A Supreme Court judge dismisses a group of Satanists’ bid to teach religious classes in some Queensland schools, describing the case as a “deplorable waste of state resources” and a political stunt.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-07/qld-court-noosa-temple-of-satan-education-challenge/101044878

Peak Warming Man said:

A Supreme Court judge dismisses a group of Satanists’ bid to teach religious classes in some Queensland schools, describing the case as a “deplorable waste of state resources” and a political stunt.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-07/qld-court-noosa-temple-of-satan-education-challenge/101044878

‘Call the next case.’

‘Yes, m’lud. Calling the case of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster vs the State of Queensland!’

the things that you’re liable to read in the bible ain’t necessarily true.

The 1st draft of ‘the atheist Bible” is finished. The grammar is still an absolute disaster.

Once I make the substitutions “elohim” becomes “laws”, “yahweh” becomes “nature” (or “thought” when it speaks directly to prophets).
Then “yahweh elohim” becomes “laws of nature” which consist of physics (eg. the weather), biology (eg. don’t eat rotting food) and psychology (eg. don’t provoke powerful men).

“Saviour” becomes “rescuer”.

Once I make those substitutions, very little of religion remains in the Bible, and what is left is more like environmentalism, “respect nature” and suchlike.

Here is the new start of Genesis.

——-

GENESIS
1
1 In the beginning, laws (ie. laws of physics) created the cosmos and the earth. 2 And the earth was formless and empty; and darkness was on the face of the deep: and the energy of laws moved on the face of the waters. 3 And laws said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And laws saw the light, that it was good: and laws divided the light from the darkness. 5 And laws called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 And laws said, Let there be a sky in the middle of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And laws made the sky, and divided the waters which were under the sky from the waters which were above the sky: and it was so. 8 And laws called the sky the atmosphere. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
9 And laws said, Let the waters under the cosmos be gathered together to one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And laws called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and laws saw that it was good. 11 And laws said, Let the earth put up grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees carrying fruit after their kind, where is the seed of it, on the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought up grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees carrying fruit, where is the seed of it, after their kind: and laws saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
14 And laws said, Let there be lights in the sky to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years: 15 and let them be for lights in the sky of the atmosphere to give light on the earth: and it was so. 16 And laws made the two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And laws set them in the sky to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and laws saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
20 And laws said, Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open sky. 21 And laws created the great sea-animals, and every living creature that moves, where the waters swarmed, after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind: and laws saw that it was good. 22 And laws fertilised them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth. 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24 And laws said, Let the earth bring up living creatures after their kind, cattle, and creeping things, and animals of the earth after their kind: and it was so. 25 And laws made the animals of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind: and laws saw that it was good. 26 And laws said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have supremacy over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the cosmos, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. 27 And laws created man in his own image, in the image of laws created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And laws fertilised them: and laws said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have supremacy over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the cosmos, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. 29 And laws said, See, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it will be for food: 30 and to every animal of the earth, and to every bird of the cosmos, and to everything that creeps on the earth, where there is life, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so. 31 And laws saw everything that he had made, and, see, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Genesis 2
1 And the cosmos and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day laws finished his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And laws fertilised the seventh day, and made it awesome; because that in it he rested from all his work which laws had created and made.
4 These are the generations of the cosmos and of the earth when they were created, in the day that nature laws made earth and the atmosphere. 5 And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprang up; for nature laws had not caused it to rain on the earth: and there was not a man to till the ground; 6 but there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7 And nature laws formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living mind. 8 And nature laws planted a garden eastward, in Eden; and there he put the man who he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made nature laws to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the middle of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thus it was parted, and became four heads. 11 The name of the first is Pishon: that is it which ranges the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12 and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that ranges the whole land of Cush. 14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goes in front of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. 15 And nature laws took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. 16 And nature laws commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat: 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you will not eat of it: for in the day that you eats of it you will surely die.
18 And nature laws said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground nature laws formed every animal of the field, and every bird of the cosmos; and brought them to the man to see what he would call them: and whatever the man called every living creature, that was the name of it. 20 And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the cosmos, and to every animal of the field; but for man there was not found a help meet for him. 21 And nature laws caused a deep sleep to fall on the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead of it: 22 and the rib, which nature laws had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her to the man. 23 And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she will be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore will a man leave his father and his mother, and will split to his wife: and they will be one flesh. 25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

——

See, not much religion in that.

mollwollfumble said:

The Buy-bull.

As a useful document, the Bible is close to being a total wreck with no insurance. Other ancient documents such as Herodotus, the Tao, the sayings of Confucius, and the Buddhist documents, are as fresh and relevant today as the day they were written. The Bible by contrast is a mess, its readability is poor and its relevance to modern day is almost non-existent.

A more readable version of the Bible is Josephus “The Antiquities of the Jews” https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm This is primarily a history so doesn’t include psalms, proverbs, song of Solomon, it misses parts of Isaiah, etc.

I got interested again in the Bible on learning that the biblical documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls were finally published some 70 years after their discovery. For 40 years after discovery they were hidden away from everyone. The final serialised publication was in the year 2002. The discovery was in the year 1947. See https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/41/3/4

For the Bible in Hebrew with parallel English translation see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/1.htm The top line of the page allows you to jump through the chapters.

Why bother with the Bible at all? Basically, because it’s huge. Contemporary (700 BC) texts from other sources are tiny, typically a couple of typed pages long or shorter. Non-Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls are also that short. The other ancient documents that make sense today – Herodotus, the Tao, the sayings of Confucius, and the Buddhist documents – are more recent than the earliest parts of the Bible. The Vedas in Sanskrit are more ancient, circa 1500 to 1000 BC, but they are even more irrelevant and ridiculous than the Bible. For the Rig Veda in English, see https://www.globalgreyebooks.com/ebooks1/ralph-t-h-griffith/rig-veda/rig-veda.pdf

Bible vs archaeology. Nothing in the Bible prior to Solomon is historical. We know from archaeology that Noah’s flood is fiction (yes I’ve read Gilgamesh), that the Exodus never happened, and that Joshua never destroyed Jericho. Apart possibly from some of the Psalms (the dating of the Psalms is mired in controversy), the earliest biblical book is the first part of Isaiah, from about 700 BC. The earliest extant part of Isaiah is from the Dead Sea scrolls and may be as early as 400 BC.

I’m slowly adding to my collection of synonyms for demystifying the Bible. Latest ones have been:
hosts → armies
tabernacle → tent
altar → barbecue (not as silly as it seems, the barbecue as a means of cooking goes back at least as far as the iron age, before 600 BC)
temple → museum (as a repository of donations)

One that has me wondering is google translate’s: spirit → wind. That tallies with my earlier translation of spirit → germs, because the wind disperses the germs into the cosmos (heaven) after death.

Earlier synonyms included
heaven → cosmos
angel → messenger (I’m not prepared to go as far as some Christians, who say that angel → spy).
messiah → benefactor
sinners → criminals
ark of the covenant → box with the contract

mollwollfumble said:

The 1st draft of ‘the atheist Bible” is finished. The grammar is still an absolute disaster.

Once I make the substitutions “elohim” becomes “laws”, “yahweh” becomes “nature” (or “thought” when it speaks directly to prophets).
Then “yahweh elohim” becomes “laws of nature” which consist of physics (eg. the weather), biology (eg. don’t eat rotting food) and psychology (eg. don’t provoke powerful men).

“Saviour” becomes “rescuer”.

Once I make those substitutions, very little of religion remains in the Bible, and what is left is more like environmentalism, “respect nature” and suchlike.

Here is the new start of Genesis.

——-

GENESIS
1
1 In the beginning, laws (ie. laws of physics) created the cosmos and the earth. 2 And the earth was formless and empty; and darkness was on the face of the deep: and the energy of laws moved on the face of the waters. 3 And laws said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And laws saw the light, that it was good: and laws divided the light from the darkness. 5 And laws called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
6 And laws said, Let there be a sky in the middle of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And laws made the sky, and divided the waters which were under the sky from the waters which were above the sky: and it was so. 8 And laws called the sky the atmosphere. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
9 And laws said, Let the waters under the cosmos be gathered together to one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And laws called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and laws saw that it was good. 11 And laws said, Let the earth put up grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees carrying fruit after their kind, where is the seed of it, on the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought up grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees carrying fruit, where is the seed of it, after their kind: and laws saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
14 And laws said, Let there be lights in the sky to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years: 15 and let them be for lights in the sky of the atmosphere to give light on the earth: and it was so. 16 And laws made the two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17 And laws set them in the sky to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and laws saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
20 And laws said, Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open sky. 21 And laws created the great sea-animals, and every living creature that moves, where the waters swarmed, after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind: and laws saw that it was good. 22 And laws fertilised them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth. 23 And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
24 And laws said, Let the earth bring up living creatures after their kind, cattle, and creeping things, and animals of the earth after their kind: and it was so. 25 And laws made the animals of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind: and laws saw that it was good. 26 And laws said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have supremacy over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the cosmos, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. 27 And laws created man in his own image, in the image of laws created he him; male and female created he them. 28 And laws fertilised them: and laws said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have supremacy over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the cosmos, and over every living thing that moves on the earth. 29 And laws said, See, I have given you every herb yielding seed, which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it will be for food: 30 and to every animal of the earth, and to every bird of the cosmos, and to everything that creeps on the earth, where there is life, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so. 31 And laws saw everything that he had made, and, see, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

Genesis 2
1 And the cosmos and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. 2 And on the seventh day laws finished his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. 3 And laws fertilised the seventh day, and made it awesome; because that in it he rested from all his work which laws had created and made.
4 These are the generations of the cosmos and of the earth when they were created, in the day that nature laws made earth and the atmosphere. 5 And no plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprang up; for nature laws had not caused it to rain on the earth: and there was not a man to till the ground; 6 but there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7 And nature laws formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living mind. 8 And nature laws planted a garden eastward, in Eden; and there he put the man who he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made nature laws to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the middle of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 10 And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thus it was parted, and became four heads. 11 The name of the first is Pishon: that is it which ranges the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12 and the gold of that land is good: there is bdellium and the onyx stone. 13 And the name of the second river is Gihon: the same is it that ranges the whole land of Cush. 14 And the name of the third river is Hiddekel: that is it which goes in front of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. 15 And nature laws took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it. 16 And nature laws commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat: 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you will not eat of it: for in the day that you eats of it you will surely die.
18 And nature laws said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground nature laws formed every animal of the field, and every bird of the cosmos; and brought them to the man to see what he would call them: and whatever the man called every living creature, that was the name of it. 20 And the man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the cosmos, and to every animal of the field; but for man there was not found a help meet for him. 21 And nature laws caused a deep sleep to fall on the man, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead of it: 22 and the rib, which nature laws had taken from the man, made he a woman, and brought her to the man. 23 And the man said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she will be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore will a man leave his father and his mother, and will split to his wife: and they will be one flesh. 25 And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.

——

See, not much religion in that.

mollwollfumble said:

The Buy-bull.

As a useful document, the Bible is close to being a total wreck with no insurance. Other ancient documents such as Herodotus, the Tao, the sayings of Confucius, and the Buddhist documents, are as fresh and relevant today as the day they were written. The Bible by contrast is a mess, its readability is poor and its relevance to modern day is almost non-existent.

A more readable version of the Bible is Josephus “The Antiquities of the Jews” https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2848/2848-h/2848-h.htm This is primarily a history so doesn’t include psalms, proverbs, song of Solomon, it misses parts of Isaiah, etc.

I got interested again in the Bible on learning that the biblical documents of the Dead Sea Scrolls were finally published some 70 years after their discovery. For 40 years after discovery they were hidden away from everyone. The final serialised publication was in the year 2002. The discovery was in the year 1947. See https://www.baslibrary.org/biblical-archaeology-review/41/3/4

For the Bible in Hebrew with parallel English translation see https://biblehub.com/interlinear/genesis/1.htm The top line of the page allows you to jump through the chapters.

Why bother with the Bible at all? Basically, because it’s huge. Contemporary (700 BC) texts from other sources are tiny, typically a couple of typed pages long or shorter. Non-Biblical Dead Sea Scrolls are also that short. The other ancient documents that make sense today – Herodotus, the Tao, the sayings of Confucius, and the Buddhist documents – are more recent than the earliest parts of the Bible. The Vedas in Sanskrit are more ancient, circa 1500 to 1000 BC, but they are even more irrelevant and ridiculous than the Bible. For the Rig Veda in English, see https://www.globalgreyebooks.com/ebooks1/ralph-t-h-griffith/rig-veda/rig-veda.pdf

Bible vs archaeology. Nothing in the Bible prior to Solomon is historical. We know from archaeology that Noah’s flood is fiction (yes I’ve read Gilgamesh), that the Exodus never happened, and that Joshua never destroyed Jericho. Apart possibly from some of the Psalms (the dating of the Psalms is mired in controversy), the earliest biblical book is the first part of Isaiah, from about 700 BC. The earliest extant part of Isaiah is from the Dead Sea scrolls and may be as early as 400 BC.

I’m slowly adding to my collection of synonyms for demystifying the Bible. Latest ones have been:
hosts → armies
tabernacle → tent
altar → barbecue (not as silly as it seems, the barbecue as a means of cooking goes back at least as far as the iron age, before 600 BC)
temple → museum (as a repository of donations)

One that has me wondering is google translate’s: spirit → wind. That tallies with my earlier translation of spirit → germs, because the wind disperses the germs into the cosmos (heaven) after death.

Earlier synonyms included
heaven → cosmos
angel → messenger (I’m not prepared to go as far as some Christians, who say that angel → spy).
messiah → benefactor
sinners → criminals
ark of the covenant → box with the contract

But surely there was light before the waters.

Tamb said:

But surely there was light before the waters.

Yeah. :-) The writer in 700 BC or so wouldn’t necessarily have known that. I figure that this writer got his ideas of the formation of the Earth from watching the formation of the clouds in the atmosphere.

My Atheist Bible uses the word “sky” in Genesis 1:7. Other versions use “vault”, “firmament”, “expanse” or “dome” in place of that word. I’m happy with my one, it’s the only translation that places this word in the atmosphere.

This following comparison chart is interesting.

I’ve been looking at Interlinear Version, King James Version KGV, American Standard Version, Revised Standard Version RSV, Good News Translation GNT and International Standard Version ISV. I’m glad for the confirmation that the Interlinear Bible is the most authentic.

The ISV and GNT have good grammar, but wrong facts and are too heavily paraphrased for me. The ISV doesn’t have a snake in the garden of Eden or have a Christ in the New Testament. The GNT doesn’t distinguish between Elohim and Yahweh. On the other hand, the KJV, American Standard and RSV have bad grammar.

The following chart has Interlinear, King James, Revised Standard, International Standard and Good News. I must keep left of the ISV.

The American Standard Version of 1901 isn’t on the above chart, where does that fit? Could it be similar to the “New American Standard Bible”, which is a direct revision of the American Standard Version? I think it is.

The NASB looks like a really good starting point. About as close to word for word as it is possible to get without sacrificing conventional grammar. The latest update of the NASB is from 2020 and can be found on https://chop.bible.com/bible/2692/GEN.1.nasb2020

dv said:

I could go into that in a bit of detail. According to Biblical scholars, when Mary anoints Jesus feet with oil it’s because he’s visiting a massage parlour. So the “messiah” is defined as anyone who visits a massage parlour. As for Jesus/Joshua, the original pronunciation is “Isa”, according to the Quran, and I’m sticking with that.

“Christ” from the original Greek “Χριστοῦ” is untranslatable, so the word “Christ” has been completely removed from the Bible in many recent translations!, to be replaced by “messiah” which is “the oily one”.

mollwollfumble said:

The NASB looks like a really good starting point. About as close to word for word as it is possible to get without sacrificing conventional grammar. The latest update of the NASB is from 2020 and can be found on https://chop.bible.com/bible/2692/GEN.1.nasb2020

This is priceless.

The NASB from 2020 is the most recent and authoritative Bible version. In it they can’t spell the name “Jesus”. In Mark 15:47 they misspell “Jesus” as “Joses”. As in, “Mary the mother of Joses”.

From now on I’m going to refer to NASB 2020 as “The Joses Bible”.

mollwollfumble said:

As for Jesus/Joshua, the original pronunciation is “Isa”, according to the Quran, and I’m sticking with that.

mollwollfumble said:

Why go with a book written half a millenium after the events described?

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

As for Jesus/Joshua, the original pronunciation is “Isa”, according to the Quran, and I’m sticking with that.

Why go with a book written half a millenium after the events described?

Why? Because it’s much bigger than anything else of the same vintage. Most ancient documents from that time are graffiti, typically only a word or two long. Very few are longer than two typed pages. It’s the sheer size that makes it valuable. It’s interesting as a document on ancient sociology and politics.

I’ve now completed as much of the Old Testimony as I’m going to.

Uploaded to https://drive.google.com/file/d/197qlMThoSYMWX6SchW2ETRCd-mGVJkT5/view?usp=sharing

Pastor Chuck is currently teaching us about Ezekiel.
He’s using the teaching method where he’s having a conversation with the chap and we are privy to the discussion.
It’s very profound.
Next week he’ll be having a conversation with a another couple of biblical chaps.
You can also go online and buy pieces of Ezekiel’s shorts that have been blessed by Chuck.

mollwollfumble said:

Most ancient documents from that time are graffiti, typically only a word or two long.

Wah,… Like “Romanes eunt domus”?

Woodie said:

mollwollfumble said:

Most ancient documents from that time are graffiti, typically only a word or two long.

Wah,… Like “Romanes eunt domus”?

You sure it was eunt?

Peak Warming Man said:

Pastor Chuck is currently teaching us about Ezekiel.
He’s using the teaching method where he’s having a conversation with the chap and we are privy to the discussion.
It’s very profound.
Next week he’ll be having a conversation with a another couple of biblical chaps.
You can also go online and buy pieces of Ezekiel’s shorts that have been blessed by Chuck.

I’ve heard about Ezekiel. He was a friend of Tony.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/mzYOTPvacJM

Peak Warming Man said:

Woodie said:

mollwollfumble said:

Most ancient documents from that time are graffiti, typically only a word or two long.

Wah,… Like “Romanes eunt domus”?

You sure it was eunt?

I think I need to conjugate the verb, Mr man. Third person plural, uh, present indicative, hey what but.

Hey moll, have you ever read Gilgamesh? A lot of the old testament is an adaptation of it, but with crucial and illuminating differences.

Mary Ann Moore-Bentley, also known as Mary Ling (6 January 1865 – 1 September 1953), was an Australian writer and parliamentary candidate.

Born in Braidwood to English-born Methodists George Bentley and Mary Ann, née Moore, young Mary and her two younger brothers was primarily educated at home by her mother. She and her sister visited the Sydney International Exhibition in 1879, but when their money ran out they were forced to work as domestic servants. In 1880 the family settled at Marrickville and Mary became a nursemaid to the children of Colonel Charles Roberts. She married postal clerk Henry Hill Ling on 3 September 1889 at the Salvation Army barracks in Burwood; they separated in 1897 and divorced in 1906.

Moore-Bentley’s first novel was rejected in 1890; she published A Woman of Mars; or, Australia’s Enfranchised Woman in 1901. A Georgist, she joined the Single Tax League in 1901 and was appointed to its council, although she only attended two meetings. In 1903, under the name “Mary Ann Moore Bentley”, she was one of four women to contest the 1903 federal election, the first at which women were eligible to stand, although she was not formally supported by the league. Contesting the Senate in New South Wales, she described herself as “the working woman’s candidate” and support free trade, abolition of state parliaments and a state bank in addition to Georgism. She received 18,924 votes (6.1%), outpolling the other New South Wales Senate candidate, Nellie Martel, by 400 votes.

By 1906, Moore-Bentley’s relations with her brothers, her nearest neighbours at Bangor where she lived, grew tense. A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel (January 1917) received a US publication in Boston and Moore-Bentley sailed to America later that year; she was repatriated at government expense in 1918 and blamed her disappointing time in America on the “Secret Service” and the Australian government’s misrepresentation of her anti-conscription activities. She retired to Menai, writing poems and children’s stories. In 1943 she was committed to the Mental Hospital at Stockton in Newcastle, where she died in 1953. Her memoir, Journey to Durran Durra 1852–1885, which was written around 1935, was published in 1983.

—-

I wonder whether moll would be interested in “A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel”.

dv said:

Mary Ann Moore-Bentley, also known as Mary Ling (6 January 1865 – 1 September 1953), was an Australian writer and parliamentary candidate.

Born in Braidwood to English-born Methodists George Bentley and Mary Ann, née Moore, young Mary and her two younger brothers was primarily educated at home by her mother. She and her sister visited the Sydney International Exhibition in 1879, but when their money ran out they were forced to work as domestic servants. In 1880 the family settled at Marrickville and Mary became a nursemaid to the children of Colonel Charles Roberts. She married postal clerk Henry Hill Ling on 3 September 1889 at the Salvation Army barracks in Burwood; they separated in 1897 and divorced in 1906.

Moore-Bentley’s first novel was rejected in 1890; she published A Woman of Mars; or, Australia’s Enfranchised Woman in 1901. A Georgist, she joined the Single Tax League in 1901 and was appointed to its council, although she only attended two meetings. In 1903, under the name “Mary Ann Moore Bentley”, she was one of four women to contest the 1903 federal election, the first at which women were eligible to stand, although she was not formally supported by the league. Contesting the Senate in New South Wales, she described herself as “the working woman’s candidate” and support free trade, abolition of state parliaments and a state bank in addition to Georgism. She received 18,924 votes (6.1%), outpolling the other New South Wales Senate candidate, Nellie Martel, by 400 votes.

By 1906, Moore-Bentley’s relations with her brothers, her nearest neighbours at Bangor where she lived, grew tense. A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel (January 1917) received a US publication in Boston and Moore-Bentley sailed to America later that year; she was repatriated at government expense in 1918 and blamed her disappointing time in America on the “Secret Service” and the Australian government’s misrepresentation of her anti-conscription activities. She retired to Menai, writing poems and children’s stories. In 1943 she was committed to the Mental Hospital at Stockton in Newcastle, where she died in 1953. Her memoir, Journey to Durran Durra 1852–1885, which was written around 1935, was published in 1983.

—-

I wonder whether moll would be interested in “A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel”.

I hadn’t heard of Georgism.

I wonder what became of all the Georgists.

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

Mary Ann Moore-Bentley, also known as Mary Ling (6 January 1865 – 1 September 1953), was an Australian writer and parliamentary candidate.

Born in Braidwood to English-born Methodists George Bentley and Mary Ann, née Moore, young Mary and her two younger brothers was primarily educated at home by her mother. She and her sister visited the Sydney International Exhibition in 1879, but when their money ran out they were forced to work as domestic servants. In 1880 the family settled at Marrickville and Mary became a nursemaid to the children of Colonel Charles Roberts. She married postal clerk Henry Hill Ling on 3 September 1889 at the Salvation Army barracks in Burwood; they separated in 1897 and divorced in 1906.

Moore-Bentley’s first novel was rejected in 1890; she published A Woman of Mars; or, Australia’s Enfranchised Woman in 1901. A Georgist, she joined the Single Tax League in 1901 and was appointed to its council, although she only attended two meetings. In 1903, under the name “Mary Ann Moore Bentley”, she was one of four women to contest the 1903 federal election, the first at which women were eligible to stand, although she was not formally supported by the league. Contesting the Senate in New South Wales, she described herself as “the working woman’s candidate” and support free trade, abolition of state parliaments and a state bank in addition to Georgism. She received 18,924 votes (6.1%), outpolling the other New South Wales Senate candidate, Nellie Martel, by 400 votes.

By 1906, Moore-Bentley’s relations with her brothers, her nearest neighbours at Bangor where she lived, grew tense. A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel (January 1917) received a US publication in Boston and Moore-Bentley sailed to America later that year; she was repatriated at government expense in 1918 and blamed her disappointing time in America on the “Secret Service” and the Australian government’s misrepresentation of her anti-conscription activities. She retired to Menai, writing poems and children’s stories. In 1943 she was committed to the Mental Hospital at Stockton in Newcastle, where she died in 1953. Her memoir, Journey to Durran Durra 1852–1885, which was written around 1935, was published in 1983.

—-

I wonder whether moll would be interested in “A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel”.

I hadn’t heard of Georgism.

I wonder what became of all the Georgists.

Several of them became prominent prime ministers and presidents

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

Mary Ann Moore-Bentley, also known as Mary Ling (6 January 1865 – 1 September 1953), was an Australian writer and parliamentary candidate.

Born in Braidwood to English-born Methodists George Bentley and Mary Ann, née Moore, young Mary and her two younger brothers was primarily educated at home by her mother. She and her sister visited the Sydney International Exhibition in 1879, but when their money ran out they were forced to work as domestic servants. In 1880 the family settled at Marrickville and Mary became a nursemaid to the children of Colonel Charles Roberts. She married postal clerk Henry Hill Ling on 3 September 1889 at the Salvation Army barracks in Burwood; they separated in 1897 and divorced in 1906.

Moore-Bentley’s first novel was rejected in 1890; she published A Woman of Mars; or, Australia’s Enfranchised Woman in 1901. A Georgist, she joined the Single Tax League in 1901 and was appointed to its council, although she only attended two meetings. In 1903, under the name “Mary Ann Moore Bentley”, she was one of four women to contest the 1903 federal election, the first at which women were eligible to stand, although she was not formally supported by the league. Contesting the Senate in New South Wales, she described herself as “the working woman’s candidate” and support free trade, abolition of state parliaments and a state bank in addition to Georgism. She received 18,924 votes (6.1%), outpolling the other New South Wales Senate candidate, Nellie Martel, by 400 votes.

By 1906, Moore-Bentley’s relations with her brothers, her nearest neighbours at Bangor where she lived, grew tense. A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel (January 1917) received a US publication in Boston and Moore-Bentley sailed to America later that year; she was repatriated at government expense in 1918 and blamed her disappointing time in America on the “Secret Service” and the Australian government’s misrepresentation of her anti-conscription activities. She retired to Menai, writing poems and children’s stories. In 1943 she was committed to the Mental Hospital at Stockton in Newcastle, where she died in 1953. Her memoir, Journey to Durran Durra 1852–1885, which was written around 1935, was published in 1983.

—-

I wonder whether moll would be interested in “A Psychological Interpretation of the Gospel”.

I hadn’t heard of Georgism.

I wonder what became of all the Georgists.

Died for eating too much pudding and pie