Agreed re: Solomon. My sense is that a lot of it was compiled during Josiah’s reign but my knowledge of the topic is sparse. Are you familiar with the theory that the David story is post hoc propaganda after David Coup’d Saul, and the David & Bathsheba story was fabricated as propaganda to legitimize Solomon after he coup’d David?
I mostly came across it all from studying Cyrus the Great, the King of Kings, and then focused on the exile, or captivity or however you want to call it.
The Neo-Babylonians started conquering Judah in about 600BCE, they burned Jerusalem, and destroyed Solomon’s Temple in 587.
The Babylonians were pretty thorough in destroying any religious icons or texts of their new slaves, which included priests and nobles who knew how to read, which was useful to the Babylonians.
This is how Babylonian creation myths ended up making cameos in the new Hebrew bible written from scraps and invention after Cyrus freed the slaves of Babylon as a kind of last fuck you to the city as he declared himself King of Babylon. (or a way to make said slaves love him)
I am a huge fan of Dan and it’s his series that made me feel like I need to learn more about Cyrus.
An interesting feature of growing up an evangelical Christian, at least for me, is the sense that biblical history is somehow walled off from secular history. Obviously places and figures from that time are mentioned, but there is no sense of continuity. I have long been interested in history but since deconstructing I am now almost obsessed with reevaluating my knowledge of what was actually going on in the world, and in greater Canaan during the time of the bible.
Re-reading and actually studying the bible as the library it is, and reading it in its historical context as I gradually plug it in to my existing understanding of history is an incredibly rewarding experience. And I credit Dan Carlin in large part with my persistent fascination with history.
Part of the reason why biblical history and secular history don’t line up is that yeah, the biblical history didn’t exist before 537BCE. That and religious propaganda.
Yep it makes perfect sense in hindsight. It doesn’t actually hook onto history correctly. When you’re presupposing the the bible is inerrant and univocal, you just avoid reconciling certain things.
Agreed re: Solomon. My sense is that a lot of it was compiled during Josiah’s reign but my knowledge of the topic is sparse. Are you familiar with the theory that the David story is post hoc propaganda after David Coup’d Saul, and the David & Bathsheba story was fabricated as propaganda to legitimize Solomon after he coup’d David?
I’m certainly over simplifying.
I mostly came across it all from studying Cyrus the Great, the King of Kings, and then focused on the exile, or captivity or however you want to call it.
The Neo-Babylonians started conquering Judah in about 600BCE, they burned Jerusalem, and destroyed Solomon’s Temple in 587.
The Babylonians were pretty thorough in destroying any religious icons or texts of their new slaves, which included priests and nobles who knew how to read, which was useful to the Babylonians.
This is how Babylonian creation myths ended up making cameos in the new Hebrew bible written from scraps and invention after Cyrus freed the slaves of Babylon as a kind of last fuck you to the city as he declared himself King of Babylon. (or a way to make said slaves love him)
I’m really interested in studying Cyrus the Great, I just got distracted by biblical history as a fixation.
Random Cyrus-related fact: David Koresh of the Waco Branch Davidians changed his last name from Howell to Koresh which is the biblical name for Cyrus.
A good intro to Cyrus the Great might be Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History. The King of Kings series. It’s only, what, 16 hours or so long.
The guy can talk, but he also lists his sources, which are also good jumping off points.
I am a huge fan of Dan and it’s his series that made me feel like I need to learn more about Cyrus.
An interesting feature of growing up an evangelical Christian, at least for me, is the sense that biblical history is somehow walled off from secular history. Obviously places and figures from that time are mentioned, but there is no sense of continuity. I have long been interested in history but since deconstructing I am now almost obsessed with reevaluating my knowledge of what was actually going on in the world, and in greater Canaan during the time of the bible.
Re-reading and actually studying the bible as the library it is, and reading it in its historical context as I gradually plug it in to my existing understanding of history is an incredibly rewarding experience. And I credit Dan Carlin in large part with my persistent fascination with history.
Part of the reason why biblical history and secular history don’t line up is that yeah, the biblical history didn’t exist before 537BCE. That and religious propaganda.
Yep it makes perfect sense in hindsight. It doesn’t actually hook onto history correctly. When you’re presupposing the the bible is inerrant and univocal, you just avoid reconciling certain things.
I was lucky to not have a religious upbringing despite the efforts of one of my parents. The other was a bit of a self identifying heathen.
It was a point of conflict.