posted
Interesting interview with professor Francesca Stavrakopoulou a British Bible scholar with Greek background. She has besides her scholarly production also written popular books and hosted TV programs, for example the series Bible´s buried secrets where she brought forth some unconventional ideas.
She is also known because of her questioning if some Biblical figures, like Abraham or Moses, ever existed.
In the interview she among several subjects talks about God's physicality, which has apparently shocked some people. Incidentally, she has also written a book on the subject.
It is a bit unsettling to hear that she has received many hate letters and even death threats because of her ideas about the Bible and biblical figures. Death threats rhyme badly with Christian love, a concept that apparently not all Christians have taken to heart. She comes to the conclusion that part of the hatred is rooted in fear, that her ideas shake some people's world view and challenge their beliefs.
In the video she also talks about Asherah, who may have been Gods consort in early Hebrew religion. She speculates about how the removal of Asherah can have created a more patriarchal society.
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
That's not trolling, this is literally what you believe -- that if someone studies and/or discusses a certain topic, they must believe or subscribe to it.
You are the troll for trying to use that idiotic logic to silence others like myself when I demonstrate better knowledge than you do on topics that you subscribe to while I don't subscribe to them.
This post by Archeotypery is a perfect example of a professional scholar studying and examining something they do not personally subscribe to, and I'm glad he posted it.
Posts: 2542 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
the topic is not me it's Francesca Stavrakopoulou
Posts: 42939 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
Tazarah
Why are you stalking my social media?
Member # 23365
posted
Who "warned" me? You? The notorious career troll who was stripped of mod duties? Did you forget you are not a mod anymore? Nobody is forcing you to read my comments or respond to them.
You don't control how a person responds to an OP.
I'm pointing out at the fact that the post in the OP about this woman is a prime example of scholars studying and specializing in things that they don't personally subscribe to.
Respect to people like her who are interested in studying things that they don't believe in or subscribe to.
Posts: 2542 | From: North America | Registered: Mar 2021
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's a shame because it's skeptical scholars like her that I think have actually strengthened Christianity and its beliefs. Sure some of what she she says may be off the mark or even outright contradictory to Christian doctrine but she is entitled to that opinion. Seriously I'm surprised she got this much flack and backlash for her views. I thought this kind of stuff usually happens to scholars on Islam especially with the death-threats. I've actually found her work to be more benign than some other atheist scholars.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: I think it's a shame because it's skeptical scholars like her that I think have actually strengthened Christianity and its beliefs.
posted
^ By refining a more accurate understanding of Biblical history through archaeology as well as historiography through more accurate translations. This is are the two biggest things that skeptics and even atheists have done, at least the honest ones.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Many bible scholars are atheist and secular, simply because they know more than the average person, who happens to be just a believer. I learned about this decades ago.
And I happen to have her book, (Francesca Stavrakopoulou) God: An Anatomy. I have not read it yet. I purchased it recently.
I did finish watching this interview:
The REAL God Of The BIBLE | The Most Accurate Bible Documentary You'll EVER See.
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ By refining a more accurate understanding of Biblical history through archaeology as well as historiography through more accurate translations. This is are the two biggest things that skeptics and even atheists have done, at least the honest ones.
I love this type of archeology, because it gives us a better understanding of the origin and how they viewed the world at the time.
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: Many bible scholars are atheist and secular, simply because they know more than the average person, who happens to be just a believer. I learned about this decades ago.
And I happen to have her book, (Francesca Stavrakopoulou) God: An Anatomy. I have not read it yet. I purchased it recently.
I did finish watching this interview:
The REAL God Of The BIBLE | The Most Accurate Bible Documentary You'll EVER See.
I read her thesis from which her book is an extension, some years back. It's basically the same as many others-- that the God of Israel is the Canaanite king of the gods El. because of the the same names as well as some similar attributes. Yet strangely she does not mention the fact that there was a higher god above him called El-Elyon which was the god that Melchezidek of Shalom (Old Jerusalem) worshiped. This is like her thesis that the Garden of Eden was the Temple of Jerusalem, even though the latter was modeled on the former since the Garden of Eden was the original sanctuary of God. You see, I'm no Bible scholar but like with other fields of academia, be it genetics, linguistics, etc. if one is knowledgeable one can dispell the errors or inaccuracies of these scholars.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As much good that skeptical/atheist scholars have done in the field of biblical archaeology and scholarship, there is obviously an agenda at play when either atheist or polytheist/pagan ideas are promoted over other biblical scholars who are Christian or Jewish believers. Which is the case in all mainstream media outlets.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Francesca Stavrakopoulou became well known for a larger audience maybe much due to her presence in TV documentaries like The Bible's Buried secrets where she also forwards some of her theses
quote:Originally posted by Ish Geber: Many bible scholars are atheist and secular, simply because they know more than the average person, who happens to be just a believer. I learned about this decades ago.
And I happen to have her book, (Francesca Stavrakopoulou) God: An Anatomy. I have not read it yet. I purchased it recently.
I did finish watching this interview:
The REAL God Of The BIBLE | The Most Accurate Bible Documentary You'll EVER See.
I read her thesis from which her book is an extension, some years back. It's basically the same as many others-- that the God of Israel is the Canaanite king of the gods El. because of the the same names as well as some similar attributes. Yet strangely she does not mention the fact that there was a higher god above him called El-Elyon which was the god that Melchezidek of Shalom (Old Jerusalem) worshiped. This is like her thesis that the Garden of Eden was the Temple of Jerusalem, even though the latter was modeled on the former since the Garden of Eden was the original sanctuary of God. You see, I'm no Bible scholar but like with other fields of academia, be it genetics, linguistics, etc. if one is knowledgeable one can dispell the errors or inaccuracies of these scholars.
I’m on my phone so editing is a bit difficult.
Anyway, I decided to look up El-Elyon in her latest book.
She does mention the El-Elyon and describes the deity as The Most High of the pantheon.
She mentioned him 7 times in the book.
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I guess I'll have to read the book then, or at least try to skim through it when I get the chance. I'm sure it's a lot better to stomach than this book.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^I am not familiar with The Good Kings. I’m going to look it up.
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I usually like Kara Cooney's work but that one book is a monstrosity, and I mean flaming 3rd wave feminist propaganda if I've ever seen it. She writes more as a feminist professor than an Egyptologist. She does not even understand basic human sociology or psychology for her to question why executive political roles of ruler have always been predominantly male. It's simply because a large part of that role is security and protection and males have always had a monopoly on brute force.
She even makes comparisons to modern day political situations especially ones of foreign policy that she, like many feminists, are totally oblivious of yet always try to put their takes on them-- big bad patriarchal men like Donald Trump. LOLPosts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^ I usually like Kara Cooney's work but that one book is a monstrosity, and I mean flaming 3rd wave feminist propaganda if I've ever seen it. She writes more as a feminist professor than an Egyptologist. She does not even understand basic human sociology or psychology for her to question why executive political roles of ruler have always been predominantly male. It's simply because a large part of that role is security and protection and males have always had a monopoly on brute force.
She even makes comparisons to modern day political situations especially ones of foreign policy that she, like many feminists, are totally oblivious of yet always try to put their takes on them-- big bad patriarchal men like Donald Trump. LOL
One could argue that these ancient tribes socially behaved much like modern day gangs / gang bangers. They fought over petty stuff and were territorial as well.
So from a geopolitical point of view that could make sense.
Posts: 22243 | From: האם אינכם כילדי הכרית אלי בני ישראל | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Geopolitics remains the same. A nation or empire is always on the defense but may at times be on the offense to gain economic and/or political leverage.
When it comes to the Ukrainian war on Russia, you often hear the often repeated lie that Russia just invaded Ukraine unprovoked when that wasn't the case at all. Ukraine violated the Nato treaty by arming their borders with missile but the real impetus was when the eastern provinces of Ukraine invited Russian for help when the Ukrainian government betrayed them by sending an army of Nazis to drive them out of their own land. Which is why those eastern provinces voted to be part of Russia notwithstanding the fact that eastern Russia and Crimea are predominantly ethnic Russians. So Ukraine was actually the offender and that Nazi government was actually set up by the U.S. under the Obama administration so...
Even Cooney's feminist gender politics are at a failure because even with a woman political executor or ruler they are just as ruthless as the men (and some studies have shown even more ruthless). So this idea of warmongering man and pacifist woman is absurd. Look at the expansion of the Russian Empire under Caterina the Great or the British Empire under Elizabeth I and later Victoria.
Posts: 26286 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic