>When the Lord saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, “Moses! Moses!” And Moses said, “Here I am.”>“Do not come any closer,” God said. “Take off your sandals, for the place where you are standing is holy ground.” Then he said, “I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.”>At this, Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.
>>18761703Sneed
Isn't the translation wrong here?I remember some discussion that the word isn't bush it's some sort of rocky structure maybe, don't remember?
>>18761923I think there was something about naptha being common ocally, can't quite reme,ber the exact discussion, but it would explain burning rocks if it's a pool of hydrocarbons
heheheha, God always has to hide in a bush because he's a pussy Jolly good
>>18761929Nah, it was a norm to cover the head during theophany. Taking your boots off before a (statue of) god was a norm either.The ancient religions had the concept of melammu, a fiery aura around the object possessed by a god. The fire never destroys the object. For the fiery plant specifically, look at epos of Lugalbunda (a trunk or a tree possessed by a god and radiating light), or look at Ra (or Horus) manifesting within the Ished tree (a persea tree) or an acacia and radiating the flame that doesn't destroy the tree. The most intriguing parallel is the inscription found in the Sinai Desert. The inscription was dedicated to the local desert god Safdu and describes him as "The god who dwells in the nabs" (nabs = desert thornbush). Considering Jews gave others' gods traits to Yahweh on their way to monotheism, maybe the original legend was about Safdu in the bush.
Ah, you’re back. So, what happened? Were you so humiliated and upset with me that you didn’t have the nerve to create any more of those shitty threads using the image of the god Bes? Well, let me refresh your memory—maybe that way you’ll stop creating these threads for a good long while. What did we learn from those threads? The use of a dotted line running parallel to a solid line follows the pattern of so-called "Midianite" pottery.The drawings and the inscriptions are not directly related: the figures were created using a thick brush, while the inscriptions were made with a fine brush—and not all of the inscriptions overlap with the drawings.If an inscription were intended as a commentary on a drawing, the author wouldn’t have allowed the text to become distorted by being written over the image—you absolute idiot. The overlap only makes sense if the author was, in fact, simply practicing their writing. Inscription 3.6 ("Yahweh... and his Asherah") was written over the feathered crown of the figure
>>18763191Oops, I almost forgot. It’s always worth remembering that the supposed identification of the figures from Kuntillet Ajrud as Bes is not an academic consensus—regardless of what a Wikipedia page might say (and, frankly, nobody cares about Wikipedia). The position established in peer-reviewed scholarly literature—dating back to Beck (1982) and Keel & Uehlinger (1998)—contradicts random Wikipedia entries and atheist memes from 2011. The relevant evidence is both iconographic and technical: the feathered headdress, the leonine features, and the dotted outline running parallel to a solid line are all characteristic of Bes as he appears in Iron Age Levantine pottery—not in Yahwistic iconography. Yahweh has no physical body and was never represented as having one. All the sources and a more in-depth look can be found in this thread—which the OP abandoned without replying to me. Go check the sources: https://desuarchive.org/his/thread/18674065/#18675075
