Replies

The "language leakage" arguments don't hunt. For a very patient explanation, try 281. Nobody has done more on this thread than misunderstand the problem. Nothing goes away that way. It's still there for anyone with an education.

Doesn't hunt? Have you read the 12 pages I refered you to? What, do you want me to type them for you? Check out the book and read it yourself.

Polytheisms? I wouldn't doub it. The ten tribes had already left their Israelite roots and dipped into paganism long before the Assyrians captured them. Their Biblical punishment was to lose their identity. You find this strange?

Metalworking. Yes, tell me about the metalworking. Don't just refer to it. Differences? No doubt. Metalworking and such technologies don't evolve over a millenium?

You routinely forget that we are talking about hundreds, or over a thousand, years here. Do you think our own root people from a thousand years ago would even begin to understand anything about our civilization now? Ideas spread over a period of time even in a illiterate world.

1) Most people think the Celts and Hebrews were different groups. How is this wrong and why has no one before you loonies noticed?

Loonies. So you do belong to the group I asked you about. It becomes clear why you refuse to discuss it. Has it escaped your notice that most people thought the world was flat centuries ago? Did that make them right?

PLease note that there is very little research on the lost tribes, and none of it existing referes to 22,000 thousand Assyrian tablets dscovered and translated.

2) Weren't the Celts around before the Lost Tribes went lost? If you're going to cite the Exodus from Egypt as peopling Europe with the first wave of Celts, why don't any sources--not Exodus, not the Egyptians--mention any such thing? What is the evidentiary basis for what looks like an ad hoc revision?

Well, there are classical references to the Egyptian origins of the Greeks. Diodorus Siculus quoting Hectaeus of Abdere mentions that the Egyptians of the time in question expelled foreigners, the most distinguished of which followed Danaus and Cadmus to Greece, but he notes, that later Moses led the greater portion to Judea.

There is a lot more. Check out Capt's book from the library and read chapter 4. Much too much to retype here. Sorry. There is not enough known for sure of the ancient world for "revision", "ad hoc" or otherwise.

The 22,000 tablets you refer to which are now in the British Museum have this early history:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 705-681 BCE Sennacherib rules the ASSYRIANS and builds a new capital in Ninevah where he begins to form a library of Sumerian and Babylonian tablets. Sennacherib is a powerful ruler who manages to subdue the entire region of western Asia.

689 BCE: The Near East - Sennacherib destroys BABYLON, but his son rebuilds it. By 650, it has once again become prosperous.

668-627 BCE: The Near East - Ashurbanipal succeeds Sennacherib as ruler of ASSYRIA. He continues to develop the library and, by the time he has finished, collects more than 22,000 clay tablets. In 648, Ashurbanipal destroys the newly rebuilt city of BABYLON in a fierce campaign.

614 BCE: The Near East - The BABYLONIANS (particularly, the Chaldeans) [ED: aided by the over 1,000,000 captured Northern Kindom warriors] with the help of the Medes, who occupy what is today Iran, begin a campaign to destroy the ASSYRIANS. In 612 they succeed, [ED: and the over 5 million northern kingdom prisoners escape out to the north and west and high tail it for Europe] and the Assyrian capital of Ninevah is destroyed. Without the Assyrians, the Chaldeans, a semetic people, rule the entire region thereby issuing in the New Babylonian period, which lasts until 539.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(excerpted from http://eawc.evansville.edu/chronology/nepage.htm)

Doesn't hunt? Have you read the 12 pages I refered you to? What, do you want me to type them for you? Check out the book and read it yourself.

I suppose I should know what you're talking about here, having been on the thread talking to you, but I don't. Don't type the twelve pages, just tell me what you're talking about. The particular transformation you describe would not occur unless the Celts essentially already existed to provide a dominant culture to provide both a model of the new-to-the-Hebrews language family and pressures to learn a new language. And the problem with that scenario is that the only necessary element is the pre-existing Celts. The rest can go and you still have the same history.

Polytheisms? I wouldn't doub it. The ten tribes had already left their Israelite roots and dipped into paganism long before the Assyrians captured them.

Their "roots" were already polytheist. Monotheism was a late development which was apparently stronger at first among the nomadic herdsmen population than in the cities. If you have a different order of events, you have a scoop.

Metalworking. Yes, tell me about the metalworking. Don't just refer to it.

The Celts did very distinctive ornate metalworking. I'm not an expert on the subject but basically you can tell one pre-tech culture from another by the stuff you find in a dig and the Celts have a signature of their own. Are you challenging this?

Differences? No doubt. Metalworking and such technologies don't evolve over a millenium?

What millenium? The Celtic digs in Austria go back to 1200 BC or so. The Celtic digs in the British Isles go back to 2000 BC or so, first wave. What's your story? How did they wind up in the same language family with the Persians if their origins are Semitic and they went to England in 2000 BC? Tell a coherent story and deal with the objections!