Talk:Achan (Bible)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by WikiProject Bible, an attempt to promote the creation, maintainance, and improvement of articles dealing with the Bible. Please participate by editing this article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventions
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This entry incorporates text from the public domain Easton's Bible Dictionary, originally published in 1897.

[edit] Rewrote article

Compared the article written by user:FDuffy with Jewish Encyclopedia Achan article [1]) given as a source, and found that the source simply did not support many statements in the article and a complete rewrite was required. For example, the source never associates the conduct with concepts such as cleromancy etc. which were linked, states that according to Rabbinical interpretation "only the beasts were stoned", and numerous other divergences from the article claimed to be based on it. The Jewish Encyclopedia source article simply does not contain any of the statements made in a large section, moved the unsourced material to the talk page below. --Shirahadasha 11:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Cleromancy is drawing lots (and variations on the theme). That is exactly what the bible states happened. The phrase drawing lots is a redirect to cleromancy. The use of the word cleromancy rather than drawing lots makes clear why they were doing it - they weren't just doing it randomly but aiming to achieve divination (i.e. find out what god wanted). Just because the bible doesn't use the exact same word as cleromancy does not mean that it is a concept completely alien to it. It does help if people look up unfamiliar words (or click on links) rather than assume some wierd outlandish claim is being made, and react destructively. --User talk:FDuffy 22:16, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree…the use of the term cleromancy is simply a modern abstraction that does include the practices mentioned in the text. Want a source for that …

Shepard, Leslie A., ed. Encyclopedia of Occultism and Parapsychology, 3rd ed. Detroit: Gale Research, Inc., 1991. Hoboscience (talk) 06:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The Jewish exegetes, Rashi, Gersonides, and others, maintain that the stoning (Josh. vii. 25) was inflicted only on the beasts, and that the sons and daughters were brought there merely to witness and be warned <<<<<

This is from http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=727&letter=A&search=achan

Hoboscience (talk) 06:33, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Critical Perspectives

Removed the following material, which simply does not appear in the Jewish Encyclopedia article claimed as a source, material can be restored if sourced.

Since a growing majority of archaeologists believe that the Israelite conquest of Jericho and Ai never happened (since they were already abandoned ruins at the time), this narrative is seen by most biblical scholars as an aetiological myth providing a folk etymology for Achor, at the point in the narrative where the vale of Achor is necessarily crossed. It is significant that Achan's name means one who troubles, in Hebrew, supposedly in commemoration of his crime, {and what it brought upon him; it is unlikely for a historic figure to be named in memory of an event that doesn't happen until many years after they are named, but quite plausible for a character in a folk story to be named descriptively.

Other scholars claim that the narrative is somewhat anachronistic in describing the garment that Achor stole as Babylonish (Hebrew Shinar) ; the time of the Israelite invasion is usually dated to the 15th or 12th centuries BC ^{[citation needed]}, but between 1595BC and 627BC Babylon was under foreign rule, and between 1595BC and 1155BC was not even called Babylon (it was called Karanduniash}). For this reason, most textual scholars are fairly certain that this part of the Achor narrative was written during the 7th century BC or later, and certainly not contemporary with the events it describes. It is not certain, however, that the whole Achor narrative dates from this time, as textual critics believe that the Achor narrative may have been spliced together from two earlier source texts; the words in the first part of Joshua 7:25, all Israel stoned him with stones (emphasis added) show a different style and tradition from those at the end of the verse: they stoned them with stones (emphasis added)^[1].

--Shirahadasha 12:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Try reading the Book of Samuel article at the Jewish Encyclopedia for the splicing/7th century/etc. Also read the Babylon article here in regard to Karanduniash, and the The Exodus article for the dating. --User talk:FDuffy 22:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)