Orthodox do not need permission, they are free to believe without Pope telling them what to think.

everyone is free to think what they like, it doesn't make them right.

The world is full of senseless disputes over interpretation. It all comes down to what is it you actually believe? I know what God has shown me personally and it confirms Scripture, so there is no debate

http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/language_history.html

This is a funny example from back when The Simpsons was actually good:

I have no doubt about the verbal memory. However, there were some things written down as well. Do you think they memorized the lineage?

Absolutely. Look at the various recitations of lineage, generally of the house of David. Many of these are eminently easy to memorize, probably more so in the ancient tongue.

An interesting feature of lineage in Genesis is comparing Genesis 4 to Genesis 5.

In Genesis 4, Adam and Even had sons Cain and Abel, Cain murdered Abel and was driven from the garden, Cain's children became various tent-dwellers and keepers of cattle and musicians and blacksmiths. But they all dwelt outside Eden. Back in Eden, Adam and Eve had another son named Seth.

But in Genesis 5, we see a different pattern:

Here, we see the name of each male sire, the age he was when his firstborn son was born, whether he had additional sons and daughters, and how many more years he lived after the birth of his firstborn son. It is striking and I think it was probably easily recited recited in ancient Hebrew, possibly with what they would consider poetic meter (a huge aid to memorization).

I find it striking that it seems to have been written by an entirely different writer and in a different style. And while Genesis 4 prominently features Cain and Abel and finally barely mentions the birth of Seth, in Genesis 5 we see that Adam was 130 years old when Seth was born and no mention of Cain and Abel is made. None. And Eve is not named: Adam in Genesis 5 signifies both Adam and his wife as a pair. That is striking, as though Moses combined another account. In truth (and fairness to Moses), the story of Cain and Abel and the later careers of Cain's offspring simply cannot be as important as the birth of Seth, the ancestor of Noah.

Anyway, these are commonly remarked upon features of Genesis. Many many others have noticed the striking difference between these two accounts of the family of Adam and Eve.

So, via a longwinded route, yes, absolutely, I think that lineages was among the most important parts of the Oral History. Not the central teaching but an essential requirement. The fact that we seem to have two accounts of Adam's family merged together (IMO) would indicate the great importance attached to it.

"If you really believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me. But since you don’t believe what he wrote, how will you believe what I say?”

Even Jesus announced that Moses wrote (not spoke) of him. It was obvious there were written texts:

Sure, Moses wrote. But Moses came along a very long time after the time of Adam and Eve and Seth and Noah. In between, there was an Oral Tradition in Judaism. And that is exactly what we should expect to find in that era.

I wasn't disputing that Moses wrote. I was suggesting that much or all of what Moses wrote was previously in the Oral History. Perhaps I wandered too far into a comparison of the actual accounts produced in Genesis.

That version of the Old Testament was the Septuagint. Today, only the Catholics really advocate for it. The Jews use the Masoretic text. Protestants do too.

Orthodox consider Septuagint as the inspired text, not the thousand years later Masoretic text

Orthodox consider Septuagint as the inspired text, not the thousand years later Masoretic text

I wasn't suggesting that we debate the merits of the modern Masoretic OT to the LXX. Like that would be useful anyway. I thought I indicated the more ancient pedigree of the LXX clearly enough as well as listing a merit or demerit or two. It wasn't really unfair IMO.

You are right though that I mentioned the Catholics but didn't include the EO as its fiercest adherents. When it comes to preserving tradition and texts, the EO have no rivals in Christendom.

Congratulations on your recent success with the Parole Board.

That Trump University diploma finally paid off!

Luberator finds that erotic, actually.

It reminded me a lot of something Mel Brooks did in a movie. Just slapstick comedy.

One of the most compelling evidences for the continued use of Hebrew into the 2nd Century A.D. is a letter from the Jewish General Simon Bar Kockba (Shimon ben Kosva, as the first line of the letter states in the above picture), which is dated at 135 A.D., which he wrote during the second Jewish revolt against Rome. This letter, along with many others, was written in Hebrew, establishing the fact that Hebrew was still the language of the Jewish people, even into the second century AD.

Same way Latin was still the language of the European people, even into the eighteenth century AD.

"Latin was also supreme as an international language of diplomatic correspondence, used in negotiations between nations and the writing of treaties, e.g. the peace treaties of Osnabrück and Münster (1648). As an auxiliary language to the local vernaculars, New Latin appeared in a wide variety of documents, ecclesiastical, legal, diplomatic, academic, and scientific. While a text written in English, French, or Spanish at this time might be understood by a significant cross section of the learned, only a Latin text could be certain of finding someone to interpret it anywhere between Lisbon and Helsinki.

As late as the 1720s, Latin was still used conversationally, and was serviceable as an international auxiliary language between people of different countries who had no other language in common. For instance, the Hanoverian king George I of Great Britain (reigned 1714–1727), who had no command of spoken English, communicated in Latin with his Prime Minister Robert Walpole, who knew neither German nor French."

Back your statement with facts based on scientific research and discovery.

You will never see an authentic Biblical record more recent than 1000 BCE.

Why?

Because there aren't any. The Jews acquired their writing skills by the Babylonians, it was cultural tradition within that empire to write. There are records going back before even 1000 BCE, but for the Jews, there is nothing.

So are you telling us that Hebrews, Jews, or their ancestors would not nor could not have learned ANOTHER or different language and written history?

With a little social structure by the Babylonians, the Hebrews stepped away from just being goat herders. Pretty remarkable!

So are you telling us that Hebrews, Jews, or their ancestors would not nor could not have learned ANOTHER or different language and written history?

It's pretty obvious they did.

So take your carbon dating theory to the trash can. Only a person with a lying agenda would bring up bullshit claims about carbon dating being science.

They were pretty much at war between themselves

I think the Bible pretty much covers what will happen when you fall away from him.

They were stuck in a foreign land for a long time. They were going to learn new things.

That doesn't mean they ever abandoned who they were:

But stated plainly, it was incest. Permitted at one time, but, if I'm not mistaken, specifically prohibited at another, and with Genesis avoiding any explicit mention of Cain's marrying his sister, as though it's something that was better off not mentioned.

I would criticize it being regarded as a matter of "social context" however. That makes it sound like whether incest was acceptable or not is purely a cultural determination.

Wasn't it prohibited in one of the myriad of laws established in the OT? (I don't remember).

There's quite a bit not explicitly mentioned in Genesis; We must cobble together a lot through dot-connecting of ancient texts and historian accounts, oral accounts and tradition, common sense and...educated speculation.

Yes, you are correct; Incest in Scripture was "permitted at one time, bu...specifically prohibited at another."

I can understand why you have an immediate visceral objection to incest. We ALL do, frankly. But the "social context" facet is totally legit. The "culture" At The Beginning" was in its infancy, obviously.

As to the question about Cain and the nature of his marriage to obviously a sister begotten from parents Adam and Eve (and subsequent children of theirs), of course I understand the discomforting feeling. BECAUSE we are considering it through our lens of contemporary society. Yes, when we think of "Incest," we think of deformities and Hillbillies. Perversions. OR even Muzzies. :-) Again, his comparison is not fair, and doesn't/can't even be applied within the same context.

BACK to what this is about: The onset of man AT THE Beginning, and how man became "fruitful and multiplied." what does the Bible record tell us? Or oral/written tradition? (it's all we have as reference):

According to Genesis 5:4, we are told Adam and Eve "begat sons and daughters."

Jewish historian Josephus helps out -- he stated that "The number of Adam's children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters."

Adam and Eve obviously had a bunch of children, essential to "being "fruitful and multiplying." Cain obviously had to find his wife -- among them, a sister, one of Adam & Eve's off-spring. (Even Abraham married his half-sister. At that time the law hadn't yet forbidden incestual marriage, and no, God didn't condemn that union.)

Even if we discount Josephus account, what of the "Incest" issue and the law?

The law against close intermarriage was not given until the time of Moses, when the law changed. By that time apparently God felt that the earth had been populated sufficiently, preceded by, "none of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him" as stated in Leviticus 18:6).

So...There was nothing wrong with brother/sister marriages, originally. How could there be? It was the only way to populate the planet. Moreover, Human DNA of Adam and Eve was as perfect it was ever going to be as the first of many millions of "copies," so defects were not going to affect the early descendants.

Why don't you go find something to cut and paste about Mount saint Helen's false readings on carbon dating. Because don't know what you are talking about.

Oh you don't have a clue.

You are about informative as a parrot.

So, beyond the Dead Sea Scrolls, what documented evidence for and about the Torah exists? None. The coincidence in time of the Babylonian influence over the Hebrews is remarkable with respect to Carbon dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls! You should perform some independent research, yourself besides listening to, "HELL FIRE & BRIMSTONE" sermons.

Using your own intellectual capacity can be a good activity and strengthen your critical thinking approach to all of life around you.

Oh you don't have a clue.

I can't identify the significance of Carbon dating for hot, molten lava with respect to well preserved organic material used for the Scrolls that I touched on. You are off on a tangent.

ME: "We and all material life as well as the Universe are devolving and growing weaker."

YOU: This is your theory, which of course runs counter to evolutionary theory.

No, it's not actually MY theory; It's a scientific theory that has yet to be disproven.

This in accordance with The Second Law of Thermodynamics (alone dismissing the notion of EVO-lution)...

No, not necessarily.

For example, a rock rolling up hill might be viewed as violating the laws of thermodynamics.

But what if that hill was beside a much taller mountain that had a land slide? Rocks falling from that mountain gain speed, and their momentum carries them up the smaller hill. End result: rocks roll uphill without any violation of the law of thermal dynamics.

Evolution of life into more complex life forms could similarly be the outplay of a much greater dissipation of energy.

I'm not a scientist, but firstly, my impression was that may be a case involving the Law of Gravity. And whatever natural "law" that considers the ramification of momentum.

In your case the momentum and energy was temporary while the original energy source was as you pointed out, a dissipated energy.

I don't believe either the Second Law of Thermodynamics applied, nor in your example did the simple mechanism apply to a living creature.

If you are citing this example to suggest a catalyst for "evolution" may be a case of biological "momentum" (or perhaps, "acceleration" of DNA change), the dynamic of THAT much change -- as billions of molecular, cellular perfectly executed and aligned FOR THE BETTER...are astronomical odds. A virtual impossibility. (we're just riffing here, Ping -- exchanging thoughts/opinions.)

Like you, I believe we ARE more than human. In fact, I believe we are far more than human than even Christianity teaches, which seems to be that the soul is sort of a that minor part is left over after a person dies.

Yes, we are on the same page more than anyone might think.

You mean we are far "more" than just our physical shell -- to which we do both concur. It is amazing how few people can actually understand and embrace this simple idea.

True, this perspective concept is not taught, embraced or contemplated by some sects of "Christianity." But generally, Christianity DOES teach and concede the notion of a physical body, spirit AND soul.

You really do get this aspect of our identity. FAR more than many Christians I know -- never mind people in general.

But Genesis is simply not the only explanation available to reach the conclusion that we are more than human.

The soul is our primary identity, our human nature only secondary. In my view, it is not inaccurate to say we are, in fact, angels living in human bodies for a short time, and our origin, as angels, is not earthly. Only our human bodies originated from earth, not us as souls or, perhaps, angels.

Heavy stuff...

Our soul is who we are ultimately. Still and all, we possess spirits AND a physical mortal flesh (or "bio-shell.")

Your POV regard -- that man is an angel who dwells in a flesh & blood bioshell "for a short time" is an interesting perspective.

God said he "knew us" before we were born.

Our bodies may have been conceived on earth, but how about our spirit and soul? For that matter, once the egg is fertilized, what of THEM? /rhetorical. Ultimately, can it be said that our bodies were born/created in the flesh "in the image of God," as extension of our individual soul -- created by God in Heaven?

It's my understanding that Angels dwell in Heaven with God. Demons are exiled Angels who rebelled, and who act as an agent of Satan, who led the very first "Rebellion/"Resistance" as "provocateurs-of-sin." (tangential related aside: Saul Alinsky dedicated his Rules For Radicals book to "Satan.")

All that said, I understand your Angel = Man concept and correlation.

Stated another way in contemporary terms, human bodies are mere rental units for souls, and not something that is created as a result of human conception, which is an idea that is quite illogical, frankly.

THAT is a uniquely wild concept. NOT as out-there as one might at first impression think. A "RENTAL-UNIT." (For a soul whose Final Destination is not yet determined.) "LANDLORD": Almighty God. Yes! "FINAL PAYMENT" due on Judgment Day.

That leads me to bringing up the next logical question: WHAT is the "currency" for paying off our "debt," aka "sins"? For Christians, the answer or solution lies simply and directly in the Gospel and through Jesus Christ.

But because of the natural assumption that our physical bodies define all there is about us, our tendency, and the tendency of the ancients who composed Genesis, is/was to bring God down to man's level, and that's what Genesis largely does.

Everything just works under this model. Including evolution, which becomes completely inconsequential in this context. It also explains why God would care about us more than animals.

Moses composed Genesis. The Ancients either retained some oral tradition or texts, passing them on. But remember -- Moses SPOKE DIRECTLY TO GOD (Burning-Bush).

I don't think ancient man was monolithic about "bringing God down to man's level." In some cases that may have been true -- those who challenged his Deity; Or that this was the purpose of writing Genesis.

The ancients -- true logical, faithful men who innately knew of a Creator-God or being much Greater-Than-Himself -- were worshipful and in awe of Him.

The "rebel" Ancients chose instead to worship "gods" and representative of them: Statues, other beings, the sun, the earth, etc.

THE overall purpose of Genesis is as a historically accurate account of The Beginning, guaranteed by the One who divinely inspired the writing of it, as well as the entire Bible. AS WRITTEN, literally.

Why Genesis was also written was because it was vital to "knowing" God as holy, one who created WITH PURPOSE, WITH LAWS, and who loves man, creating us in HIS "Image." Genesis sets the plate for the REST of His Word. Remove it or dilute it and the rest of the Bible matters not.

No, it's not actually MY theory; It's a scientific theory that has yet to be disproven.

LOL

I think you know that isn't how science works.

Can you be more specific?

You will never see an authentic Biblical record more recent than 1000 BCE.

Why?

Because there aren't any. The Jews acquired their writing skills by the Babylonians...

Moses lived in the 1400s BC.

Are you claiming any events that occurred BEFORE 1400-1000 BC and been documented/validated by Moses (yes, like Genesis) and the Prophets CAN'T be true or factual?

The coincidence in time of the Babylonian influence over the Hebrews is remarkable with respect to Carbon dating of the Dead Sea Scrolls!

You should perform some independent research, yourself besides listening to, "HELL FIRE & BRIMSTONE" sermons.

Again, what is your primary contention here?

To invalidate ANY Scripture or non-Hebrew-Jewish history and accounts that pre-dated Babylonian documentation?

Moses lived in the 1400s BC.

Are you claiming any events that occurred BEFORE 1400-1000 BC and been documented/validated by Moses (yes, like Genesis) and the Prophets CAN'T be true or factual?

Yes, i know. I think there were written records before that ( too conservative says they were all verbal). I can't show evidence of the written records, though.

It's pretty obvious they [Hebrews/Jews] did [learn ANOTHER or different language and written history.]

Absolutely.

Bucky is in Strawman-Mode today.

Moses lived in the 1400s BC.

According to the Old Testament, he lived for what ... one thousand years? That is quite a lifespan, don't you think? But with a range of one thousand years, why have you limited him to just 1400 BCE?

Yes, i know. I think there were written records before that ( too conservative says they were all verbal).

Facts, figures, places, people, dates, events -- ALL validated. Whether CNN or the Babylonians were there to record it.

Some folks also forget that Moses consulted with The Almighty directly. But again, TC might dismiss that as a source for Moses' Ten Commandments tablet and Genesis because rumor has it that Christiane Amanpour or a New York Times reporterette wasn't standing there to interview Moses at the base of Mt Sinai.

I think there were written records before that ( too conservative says they were all verbal). I can't show evidence of the written records, though.

As I said a few posts ago on this thread, you nor anyone will ever find earlier records than 1000 BCE; even then I give allowance for error. The first records are coincident in time based on the Babylonians educating the Hebrews about methods of communications beyond just simple verbiage. The time domain is about 500 BCE for the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Why can't you find any? Because there aren't any. The Hebrews were uneducated goat herders except for the invasions by Syria and Mesopotamia, wherein the Hebrews fought tooth and nail for their very own sand.

[Moses] lived for what ... one thousand years? That is quite a lifespan, don't you think?

But with a range of one thousand years, why have you limited him to just 1400 BCE?

Not nearly one thousand years (According to Deuteronomy 34:7, Moses died at age 120 -- still pretty long, eh?), but yes, the ancients did exceed our current life span by quite a bit. Hundreds of years. Especially Pre-Flood man.

Scripture tells us Moses was 40 when as an Eygptian struck the slave: (Acts 7:22-29)...

According to Exodus 7:7, Moses was 80 years old when he made his demands to Pharaoh.

Quite a resume, don't you think?

The Pre-Flood people as well as ALL life on earth -- possessed DNA that evaded eventual damage of the post-Flood planet when all life got smaller, weaker, and died much sooner. Many species as you well know went extinct.

According to Genesis, man routinely live to between 400-900 years. We can tell by the fossil record and bones embedded within the rock strata that very LARGE and different flora and fauna were completely wiped out, became extinct during the world wide cataclysim or the Ice Age, never to return after the Great Flood.

But with a range of one thousand years, why have you limited him to just 1400 BCE?

That's the approximate documented date at which Moses writings are said to have been transcribed.

I think he has been watching the History Channel too much.

That's one reason I NEVER watch those PBS or "History" Channel shows.

It should be called, The Historical Revisionism Channel.

They run these programs under the guise of "history" in order to bait and mislead the confused, the ignorant, or the ill-informed. It's pure political propaganda, lies, half-truths, and revisionism from both PBS or the History Channel. With respect to any subject -- "Science," The Civil War," especially ANY THING "Biblical," you're bound to mutter to yourself, "BS!" or "CHYEAH, RIGHT."

Take Joseph and Sarah as an example. Sarah gave birth to a baby @90 years old!

Do you believe that?

The contents of the Old Testament are largely fictional about anyone's longevity. Why? These folks lived a difficult life (day to day struggle actually) with little nourishing food or adequate health care.

Are you referring to the Pre-Flood days? Or the post-Flood from Abraham till Moses... and beyond?

There are at least three different eras to reference. The Planet was far different Pre-Flood.

So of course they placed their trust in a God, or hope in a God or faith from day to day in a God. Thy had little recourse but to make up faerie tales of all sorts about themselves or the world around themselves.

Your lens is seeing things and people through recent eyes and logic. I get it. But you need to examine history fat more than a cursory look that you give it.

The more and closer you examine things, the more fascinating and logical it all becomes. You might surprise yourself.

Take Joseph and Sarah as an example. Sarah gave birth to a baby @90 years old!

Do you believe that?

You mean Abraham and Sarah?

Yes, of course.

In your defense even Sarah doubt God's promise to give birth at her age. considering it through contemporary eyes -- of course its impossible.

One factor to consider -- the genetics and DNA at Abraham/Sarah's time wasn't quite as damaged as it would eventually become.

Here is a fascinating Chart that illustrates the Great Flood's affect on an increasingly reduce age-span on various Biblical Patriarchs as the quality of genetics devolve over generations.

There are further notes on aging below:

In his book about the history of the Jews, the first century historian Josephus stated the following regarding the advanced ages of the pre-flood patriarchs.

"But let no one, upon comparing the lives of the ancients with our lives, and with the few years which we now live, think that what we have said of them is false . . . " (Antiquities (History) of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3).

Josephus also states that the reason for the very long lifespans of the pre-flood people was that God decided to be merciful to them and that the food they ate was much better for their bodies than the food eaten post-deluge. The average life span before the flood (ten generations) was 857 years.  After the flood, however, the average life span (for the ten generations from Shem to Abraham) was only 317 years!  In 2008, the average life expectancy of a person living in the United States was 78 years.

Did you know about the Patriarchs . . . ?

The word Patriarch is applied in the New Testament to Abraham (Hebrews 7:4), to the sons of Jacob (Acts 7:8 - 9), and to David (Acts 2:29).

Adam lived long enough to see EIGHT generations of his family born! Adam died when his great, great, great, great, great, great grandson Lamech was 46 years old!

The Biblical patriarch Abraham had eight children through three women. Abraham's son Isaac lived 180 years, longer than he did (175 years) or Isaac's son Jacob (147 years).

Abraham's wife Sarah holds the distinction of being the ONLY woman in the entire Bible where her age at death is recorded.

http://www.biblestudy.org/maps/large-chart-life-span-patriarchs-from-adam-to-noah.html

I see it as a inane quarrel between liberal dumb high school teachers from New York or San Francisco with snake handling hillbillies. Neither of them has a clue what they are talking about.

To understand what is the real meaning of a scientific theory one needs to spend a few years in the research in a quality school or institution.

In the religious aspect both "Creationist" and "Evolutionists" are right, in scientific aspect many of them know as much as 5th generation city dwellers about farming.

Are you referring to the Pre-Flood days? Or the post-Flood from Abraham till Moses... and beyond?

All contained in "Genesis." And to answer your question, yes, and beyond.

What was the day to day life of People all about during those times when there wasn't any free food or health care or mass production of a plentiful bounty as in contemporary times? Miracles handed down by God? In a sense, yes as these faerie tales gave hope to those dealing with the day to day struggle of life.

Of course, they believed in a God. Why? To promote their lives as there was no other way for "hope" in the future. There is nothing more important to men and woman to believe in something, often anything, when challenged under forces of great oppression whether man-made or any other natural causes.

The story of Ireland in the 1800s is apropos here, during the Great Potatoe Famine. They lost everything with Great Britain ignoring the plight. And, all of a sudden, Leprechauns sprung up with Pots o' Gold!

Do you think the issues of day to day living was confined to just the Hebrews creating myths over 2500 years ago?

Just to make it clear. I get a little tired tutoring contrary, overgrown and disorderly students, without being paid.

You either forgot your sarcasm tag, or are delusional. You're posting to Liberty's Flame, NOT to your empty cyber-"classroom" down your basement or at the pub in between darts.

Let's make THIS clear; To be considered a "tutor," one must be hired. You would have to pay ME to instruct YOU.

Secondly, the source of "quality school or institution" is relative to the beholder or behold-ee. Stuff that Cert or Diploma from Commie U.

THEN, he/she/it must be teaching subject matter based on legit, relevant FACTS and KNOWLEDGE based on legit qualifications from a legit authority or source. (A Bible will do in this case.)

(Btw, WHAT are you supposed to be lecturing, and to WHOM?)

Are you insisting that Author: Fr. Lawrence Farley in his cop-out essay is the be all, end all answer to the question, "Evolution or Creation Science?"

The oldest fragment we have of Hebrew scripture is the Nash Papyrus. It dates to around 100 BC to 150 BC, or so we're told.

Twenty four lines long, with a few letters missing at each edge, the papyrus contains the Ten Commandments in Hebrew, a short middle text, followed by the start of the Shema Yisrael prayer. The text of the Ten Commandments combines parts of the version from Exodus 20:2-17 with parts from Deuteronomy 5:6-21. A curiosity is its omission of the phrase "house of bondage", used in both versions, about Egypt — perhaps a reflection of where the papyrus was composed. Some (but not all) of the papyrus' substitutions from Deuteronomy are also found in the version of Exodus in the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Pentateuch from the 3rd-2nd centuries BC, made in Alexandria. The Septuagint also interpolates before Deuteronomy 6:4 the preamble to the Shema found in the papyrus, and the Septuagint also agrees with a couple of the other variant readings where the papyrus departs from the standard Hebrew Masoretic text. The ordering of the later commandments in the papyrus (Adultery-Murder-Steal, rather than Murder-Adultery-Steal) is also that found in most texts of the Septuagint. The papyrus preamble before Shema Yisrael, also found in the Septuagint, is taken from Deuteronomy Ch. 4:45 which is the only time the recurring formula “This is the commandment(s) and rules and teachings...” mentions the Exodus from Egypt. The Nash preamble correctly cites Moses as the speaker rather than God as in the Septuagint. The insertion of Deuteronomy Ch.4:45 before Shema Ysrael in the papyrus and especially the Septuagint, which has two preambles in the same section: Ch. 6:1 and the interpolation to Ch. 6:3, was probably done to distance the central Shema Yisrael prayer from it context: sections dealing with the entry to the Promised Land of Canaan. According to the Talmud it was once customary to read the Ten Commandments before saying the Shema. As Burkitt put it, "it is therefore reasonable to conjecture that this Papyrus contains the daily worship of a pious Egyptian Jew, who lived before the custom came to an end".[2] It is thus believed that the papyrus probably consisted of a liturgical document, specifically the constituents of a Phylactery,[1] which may have purposely synthesised the two versions of the Commandments, rather than directly from Scripture. However, the papyrus' similarities with the Septuagint, support a possibility that a Hebrew text of the Pentateuch was in circulation in Egypt in the 2nd century BC, and served both the Nash papyrus and the Septuagint translation as source, but which differs significantly from the modern Jewish Masoretic Text.

So the Nash papyrus throws rocks at everyone's modern ideas about the era. It doesn't agree with the Masoretic text of the Torah (dating from 900 AD and the official Hebrew of Israel). It doesn't agree with the (offically unauthorized) Greek translation of the Torah called the Septuagint, circa 300 BC. And it mixes together phrasing of the Ten Commandments from both Exodus and Deuteronomy but differs from both of them.

Well, that's a fine mess. I included the long quote from Wiki to indicate the limits of what we know or can know at present about many manuscripts and tablets from this era. There was a lot of stuff floating around and, obviously, much of it was not officially approved translations. These text variant could be the result of being part of a mezuzah or a liturgical text, not an officially approved copy of the Torah (by Temple standards).

This is a good site by a Jewish scholar of high standing in Israel on these ancient texts.

TheTorah.com: The Oldest Known Copy Of The Decalogue

If we want to look for older examples of what we call Hebrew, there are just a few. The oldest is dated to around 1000 BC and is a pottery fragment.

One thing that is pretty annoying with this stuff is the wide variety of names given to these ancient dialects. Here's some that I can recall: proto-Hebrew, paleo-Hebrew, Old Hebrew, proto-Canaanite, proto-Samaritan, proto-Masoretic, proto-Phoenician, Early Alphabetic and at least as many others I can't recall or never heard of. Quite often, the type of alphabet used and the style of writing (elongated traditional type or the little square Babylonian text type) indicates what flavor of proto-whatever it is considered to be or the spellings of individual words indicate their dating and relation to other ancient texts. This is a technical area that only the experts understand at all. And they constantly argue over all their research and results.

Wiki: Khirbet Qeiyafa inscription

Dating to 1000 BC, this is a faded portion of text on a clay tablet. It is in the most ancient known Judaean city.

BiblicalArchaeology.org: Qeiyafa Ostracon Relates the Birth of the Kingdom of Israel

    Do not oppress, and serve God…despoiled him/her
    The judge and the widow wept; he had the power
    Over the resident alien and the child, he eliminated them together
    The men and chiefs/officers have established a king
    He marked 60 [?] servants among the communities/habitations/generation.