Talk:Achan (biblical figure)

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Bible Mid‑importance

	Bible portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)

If you look at the wiki article on Jericho , there are sources there that state that Jericho has been continuously inhabited for thousands of years and that there are walls from the time of Joshua. I am not exactly sure why there is only one view in this article which states that the Israelite conquest of Jericho and Ai never happened. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.216.139 (talk) 22:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Jewish Encyclopedia

rename article

Please consider renaming this article Achan, son of Carmi as per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Bible#standardized_way_of_naming_articles_for_biblical_persons. Lemmiwinks2 (talk) 21:46, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deuteronomistic History

This article is full of tendentious claims, but this is perhaps the oddest: "many Biblical scholars believe the judge Samuel may have put together this account from historical books from that time..."

I'm not aware of any serious Biblical scholar who would support this view. Joshua, like Judges, Samuel, and Kings, is usually taken to be part of an Exilic or post-Exilic composition usually dubbed the "Deuteronomistic History". What its sources were may be disputed, but there's no reason to assume that the story of Achan has a monarchic basis, much less a tenth-century one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.203.100.9 (talk) 07:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Duplication error - cut and paste typo?

There is an unnecessary repetition of a large section of text that requires editing. The paragraph that is duplicated is:

“The Book of Joshua claims that this act resulted in the Israelites being collectively punished by God, in that they failed in their first attempt to capture Ai, with about 36 Israelites lost (Joshua 7:5). The Israelites used cleromancy (the sacred Lots Urim and Thummim)[1] to decide who was to blame, and having identified Achan, stoned him, as well as his sheep, other livestock and his children to death. Their remains were burnt by the Israelites, according to the text, and stones piled on top.“ 67.71.171.184 (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Jewish Encyclopedia

[1]