Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Bible content was "adapted" from Egyptian religious mythology. I was listening to one scholar who said Genesis was created after Exodus because the people realized they couldn't exit a place if they had no beginning. In Egypt there was a pharoah Akhenaton who introduced monotheism into Egypt. After he died, they destroyed traces of his influence and went back to polytheism. The people who followed him were in danger of being persecuted so they left. They went to the area of Palestine, if I am rembering correctly. This makes sense in terms of the story of Moses leading people out of Egpyt. The Greeks went to Egypt (Kemet) to study. If they studied under Akhenaton, then the pupils would have adopted his concept of one God. So it makes sense that their beginning would be the exodus (because that's when they broke from Egyptian polytheism and started worshipping one God) and then they'd go back and write their creation story. I can't remember which books, but I was reading the OT and two of the books seemed out of sequence. I want to say I felt that Numbers should have come before Leviticus, but I'd have to re-read to be sure. Just because we have the Bible in a certain format doesn't mean the books are in the correct order...
There is so much lost to time that would allow us to trace the steps to how the Israelites originated. So myth and legend will have to suffice as the question can never be answered.
There is so much lost to time that would allow us to trace the steps to how the Israelites originated. So myth and legend will have to suffice as the question can never be answered.
The Bible content was "adapted" from Egyptian religious mythology. I was listening to one scholar who said Genesis was created after Exodus because the people realized they couldn't exit a place if they had no beginning. In Egypt there was a pharaoh Akhenaten who introduced monotheism into Egypt. After he died, they destroyed traces of his influence and went back to polytheism. The people who followed him were in danger of being persecuted so they left. They went to the area of Palestine, if I am remembering correctly. This makes sense in terms of the story of Moses leading people out of Egypt. The Greeks went to Egypt (Kemet) to study. If they studied under Akhenaton, then the pupils would have adopted his concept of one God. So it makes sense that their beginning would be the exodus (because that's when they broke from Egyptian polytheism and started worshipping one God) and then they'd go back and write their creation story. I can't remember which books, but I was reading the OT and two of the books seemed out of sequence. I want to say I felt that Numbers should have come before Leviticus, but I'd have to re-read to be sure. Just because we have the Bible in a certain format doesn't mean the books are in the correct order...
My understanding of Genesis - the creation and the flood parts - is that they are Mesopotamian myths.
Of course Genesis is just allegorical myth stories borrowed from other cultures.
Oh, this post is 3 years old I just noticed. I think jeff is gone with the wind.
This was an old thread but Jeff is still around. I don't knock him - I think he is an Ok guy. I have a rather religious family - in fact, I come from a long line of missionary types. I have more pastors and bishops in my family tree than a thermometer has degrees (to adapt a favorite expression ). One of my great uncles was known by the African locals as "The lion of the great forest" back in his day. I'm the black sheep the family.
Because he was just as stupid and brain-washed as everyone else.
The fact that a brain-washed person repeats information used to brain-wash them doesn't make it true.
Jesus was also ignorant. So ignorant, that if Jesus would be here now, he couldn't even hold a conversation with a genealogist, because he doesn't understand DNA.
There was either an Adam, or there was an Eve, but they could not both exist at the same time.
One of them, either Adam or Eve, came first, and they were totally unique on this Earth.
The other came many generations later, because it takes that long for a mutation to spread through a population.
Jesus is also stupid if he believes the Noah myth, because if it would be true, then we would have DNA evidence that would prove it.
Y-DNA is passed only from father to son, so according to the Noah myth, all Y-DNA Haplogroups were eliminated from Earth, except one.
It takes 10,000 to 40,000 years for a mutation to occur to alter a Y-DNA Haplogroup.
The fact that there are 12 Y-DNA Haplogroups alone for just the indigenous populations of North and South America single-handedly debunks the Noah story.
The fact that there are dozens of other Y-DNA Haplogroups for populations in Africa, Europe and Asia totally annihilates the Noah story.
And here lies the problem of putting your complete unwavering faith in science. How do you know that back in the time of Adam and Eve, there was not some unknown element or factor that caused mutations to behave differently? We don't even know if the human body back then was exactly the same as our current bodies. Maybe Adam didn't have wisdom teeth. Who knows? But it is arrogant to make such assumptions as fact. How do you know there won't be a future discovery that completely rewrites your assumptions about Y-DNA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Wrong answer. Archaeology destroys the Exodus myth.
Jericho, Gibeon and Ai weren't even occupied at the time of the Exodus, which debunks it.
Jericho wasn't destroyed, which further refutes the Exodus myth.
Only three cities were destroyed, debunking the Exodus myth further.
Of the three cities that were destroyed, two cities are known for a fact to have been destroyed by sea-peoples, and not the Israelites.
That's just more damning evidence the Exodus is pure myth.
For the sole city that was destroyed, Israelite culture and Canaanite culture are so virtually identical, that it is impossible for archaeologists to determine if the city was destroyed by Israelites or Canaanites.
So much for the veracity of the bible.
The time of the Exodus is debatable so unless that can be nailed down conclusively, your argument here doesn't hold water. Some say 15th century BC, some say 13th century BC. That's a pretty big gap.
And here lies the problem of putting your complete unwavering faith in science. How do you know that back in the time of Adam and Eve, there was not some unknown element or factor that caused mutations to behave differently? We don't even know if the human body back then was exactly the same as our current bodies. Maybe Adam didn't have wisdom teeth. Who knows? But it is arrogant to make such assumptions as fact. How do you know there won't be a future discovery that completely rewrites your assumptions about Y-DNA.
Sure. And how do we know that Adam didn't sprout angel's wings and fly to the Kingdom of Nod and back delivering bagels to Cain and his mysterious wife? How do we know that Adam and Eve weren't dancing the Jitterbug with leprechauns and the Loch Ness Monster?
How do we know? Well, that's not how you reach a conclusion. You can't include every "what if' that your imagine dreams of. What's important is whether or not there is any evidence that their bodies were different from ours. Is there any evidence of an unknown element or factor?
In fact, is there any evidence for an Adam and Eve and a Garden of Eden? The answer to all of these things is a resounding no.
Which means they can all be dismissed as easily as you assert them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffbase40
The time of the Exodus is debatable so unless that can be nailed down conclusively, your argument here doesn't hold water. Some say 15th century BC, some say 13th century BC. That's a pretty big gap.
The fact that it can't be pinned down only gives credence that it probably never happened in the first place.
And here lies the problem of putting your complete unwavering faith in science. How do you know that back in the time of Adam and Eve, there was not some unknown element or factor that caused mutations to behave differently?
That is not how science works. And if you are going to talk about science it would help to try and actually understand the basics of the topic.
In science we postulate the conclusions that match the evidence. We do not ignore the evidence that is there - or postulate evidence that is not there but might be missing. The "correct" conclusion in science at any given time is the one that matches the data available at that time.
There is value in imagining data that might be missing of course - because then we can come up with ways to go and try and find it. So your "what if" is easy to answer. If you think there is missing data - go seek it and we will incorporate it if and when you find it.
But until that time, the only viable and logical and reasonable option open to us is to use only the data that we actually have and construct theory and Theory that conforms with all of it. Not some of it - not imaginary bits of it - but all of what we actually have right here, right now.
My understanding of Genesis - the creation and the flood parts - is that they are Mesopotamian myths.
And what little archaeology and linguistics can tell us is that the Hebrews were an Aramaean hill -tribe who - like the Assyrians - emerged out of the hill -country after the 11th c B.C collapse. No trace of an Exodus
This was an old thread but Jeff is still around. I don't knock him - I think he is an Ok guy. I have a rather religious family - in fact, I come from a long line of missionary types. I have more pastors and bishops in my family tree than a thermometer has degrees (to adapt a favorite expression ). One of my great uncles was known by the African locals as "The lion of the great forest" back in his day. I'm the black sheep the family.
He is still around and I think he is OK, too. So are they all, all Ok Guys. It's the religion than makes them asshats. I knock that - not him.
Sure. And how do we know that Adam didn't sprout angel's wings and fly to the Kingdom of Nod and back delivering bagels to Cain and his mysterious wife?
Where and how that potential wife in Nod came from is even more of a mystery
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In Egypt there was a pharoah Akhenaton who introduced monotheism into Egypt. After he died, they destroyed traces of his influence and went back to polytheism. The people who followed him were in danger of being persecuted so they left. They went to the area of Palestine, if I am rembering correctly. This makes sense in terms of the story of Moses leading people out of Egpyt. The Greeks went to Egypt (Kemet) to study. If they studied under Akhenaton, then the pupils would have adopted his concept of one God. So it makes sense that their beginning would be the exodus (because that's when they broke from Egyptian polytheism and started worshipping one God) and then they'd go back and write their creation story. I can't remember which books, but I was reading the OT and two of the books seemed out of sequence. I want to say I felt that Numbers should have come before Leviticus, but I'd have to re-read to be sure. Just because we have the Bible in a certain format doesn't mean the books are in the correct order...
). One of my great uncles was known by the African locals as "The lion of the great forest" back in his day. I'm the black sheep the family. 
