What If The Bible Had Never Existed???

by ziddina 82 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  ziddina

  I posited that the "Abrahamic" lineage never separated from the Canaanites...

  Which would have eliminated the entire bible.

  No 'missing' books; no 'which group of heathen Roman senators decided what was to be in the final version of the bible'; nothing - zip, zilch, zero, nada...

  Which apparently a LOT of people misse d - evidently they didn't actually READ my post where I posited that "Abraham" doesn't save his son "Isaac" but instead sacrifices him to the Canaanite gods, and provides his REAL first-born son, "Ismael", with whatever inheritance "Abraham" may have had at his death...

  Page 3...

  SheeeeEEEEESH!! [face/palm slap] You people haven't even BEGUN to scratch the surface of this subject!!

  Almost all of the replies so far have been defensive postures on their particular form of pseudo-mono-theism...

  Let me show you a direction you haven't even considered... And initially I'm going to have to bring in some of the bible mythology, just to get this started...

  "What If The Bible Had Never Existed???"

  Let's start out with the mythological patriarch, Abraham - who is also included in the mythological ancestors of the Arabs - but I'm getting ahead of myself....

  "Abraham" had a first-born son, Ismael. His second son, Isaac, was almost sacrificed - and incidentally, the fact that "Abraham" willingly agrees to sacrifice his second-born son, shows that "Abraham" was worshipping the Canaanite gods initially, since the Canaanites practiced child sacrifice.

  So - let's postulate that "Abraham" went ahead and sacrificed his second son to appease the Canaanite gods, instead of "suddenly" getting the "new information" from a 'new' god about NOT sacrificing his second son because a "mighty nation" was going to be built from him.

  So, instead of allying himself with "Sara's" extended family for a nation-building process, "Abraham" remains with the Canaanites.

  Which means that the Canaanites are never pushed out of their land. It also means that the "Abrahamic" blood line - or lines - would be incorporated into the nation of Canaan.

  With a lot of hi-liting and bold to get the message across...

  So, first of all, let me address FlyingHighNow's comments about Sir Flinders Petrie...

  Zidd, the first quote I gave you was from a book by Flinders Petrie. He was a pioneer in the modern methods of archeology. Look at what he discovered about each Egyptian city having its own god. It is his theory that gods multiply with each generation.

  And...

  Sir William Matthew Flinders PetrieFRS (3 June 1853 - 28 July 1942), commonly known as Flinders Petrie, was an English Egyptologist and a pioneer of systematic methodology in archaeology. He held the first chair of Egyptology in the United Kingdom, and excavated at many of the most important archaeological sites in Egypt, such as Naukratis, Tanis, Abydos and Amarna. Some consider his most famous discovery to be that of the Merneptah Stele, an opinion with which Petrie himself concurred.

  And...

  Why don't you answer your own question? I gave you the findings of the pioneer egyptologist. Why don't you give us some answers?

  I answered that question already, when I stated:

  Note the emphasis on the terms modern archaeologists and modern paleo-archaeologists...

  Just as you wouldn't even dream of going to a doctor who still practices medicine the way it was done in the Victorian era [and I've used this illustration before, but some people just don't get it...], I would never consider taking the words of an early archaeologist over current findings... That's almost 'flat earth' thinking...

  As for the Aborigines having a supreme "sky god", you'll notice that the source didn't state that the "sky god" was their ONLY god, did you??

  "Going back to the most primitive people, the Pygmies of Africa or the central Australians or the central Californian Indians--all have one Supreme Sky God to Whom they make offerings ..."

  First of all, this quote is again taken from a site that has a stated purpose of:

  "These 60 Doorway Papers and 6 books present unique connections between scientific research and biblical understanding bringing together faith and reason. ..."

  So the site is already slanted towards biblical thinking - not an impartial source of information.

  I suggest that you read "Voices of the First Day - Awakening in the Aboriginal Dreamtime", copyright 1991 by Robert Lawlor, for a much more up-to-date, initial understanding of the Aboriginal mythology...

  And it certainly doesn't support that "momo-theistic" notion of yours...
• 

  ziddina

  Oh, and Strymeckirules???

  Your comment on page 1:

  strange question. the question should be,

  "What if humans never decided to write down history?"

  (remember the bible is many little scrolls from different time periods in one book.)

  the answer is -
  Then we would NEVER learn from our mistakes.

  Oh, the ignorance...

  WHAT on EARTH makes you think that the ability to write things down, began with the bible???????

  For you, I would recommend researching the history of cuneiform writing.....

  And PAY ATTENTION TO THE DATES GIVEN. You'll note that the earliest forms of writing arose long before the bible began to be written...
• 

  ziddina

  I've considered this thread further, and here's my final take on those comments that were questioning, critical - and off-topic, to boot...

  Leolaia, Terry, AK_Jeff and many others have posted reams of information pertinent to your doubts and scepticisms. They have spent countless hours of their precious time, laying out solid, fact-based scientific research - frequently including links - of the most current, up-to-date nature. Some have even practically spoon-fed such information to you...

  However, I will not do that.

  People who are truly "open-minded" have intellectual curiosity. People who have an intellectual curiosity generally will either have already DONE the research, or will seek it out without prompting, once their interest is piqued. Your accusations that I am not "open-minded" show that you are still practicing a variation of Watchtower - or perhaps that should be Literalist Christian - hypocrisy. If you haven't already sought out current, fact-based, multiple sources of information, then YOU need to develop more curiosity.

  I now realize that my attempts at stimulating intellectual curiosity in people who resist new information that conflicts with their pet set of beliefs, is as ineffective as my using the toilet for them, or going on a hike for them...

  If I use the toilet for you, you will not feel relieved. If I go on a hike for you, you will not build muscle tissue nor will you burn fat.

  I began reading books on [the subject of] geology when I was six, books on archaeology, volcanoes, and paleontology [among other subjects...] when I was seven, and books on various ancient religions when I was twelve. I read a critical review of the Jehovah's Witnesses - William H. Whalen's book, "Armageddon Aound the Corner", when I was ten, and began reading about World War II when I was thirteen.

  I have continued to read such books, especially those on the subjects of geology, archaeology, paleo-archaeology, paleontology, anthropology, psychology, and many more related subjects, for the last fifty years...

  But I will not do your research for you.

  Zid