Bible - Alternative Translation

[fallingblood]

The original polytheists bought that it was monotheistic, why can't the monotheists buy that it is polytheistic?

Well that is simply wrong. The original polytheists were long dead by the time the religion changed to a monotheistic religion. It wasn't as if it just happened all of a sudden. It was a gradual change, in which the religion when to monolatrous religion, and finally monotheistic.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

It's a little frustrating that people find this thread so uninteresting.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

And you begin with abysmal contempt for your subject?

Actually I think his point by saying his subject area was mythology was that his subject was writing myths, or stories. Hence the OP. It's a myth. From someone whose subject area is mythology. The whole thing now make perfect sense! Sure, Aesychylus, Sophocles, or Euripides may have done more with the material they were working with, but clearly this was first attempt at taking an old, well-known story and re-working it freely.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Actually I think his point by saying his subject area was mythology was that his subject was writing myths, or stories. Hence the OP. It's a myth. From someone whose subject area is mythology. The whole thing now make perfect sense! Sure, Aesychylus, Sophocles, or Euripides may have done more with the material they were working with, but clearly this was first attempt at taking an old, well-known story and re-working it freely.

Such profound generocity.

I think that the claim to "myth" as his speciality simply means that he think this that he can rape the original story remorselessly on the thin claim that he knows anything at all about the dynamics of myth. Or even "story" for that matter.

The weird thing is that he's managed to completely mutilate everything - the biblical story, history, and any kind of substance from either tradition. It's artless.

 

[HiddenDjinn]

It's a little frustrating that people find this thread so uninteresting.

I'm here, but I just refuse to further feed the engorged troll.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Hey did you folks know that Mazran the Fake Man -- in the book of Soft Apples swung around the desert with a rope that he made out of butt hair with his teeth? The crazy thing is he never cut the hair out. He just stuck his head right up his butt and out came the rope (after about three years).

Now that would be one hell of a bar trick.

I thought that this was pretty damn funny.

 

[outhouse]

You can keep trying to put the Canaanite "Asherah" if you like, but it doesn't make it real. Asherah was Baal's consort.

Asherah was said to be Yahweh's consort as well as El's depending on what source you find. No scholars or historians doubt this that have any credibility.

El was the father of Yahweh and Ball and asherah were all worshipped as a family of gods early on in ancient hebrews beginnings.

You can't seem to understand that this is not in our scripture,

edited out after ancient hebrews went monostheistic around 600 BC

Asherah and Baal both turned from deities to more or less cult objects early on. from 1200-800 BC its easy to say they were a part of ancient hebrews religion and worship practices.

 

[outhouse]

And really, none of that matter. Because we are talking about now. The vast majority of the history of Judaism shows that it had only one God.

But are we forgetting that Israel to the north worshipped El while those to the south followed Yahweh when the culture was first forming?

Almost all scholars and historians now know early hebrews were polytheistic for over 600 years after their formation around 1200 BC

Yahweh isnt even their god, we know Yahweh goes back to the Shasu tribe noted in Egypt that predates any ancient Israeli

 

[outhouse]

Such profound generocity.

I think that the claim to "myth" as his speciality simply means that he think this that he can rape the original story remorselessly on the thin claim that he knows anything at all about the dynamics of myth. Or even "story" for that matter.

The weird thing is that he's managed to completely mutilate everything - the biblical story, history, and any kind of substance from either tradition. It's artless.

he does have a very poor take on history and what really happened.

but it fuels the fire when others try to add more history that really doesnt constitute more then imagination.

Not your work :bow: which I have found to be well centered when you play

 

[outhouse]

Genesis looks like multiple books with multiple authors, So each Section of Genesis i view as rather Separate to each other, thus its better i think not to use gen 12:1 e.g to interpret Gen 1:4 e.g

genesis are later legends not books that were formed not only from oral traditions but ones unique to certian hebrew cultures. You had collections of writings that were edited together over hunderds years. the legends grew and were edited to meet certain time periods of belief. One part of genesis was added hundreds of years after the original version.

genesis was a evolution of writing that changed with the culture as it changed. It is heavily fragmented and you are right that you should not try and Interpret one to the other.

 

[outhouse]

The alter-translation will bring the bible to its too polytheist roots, but i am a Hellenistic polytheist, not sure how i can be a minister

No it wont.

You cant follow how the different collections were put together, nor how they were edited together over the years.

You cannot follow the evolution of the pieces by simply changing the intepretation.

Go back to the sacred text site and read about the contruction of genesis there. Its dry and long and puts me to sleep but there is a wealth of a older scholarship on the subject that is very thorough.

If you have interest and you want to take this to a new level and make yourself credible, you need to know that information.

Right now I agree with levite, A&E and fallingblood. You might have had good intentions but your butchering it due to either ignorance on the subject or personal biases

 

[HiddenDjinn]

outhouse,
Go ahead, and believe what you want. Someone will always be there to tell you that you are wrong.

 

[outhouse]

outhouse,
Go ahead, and believe what you want. Someone will always be there to tell you that you are wrong.

Not many that actually know the real history.

Its alot like biblical jesus is not historical jesus

 

[Rhadamanthus]

outhouse,
Go ahead, and believe what you want. Someone will always be there to tell you that you are wrong.

Still trolling, If you don't like this thread Ignore it.

 

[Rhadamanthus]

Well that is simply wrong. The original polytheists were long dead by the time the religion changed to a monotheistic religion. It wasn't as if it just happened all of a sudden. It was a gradual change, in which the religion when to monolatrous religion, and finally monotheistic.

The rise of Imperialism perfectly coincides with the rise of monotheism, because they are the same thing, because "Imperialism" is the idea of a "Mono-" ruler , to rule over multiple Kingdoms, e.g. King of Kings. and to sustain and rule over a large empire, they create God, in the image of the Imperator to control the Mass of the Empire and keep them in Line, and present the Mass a False history, If they gave the mass the real history, they Mass would turn on the rulers, for they know what they not know.

 

[outhouse]

The rise of Imperialism perfectly coincides with the rise of monotheism, because they are the same thing, because "Imperialism" is the idea of a "Mono-" ruler , to rule over multiple Kingdoms, e.g. King of Kings. and to sustain and rule over a large empire, they create God, in the image of the Imperator to control the Mass of the Empire and keep them in Line, and present the Mass a False history, If they gave the mass the real history, they Mass would turn on the rulers, for they know what they not know.

what you state worked for others in hellenistic myths and men BUT this is not seen in ancient hebrew culture though.

Monotheism started after the fall of the temple, the Yahwist took over the government.

They didnt create yahweh in any sense, he was used since 1400 ish by the Shasu tribe long before hebrews. El had been a mesopotamian deity. They compiled the two around 600 BC but even if they did redifine Yahweh, they were still worshipping the same deity they had for 600 years previously. All they really did was just eliminate El and edit the books they had to format a monotheistic religion. In doing so they couldnt hide the previous deities, but they could make the stories follow a monotheistic tone.

They did create a history but this had gone on before 600BC and it wasnt something that had just happend during ther slow switch to monotheism.

as FB pointed out The switch to monotheism did take a while and its evident in scripture.

 

[outhouse]

OP heres the link you should read and all 5 parts with it from the index if you havnt already.

The Legends of Genesis: V. Jahvist, Elohist, Jehovist, the Later Collections

 

[Rhadamanthus]

what you state worked for others in hellenistic myths and men BUT this is not seen in ancient hebrew culture though.

Monotheism started after the fall of the temple, the Yahwist took over the government.

They didnt create yahweh in any sense, he was used since 1400 ish by the Shasu tribe long before hebrews. El had been a mesopotamian deity. They compiled the two around 600 BC but even if they did redifine Yahweh, they were still worshipping the same deity they had for 600 years previously. All they really did was just eliminate El and edit the books they had to format a monotheistic religion. In doing so they couldnt hide the previous deities, but they could make the stories follow a monotheistic tone.

They did create a history but this had gone on before 600BC and it wasnt something that had just happend during ther slow switch to monotheism.

as FB pointed out The switch to monotheism did take a while and its evident in scripture.

The Scriptures have a maximum of at least 600BC, evidence of this is found in Noah' Nation
Tablet.

Genesis 10:7
And the sons of Cush; Seba, and Havilah, and Sabtah, and Raamah, and Sabtechah: and the sons of Raamah; Sheba, and Dedan.

(--Rulers of Cush--)
Cush (King Kashta) *765-752 BCE*
Sabtah (King Shabaka) *721-702 BCE*
Sabtechah (King Shebitku) *707-690 BCE*
Nimrod (King Nimlot II) *735-665 BCE*
Japeth/Phut (King Iuput II) *754-715BCE*
Medai (King Midas) *about 700BCE*
Dedan (King Tanutameni) *664-657BCE*

The switch of monotheism is likely attributed to the Persian takeover and Zoroastrian beliefs

 

[outhouse]

The switch of monotheism is likely attributed to the Persian takeover and Zoroastrian beliefs

False bud.

it was due partly to the fall of the temple, but more so the king was a strict Yahwist.

You had different camps and during times of war Yahwist would strengthen. But with a king who was a Yahwist, you had no choice. Not everyone switched right away but it was the beginning of Monotheism.

If you want to present a case for this, you need to show a tie between the king and Zoroastrian beliefs. but we know he was a yahwist

The Scriptures have a maximum of at least 600BC, evidence of this is found in Noah' Nation
Tablet.

what are you talking about? you need to be more descriptive here.

what is a maximum?

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

what is a maximum?

The point at which a function reachs either a high value (local maximum) or the highest value (global maximum). Use the first and second derivative tests.