Denigration noted. Now, yet again: show me evidence that the Passover sacrifice was a human sacrifice carried out by Israelites for Israelites.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did the Babylonians invent Judaism?
- Thread starter Godwilling
- Start date
- Status
What are your three favorite texts on the archaeology of Israel?
The Jeremiah and Ezekiel rants are little more than hyperbole. We could discuss the context and genre, but such a discussion would be wasted on bigots concerned with little more than culling quotes in the service of antisemitism.
2 Kings, however, purports to be history and should be addressed as such.
2 Kings 17:7-23 is identified by Cogan and Tadmor as A Homily on the Fall of the Northern Kingdom. The Deuteronomist is confronted with an historio-theological problem. His God is the God of history and, therefore, the fall of the norther kingdom must be attributed to divine retribution. He therefore conjures up a picture of rampant idolatry and pagan practices. There is little in the archaeology of the area to support this, but we do know a couple of things:
- The force behind the fall was, in fact, the Assyrian conquest of Tiglath-pileser III, a conquest that was accompanied by massive and bi-directional population transfers aimed at Assyrianizing the conquered lands. It is 'Israel' in cooped leadership and location only.
- The polemic highlights the exact opposite of what our Israel bashers wish to portray: human sacrifice was deemed anathema to Deuteronomist and the prophets who followed. The very Judaism that the anti-Semite persistently attacks with blood libel engaged in a persistent theocratic condemnation of and polemic against such sacrifice.
waitasec
Veteran Member
No, you have not. You've pointed to a well known narrative wherein God kills (or, if you wish, sacrifices) the first born as the tenth plague wrought against Pharoah on behalf of the Israelites. I will gladly discuss its possible etiology with anyone not wedded to blood libel but, in your case, it is sufficient to note that the narrative in no way depicts the Passover sacrifice as - as you hatefully claim - human sacrifice carried out by Israelites for Israelites. That you continue to insist otherwise is truly reminiscent of a stormfront mentality. It should be as shameful to you as it is disgusting to others.
Just a brief side note regarding ...There is something unique about the antisemitic historiography typical to the more religiously skeptical of those commited to blood libel and the denigration of Judaism. Their understanding of Israelite archaeology and ethnogenesis is effectively nonexistent. Rather, they surf the internet for selective quotes guided by one over-arching principle: if it can be used to disparage Israel or Judaism it is true and/or symptomatic of evil intent, otherwise it is a worthless hodge-podge of barbaric theology and zionist propaganda. As a result, the religious movement that defined itself in part in opposition to and condemnation of idolatry and human sacrifice is portrayed as the barbaric theology of idolatrous child-killers. Blood libel was ugly then and it's no less ugly now.
waitasec
Veteran Member
i don't hatefully claim anything. and if you haven't noticed i haven't accused anyone of blood libel. i've been telling you i think it's a folk tale, a story conjured up by the israelites to justify why they think they are in the right, because "god said so" or they are "the chosen ones". give me a break. and you're getting your knickers all in a twist over my interpretation of this tradition...how ridiculously silly.
No, you have been telling us that the Passover sacrifice was a human sacrifice carried out by Israelites for Israelites. That is Blood Libel.
waitasec
Veteran Member
you're leaving something very important out, conveniently so, i've always said i think it's folklore. so no you are wrong.
you owe me an apology.
There is no folklore - other than the likes of the Protocols of Zion - that claims as you have that the Passover sacrifice was a human sacrifice carried out by Israelites for Israelites. That piece of disgusting blood libel is here courtesy of you.
Just to recall ...Blood libel.
waitasec
Veteran Member
selective memory...
funny how you intentionally misrepresent what i said...
besides we weren't talking about recipes either....
Last edited:
Show me scripture, narrative, folklore - whatever you choose to call it - that depicts the sacrifice of the first born
by whom...the israelites
waitasec
Veteran Member
first let me start by saying, i don't really think this ever happened.
i am inclined to believe that this is folklore, a story to encourage and justify to a group of people to believe they are gods chosen (instilling a sense of right). this fictional sacrifice/exodus, represents their right to freedom, their right to ratify revenge on any rival tribe and to think these things actually happened by saying things like, god killed the 1st born of the egyptians to free israel, is hideous at best.
No. Start by answering the question:
Show me scripture, narrative, folklore, story, fictional account - whatever you choose to call it, and created for whatever purpose you choose to attribute to it - that depicts the sacrifice of the first born
by whom...the israelites
That is antisemitic blood libel and a despicable lie.
waitasec
Veteran Member
you are hereby christened "drama queen"
Sadly, forum rules do not allow me to express what I think of you and the scum you emulate.
waitasec
Veteran Member
why stop now?
you have already broken a few
waitasec
Veteran Member
Blood libel (also blood accusation[1][2]) is a false accusation or claim[3][4][5] that religious minorities, usually Jews, murder children to use their blood in certain aspects of their religious rituals and holidays.[1][2][6] Historically, these claims—alongside those of well poisoning and host desecration—have been a major theme in European persecution of Jews.[4]
Blood libel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
i have not made any claims.
:sorry1:
so when someone criticizes my heritage for being involved in the genocide, which actually happened, of an indigenous group of people, are they anti-spanish?
you're funny.
Blood libel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
i have not made any claims.
:sorry1:
so when someone criticizes my heritage for being involved in the genocide, which actually happened, of an indigenous group of people, are they anti-spanish?
you're funny.
Last edited:
- Status