outhouse
Atheistically
:slap: sure it is
Israelites didnt really exist until 3200 year ago
and then they were only a semi nomadic people labeled as proto israelites who held a Canaanite identity more so then a Israelite identity
-
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!
Israelites were polytheistic
- Thread starter outhouse
- Start date
:slap: sure it is
Israelites didnt really exist until 3200 year ago
and then they were only a semi nomadic people labeled as proto israelites who held a Canaanite identity more so then a Israelite identity
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
:slap: sure it is
Israelites didnt really exist until 3200 year ago
and then they were only a semi nomadic people labeled as proto israelites who held a Canaanite identity more so then a Israelite identity
So Abraham was not an Israelite; he was before them.
http://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/640221/jewish/What-is-the-Meaning-of-the-Name-Jew.htm
Last edited:
outhouse
Atheistically
Abraham has no historicity what so ever.
as far as historians are concerned, he was created in scripture and never existed
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Historians are not always right.
If history has not found any evidence that does not mean that person did not exist. Do the historian know names and life period of everybody born in this world? I think they have no such list.
outhouse
Atheistically
No but we know for a fact theology creates MYTHOLOGY to explain the past. :slap: the bible WAS NOT intended EVER as a history book
In this case there is no mistake, by the writing style alone we know when and why he was created.
Abraham - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
the stories of Abraham, all originated from literary circles either during the Persian period of the late 6th century BCE, to the 5th century Babylonian rule,[21] or as late as Hellenistic times
as there is nothing specific in the Genesis stories that can be definitively linked to known history in or around Canaan in the early second millennium BCE. There is no solid evidence for any date during that period, as none of the kings mentioned are known, neither the anonymous Pharaoh who enlists Joseph into his services.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Historians are not agreed as to the historicity of Abraham. There are a number of historians and scholars who accept the possibility that Abraham did in fact exist. They also agree though that the story as recorded in Genesis is not 100% accurate.
There could have been some nugget of truth behind the folklore, as there usually is. There does seem to be quite a bit of influence from Mesopotamia, especially in the earlier age, and the Bible tells us that is where Abraham came from. So it does make sense. And there are aspects concerning Abraham that don't really mesh up with later Hebrew culture, and in fact are embarrassing so are unlikely to have been made up.
So basically we come down to probability. There is some probability that Abraham existed. We do have one tradition that does support such an idea, and there are things within that tradition that do lend some credibility. At the same time, one can not say for definite he existed as we do lack evidence.
You make a good point though, a lack of evidence simply is not enough. And really, that is why historians do disagree.
outhouse
Atheistically
in this case we know, Israelites are talking about a man they never knew anything about.
were talking about people describing someone who they say lived over a thousand years previously
were talking about people who wrote at the time mythology not history, they wrote theology, not history. These same people have also written many things we know are not true and never happened.
these same people also wrote the exodus that descibes where israelites originated and we know for a fact the story as written is mythology even if there is a slight historical core, the events as decribed are known mythology.
these same people also described a mythical global flood that never happened.
You would be hard pressed to find a scholar who gives any historicity at all to Abraham as written. :sorry1:
That is the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
I don't agree with you. Quran for one does not create any mythology; so you are wrong here, in my opinion.
outhouse
Atheistically
this it would be upon you to provide evidence backing your claim
and since the quran is not as old as the OT, its authors did not have a possibility to know early Israelite history with any accuracy at all.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Mythology isn't a bad thing though. Many people think that mythology equals something that is false, or untrue. However, at the basis of all myth is truth. That is why myth is created. The problem is that many people have equated mythology with the modern use of myth, which simply is incorrect.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Certainly; myths are fabricated that is why these are called myths, in my opinion.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
That is completely missing the point of what a myth is. A myth isn't just a fabricated story. It is a story that is meant to portray a truth. It does so in different ways.
The problem is that the modern definition of myth, or at least the usage of the term myth, has been mangled into meaning something quite different, that it is false, or that it is only a story.
gnostic
The Lost One
paarsurrey said:
Of course it does.
The Qur'an say that Adam was made from clay. Myth.
The Qur'an say that Satan couldn't name the animals, so Adam won, and that was the reason why Satan rebelled - again, myth.
The Qur'an say that Solomon could speak to and control animals (eg ants and birds), jinns and the winds. Another myth.
Islam teaches that Muhummad went to Jerusalem in a single night, on a magical steed, as well as visited god, going through 7 heavens (the Night Journey). Myth, and a rip off from the 2nd book of Enoch.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
There is no myth there; it is only one's imagination and not understanding Quran correctly.
If somebody thinks that any myths are made as mentioned above; please select any one of the above which one thinks is sure a myth for open discussion; then quote the verse of Quran with some preceding and some following for the context and then prove one's point of view.
Shermana
Heretic
If the story of Solomon being able to control demons like in "Testament of Solomon" was meant to be regarded as a myth, the NT writers wouldn't have Jesus mentioning Solomon, calling himself "one greater than Solomon" in relation to being able to control demons. Whether you believe in the existence of demons or not, I strongly doubt the authors intended it to be read as anything less than upholding the tradition of Solomon having mastery over demons as a matter of fact literal truth. I don't believe the account is dismissed as myth by the Talmud either.
It is things like this that I have interest in the Quran about, that it does in fact provide some support for old pre-Rabbinical Midrash as if it were matter of fact.
Last edited:
gnostic
The Lost One
shermana said:
It only prove that Muhammad know of the myth about Solomon speaking to animals, winds and demons, and had adopted it into the Qur'an. it (Testament of Solomon or the Qur'an) prove nothing to be factual.
The earliest legend of King Arthur belonged to the Celtic Welsh (including the Old North kingdoms, in today Scotland). The Anglo-Saxons and French had adopted Arthurian as their own.
It is quite possible for one culture to adopt other cultures, including traditions, fables and myths.