joelr
Well-Known Member
No, you cannot cop out and say a Christian who commits a crime isn't a Christian. It isn't for you to judge and the church allows for confession absolving one of sins
There is no difference. Because you say different words and you feel there is some magical effect is not proof.
Good because Plato also said in the Republic that to get average people to follow virtues you have to make a mythology and call non-believers heretics and kill them.
He predicted the Vatical centuries prior. He said people need a God/demigod to follow rules. It's called the Noble Lie.
It's been demonstrated in history that the stories are all taken from older myths. The evidence is clear. Only non-educated religious think this isn't true. So you have been told it's a myth. If you study the field you will see it isn't.
All biblical archeologists know the Israelites emerged from the Canaanite culture. This isn't in debate. again, inside religious circles you are told things tat are not true.
William Denver biblical Archeologist:
"
Is there mention of the Israelites anywhere in ancient Egyptian records?
No Egyptian text mentions the Israelites except the famous inscription of Merneptah dated to about 1206 B.C.E. But those Israelites were in Canaan; they are not in Egypt, and nothing is said about them escaping from Egypt.
Is there evidence of the Israelites in the central highlands of Canaan at this time?
We know today, from archeological investigation, that there were more than 300 early villages of the 13th and 12th century in the area. I call these "proto-Israelite" villages.
Are there signs that the Israelites came in conquest, taking over the land from Canaanites?
The settlements were founded not on the ruins of destroyed Canaanite towns but rather on bedrock or on virgin soil. There was no evidence of armed conflict in most of these sites. Archeologists also have discovered that most of the large Canaanite towns that were supposedly destroyed by invading Israelites were either not destroyed at all or destroyed by "Sea People"—Philistines, or others.
So gradually the old conquest model [based on the accounts of Joshua's conquests in the Bible] began to lose favor amongst scholars. Many scholars now think that most of the early Israelites were originally Canaanites, displaced Canaanites, displaced from the lowlands, from the river valleys, displaced geographically and then displaced ideologically.
So what we are dealing with is a movement of peoples but not an invasion of an armed corps from the outside. A social and economic revolution, if you will, rather than a military revolution. And it begins a slow process in which the Israelites distinguish themselves from their Canaanite ancestors, particularly in religion—with a new deity, new religious laws and customs, new ethnic markers, as we would call them today.
Archeology of the Hebrew Bible
The point is humans already knew these things. In fact the Greeks were far more evolved, wanted to abolish slavery, had democracy. But these were made by humans.
Then Yahweh shows up and gives worse versions of known laws? Or...these were laws the Israelites encountered in Canaan (where they were from) and just made similar laws.
Like the Canaanites these are man made myths and stories from myths. Mostly Mesopotamian some Egyptian.
