How many of Judaism's stories are actually true?

[Pedro de San Patricio]

What you dejected ex-Christians always do is consider the bible to be a religious text and then interpret it in the most absurd and illogical way possible.

It's ******* pathetic.

You think I'm an ex-Christian? xD

 

[Muhammed]

What you dejected ex-Christians always do is consider the bible to be a religious text and then interpret it in the most absurd and illogical way possible.

It's ******* pathetic.

You think I'm an ex-Christian? xD

Yes, over the decades I have become very adept at spotting your type.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

What you dejected ex-Christians always do is consider the bible to be a religious text and then interpret it in the most absurd and illogical way possible.

It's ******* pathetic.

You think I'm an ex-Christian? xD

Yes, over the decades I have become very adept at spotting your type.

Interesting. Are you an ex-Christian? I've met quite a few.

 

[Muhammed]

What you dejected ex-Christians always do is consider the bible to be a religious text and then interpret it in the most absurd and illogical way possible.

It's ******* pathetic.

You think I'm an ex-Christian? xD

Yes, over the decades I have become very adept at spotting your type.

Interesting. Are you an ex-Christian? I've met quite a few.

No, I've never been religious because I wasn't raised in a religious family.

What I've noticed is that athiests who were brought up Crhistians are the ones who express so much resentment towards Christians. For example, Bill Maher.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

What I've noticed is that athiests who were brought up Crhistians are the ones who express so much resentment towards Christians. For example, Bill Maher.

I don't think that Christians follow Judaism or that stating that most of the stories Judaism is based on are factually incorrect is expressing resentment though?

 

[irosie91]

I love Sumerian "literature" ^_^

My fav is Inanna's Descent, Enûma Eliš, and Nergal & Ereshkigal


​

I actually love how much of the Book of Genesis was lifted from Gilgamesh

Actually The Epic of Giliganesh is nothing like Genesis. Despite some similarities with the story of Noah, Giligamesh was nothing like Noah, and that was just one part of a much bigger story.

Gilgamesh was on a quest for immortality. And he was a badass. He was so badass he turned down sex with the Goddess Ishtar! lol. He also liked to fight. He fought what sounded like a mechanical bull from Heaven (but could be interpreted otherwise), he fought some crazy ass giant demon thing in the woods with his homeboy at his side, etc. He was more like Hercules if you ask me.

So yeah. Genesis is about the creation of the World and the creation of Man, and some of the struggles faced by the first generations of humanity on Earth, especially in regards to their relationship with God. The main character of Genesis is actually God... not some mortal or demigod. The Epic of Gilgamesh was about Gilgercules.

​

Gilgamesh and Enkidu about to go kick some ass

​

try again-----what "entirety"? the nascent Hebrew community consisted of a family of 12 brothers and its retainers, You are getting tangled in your own stupidity ---taking as HISTORY, "realities" not provable except by conjecture and rumor and
rejecting a written narrative.

Please tell the class what is written in Exodus 1:5-7. I will be more than happy to do so should the task prove too difficult for you.

Even your statement that Hebrew and the Egyptian language are SIMILAR is utter BULLSHIT-----the Egyptian language was not a particularly semitic language----it was more cushite.

Understanding what I've said so far requires an educational foundation I thought you would already have. You have my apologies for the assumption. The first thing you should know about is where languages come from. The easiest way I've found to explain this is to imagine a small tribe of people living in a valley. They have one homogenous language and culture. As they multiply their population expands outwards. Soon they occupy two more valleys as well. The branches of the tribe remain in contact but begin to become different as time goes on. Their cultures slowly diverge in the details. They begin speaking their shared language in a slightly different way. Those differences become more recognizable as distinct dialects. The tribe continues to grow and expand geographically. Eventually you have a situation where the people of the central valleys speak mutually intelligible but distinct dialects and the people on the relatively isolated frontiers have a hard time understanding the people in the middle and probably can't understand the people on the other side of the country at all. It's obviously a really simplified explanation but hopefully it's enlightening enough for our purpose. The original language became the archaic mother of a language family with several descendants, each with their own dialectal variations.

One of the primary language families is one called Afro-Asiatic. It's made up of the Berber, Chadic, Cushitic, Egyptian, Omotic, and Semitic families. These families are all considered to be Afro-Asiatic because they are all related by common descent back to a proto-Afro-Asiatic language. Basically, you're right that Egyptian and Chadic are related. You're wrong in saying that Egyptian and Semitic aren't related. They are all related to each other. It's like saying that English isn't related to Spanish or Hindi because it comes from proto-Germanic.

It's ok with me----if you wish to discount all of ancient writings of the world as bullshit-----unless they can be proven with DNA and fingerprints------ok with me. Most of history goes down the drain. I consider ALL ancient scriptural writings to be important. I am even willing to concede that a personality "muhummad" really existed despite the absolute absence of physical evidence

There are ancient writings I do accept, at least partially. The thing is, it's very important when reading literature of that age and nature that much of it was written by people who had no access to modern information or methods and quite possibly no education unrelated to their profession whatsoever for an audience much the same. That's not to say that they weren't intelligent. It's just that they often believed some pretty stupid shit because they didn't know better and had no way to know better. It's a fair guess that the sun is driven across the sky by a chariot if youn don't know what it is or anything about the solar system. The idea that the flight of birds or the shape of a sheep's stomach when you pull it out communicates the will of the gods makes sas much sense as any other divination technique. At least then it's something everyone can see rather than the priests going behind a curtain and coming up with some bullshit to keep the people feeding and taking orders from them.

that's because it isn't. Genesis has virtually nothing to do with the epic of Gilgamesh -----and there is no evidence that one preceded the other. In a court
of law----the charge would fail If one studies the epic stories or poems of the ancient world----it is easy to find similarities here and there-------real idiots like to make an issue of it.

There are similarities. There are good reasons for that. One is cultural drift, where a culture fragments like we discussed above and the new cultures retain their shared heritage. One of those is direct derivation, as with the myth of Noah's flood being taken from Utnapishtim's. Another is indirect influence exerted from local or influential cultures/stories. Even stories originating from cultures not in contact share commonalities just by virtue of being stories. There are only so many tropes one can use. There are only so many variations you can make on one theme.

'
your long pseudo intellectual "ESSAY" informs me of nothing In fact the ONE
sentence which does make sense is "even stories originating from cultures not
in contact share commonalities just by virtue of being stories" Well----the
commonalities are really a bit more intriguing than that and are really
virtually HARDWIRED in the human brain. ------you seem to be quoting something
out of some baby INTRO course in sociology-----Sociology 101 for the not too bright. Linguistics are ----in fact, quite an accurate way of tracing migrations----
Hebrew is derived from Amharic-----not Egyptian which is a very different language.
SANSKRIT is indo European but it is very different from Hungarian. For far better
discussion regarding the COMMONALITIES in "stories"---forget about the baby
intro to sociology and read FREUD et al

 

[irosie91]

What I've noticed is that athiests who were brought up Crhistians are the ones who express so much resentment towards Christians. For example, Bill Maher.

I don't think that Christians follow Judaism or that stating that most of the stories Judaism is based on are factually incorrect is expressing resentment though?

the practice of Judaism --or the practice of any other religion eg Hinduism ----is not dependent on the reality of the details of its scriptural writings

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

your long pseudo intellectual "ESSAY" informs me of nothing

It wasn't really even an essay though. It was an explanation of why there are language families and why you're wrong in thinking that Hebrew and Egyptian aren't related/similar. Possibly showing you the phonology and grammar of both languages would have been better.

In fact the ONE
sentence which does make sense is "even stories originating from cultures not
in contact share commonalities just by virtue of being stories"

That was the only sentence of the entire post that you understood? Seriously? You don't even understand how a culture can take a story from another culture and adapt it to itself? That's hard for you?

Well----the
commonalities are really a bit more intriguing than that and are really
virtually HARDWIRED in the human brain.

Yuhuh. They're called tropes. Trope - TV Tropes takes the topic about as seriously as I should probably start taking this discussion but it's still an enlightening read if you have a spare twelve hours or so.

------you seem to be quoting something
out of some baby INTRO course in sociology-----Sociology 101 for the not too bright.

I'm unclear what you think I'm quoting. I was definitely trying to give you a baby intro to linguistics in the first paragraph tho.

Linguistics are ----in fact, quite an accurate way of tracing migrations----

"Linguistics are" and you're going to try to argue this topic with me? Okay... Fwiw, it's pretty common knowledge that the discipline has been instrumental in giving us a better understanding of how populations have moved. Analysis of the athematic vocabulary of Romani is how we figured out the route they took from India.

Hebrew is derived from Amharic-----not Egyptian which is a very different language.
SANSKRIT is indo European but it is very different from Hungarian.

Amharic is a Semitic language of Ethiopia. Aramaic is another Semitic language. Hebrew is a Semitic language as well. Equating them is like equating Spanish, Italian, and Romanian because they're all Romance. All of the Semitic tongues derive from a common root, which ultimately shares a root with the Egyptian tongue. That's why the Semitic and Egyptian languages are similar in sound and structure yet different. It's like the hypothetical tribe I mentioned in the simplified explanation. You start with one language and one tribe. Give it enough time and geographical distance and you end up with dialects descended from the original language. The farthest dialects will probably be the least alike. Given more time and less contact and you'll end up with a language family. You mention the Indo-European family. It worked the same there. The language of this tribe that probably existed in Anatolia became a vast family of related families of individual languages. Hungarian is not one of those related Indo-European languages btw. It's Uralic, meaning it's descended from the same language as, say, Finnish.

For far better
discussion regarding the COMMONALITIES in "stories"---forget about the baby
intro to sociology and read FREUD et al

Literature, sociology, and psychology are different fields tho? You might as well be telling me to throw out Darwin and read Kant instead.

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

try again-----what "entirety"? the nascent Hebrew community consisted of a family of 12 brothers and its retainers, You are getting tangled in your own stupidity ---taking as HISTORY, "realities" not provable except by conjecture and rumor and
rejecting a written narrative.

Please tell the class what is written in Exodus 1:5-7. I will be more than happy to do so should the task prove too difficult for you.

Btw, I asked you to use Exodus 1:5-7 to back this up a page ago and said I would quote it if you didn't. I guess I should:
5. And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already.
6. And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.
7. And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.

Fucked that up much?

 

[irosie91]

try again-----what "entirety"? the nascent Hebrew community consisted of a family of 12 brothers and its retainers, You are getting tangled in your own stupidity ---taking as HISTORY, "realities" not provable except by conjecture and rumor and
rejecting a written narrative.

Please tell the class what is written in Exodus 1:5-7. I will be more than happy to do so should the task prove too difficult for you.

Btw, I asked you to use Exodus 1:5-7 to back this up a page ago and said I would quote it if you didn't. I guess I should:
5. And all the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls: for Joseph was in Egypt already.
6. And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation.
7. And the children of Israel were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and multiplied, and waxed exceeding mighty; and the land was filled with them.

Fucked that up much?

what is there about those lines that bother you? ------seventy people were the children,
and grandchildren and great grandchildren of Jacob-----when he died----makes sense to me----he had 12 sons and a daughter. My husband is one of ten kids------his parents died a few years ago-----but if you count up all their kids---grandkids and
great grandkids -----its a LOT MORE THAN 70. I am one of five-----my mother has five children -------nine grandchildren and three great grandchildren ----that adds up to
17 from my dad's loins What point are you struggling to make

 

[Pedro de San Patricio]

Well, considering the next verses explain how pharaoh enslaved the Hebrews, who numbered far more than twelve by then by your own admission...

 

[irosie91]

Well, considering the next verses explain how pharaoh enslaved the Hebrews, who numbered far more than twelve by then by your own admission...

pedro ----different pharoah. I read the book LONG ago----and I am not looking---
I remember because-----I remember stories. The book SPECIFICALLY says
that the Pharoah that enslaved DA JOOOOS did not "know Joseph"-----that means
it happened after Joseph died and was done by a guy who never met him-----
in fact the ----new pharoah did not recognize his ancestor's promise to Joseph----
there----now you understand.... I know you do. A family of 12 sons and one
daughter and their spouses and children migrated to Egypt-----landed in a city "Goshen"------and had lots of descendants who then got enslaved. Romulus and Remus started all the Italians

 

[CynthiaZ]

I love Sumerian "literature" ^_^

My fav is Inanna's Descent, Enûma Eliš, and Nergal & Ereshkigal

​

I actually love how much of the Book of Genesis was lifted from Gilgamesh

Actually The Epic of Giliganesh is nothing like Genesis.

Gilgamesh was on a quest for immortality. And he was a badass. He was so badass he turned down sex with the Goddess Ishtar! lol. He also liked to fight. He fought some crazy ass giant demon thing in the woods with his homeboy at his side, and a Celestial Bull God thing... he was kinda more like Hercules if you ask me.

So yeah. Genesis is about the creation of the World and the creation of Man, and some of the struggles faced by the first generations of humanity on Earth, especially in regards to their relationship with God. The main character of Genesis is actually God... not some mortal or demigod. The Epic of Gilgamesh was about Gilgercules.

​

The Flood story is pretty much lifted from Gilgamesh

 

[CynthiaZ]

Here another thing that is definitely not true from the Old Testament. The origin of the Samaritans. In the Old Testament we are told that Sargon took away all the inhabitants of Northern Israel and replaced them with foreigners who conveniently worshiped the same god as the previous inhabitants and that the Samaritans are the descendents of foreigners and some Levites that Sargon returned. But DNA testing as actually proved that the Samaritans were actually the original Northern Israelites all along and Sargon in his own records testifies that he only took the royal and upper classes and lest the more poorer inhabitants in the land. The Judeans were lying about the Samaritans all through their scriptures because they felt that they were competitors.

 

[irosie91]

I love Sumerian "literature" ^_^

My fav is Inanna's Descent, Enûma Eliš, and Nergal & Ereshkigal

​

I actually love how much of the Book of Genesis was lifted from Gilgamesh

Actually The Epic of Giliganesh is nothing like Genesis.

Gilgamesh was on a quest for immortality. And he was a badass. He was so badass he turned down sex with the Goddess Ishtar! lol. He also liked to fight. He fought some crazy ass giant demon thing in the woods with his homeboy at his side, and a Celestial Bull God thing... he was kinda more like Hercules if you ask me.

So yeah. Genesis is about the creation of the World and the creation of Man, and some of the struggles faced by the first generations of humanity on Earth, especially in regards to their relationship with God. The main character of Genesis is actually God... not some mortal or demigod. The Epic of Gilgamesh was about Gilgercules.

​

The Flood story is pretty much lifted from Gilgamesh

you are a victim of intro to stupidity 101 for several reasons.
The founding stories of many many different cultures have common
features. In order to understand why----you need to get way past intro to psychology 101 (the baby course for home ec majors) I will help you to understand-----all human brains is made the same----and symbols are
HARD WIRED in the system-----that is why freud was able to write his
book ON DREAMS ----in fact so was Aristotle.

 

[CynthiaZ]

I love Sumerian "literature" ^_^

My fav is Inanna's Descent, Enûma Eliš, and Nergal & Ereshkigal

​

I actually love how much of the Book of Genesis was lifted from Gilgamesh

Actually The Epic of Giliganesh is nothing like Genesis.

Gilgamesh was on a quest for immortality. And he was a badass. He was so badass he turned down sex with the Goddess Ishtar! lol. He also liked to fight. He fought some crazy ass giant demon thing in the woods with his homeboy at his side, and a Celestial Bull God thing... he was kinda more like Hercules if you ask me.

So yeah. Genesis is about the creation of the World and the creation of Man, and some of the struggles faced by the first generations of humanity on Earth, especially in regards to their relationship with God. The main character of Genesis is actually God... not some mortal or demigod. The Epic of Gilgamesh was about Gilgercules.

​

The Flood story is pretty much lifted from Gilgamesh

you are a victim of intro to stupidity 101 for several reasons.
The founding stories of many many different cultures have common
features. In order to understand why----you need to get way past intro to psychology 101 (the baby course for home ec majors) I will help you to understand-----all human brains is made the same----and symbols are
HARD WIRED in the system-----that is why freud was able to write his
book ON DREAMS ----in fact so was Aristotle.

We know Gilgamesh is older you stupid ***** because the Sumerian language and culture was extinct by the time the Hebrew language came into fruition. In fact Hebrew didn't even exist as a language when the first Sumerian poems were composed.

 

[irosie91]

Here another thing that is definitely not true from the Old Testament. The origin of the Samaritans. In the Old Testament we are told that Sargon took away all the inhabitants of Northern Israel and replaced them with foreigners who conveniently worshiped the same god as the previous inhabitants and that the Samaritans are the descendents of foreigners and some Levites that Sargon returned. But DNA testing as actually proved that the Samaritans were actually the original Northern Israelites all along and Sargon in his own records testifies that he only took the royal and upper classes and lest the more poorer inhabitants in the land. The Judeans were lying about the Samaritans all through their scriptures because they felt that they were competitors.

you got a link for that idiot reconstruction ? The Assyrian exile is not described as being completely comprehensive-------just the leaders. ----the sorta educated and "upper class" types----the country side people were left alone. You got a link to those "lies" about the Samaritans "all thru the scriptures"??? (for those interested----the samaritins are barely mentioned in the "old testament"------
they are a kind of split off sect which still exists) "competitors" ?? genetically and culturally they have been isolated from other jews for more than 2000 years. ---more like at least 2500 years. "competitors"?????

 

[irosie91]

I love Sumerian "literature" ^_^

My fav is Inanna's Descent, Enûma Eliš, and Nergal & Ereshkigal

​

I actually love how much of the Book of Genesis was lifted from Gilgamesh

Actually The Epic of Giliganesh is nothing like Genesis.

Gilgamesh was on a quest for immortality. And he was a badass. He was so badass he turned down sex with the Goddess Ishtar! lol. He also liked to fight. He fought some crazy ass giant demon thing in the woods with his homeboy at his side, and a Celestial Bull God thing... he was kinda more like Hercules if you ask me.

So yeah. Genesis is about the creation of the World and the creation of Man, and some of the struggles faced by the first generations of humanity on Earth, especially in regards to their relationship with God. The main character of Genesis is actually God... not some mortal or demigod. The Epic of Gilgamesh was about Gilgercules.

​

The Flood story is pretty much lifted from Gilgamesh

you are a victim of intro to stupidity 101 for several reasons.
The founding stories of many many different cultures have common
features. In order to understand why----you need to get way past intro to psychology 101 (the baby course for home ec majors) I will help you to understand-----all human brains is made the same----and symbols are
HARD WIRED in the system-----that is why freud was able to write his
book ON DREAMS ----in fact so was Aristotle.

We know Gilgamesh is older you stupid ***** because the Sumerian language and culture was extinct by the time the Hebrew language came into fruition. In fact Hebrew didn't even exist as a language when the first Sumerian poems were composed.

no----actually we don't know that nor do we know when this or that story was
done. It seems YOU know that which nobody else knows ------when "Hebrew came into fruition"? when was that? It just POPPED into "fruition"
one day? Arabic was not a written language until about 300 AD-----does that mean that 2000 years ago arabs did not speak?

 

[Dante]

We know the creation of...

Children of Abraham: Christians, Muslims, and Jews and their fairy tales

 

[irosie91]

We know the creation of...

Children of Abraham: Christians, Muslims, and Jews and their fairy tales

you have to be an idiot to regard ancient scriptural writings as "fairy tales"-----in fact they reflect universal (that is human brain type) symbols and are invariably linked to real history. Ask Heinrich Schliemann and Sigmund Freud Nothing comes from NOWHERE------not even psychotic delusions