Zone1 Was The Garden Of Eden A Real Place?

[mudwhistle]

Only goes to proof that this self-written Hebrew-book - also beholds a collection of previous known occurrences/legends, recorded by other civilizations, predating the Bible by thousands of years. Summarized and then fabricated accordingly, to solely suit the Zionist agenda - dating from around 800.B.C. onward.

Moses only exists in the Judaic tradition/fantasy and it's desert religions offspring's - to lay claim onto a "promised land" and the "justification" to implement laws "commandments" (claimed to be given by their God) onto the Hebrews.

It is PROVEN (historically recorded) that a monotheistic belief - originating in Egypt at around 1500 B.C. had spread across Egyptian held and influenced territory. This Egyptian Dynasty (three kings) was militarily severely beaten by the Hittites - (could very well explain the Bible invention of the Moses Red-Sea devastation of the Egyptian army), thus causing a power-vacuum in e.g. Canaan. Therefore allowing Semitic people that lived and adhered to this monotheistic belief (hence being termed Israelite's by the Egyptians) in Canaan - to revolt against the established Semitic elites in Canaan that practiced theistic religions. Thus conquering/attacking and probably even peacefully "converting" - several Canaanite cities towards their religious belief.

E.g. Israeli archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, dispelled any illusions that their digs had verified the story of the Egyptian Exodus:



It is also (historically recorded) by the Egyptians, documenting their war and destruction of "Israelite held" cities in Canaan at around 1150 B.C. Around 300 years later the survivors of this monotheistic religion were still living in Canaan (Egyptian text reporting - (Israel has been destroyed - it's seed however continues to live on).

With both Egyptian and Hittite power deteriorating/vanishing in Canaan aka the Levant, and being replaced mostly by the Philistine conquerors/invaders - those still being faithful towards their monotheistic believes - then battled it out with the Philistines and others living in Canaan, INVENTED the Bible from around 800 B.C. onward - hence referring to themselves as Hebrews - simply to lay a "religious claim" (backed solely by their own invented God's words and promises) onto previous Philistine and others controlled land and cities and neighbor kingdoms - especially towards the Assyrians - resulting in the Hebrew Kingdom of David and Solomon which lasted from around 800 B.C. to 550 B.C.

You got anything else to offer besides citing your self-written Bible, and some self-written Wiki article?

Did you do that from memory, or did you cut & paste?

BTW, none of what you posted disproves the existence of Moses or the exodus of Hebrews from Egypt.

The very fact that Jerusalem and temple mount exists proves that it happened.

It's just that recorded history can fade over time. Not to mention the fact that invaders did everything they could to erase Israel's history.

 

[Kruska]

So desperate to dismiss any mention, let alone discuss Ebla,

that you need to change the subject? Sure you can string

an original thought, at least try.

The only one who is "desperately" providing unsubstantiated one liner posts and "claims" is YOU

As for changing the subject:

Was The Garden Of Eden A Real Place​

YOU brought in the Ebla story and it's ludicrous Hebrew claim, not me.

 

[Kruska]

Did you do that from memory, or did you cut & paste?

What ever is copy/paste, aka a given source by me, is shown in "italic"

BTW, none of what you posted disproves the existence of Moses or the exodus of Hebrews from Egypt.

Off course it does - and there is no proof in regards to Moses and the Egyptian Exodus - obviously you can't read, or rather prefer to ignore facts - that ain't suitable in regard to your believe into a self-written, composed Hebrew storybook.

The very fact that Jerusalem and temple mount exists proves that it happened.

You got any idea as to when Jerusalem aka "Temple" was build/constructed? - obviously not. And besides that, what does this "temple" proof in regards to Adam&Eve or Noah, Moses etc. ??? NOTHING

It's just that recorded history can fade over time.

Off course, and that is known and thus continuously rectified/researched via archeology - what does this have to do, with this self-written Bible (which is NOT representative of HISTORY)??
Creation of Earth, Adam&Eva, Garden of Eden, Noah, Moses and anything else pertaining to the Bible, are NOT history - but simply "invented stories", solely by Hebrews, garnishing it, via the use of previous existing stories/myth, that have been circulating amongst various civilizations - millennia before that self-written book went into existence.

Archeology does not doubt a Sumerian nor Indus flood - it factually confirms those floods - however there is absolutely no poof towards "the Biblical proclaimed and described global flood" - as solely invented in the Bible.

You can believe whatever you want or like - especially religion, or that the Germanic tribes were Hebrews, but that doesn't make it REAL/Factual.

Not to mention the fact that invaders did everything they could to erase Israel's history.

Walls and buildings pertaining to the Kingdom of David and Solomon have indeed been mostly erased - but records have not. And archeology keeps coming up with findings and evidence that continuous to discredit this self-written story book all the way. Especially since the 19th century when science and archeology managed to get rid of being suppressed by religious institution.

 

[surada]

Interestingly, archeological evidence settles them in today's Russia/Volga area (Nizchny-Novgorod/Kazan/Samara at around 4000 B.C. And it is hypothesized that they originate like many other migration-streams - starting at around 8000-6000 B.C. from today's Xinjiang vicinity. - must have been Hebrews.!!

There weren't any Jewish people 8000 years ago.

 

[surada]

The first time I've seen this theory proposed is here in the forums.
Generally, it's no different from the claims of the British throne,
and many other peoples pondering on their alternative past.

Hebrews were a Levantine civilization, or a specific stage
of it's collective history, rather than a tribe, which for
reasons Torah chooses not to mention ended in
exile, with the remnant being a single family.
And the experience of an entire civilization
through a singe character called to revive
it despite all odds of what looks as
apparent extinction...but the flame
burns and the bush is alive.

They were a tribe of landless Canaanites who worshipped the Canaanite pantheon.

 

[surada]

Only goes to proof that this self-written Hebrew-book - also beholds a collection of previous known occurrences/legends, recorded by other civilizations, predating the Bible by thousands of years. Summarized and then fabricated accordingly, to solely suit the Zionist agenda - dating from around 800.B.C. onward.

Moses only exists in the Judaic tradition/fantasy and it's desert religions offspring's - to lay claim onto a "promised land" and the "justification" to implement laws "commandments" (claimed to be given by their God) onto the Hebrews.

It is PROVEN (historically recorded) that a monotheistic belief - originating in Egypt at around 1500 B.C. had spread across Egyptian held and influenced territory. This Egyptian Dynasty (three kings) was militarily severely beaten by the Hittites - (could very well explain the Bible invention of the Moses Red-Sea devastation of the Egyptian army), thus causing a power-vacuum in e.g. Canaan. Therefore allowing Semitic people that lived and adhered to this monotheistic belief (hence being termed Israelite's by the Egyptians) in Canaan - to revolt against the established Semitic elites in Canaan that practiced theistic religions. Thus conquering/attacking and probably even peacefully "converting" - several Canaanite cities towards their religious belief.

E.g. Israeli archaeologists Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, dispelled any illusions that their digs had verified the story of the Egyptian Exodus:



It is also (historically recorded) by the Egyptians, documenting their war and destruction of "Israelite held" cities in Canaan at around 1150 B.C. Around 300 years later the survivors of this monotheistic religion were still living in Canaan (Egyptian text reporting - (Israel has been destroyed - it's seed however continues to live on).

With both Egyptian and Hittite power deteriorating/vanishing in Canaan aka the Levant, and being replaced mostly by the Philistine conquerors/invaders - those still being faithful towards their monotheistic believes - then battled it out with the Philistines and others living in Canaan, INVENTED the Bible from around 800 B.C. onward - hence referring to themselves as Hebrews - simply to lay a "religious claim" (backed solely by their own invented God's words and promises) onto previous Philistine and others controlled land and cities and neighbor kingdoms - especially towards the Assyrians - resulting in the Hebrew Kingdom of David and Solomon which lasted from around 800 B.C. to 550 B.C.

You got anything else to offer besides citing your self-written Bible, and some self-written Wiki article?

The story of Moses in the bullrushes is just like the much older story of Sargon in the bullrushes.

 

[surada]

Yes, the people of Northwest Europe are various tribes of Israel. The British and American settlers are Joseph, one of the Twelve Tribes

Hogwash. That's a tired old parlor game.

 

[mudwhistle]

What ever is copy/paste, aka a given source by me, is shown in "italic"

Off course it does - and there is no proof in regards to Moses and the Egyptian Exodus - obviously you can't read, or rather prefer to ignore facts - that ain't suitable in regard to your believe into a self-written, composed Hebrew storybook.

You got any idea as to when Jerusalem aka "Temple" was build/constructed? - obviously not. And besides that, what does this "temple" proof in regards to Adam&Eve or Noah, Moses etc. ??? NOTHING

Off course, and that is known and thus continuously rectified/researched via archeology - what does this have to do, with this self-written Bible (which is NOT representative of HISTORY)??
Creation of Earth, Adam&Eva, Garden of Eden, Noah, Moses and anything else pertaining to the Bible, are NOT history - but simply "invented stories", solely by Hebrews, garnishing it, via the use of previous existing stories/myth, that have been circulating amongst various civilizations - millennia before that self-written book went into existence.

Archeology does not doubt a Sumerian nor Indus flood - it factually confirms those floods - however there is absolutely no poof towards "the Biblical proclaimed and described global flood" - as solely invented in the Bible.

You can believe whatever you want or like - especially religion, or that the Germanic tribes were Hebrews, but that doesn't make it REAL/Factual.

Walls and buildings pertaining to the Kingdom of David and Solomon have indeed been mostly erased - but records have not. And archeology keeps coming up with findings and evidence that continuous to discredit this self-written story book all the way. Especially since the 19th century when science and archeology managed to get rid of being suppressed by religious institution.

I'm sorry, but if you don't know what cut& paste means by now then I'm talking to an idiot.

And when it comes to history, the victor controls what goes in the history books.

The entire purpose of archeology is to not to prove your assumptions about ancient history but to discover anything that we don't already know about it.

The Bible is history, but as Jesus once said, many of the stories contained in the Bible are "parables" not actual events. Also, the Bible doesn't include the entirety of human history but instead focuses on the tribe of Israel, meaning Abraham's descendants. I'm sure there were other tribes that were in existence after the days of the Babylonian Empire.

 

[BreezeWood]

The Stone Tablets were inside the Ark Of The Covenant, so find the Ark and you will find what's left of the tablets.
But they're 4000 years old so they may be a little dusty.

the stone tablets ... lied to be etched in the heavens -

were destroyed by the madman moses before they could be read. the 1st century is the repudiation of judaism and their false commandments.

and is void of the writings found in the 4th century christian bible, not including liberation theology, self determination jesus and those others died for in the 1st century.

 

[Foxfyre]

View attachment 911507​

It's said that where the Tigrus and Euphrates meet it is the most fertile soil on the planet.

This is supposed to be originally the area that the Garden of Eden was located.

This is in Iraq.

One of my buddies who spent time in Iraq after Desert Storm said there's a place in Iraq where you can grow anything without fertilizer or water.

Where Is The Garden Of Eden? And Where Would It Be Located Today?

The Bible suggests the Garden of Eden is located somewhere between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.

www.iflscience.com

Globally Important Iraqi Marshes Designated As A World Heritage Site

Globally Important Iraqi Marshes Designated As A World Heritage Site

www.iflscience.com

Interesting thread topic. And my answer to the question is always, "Does it really matter?" I have always seen the Bible as a collection of manuscripts containing bits of other manuscripts, crib notes, and oral tradition including history, law, poetry, metaphor, allegory/parable, prophecy, symbolism, wisdom sayings, descriptive illustrations to explain things, etc. The serious Bible scholar usually tries to sort out the various passages as to which category they fit into.

Those of us who accept the science of evolvement of species are far more likely to see the Garden of Eden as allegory to illustrate that a/God created humankind and its habitat and b/an explanation for why some things are the way they are.

In the Garden we see Adam and Eve committing the first sin, i.e. how sin came into the world and the consequences for that. In the story of Cain and Able we see sin expanding into the family. In the story of Noah we see sin expanding into the community. In the story of the Tower of Babel we see sin spreading into the entire world.

Does God care whether we observe these stories as literal or whether we consider them allegory to teach a principle? I don't think He does. I have taught Bible for a long time now and always assure my class that it isn't my intent to say whether the stories are actual history or allegories to teach, and I have never had any sense or discomfort that my approach was wrong in that.

I honestly don't think God cares all that much about our theology anyway. I think what He considers important is how we regard Him and how we regard and treat each other.

 

[mudwhistle]

Interesting thread topic. And my answer to the question is always, "Does it really matter?" I have always seen the Bible as a collection of manuscripts containing bits of other manuscripts, crib notes, and oral tradition including history, law, poetry, metaphor, allegory/parable, prophecy, symbolism, wisdom sayings, descriptive illustrations to explain things, etc. The serious Bible scholar usually tries to sort out the various passages as to which category they fit into.

Those of us who accept the science of evolvement of species are far more likely to see the Garden of Eden as allegory to illustrate that a/God created humankind and its habitat and b/an explanation for why some things are the way they are.

In the Garden we see Adam and Eve committing the first sin, i.e. how sin came into the world and the consequences for that. In the story of Cain and Able we see sin expanding into the family. In the story of Noah we see sin expanding into the community. In the story of the Tower of Babel we see sin spreading into the entire world.

Does God care whether we observe these stories as literal or whether we consider them allegory to teach a principle? I don't think He does. I have taught Bible for a long time now and always assure my class that it isn't my intent to say whether the stories are actual history or allegories to teach, and I have never had any sense or discomfort that my approach was wrong in that.

I honestly don't think God cares all that much about our theology anyway. I think what He considers important is how we regard Him and how we regard and treat each other.

If we could find where it was located it would make the Bible more real to nonbelievers.

But when it comes to Jesus.....everything must be on faith.

My belief is that Adam and Eve were a representation of humanity.

 

[Foxfyre]

If we could find where it was located it would make the Bible more real to nonbelievers.

But when it comes to Jesus.....everything must be on faith.

My belief is that Adam and Eve were a representation of humanity.

I have always considered the Garden of Eden story as allegorical rather than an actual place, but have no problem with anybody who believes it existed and Adam and Eve were actual people. Whichever way one believes I think is harmless and God is okay with it. I don't try to talk anybody out of their beliefs on that because I don't see it as important.

If I was teaching school on the evolution of homo sapiens and had students who brought up the Creation stories that don't fit the science, I would assure them that nobody knows for certain how it all began and I am not going to tell anybody what to believe. But we do have to know the science that is in the science books so you'll have to answer the questions on the test according to the answers in the books even if you believe they're wrong. Okay?

 

[mudwhistle]

I have always considered the Garden of Eden story as allegorical rather than an actual place, but have no problem with anybody who believes it existed and Adam and Eve were actual people. Whichever way one believes I think is harmless and God is okay with it. I don't try to talk anybody out of their beliefs on that because I don't see it as important.

If I was teaching school on the evolution of homo sapiens and had students who brought up the Creation stories that don't fit the science, I would assure them that nobody knows for certain how it all began and I am not going to tell anybody what to believe. But we do have to know the science that is in the science books so you'll have to answer the questions on the test according to the answers in the books even if you believe they're wrong. Okay?

Well....there are still people who think the Earth is only 6000 years old and Russian Collusion was real.

 

[Woodznutz]

Certainly not in regards to mankind's history - only in religious claimed history, deriving from a self-written fantasy book, that doesn't behold any scientific approach.

The scientific approach is what got us in trouble in the first place.

 

[Woodznutz]

I have always considered the Garden of Eden story as allegorical rather than an actual place, but have no problem with anybody who believes it existed and Adam and Eve were actual people. Whichever way one believes I think is harmless and God is okay with it. I don't try to talk anybody out of their beliefs on that because I don't see it as important.

If I was teaching school on the evolution of homo sapiens and had students who brought up the Creation stories that don't fit the science, I would assure them that nobody knows for certain how it all began and I am not going to tell anybody what to believe. But we do have to know the science that is in the science books so you'll have to answer the questions on the test according to the answers in the books even if you believe they're wrong. Okay?

That's called "giving the Devil his due."

 

[Foxfyre]

That's called "giving the Devil his due."

Not to me. It is what the First Amendment values represent as well as common sense.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well....there are still people who think the Earth is only 6000 years old and Russian Collusion was real.

Yes and there are very good even well educated people who think the Earth is flat. But who do they harm? Apart from interest from normally curious people and/or those those are in the position of power to make policy based on the paleontological history, what difference does it make to anybody else what they believe? They are such a small minority and most are conservative and wouldn't interject their religious beliefs into public policy even if they are put into a position of power.

So far as the Russian collusion goes, the real facts should be out there for those with eyes to see, ears to hear, and who are open minded enough to understand them as that belief is used to harm people on purpose.

 

[mudwhistle]

Yes and there are very good even well educated people who think the Earth is flat. But who do they harm? Apart from interest from normally curious people and/or those those are in the position of power to make policy based on the paleontological history, what difference does it make to anybody else what they believe? They are such a small minority and most are conservative and wouldn't interject their religious beliefs into public policy even if they are put into a position of power.

So far as the Russian collusion goes, the real facts should be out there for those with eyes to see, ears to hear, and who are open minded enough to understand them as that belief is used to harm people on purpose.

I used to get into discussions with strict Christians......and I could never convince them that not everything in the Bible was to be taken literally.
The hardest people to convince are people who want to ridicule Christianity while sucking up to Muslims.
They use Catholics every time to trash Christianity.
They use the Old Testament against people who follow Jesus's teachings.
Far rightwingers give religion a bad name.
Roman Catholics are the worst.
It's a real mess.
I remember listening to Muslims argue over religion for hours.
Nobody ever gives an inch because they all think they know more than everyone else.

 

[surada]

I used to get into discussions with strict Christians......and I could never convince them that not everything in the Bible was to be taken literally.
The hardest people to convince are people who want to ridicule Christianity while sucking up to Muslims.
They use Catholics every time to trash Christianity.
They use the Old Testament against people who follow Jesus's teachings.
Far rightwingers give religion a bad name.
Roman Catholics are the worst.
It's a real mess.
I remember listening to Muslims argue over religion for hours.
Nobody ever gives an inch because they all think they know more than everyone else.

I've never had any problem discussing religion with Muslims.

 

[Foxfyre]

I used to get into discussions with strict Christians......and I could never convince them that not everything in the Bible was to be taken literally.
The hardest people to convince are people who want to ridicule Christianity while sucking up to Muslims.
They use Catholics every time to trash Christianity.
They use the Old Testament against people who follow Jesus's teachings.
Far rightwingers give religion a bad name.
Roman Catholics are the worst.
It's a real mess.
I remember listening to Muslims argue over religion for hours.
Nobody ever gives an inch because they all think they know more than everyone else.

I refuse to argue religious faith with anybody. I will express my own beliefs but I allow people to believe what they believe without interference from me unless that belief is harmful to others in a physical or material way. I will as much as possible try to get through to people whose beliefs are acted out in ways that are injurious physically or materially to others. For instance, I strenuously opposed a short lived campaign by a Christian group to get Ellen DeGeneres fired as spokesperson for J.C. Penney for no other reason than she was lesbian. Her ads did not promote anything other than J.C. Penney products. The Westboro Baptist tactics should be condoned by nobody with any sense of fair play or ethics.

But if my shirttail cousin is a flat Earther no matter how irrational that might seem to others, she harms nobody with her beliefs. I don't argue with her about them but just change the subject.

But for sure there are some truly mean spirited people who will try to destroy another's religious faith and they are not at all kind in how they do it. And those with dogmatic beliefs will presume to judge anybody who doesn't share those beliefs. I have always shuddered to think of how many people were pushed to reject God/Jesus because of the ugly manner in which He was introduced to them. I don't know a soul who came to know the Lord by being told he/she was going to hell.