The Bible is Completely Unreliable

So what?

Did you see the ancient Canaanites doing their actual ritual worships?

Why? Since you make claims.... I'm simply telling you to provide the evidence.


Their religion apparently never did mention any description about the universe - unlike the Bible.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Canaanite_religion

Maybe, you were just taking it literally. You haven't done your research?

 

What's this got to do with religious ritual practices by the pagans?

 

There's a who thread on the religious practices of the Canaanites. The Hebrews just trashed them.. Nothing accurate about the Bible.

Meanwhile,

Jerusalem was then confined to the small spur south of the Temple Mount known today as the City of David. As Geva reminds us, even then Jerusalem “was the center of an important territorial entity.” From this period, the area includes a massive fortification system that has recently been excavated.

Overall, however, the area comprises only about 11–12 acres. Geva estimates the population of the city during this period at between 500 and 700 “at most.” (Previously other prominent scholars had estimated Jerusalem’s population in this period as 880–1,100, 1,000, 2,500, 3,000; still this is hardly what we would consider a metropolis.)

https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-sites-places/jerusalem/ancient-jerusalem/

 

Here's the thread on the Canaanite religion.. Its not just wiki.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...re-and-religion.395647/page-2#post-1068344252

 

I never said it was BS. I am just pointing out the obvious ignorance of those who believe it is BS.

 

Pretty much everything has its roots in the east.....derp!!!

 

Where are you trevorw2539? I miss you.

 

and written by many men that had the same traits as some of the authors of today have. They can get wrapped up in self importance and will intentionally exaggerate a little, or perhaps a lot. Makes me think of the old fish story: the man that tells the first fish story hasn't got a chance.

 

Ancient Palestine was never 'a land flowing with milk and honey'. There were certain areas in which some fruits could be grown - and traded. There was fertile land, but not the machinery of today to make the most of it. Sheep were raised to provide the population of 'cities' and 'towns' with food etc. 'Cities' were the size of modern small towns. and 'towns' comparable to today's villages.

The Bible only provides evidence of places, some events and Kings evidenced by external sources.

First chapters in Genesis in the Pentateuch is merely a mishmash of early myths and creation stories. The rest is an historical novel, using known places and events. Written in the 7/6th centuries by scribes who got many things wrong and had no understanding when writing things like the Exodus, wilderness travel etc. Known and evidenced Ancient History proves this time and again. Of wilderness travel they had no idea as they had never experienced it. Thus we have the ridiculous story of 2.5m - 3.3m Hebrews leaving Egypt and the even more ridiculous order of march and camping they were supposed to have followed in the desert.

Coming up to Christmas, Christians will be celebrating and singing Carols which are clearly based on Nativity stories that contradict each other in Luke and Matthew. And Matthew bases his story on 'prophecies' that are clearly taken out of OT context. Luke on 'laws' that did not exist. And even more, if we study Luke 'because he was of the house and lineage of David' it means that hundreds of thousands of the 20 sons of David (1000 years earlier) are making for the small 'town' of Bethlehem at the same time. Joseph and Mary wouldn't have got within 10 miles of Bethlehem.

 

Huge exaggerations are the rule rather than the exception.

 

Nice to have you back..

The Exodus story really is absurd.......

 

While Enoch was referenced in the NT, the Book of Enoch was left out of the OT. But within it, Enoch lays out our cosmology. Except he was wrong ,but went into great detail. And the earth did not revolve around the sun in his details.

 

Been busy lately.

It's really odd to see how people see Palestine as they believe it was, often according to what they think the Bible is saying, instead of understanding what it really was.

The Bible is simply full of extreme exaggerations. And that is easily seen when you study ancient history. The exaggerated army numbers in all cases are hilarious, particularly when you compare them with the far smaller armies of the Empires of the Babylonians and Assyrians - who also used 'mercenaries' to bolster their armies. Much as the Egyptians did with the Nubians etc. How could Judah raise 500,000 men to combat Israel's 800,000 men when no ancient Empire army came any fraction near that.

Palestine had certain goods they could trade, but the main advantage of occupying Northern Palestine was access to the ports of Tyre and Sidon, and Mediterranean trade. Other than that they could just manage to support themselves with a population of around 1 million.

To take the Bible literally 'Abraham' must have existed around 2100/2000. 400 years before the Hittites. So how did he buy land from them? And 'Moses' could not have written about Ur of the Chaldees as they arrive on the scene in the Neo Babylonian Empire - 400 years after 'Moses'.

 

Hahaha.. Israel couldn't feed an army of 800,000.

The nonsense about Ur of the Chaldees is well known. Why don't the faithful look at that?

 

The Greeks knew, where do you think Copernicus got his ideas from? He even pays homage to them in his writings.

Because that was a central tenet of every religion known to mankind until Christianity showed up and distorted everything it came into contact with. And the ancestors of the Jews adopted teachings they did not understand and attributed it to Moses. Both Bruno and Julian attached particular significance to Genesis 1:2.

The first quote seems compelling, but it's really a general statement based on observation. That does not at all suggest exact knowledge of the sun revolving around the earth. Genesis 1:1 is similar, it only takes into account this planet and it's atmosphere.

The second quote reminds me of Plato's interpretation of the Atreus and Thyestes myth.

 

They don't want to know that. It's too disturbing.

 

Thanks. Honestly I think in alot of ways from what I can tell we might feel the same. I just think we are just on opposite ends of the spectrum on the whole topic. I have said the same thing myself actually and asked that very question. There are so many out there and we can't all be right. At one point I did approach it with the whole logical Spock type of an attitude because I do think something of this magnitude does need to be researched thoroughly.

Scientifically and architecturally speaking there have been discoveries to back up some of the facts in the Bible of certain events possibly having taken place. So I tend to lean towards that. We can't prove the existence of God, but yet at the same time we can't disprove it either. Even after all the centuries we still have the same underling question. Is God real. I guess at the end of the day it all boils down to faith and what you choose to believe.

I am a big advocate of faith being personally chosen. Free will and all that. Reason being is if God is real I'd imagine him much like a parent. Being a parent I would want my kids to choose to love me and not because someone told them they are suppose to. It just really doesn't work that way.

 

So you use an archeological site - which is irrelevant!
Where does it say that Hebrews were envious of them???


To say that Hebrews were "envious" and "trashed" Canaanites, is pure speculation!

 

Not if you learn anything from archeology or from the Canaanite religious practices.. Clearly, you can't be bothered with the links I posted..

 

Your article is irrelevant to my question.

I don't think you understand at all why I asked you to point out where archeology supports your claim
that the Hebrews were envious.

 

Excuse me butting in.

Many of these are simply historical events often written into the Bible story as you would write events into an historical, basing your story round them.
Of course the walls Jericho, for instance, fell down. What better than a man called Joshua bringing down the walls at Jahweh'a command. Of course, Joshua never existed, and the walls of Jericho have fallen more than once in it's 11,000 year old history - by conquest, and virtue of the fact it is in an earthquake zone. The conquest of the Promised Land is a good story - but only a story.
If you take the period covered by the Books of Kings , then you have much actual history though often highly exaggerated and in some cases contradictory.. Before that, we have stories written round events known to the scribes in the 7th century. Unfortunately, the scribes have characters like supposed Abraham and supposed Moses doing and saying things that they could not do or say at the time of their supposed existence because the scribes were too remote from the period in which the stories were written.

Archaeology can show what events occurred, and often why. It cannot show the intervention of a supernatural being.

Claims for science in the Bible proving the Bible to be Divine neglect the facts that much of the 'science' was already known - or - postulated - when the OT was written. Egyptians and Greeks were well ahead in simple medicines and understanding of the body. The Greeks in scientific and astronomic advances. Even the Bible - with its understanding of the Hydrological System proves that the mythical 'Noah's flood' could not have flooded the highest mountains.

 

However.....some claims in the Bible could only be proven by MODERN SCIENCE.

So, the Bible is way ahead of science.

http://www.ngwa.org/Fundamentals/hydrology/Pages/The-hydrologic-cycle.aspx

Hydrological system didn't matter - if we're going to follow what was written as to what had caused Noah's flood. It wasn't simply due to the endless rain that the earth was flooded.


Genesis 7
11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day
all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights.

Speaking of springs in the ocean. They were discovered only in 1977!
And yet, the Bible spoke of them.

https://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/dynamic/exploring.html

 

Noah's flood happened in 2900 BC and was caused by spring rains and snowmelt from the Zagros Mountains.

 

No you don't. Or show us.

You can't even present the evidence of what you yourself just did as recent as yesterday.

If you can't present evidence for the everyday of your past, nor can the 70 humans on earth. If you did one thing yesterday which cannot be evidenced, then we have 70 billion things just happened yesterday and cannot be evidenced. Now try to count 10 years back to have a better picture of what this reality is!

 

Nope.. fresh water springs in the Persian Gulf were discovered in the late 1930s.