Part 30 of Post Your Tough Questions Regarding Christianity>>>MOD ALERT<<<

Did the Canaanites Practice Human Sacrifices?


It is often asked or even assumed that the Canaanites engaged in human sacrifice, particularly child sacrifice, but no evidence of adult or child human sacrifice has ever been uncovered in Ugarit.(1) Most scholars have reached a consensus that human and child sacrifice never occurred in Ugarit.(2) The Canaanite archaeological record is also quiet on the issue.

Child sacrifice may have occurred in Phoenicia, Carthage, and occasionally in Iron Age Israel(3), but the evidence is dubious. Although there are large child graveyards, the reasons for these are likely more diverse than child sacrifice, and more likely include reasons such as infant mortality, childhood illness, warfare, and accidental death.

1. Curtis, Adrian. Ugarit (Ras Shamra). William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1985, p. 94-5; Pardee, Dennis. Ritual and Cult at Ugarit. Society of Biblical Literature, Atlanta, Georgia. 2002, p. 233.
2. Clemens, David M. Sources for Ugaritic Ritual and Sacrifice, Volume I: Ugarit and Ugarit Akkadian Texts. Ugarit-Verlag, Münster , Germany , 2001, p.54.
3. Dever, William. Did God Have a Wife?: Archaeology and Folk Religion in Ancient Israel. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, 2005, p. Dever 217-8.

http://canaanitepath.com/canaanfaq.htm#sacr

 

LOL.

Do you remember what we've been arguing about this whole time? Seems like you actually forgot.
I'm arguing that God is the basis of moral values and duties. That's been my argument from the very beginning.
I told you countless times that objective moral values and duties don't make sense with out God.

Let's give you an example: Jay walking on a busy New York City street is dangerous. Not jay walking is a moral responsibility not only to yourself but for the drivers on the road.

But ya know, that example I gave you just makes too much sense. So, once again. Lets just agree to disagree otherwise we'll be arguing forever about it.

ROFLMAO. Just give up man. Now you're just trying way too hard to save face.

BUAHAHAHAHA!
Keep backpedaling my friend.

You've been very funny today. I figured you would've given up a long time ago.

 

Along with a slew of other (*)(*)(*)(*) arguments that you've brought up and then dropped once they don't come to fruition.

And I have told you countless times that objective moral values don't exist in the first place.

Are you asking me to just stop pointing out the contradiction of your argument? I will not until you ADDRESS IT.

You are arguing that right and wrong are completely arbitrary distinctions while simultaneously arguing that they are objective and based on God's nature.

That must be the reason why you can't answer my question.

And again, a childish avoidance that stems from you being unable to answer my question. Do you or do you not have an answer for it? If you do, answer it instead of trolling. If you don't, just admit it outright.

"Why in the world would saying "God is a monster for what he did", to you, also mean "what the Canaanites did was OK"?"

Or in another form: Why can I not condemn two groups of people at the same time?

 

What are the Oldest Texts describing Canaanite Religion?


The oldest known information about Canaanite religion is left by the Canaanite culture itself, and these texts predate biblical accounts. Ancient clay tablets written in Ugaritic cuneiform and found in the ancient city of Ugarit, a city now called Ras Shamra, detail literature and practices.

Ancient scribes wrote these texts around 1200 BCE, about 3200 years ago. Scholars debate whether Ugarit is a Canaanite city by a strict definition, but there is a general consensus that Ugarit exemplifies Canaanite culture. There are about 1500 of these primary texts available.

Of the body of texts, some are mythological literature, and some are priestly crib notes about rituals. The priestly notes leave behind ritual outlines, lists of deities, lists of offerings, month names, and indications of festivals. The literature includes the tales of Aqhat, Kirta, Yarikh and Nikkal's Wedding, The Birth of the Gracious Gods Shachar and Shalim, and the Ba'al Epic. See Library for further details about Canaanite literature. See Resources for further studies on Canaanite literature and priestly texts.

If you are interested in the Canaanite religion outside the rather nasty claims made in the OT..............

 

Oh, so you know that I'm arguing for objective moral values, right? Ok. Now just remember that for when I address something else below...

Oh, but you've told me countless times that objective moral values don't exist. Well, if I've been arguing about right and wrong having arbitrary distinctions, then you wouldn't be telling me countless times that objective moral values and duties don't exist. Notice the contradiction here? This is why we're talking in circles about this. This is why I'm trying to drop it, because you're talking in circles.

** sighs **

Oh boy...

First off, you said that morality is based off a body of people. In other words, a society of people create the basis for morality. This is what you said. I pointed out that Sharia Law was based off of this same principle and now you're saying I'm grouping you with a foreign society. Look man. There's many people under Sharia Law who do not agree with it. So, it's pretty obvious that you're wrong when you say morality comes from a body of people. It doesn't. There's living proof of this.

The Canaanites were pretty evil. If you think God was wrong in destroying them, then you should also think the Americans were wrong for killing Stalin, or Osama Bin Laden or any other evil dictator. If you do not believe the Americans were wrong in doing such, then that's hypocritical thinking. I have a feeling you'll make up some excuse and try to defend this stance, and I'll just laugh at you again and you'll continue to stumble over your own words again, and again, and again.

 

???????????????????????

Am I wrong or did you not say that a lot of knowledge has been lost because of wars? And I pointed out that you would not throw away useful things. That war has actually increased our knowledge in many ways.

A lot of knowledge has not been lost. In many cases it has simply been put to one side until the means of advancing it is available.
Here's an interesting 'source' you so long for http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_hitech05.htm.
There is evidence - in writing and drawings - of the use of electricity in ancient times. The likelihood is that they never had the means means of improving on it - building power stations etc to produce sufficient quantities to make it worth the effort. We know about it from writings - so it wasn't lost.
The scientific revolution came about because we had the ability to use materials for making things, for doing experiments etc. that the ancients never had. Who knows, if they could have made massive steel girders, large sheets of glass, modern bricks we might still find the remains of skyscrapers. AND we might be 2000 years ahead of where we are now in science and technology.

For the sake of cordiality let's agree some knowledge may be lost. Usually because it is insignificant in the great scheme of things, or because is has no useful future.

 

I'm a bit speechless. I've never heard anyone say what you're saying. Ever.
Let's review what you said... You said that war has ** increased ** our knowledge. When you bomb areas and set places on fire, how does that increase knowledge? How does knowledge increase when you are killing people? That statement is so astoundingly ignorant that I'm almost totally speechless.

War has wiped out entire cultures and civilizations, and you're saying it has increased knowledge?... Wow.

Hey, man. Lets just drop this conversation. I have never heard such nonsense before in my life.

Sorry for wasting your time.

 

How did the atomic world come into fruition. It started with the invention and deployment of atomic bomb over Japan. Jet aircraft came into being when Germany invented rockets and the UK the Meteor, the worlds first jet fighter.
Napalm was a product of war. Invented in the US in 1942 and used by the US Army in the Far East. Also in Vietnam. It killed many Japanese, and saved many US lives.
From the catastrophic WWI came the knowledge that war must be prevented - and so the League of Nations was formed.
Before WWI women were considered inferior, unable to do the work of a man. From that War came the knowledge that they are just as capable as any man. Man had to adjust his 'Knowledge'.

Of course war has destroyed, war is stupid and inhuman in many cases. But it does produce knowledge - good and bad.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/31326/5-medical-innovations-civil-war Try reading this.

There are other areas where man has benefitted in knowledge from war.


If you wish to ignore this please yourself.

 

These are scientific inventions designed to destroy. Knowledge was not gained in this way. An atomic bomb hasn't helped mankind, but has made mankind fear himself. These weapons have not helped me in my everyday life.

Also, that source you gave me is a joke. Learning how to treat people who have become victims of war isn't how to advance a civilization.

If you go back to the ancient world where most people wielded swords and shields, what knowledge was gained by wiping out entire civilizations and cultures? There were multiple tribes of native Americans before the country was colonized, and yet we know next to nothing about them - save for a just a few. There are entire tribes that have gone totally extinct that we know nothing about. We know nothing of their culture, their languages, their battles with other tribes. Nothing. We've gained nothing by wiping them out. Your only excuse is, "But we were more advanced than them". What a heartless statement. There's always something to learn from other civilizations. We don't just assume we've got nothing to learn from them and then wipe them out.

We've found multiple advanced and ancient civilizations that were totally wiped out. The only way we know anything about them is from whats left behind, but that only shows a small portion of that civilization. War brings destruction, and destruction doesn't increase knowledge. It destroys it.

 

You have a most peculiar view of Knowledge.

Whether knowledge is used to destroy or help man is irrelevant. It is still knowledge.

As to the source I gave you, I'm certain the men who had their legs amputated with the new knowledge the surgeons gained as a result of the Civil War were grateful to those who saved their lives. Subsequent to this men who had their limbs amputated with the knowledge of anaesthesia suffered agony and more often than not - death.

I can't comment on American tribes as I haven't studied.

I didn't say destruction brought knowledge. I said war brings knowledge.

Again you have widened the discussion into terms away from the Middle East. Most early Middle East civilisations have not been destroyed, even by war. If you study you will see that most were absorbed by larger civilisations, often by war, and interchange of ideas ensued. That's why the Middle East civilisations had much in common, including religion. That's why many codes have similar ideas, many myths are the same (sometimes with altered details). That is why Israel also includes many myths in its early parts - absorbed and converted from earlier sources. It happened very often. When the Romans invaded Greece they absorbed Greek gods, under different names. When the Greeks took over Palestine from the Persians many of the Jews absorbed Hellenism. It happened all the time.

Not heartless at all. It was your idea of wiping them out, not mine. You're becoming rather like another poster and accusing people of things they didn't say.

You want to know about the African tribes? Look at Africa over the last few years. Tribe trying to wipe out tribe in genocide. Now widen that to the world. That is the history of man.

 

Exactly. So, I think our conversation is done. Once again, sorry for wasting your time.

 

Man benefits from knowledge gained from scientific investigation. It can be speeded up through application of more money allocation due to war but the same application of money would increases knowledge even in the absence of war.

 

What civilization has ever been totally wiped out?

 

The Aztecs, the Canaanites and the Hittites

 

What do you think of the idea that scientific discoveries can be gifts from God?


http://www.near-death.com/storm.html#a04

 

No! I'm not confused at all! As far as we Christians are concerned the answer is yes indeed! He is the same God. You should ask the Jews that question who refuse to acknowledge/accept Jesus Christ as being the Son of God. They reject everything in the New Testament.

Again you should talk to the Jews who reject Christ, you do not need to lecture a follower of Christ...a Christian.
They (Judaic /Jews) are the ones who are now worshipping a false god. That's why they are no longer worshipping the one true God of Abraham. The God of Abraham is the Triune Godhead, the Trinity consisting of the Father, Son (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit! That is the Christian belief, while it is not the belief of the Jews.

Yes, the Old Testament is the same as the Jewish Torah...word for word.

Look the whole point I'm making is that because the Jews don't accept Jesus Christ as the Messiah, as the Son of God, then they can't be worshipping the same God as we Christians are anymore, that's all I'm saying and so I'm certainly not saying that the God of the Old Testament is not the same God as the New Testament. In reality it's the Jews who reject Jesus who are saying that...not me!

So obviously you misinterpreted what I have been saying and now I hope you understand clearly what I've been saying...don't be confused like those Jews who don't accept our Lord Savior Jesus Christ...ok?...lol

Anybody who refuses to accept the divinity of Christ, who refuses to accept Him as the Messiah, who refuses to accept He is the Son of God, who refuses to accept the Triune Godhead, the Trinity consisting of the Father, Son (Jesus Christ), the Holy Spirit will not be saved.

Our Lord Savior Jesus Christ in fact tells us that when He is quoted saying, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me."---John 14:6 NLT

So in other words Jesus is saying that any Jew/Gentile who rejects Him is not going to be saved.

 

From Hebrew for Christians

The name Elohim is unique to Hebraic thinking: it occurs only in Hebrew and in no
other ancient Semitic language. The masculine plural ending does not mean “gods”
when referring to the true God of Israel, since the name is mainly used with singular
verb forms and with adjectives and pronouns in the singular (e.g., see Gen. 1:26).
However, considering the Hashalush HaKadosh (Trinity), the form indeed allows
for the plurality within the Godhead.

​

This is their lack of understanding and not the worship of another god.

- - - Updated - - -

I respectfully disagree. If they did worship the same God there would be no
contradiction of beliefs and writings.

 

Oh please.. even Christians disagree. .. and El just means God .. just as Jah means God... and there are many contradictions in scripture.

For the Canaanites, &#274;l or Il was the supreme god, the father of mankind and all creatures

 

It is their lack of understanding as well as their rejection of the Triune Godhead, the Trinity consisting of the Father, Son (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit!

With that said, tell me who are the Jews worshipping now? They are certainly not worshipping the Trinity, thus their god who is not the Trinity is not the same God as we Christians worship because our God is the Trinity!

God can't be a Trinity and at the same time not be a Trinity. So do you understand now from the Christian perspective that they are not worshipping the same God as Christians?

We read in Scripture:

Jesus told him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me."---John 14:6 NLT

So in other words Jesus is saying that any Jew/Gentile who rejects Him is not going to be saved.

 

That's a given.

Yes, El means God. Did you read the information in the link I provided.

The Jews and Christians worship the same God. The practitioners of that "religion of peace" don't.
They worship the one that Muhammad decided he wanted for the religion he created.

The Canaanites didn't worship the same God as the Jews. In fact they had many gods.

By the way, there are no contradictions in the Bible. If you care to provide one or many
please do so. I'd like to see them. Oh, I'm aware of the huge lists of contradictions found on
the Internet and they've all been discredited.

But, please provide one or as many as you care to.

For the Canaanites, &#274;l or Il was the supreme god, the father of mankind and all creatures[/QUOTE]

- - - Updated - - -

The same God they worshiped from the beginning. They simply don't accept that
the Messiah has come and will come again. They wanted an all powerful King and
not a humble servant.

 

This is funny because Qchan does not believe in the Trinity either. He claimed that Jesus was not (The Father).

 

So far I agree with everything you said.

This is where I don't agree with you. The Jews deny that God is a Trinity of 3 persons, and of course it follows that they also deny the incarnation of Jesus, these are crucial differences from what Christians believe in.

Before Jesus came on the scene, we can say yes indeed the Jews were worshipping the one true God but when God sent His only begotten Son into the world the Jews rejected Him, in other words they had turned their back on the one true God and so consequently they are not worshipping the one true God anymore.

God revealed His Trinity to us when He sent His only begotten Son Jesus Christ into the world and the Jews rejected it, they rejected it back then and still reject Him today. As a matter of fact they are still waiting for the Messiah to come but we Christians have acknowledged the fact that He had already came into the world some 2000 years ago in the person of Jesus Christ.

Rejecting Jesus is to reject the one true God, the Triune Godhead, the Trinity consisting of the Father, Son (Jesus Christ) and the Holy Spirit.

We read in Scripture:

Jesus told him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me."---John 14:6 NLT

In other words Jesus is saying that any Jew/Gentile who rejects Him, they will not be saved!

 

Well, your first paragraph was all I needed. Apparently, we agree with each other. You're saying that because they do not believe in Jesus, they therefore, do not believe in God. At least, the God they're supposed to be believing in. I agree with this 100%. So, I apologize for misunderstanding you.

 

You're right, and you're the only person that made sense out of it.
Thanks for explaining this. I'll concede and I will drop my claim.

 

- - - Updated - - -


The same God they worshiped from the beginning. They simply don't accept that
the Messiah has come and will come again. They wanted an all powerful King and
not a humble servant.[/QUOTE]

The Hebrews were just another Canaanite tribe that were landless and unaffiliated have nots.. El is the Creator God of the Canaanites .. and the word is the same in Hebrew and Aramaic.