Who were these people that were" Beast?
If you notice, the hebrew creation myth has adam and eve living in paradise, but then they are cast out into the nasty regular world. They have some
kids, and one kid, cain, goes off to live in the wild wastelands, but soon enough is living in the cities. The general impresion I get is that the
creation myth is the creation of the ancestors
of the myth tellers, not all humanity. Adam and Eve are the first hebrews (or whoever actually
made up the myth), not the first humans ever. Its just that all other humans are beastial and subhuman, compared to the tribe telling the myth.
If you notice also, the inuit of the artic, the word inuit means 'the people' or something like that. I think that this jives with the above, the
inuit certainy knew about other types of people, they simply considered them inferior. All tribes look upon other tribes as less special, as
non-central to the world and its history, and as rather ultimately un-human. These other references to man and beast mixig amoung the tribes and
co-existing with the tribes, seems to confirm this.
Its another example of one of the problems of taking a myth that is thousands of years old out of its original context and putting it into a modern
one, it doesn't make sense.
Jews look like Arabs.......at least the middle eastern ones do.
Also, the people that were originally telling these stories probably looked nothing like the people that live in those lands now. The arabs are a
group that existed in the deserts of the arabian penninsula, they expanded to the rest of the middle east a long time ago. Before that, there had
been other expansions. There's been a lot of changing ethnicities in that region, as with the rest of the world. What I think is most intersting is
- The Semitic Languages are part of the African Language Group
- The semetic Languages are closely related to the elammite group, and thru this possibly the dravidic-harrapanan languages
I also think that there are descriptions of the native sumerians being derided by one of the peoples that invaded them as being very dark skinned, and
the sumerians are thought to have spoken a semitic-elamite type of language.
Now, language doesn't really
have anything to do with ethnicity, just look at the numerous ethnicities that speak spanish, or english. Heck,
even in england there are celts, picts, italians (via rome), germans, danes, vikings (normans) and french.
, given no other information, perhaps the people that orignally told this myth were more like the sumerians and harrapanans than anything
else, so perhaps they looked like southern indians more than modern palestinians and yehudis.
A temple dancer?
The orignal jezebel?
*shrugs* Thats how I tend to think of it anyways, not very logical in the end tho.
fallen from teh tree
were added by the church to justify the acceptance of slavery and servitude.
This is easily refuted by seeing that the orignal texts, which 'the church' has nothing to do with, had this language. It was not added by the
The Bible implys strongly that earlier and purer DNA made it possible for humans to live for 3-500 years, but the purity was corrupted one way
or another to drasticly shorten our life span.
The bible implies nothing of the sort and offers no explanation for why the really remote patriarchs are able to live for so long. It says nothing
about dna or any sort of logical mechanism about it at all. THe bible probably has really long living patriarchs and also giants and the like because
all cultures allways think that things were better in teh remote past. In the golden age, where men were heroes and everything they did was huge.