It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Camel bones suggest error in Bible, archaeologists say

page: 6
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 11:11 AM
link   

RedParrotHead

Besides, believers will believe anything and everything the bible says. It is the "Word of God" after all. No amount of scientific proof or opinion will sway them...that's the definition of a "faithful believer" - they're all in! You gotta respect that steadfastness even if you don't agree with them.



i can describe with science, every thing in the bible that is called magic. not that i believe it all is explained with science, just proving the point that saying it's not possible because you don't recognize the scientific possibilities is not the problem of the text.

virgin birth = artificial insemination.
made in the image of = cloned
flying in the air = aircraft/spacecraft/other dimensional craft
serpent in the tree = inheritable dna
changing water to wine = transmutation
raising from the dead/resurrection = resuscitation
walking on water = anti-gravity
multiplying fish and bread = this one is a bit harder to explain
parting the red sea = a long horizontal column of forced, directed air
ark of the covenant = gigantic electrical capacitor capable of holding generated static electricity in a massive amount
and so on.

perhaps the real question is, which is it: science or magic




posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 03:17 PM
link   

chr0naut

Jukiodone
Yes, it's the Camel Bones that suggest factual errors in the Bible....

Nothing to do with the Giants, Dragons, Unicorns, Bigfoots (!! Satyr!!) 400 year old men, flying people, water walking etc etc...

Great collection of moral tales designed to illicit a certain response in the reader...very bad source of facts.
edit on 10-2-2014 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)


Where in the bible does it mention dragons, unicorns, bigfoot/s or satyr/s?

You seem to have assumed that mythical stuff from many sources is included in the Bible.

If you knew something about it, then perhaps your comment would be valid. Since you don't...




Seemingly someone already beat me to replying about how yes, these "creatures" do appear in various Bibles:

www.examiner.com...

Why though, even when you are wrong, do you only dispute part of my list?

Flying folk, 400 year old humans and water walkers slipped through your tightly woven net of rational thinking or not worthy of inclusion because they are so obviously real?


edit on 12-2-2014 by Jukiodone because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by AliceBleachWhite
 


okay, i've read sargon's story and this is my take on it:

putting a child in a basket on the river, was probably not unusual in those days. similar to women dropping their babies off at orphanges or the equivalent. the only thing that highlights the story, is that in both cases, said child became a famous leader. depending on the frequency of this particular approach to adoption, i would say the adoption part is a no-brainer, right up there next to the concept that having a baby on your lap as an icon, means that jesus on mary's lap was evidence that every ancient depiction of mother and child, is evidence of jesus' story being a copy of an older story.

don't misunderstand me, however, as i think there's something to the story that jesus was the last pharaoh of egypt, son of cleopatra, but the biblical account is accurate in as much as it reveals. it appears to leave out huge parts of the story, not as a matter of inaccuracy, but as a matter of mystery. someone opted to remove the information from the text and only make it available to serious researchers or adepts.

what would concern me is that having removed it, they could then have the hidden information mean whatever they wanted. that's the bad part. there's no way to keep tabs on it, as it is hidden, no verification of the hidden information's veracity over the 2 millenia since jesus walked the planet.


edit on 12-2-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:09 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Well, whatever the case, my position, based on the Historicity of non-self promotional outside sources is that many of the stories a number of cultures claim in the foundation of their own mythologies are baldly plagiarized from predecessor cultures.

Additionally, because "Old", "Antiquity", and "History" as concepts which could be employed to add weight gave any story a venerability, and there was no one around from "way back when" to dispute any lies about any fabricated event from "way back when", a number of cultures simply invented stories that were sold as "ancient" the very second they were made up.

Thus, we can have a group of filthy desert nomads with a persecution complex stealing stories from their former slave masters and claiming they to belong to them because it really actually f'realz fosho total troof legit happened to them and their ancestors and the people they stole it from, stole it from them first.

Everyone wants to have some association with some special belonging and identification with super special neato magical mystery past. Before we could actually see into the past through Archaeology, it wasn't uncommon for people to simply make up their own Histories.

Considering also, as clever as some individual folk can be, a large demographic of folks really aren't all that very creative, or clever at all, and instead of going through the effort of making up their own Histories from scratch, stealing stories from other cultures worked just as well.

In such fashion, in examining cultures that existed before there was ever a "hebrew identity", we can quite easily see a number of the influences throughout the entire Middle Eastern, North Eastern Africa, and Western India region where concepts, ideologies, symbologies, names, and stories were picked up and carted off to be integrated into some other identity.




edit on 2/13/2014 by AliceBleachWhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:12 AM
link   
Errors?? In the BIBLE?!?!

It can't be true. The bible has been so accurate for all these years.




posted on Feb, 13 2014 @ 02:25 AM
link   
reply to post by AliceBleachWhite
 


my premise is that it isn't stolen history. it's shared history. i don't see what the issue is. they were habru from nibru. nibru was the name of enlil's city on the euphrates, today it's called nippur. the etymology is nibru, nibbur, nippur.

nippur
oi.uchicago.edu...


edit on 13-2-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 04:35 PM
link   

undo
the dragon constellation is old, predating the bible, even predating the torah. in fact, here's a 7 headed one from sumer-akkad.


Where did you find that picture? Is it from Enuma Elish (as in Mushussus-dragon or similar)? Got a link? Kool find!



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 05:13 PM
link   

undo
the first five books of the bible, called the pentateuch or torah, were written around 1500 BC.


I think we'd say c. somewhere post 538 BC, when Babylon fell and Jews were allowed to leave. Most either stayed or moved elsewhere while some nationalists/patriots returned to Judah and Israel to build the Second Temple and write the Torah among other things. Check your sources. The books in question do rely on older sources, that's true, but the first Torah came around 500 BC. Job is possibly the oldest book of the Tanakh, predating the Tora by a couple hundred years.



posted on Feb, 28 2014 @ 07:01 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Which is one of the connotations of ib.ru, from the Sumerian city Ni.ib.ru, where it's thought Abram (later Abraham) descended from a line of Nippurian priests, before relocating to Ur. There's several parallels between Nippur's cult center and Judaism. The "City of Crossing" (ni.ib.ru) lent it's name to the "people of crossing" (ib.ru ~ hebrew?)

Abraham's basis for Genesis and the Hebrew Bible shares far too many parallels to Sumerian worship and tales, especially regarding Nanna/sin to be coincidental. But I don't think it's fair to say he "stole" the tales from the Sumerians, as several Semitic races (Akkadians and Amorites among them) were part of that culture as well.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Blackmarketeer
reply to post by undo
 


Which is one of the connotations of ib.ru, from the Sumerian city Ni.ib.ru, where it's thought Abram (later Abraham) descended from a line of Nippurian priests, before relocating to Ur. There's several parallels between Nippur's cult center and Judaism. The "City of Crossing" (ni.ib.ru) lent it's name to the "people of crossing" (ib.ru ~ hebrew?)

Abraham's basis for Genesis and the Hebrew Bible shares far too many parallels to Sumerian worship and tales, especially regarding Nanna/sin to be coincidental. But I don't think it's fair to say he "stole" the tales from the Sumerians, as several Semitic races (Akkadians and Amorites among them) were part of that culture as well.


Please have a brief search through the Pennsylvania Universities' "Electronic Sumerian Dictionary" or in Oxford Universities' "The Electronic Text Corpus of Sumerian Literature". I think you will find that the word Nibiru (and the alternate spelling Neberu) don't actually exist in the Sumerian language.

So anything equating "ib.ru" with the name "Hebrew" (in that incredibly Dan Brown way that ignores translational, cultural and language differences) and due to phonetic similarity is highly doubtful.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 04:51 AM
link   

undo
reply to post by AliceBleachWhite
 


my premise is that it isn't stolen history. it's shared history. i don't see what the issue is. they were habru from nibru. nibru was the name of enlil's city on the euphrates, today it's called nippur. the etymology is nibru, nibbur, nippur.

nippur
oi.uchicago.edu...


edit on 13-2-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)


Or...

Sitchin invented the name "Nibiru" recently and published several books about his fantastical stories of the Sumerians.

This caused some people, having no other source of knowledge other than these fictions, to come to believe them as true.

They then seem to spout additional made up details and hand them out as if they were true. Making themselves look highly knowledgeable to the ignorant and other "believers".

But this is no longer the age in which Sitchin lived and we can look up actual accurate and academically verified translations of Sumerian texts on the Internet, should we choose.

Deny ignorance.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 


Please understand "Ni.ib.ru" and "Nibiru" are two different things. Nibiru is Sitchin's fictional planet.

Ni.ib.ru is the city of Nippur, and it does exist as a word in the Sumerian lexicon.

See: Museum.upenn.edu

It's also found in the "Ershemmas" (xlated by Cohen), a series of hymns and liturgy or lamentations, appeals to god for forgiveness. Sumer was never a wholly unified religious empire, it always had factions vying for dominance, Akkadians, Sumerians, Western Semites (which Abraham's ancestors most likely belonged to) as well as strong outside influences from Canaan, Elam, etc. There was a push-pull dynamic raging between the various cult centers in Sumer, but for most of it's existence, it took it's religious direction from Nippur, the Place of Crossing.

It is from Abraham himself that the term "ibri" is identified as the origin for the name "Hebrew", and in Sumerian Ibri would be translated as "natives of IBR", Ni.ib.ru, or Nippur. Both the place names Ni.ib.ri, Ibri, and the verb ibri relate to place of crossing, to cross over, or crossing, an aspect associated with that city. While Abraham was from Ur, Abraham's father (and his ancestral line) were from Nippur, and were considered it's most noble priestly class. It would seem that these Western Semites became the conduit by which Sumerians, Akkadians, and other Semitic races in Nippur and Ur could communicate with God.

When the 3rd Dynasty in Ur collapsed, Abraham and his cult center were out of favor, with most of Sumer going towards Marduk, Abraham uprooted for friendlier environs, namely the Sumerian city of Harran, the gateway city between Sumer and the Western Semites. Eventually Abraham would lead a conquest for territory and religious dominance in Canaanite lands, incorporating El, the chief Canaan deity into Abraham's hodge-podge of religious views, before simmering everything down to the worship of a single omnipotent deity.

There's a few good texts out there illustrating the strong correlation between Biblical passages and the ancient Near East, to name just a couple:
The Bible and the Ancient Near East: Collected Essays (Jimmy Jack McBee Roberts)
Interpreting the Psalms: Issues and Approaches (Philip S. Johnston, David G. Firth)

Perhaps the most important term relevant to this topic is "Diffusion", the flow of intellectual and especially religious ideas from Sumer to virtually every land and people in the ancient world - Diffusion of Sumerian religion impacted Egypt, Canaan, Greeks, and most certainly Western Semites of Syria, which is how Sumerian-themed tales ended up in our Judaic bible.



posted on Apr, 5 2014 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


You have made the assumption that Sumerian culture predated the pre-Abrahamic dynasties.

By definition, it didn't, as these dynasties founded the nations and cultures of the region.

The Sumerians were non-semitic peoples from somewhere called 'Dilmun' (probably the Arabian coast) who invaded the area of Caanan and took the lands of the people of the Samarran Culture.

So that would make the Sumerians the plaigarists, perverting their histories to match those of local Caananite kings and deities to prop up their 'right' to rule.

Consider this:

The Sumerian legends have incredible hero's who do supernatural and amazing things and are usually described as gods (although they sometmes also are afflicted with human limitations and histories).

The Hebraic genesis has extremely fallible and human, humans who consistently get bailed out of their predicaments by a single supernatural deity who cares for and directs them.

The Hebrew people claim to be the original inhabitants of lands to the North of their "promised land", to be Cannanites and their histories, and genealogies, reflect that.

The Sumerians first claimed to be invaders from a distant country but in their legends, the creation is framed in terms that are entirely local to Caanan (mentioning rivers, borders & cities). They also do not have complete genealogical listings that go back to the original couple.

You choose which one is the most believable "origin" story.

edit on 5/4/2014 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2014 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 


Dilmun and Sumer were two different civilizations. Sumerians were NOT from Dilmun. Dilmunites were Semitic.

The Samarran period is like the Ubaid, an early phase that was per-cursor to civilization. No one here is denying that, so I'm not quite sure what point you're driving at. There were numerous peoples in that region. Yet it was the Sumerians who first achieved high civilization. Of course they built it on the increasing urbanization that was occurring around them, but it was their ingenuity and industry that paved the way. (Sumerians were actually hostile to several Semitic races in the region, particularly the Martu/Amarru, the Semitic ancestral people to the Canaanites)

You also seem to be implying Canaan is in the region of the Samarran culture, which is not correct. They are distinct regions. Sumerians did not adopt Canaan deities, however the Hebrews did incorporate the name of the chief Canaan deity into their Bible ('El'). Let's remember, that one of the primary influences in the development of Canaan culture was Ugarit, in modern day northern Syria, a region from whence came the Western Semites that would extend increasing influence in Sumer, it is also the region Abraham fled to and several scholars theorize Abraham's line was descended from Western Semites.

Regarding Abraham, he (and his forefathers) were noble priests to Sumer - however they came to be there (as mentioned, Western Semites were extending greater and greater influence into Sumer), and many of the hymns, liturgies, and devotionals that survived from that era show that while Nippur was polytheistic, it was developing a tendency toward monolatrism - they recognized other deities, yet focused worship on one deity. Eventually Abraham broke with Sumer after the fall of Ur-Nammu and thus began his quest to find/found his own place in the world. Much of the Semitic races in the region held Abraham and his priest in high regard and he as an important man. I've posted here on this site that I don't regard Abraham as having "stolen" Sumerian tales regarding creation, rather the Sumerian and Semitic tales evolved together, the Semitic races were always a large component of Sumerian society. But Sumerians devised their language and oldest tales prior to the arrival of Semitic influences, it wasn't until much later that Sumer came under greater and greater influence and dominance by Semitic races (primarily Akkadians). That doesn't mean Sumerians were influenced by these Semitic races from a very early period, but we have no way of knowing that, as the very earliest writings are in the non-Semetic Sumerian language, and do not incorporate any Semitic place names.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join