OT Stories - Myths,Legends, Parables, or Real
Offline In discussions with Caposkia on his thread regarding his recommended book (New Atheist Crusaders) we have mutually agreed to open a discussion on the OT discussing reality versus myth for stories in the OT. My position is that the OT is largely myths and legends with little basis in reality. There may be stories that may be considered literature as Rook has suggested though it still incorporates myths and legends as well in my opinion. The intent is to examine major stories and discuss the mythical components versus the interpretations by Christians and Jews that these events were real. Caposkia has indicated in many of his posts that he agrees that some of the stories are reality based and in those areas I'm interested in understanding his reasoning or any other believer for acceptance versus others where he does not consider them to be. It may be there are a few where we may find agreement as to a story being a myth or it being real though my inclination is little more is reality based other than kingdoms existed in Palestine that were called Israel and Judah and they interacted with other nations in some fashion.
Since the basis of Christian beliefs started with creation and the fall of man we'll begin there and attempt to progress through Genesis in some sort of logical order sort of like Sunday School for those of you that went. I’m not particularly concerned about each little bit of belief in these stories but I’m more interested in the mythology aspects. We could for pages argue over original sin or free will but that isn’t even necessary in my opinion as the text discredits itself with blatant assertions and impossibilities. Instead consider for example Eve is created in one version from Adam’s rib which can be directly compared to the Sumerian goddess of the rib called Nin-ti which Ninhursag gave birth to heal the god Enki. Other comparisons can be made to the Sumerian paradise called Dilmun to the Garden of Eden as well. These stories predate the OT by thousands of years and tell the tale of the ancient Annuna gods that supposedly created the world. Visit www-etcsl.orient.ox.ac.uk/# for more information and some of the translated stories, click on corpus content by number or category.
In order for salvation through Christ from our supposed sins against the God the events of Genesis must have occurred in some fashion. If the Genesis stories are largely mythical or they are simply a parable then this basis is poorly founded and weakens the entire structure of Christian belief. Caposkia claims I error at square one because I don't acknowledge a spiritual world. I suggest that he and other followers error by accepting that which there is no detectable basis. This is done by interpreting parables and myths by the ancients to be more than inadequate understanding by unknowing people that looked for an answer to why things were in the world they observed.
In Genesis 1 is the supposed creation of the world by God. In this account illogical explanations start immediately with the description of the Earth being without form and darkness was upon it. Light is then created and explained as day and night. Next God molded his creation into better detail by creating Heaven above meaning the sky and waters on the earth. He then caused dry land to appear calling it the Earth and the waters the Seas. On this same day he created vegetation with the requirement that it bring forth after its kind by duplication through seeds. The following day he created the heavenly bodies to divide day from night and to be signs for seasons and for years. He made the great light to rule the day and the lesser light the night as well as all the stars. On the 5th day he created all the life in the seas and air with the requirement they reproduce after their own kind. The 6th day he created all the land animals including man both male and female. The gods in this case made man after their image as male and female in their own likeness. He commanded them to multiply and replenish the earth.
Problems start with this account immediately. The Earth according to science is leftover material from the forming of our star, the Sun. This material would have been a glowing mass of molten material. The land in any event would emerge first before water could exist as a liquid upon it due to the extreme heat. Light would already exist in the form of the Sun which according to current science is not as old as other stars in our galaxy not to mention in the Universe. The account mentions that day and night were made but this is not so except for a local event on the planet. An object not on the Earth would have no such condition or a different form of night and day. The account further errors in claiming the Sun, Moon, and stars were all formed following the creation of the Earth. In theories of planet formulation the star is formed first and planets afterwords. In the case of the moon multiple theories occur though not one where it zapped into the Universe suddenly. The statement that the heavenly bodies were created for signs and seasons is more evidence of a legend. The other planets and stars are purposeful in ways that aid in life existing or continuing to do so on Earth. Jupiter for example is a great big vacuum cleaner sucking into its gravitational field all sorts of debris that could eradicate life on Earth. Is this then a design by the god or just part of the situation that helped to allow life to progress as it did on the Earth? The observation of specific planets or stars in specific areas of the sky is just that, an observation no more and not placed there by a god to indicate the change of seasons.
One can also see some similarity between Genesis 1 and the Egyptian creation myth Ra and the serpent, see http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/~humm/Resources/StudTxts/raSerpnt.html . In this myth Ra is the first on the scene and he creates all the creatures himself doing so before he made the wind or the rain. Ra does not create man but the gods he created gave birth to the people of Egypt who multiplied and flourished.
Some Jewish sects as well as Catholic belief allow for evolution to have been the method for creation of life on Earth. This however is in contradiction to Genesis in that all vegetation and animals were to reproduce only after their own kind. If this is so, then evolution is not compatible with the creation story. Simply put the life could not alter and produce different versions not after its kind. Since obvious examples exist for variation in species such as evolution even as simple as fish in caves without eyes or color versus those that are in streams outside there is obvious adaption thus discrediting this part of Genesis as myth.
The creation of man in Genesis 1 also suggests multiple gods as man was created in their likeness male and female thus following Canaanite gods such as Yahweh and his Asherah or Ba'al and Athirat that may be a reflection of an older tradition from either Egypt or Sumer. Genesis 2 on the other hand has a slightly different version from a variant I'll discuss in a later post.
I consider Genesis 1 to be a myth, legend or a parable based on all the problems discussed with basis in ancient stories from Sumer and Egypt. I leave it to Caposkia and other believers to indicate where they accept parts of Genesis 1 as reality and to indicate their reasoning if they do so.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
- Login to post comments
Offline There is also documentation for objects carried into battle by other ancient civilizations including their god representations, called idols by Christians. That the Israelites have something similar only indicates they felt a need to have something to represent their "invisible" god which they were not to make as an actual representation by order of the god. Others also had containment vessels in their temples to hold supposed sacred objects as well.
As I recall, there is some legend it is located in an Ethiopian monastery like you mentioned, though no one has brought said article forward to prove it.
It's true that ancients "felt a need to have something to represent their "invisible" god"... which then makes the Christian God that much more mysterious and non-typical be it that the Bible specifically states that the Christian God hates idols and does not want anyone to make an idol of Him... if in fact this was another mythical god to "appease the masses" wouldn't it not only be ok, but encouraged by this god to make idols of Him and worship/sacrifice to them daily as every other god seemed to?
So far in my examination of Samuel I see little that merits it as being "historical".
i think it was a general statement about historians commenting on the historical references in the book.
The next few chapters I'm about to post have the basis for selecting Saul and are just as much legend in their presentation as the legends of Arthur. We'll see where it goes, but if Saul was a king I need to be convinced it was over more than a few thousand people. See Finkelstein and Marcus I referenced earlier.
understood
- Login to post comments
1 Samuel part 4- Cont’d
Chapter 8
We learn that Samuel has 2 sons that he made judges over Israel and as in other family ventures such as with his predecessor Eli, they were self serving taking bribes and making judgments based on self interest.
In response the people of Israel demand that Samuel come up with a king to rule them . The god responds to him that he should do so as the people asked as they were rejecting the god’s rule not Samuel. So he tells the people what will occur under this situation whereby the king will put many of them to service as well as impose taxes, force them into the army, take portions of their lands and they will eventually be distressed. Never the less the people still demand a king so Samuel tells the god of their wants.
The god tells Samuel to comply with their demand.
Chapter 9 – background on Saul
Saul was a young man the son of a Benjamite named Kish. The donkeys’ of his father had become lost so Saul & a servant were dispatched in an effort to recover them. At some point Saul concludes they should go back but the servant suggests they go into the the town where a seer of god could help them.
1 Sam 9:9 (NIV) - Formerly in Israel, if someone went to inquire of God, they would say, “Come, let us go to the seer,” because the prophet of today used to be called a seer.
Side comment on this verse. – This indicates to me that the god beliefs of the Israelites was just as mired in magic and superstition as any other ancient culture and was recast later on to support the developing Yahweh religion.
The two of them walk towards the town and then encounter Samuel who tells them the donkeys have gone home but Saul should stay as he was expected. Samuel had been told that he would meet Saul on this day in this way by the god. Samuel had a feast and meal prepared for the occasion in advance and told Saul he was to be the one all Israel turned to. He told Samuel he was of the insignificant tribe of Benjamin and asked why should this be. The next day they rose early and came down from the high place to the town and Samuel told Saul to send his servant home.
Chapter 10 Saul is anointed to be king
Samuel then anoints Saul. He told him he would meet 2 men near Rachel’s tomb that would tell him the donkeys were found and his father had become worried over him. He tells Saul of other encounters he will have including a meeting with prophets who are prophesying which he will also do, forever changing him.
Samuel calls the tribes all together and told them the god had understood they had rejected him and wanted a king. So the tribes and clans were to present themselves. When the tribe of Benjamin was presented Saul was hiding in the supplies and was fetched to Samuel who presents him as their king.
Comments
This story is like any other mythical fiction or legend of the ancients describing how a man is selected to govern them by the god. Consider for example the story of King Arthur which is equally steeped in such legend. I see nothing here to suggest that the selection story of Saul was any different than any other such legend.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
1 Samuel part 5- Cont’d
Chapter 11
This is a far fetched tale of how Saul defeats the Ammonites, it is far fetched for a number of reasons that hopefully you can see, if not as always I’ll point it out after my short synopsis.
The Ammonites lead by Nahash besieges Jabesh Gilead. The people of the city are willing to surrender and make a treaty where they will be subject to Ammon. The leader however will only agree if all the people have their right eyes removed putting disgrace on all Israel. The people inform them they will need 7 days to decide and will send out messengers asking for help to rescue us. If no one comes to our rescue we will surrender to you.
When Saul heard what had occurred the spirit of the god came upon him and he became enraged. He was out in the fields and took a pair of oxen and cut them to pieces. He sent those pieces throughout all Israel with the message that whoever did not come out and follow Saul & Samuel will have this done to their oxen. And terror of the god came upon all of Israel so 300,000 of them as well as 30,000 of Judah came forth and assembled at Bezek. Saul sent a message to Jabesh that they would come to their aid by the time the Sun was hot.
The people of Jabesh informed the Ammonites they would surrender the next day when they had heard the message of Saul. And early in the morning Saul split his forces into 3, and attacked the Ammonite camp at the end of the last watch, slaughtering them until the heat of the day until there were not 2 of them left together.
This battle made all the people accept Saul as king and desired to murder all those who had opposed Saul in the 1st place. Saul told them, no one will die, as the God had saved Israel today. They then went to Gilgal where Saul was made king before the God and sacrifices were made to the God and Saul and the men of Israel celebrated.
Comments –
1-The besiegers I’m sure are going to allow those trapped in their city to send out messengers for help. Probably not.
2-Saul is shown to be a hothead, and kills his own oxen to force the people to come help their brothers in Jabesh. They come to help because they are terrified of consequences from the god. I Sam 11:7 NIV used the word terror, while KJV used the word fear in regard to the god.
3-300,000 Israelites and 30,000 Judahites assemble to come defend Jabesh. Based on archeology the populations in these 2 countries were at best – no more than 45,000 between both of them in about 250 communities. See Finkelstein Bible Unearthed pp 114-115. This included women and children as well in the population estimates based on archeology.
4- Nothing so far in archeology supports these 2 diverse countries, Israel and Judah were unified at the time of Saul’s supposed actions. Nothing supports Saul was a king over anything more than small tribes of highland dwellers in Judah. Nothing supports he was real either.
____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me
"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.
Where archeology lacks, other archeology more than makes up for according to many Biblical scholars. If you have a theological library in your area... or even if you don't a public library should be able to borrow from one 2 sources that might be relevent to our discussion and specifically archeology.
1. The Bible and the Historian (Paul S. Minear, Abingdon Press)
2. The New Encyclopedia of Archeological Excavations in the Holy Land. This is a 4 volume encyclopedia detailing... from what I understand everything we could possibly know about all archeology from that time and location. It is referenced in CBD.com as "an essential reference tool for archaeologists, historians, Bible scholars, and explorers."
With these 2 sources, i'm willing to bet you'll see that there really isn't a "lack of archeology" rather a lack of knowledge of archeology and how it ties in with Biblical texts.
The statement had nothing to do with whether it made Him true or real at this point or not, rather it was a questioning to the rationality of this particular god being more popular of a following than any other god in history. What caused YHWH to be the god to follow if you had a believe and not... say Zeus or Thor?
well, to get an accurate picture of what is found of course I would. I was just taking a general conclusion from many others who claimed to have done the work and concluded such. It seems odd to me that so many sources would come to the conclusion they did then assuming with a more thorough inspection on my part I'd find something different.
I'm willing to look into anything you have to offer