Is Judaism based on earlier religions?

[jasoncran]

doesnt genesis say that nimrod built babylon? i recall that the tower of babel was built in that area. as far as archeology abram was from hur witch was part of sumeria that had early babylon as one of the cities in the kingdom.

jason

Consider that in that beginning history Sargon of Akkad, is...Cain. The name Sargon means "King Cain." But, I'm speaking about Cain laying the foundation of the great city Babylon which is spiritual. It is false religion. That great city is alive and well today.

is that akkadia? akkadia in archeaology that culture is where the earliest alphabet is found.
also in iraq, near babylon.

jason

 

[justvisiting]

God had given Divine truth to other groups besides the Jews, and the corrupted remnants of that truth survived in various false religions.

A good example is the flood myths. The Flood literally occurred, and as Noah's descendants became more corrupt, the true story was twisted into their new religious beliefs.

Incidentally, the Gilgamesh Epic is so different from the Creation story that the two can't even be related.

Not bad Vince
I agree. There are no doubt stories in other religions about such things as Shadrach, Meschek and Abednego, also.
Many other religions have tried to counterfeit the true God and the miracles of the true believers.
What else is new from those that won't follow the truth?
These counterfeits are really a testimony that those things of God, really did occur.

 

[whirlwind]

doesnt genesis say that nimrod built babylon? i recall that the tower of babel was built in that area. as far as archeology abram was from hur witch was part of sumeria that had early babylon as one of the cities in the kingdom.

jason

Consider that in that beginning history Sargon of Akkad, is...Cain. The name Sargon means "King Cain." But, I'm speaking about Cain laying the foundation of the great city Babylon which is spiritual. It is false religion. That great city is alive and well today.

is that akkadia? akkadia in archeaology that culture is where the earliest alphabet is found.
also in iraq, near babylon.

jason

Yes. :yes

 

[wavy]

Wavy, you dismiss various arguments as "ludicrous," yet you offer no historical evidence to back your statement.

Well, this is an ironical statement, isn't it?

The following are several assertions made by you in this thread:

The Flood literally occurred, and as Noah's descendants became more corrupt, the true story was twisted into their new religious beliefs.

The flood myths were widespread, while most myths were only local. This indicates that the Flood actually occurred, and the story later got corrupted

The strata were laid down by a universal Flood. (note, this is based off of a 'photograph' you've 'seen')

One time I saw a creationist on TV showing a lump of coal with a hammer imbedded in it. The coal had been formed by dead plants and animals under pressure and chemicals, settling around a man-made object as the Flood waters settled

Since God revealed Himself to many people before the beginning of Judaism, it is no surprise that traces of truth remain in other faiths. Man's first religion, before Judaism, was monotheistic, and that religion steadily became more corrupt

There is no historical or scientific evidence against the Bible. Skeptics start with a wrong conclusion, use wrong methods to head in the wrong direction, and then have to rely on scorn to cover their lack of evidence.

When you're ready to live up to your own standards (see multiple unsupported claims above), then you and I can take it to the point of listing evidence, historical or otherwise.


Finis,
Eric

 

[Vince]

Sorry, Eric, but a man-made hammer embedded in coal, and a tree that crosses several layers of rock strata ARE evidence.

 

[wavy]

Sorry, Eric, but a man-made hammer embedded in coal, and a tree that crosses several layers of rock strata ARE evidence.

Unfortunately, you seeing something 'on TV' by a 'creationist' is hardly 'evidence' worth considering.


Finis,
Eric

 

[kenan]

I really appreciate your posts guys; I have a hard time arguing the authenticity of the Bible elsewhere with people who are more familiar with ancient history. If I have any other queries, I'll post here instead of making a new thread.

Again, thanks for your input guys ;)

See the red highlight. That should tell you something right there. What you're doing is trying to defend something you yourself admit you are not equipped to defend; in other words, you're looking for ways to support a presupposition by not taking a neutral stance on the evidence to follow it where it leads.

This is very important. Because there is no such thing as the 'authenticity of the bible' . The bible is a variegated collection of ancient writings, some historical and others not so much. So everything has to be examined on a case by case basis.

Finis,
Eric

Sorry I got to this so late. If you look at the bold part of your post, that's exactly what I'm trying to do. The authenticity of the Bible as a whole can't really be measured, and only the sum of its parts can be.

 

[stovebolts]

So you see, it's not that Judaism was based on earlier religions, rather, Israel was called out of other religions to be a light for all nations.

And yes, the religion of Israel evolved out the religions of the ANE.

Finis,
E.L.B.

Hey Eric,

I don't think it's disputable that the ANE had an influence on Israel and I don't think it's disputable that Egypt had an influence on Israel. Actually, we don't have to look any further than the texts within our canon to see this fact. However, I think that the story is different than the stories in the ANE or in Egypt in many ways.

Take for example Abram who was called out from the heart of ANE culture and YHVH tells him to sacrifice his only son Isaac. Abram doesn't bat an eye partially I believe because in the ANE, human sacrifice was not uncommon and I'm sure you already know this, so, from Abram's perspective why would YHVH expect any less than the gods of his former land?

The difference I believe, is that YHVH does not allow the sacrifice which was revolutionary in Abraham's day and the culture that surrounded him... and there are many other distinctions like this that buck the norm of the ANE.

So I think anyway, that yes, there are a lot of common threads between the stories of the Bible and the ANE, but the way they are handled (e.g. creation {1 - 2 Genesis}) were revolutionary in their day.

 

[RND]

It seems awfully likely that Judaism was based upon earlier religions such as atenism (some Psalm 104 seems to be based off The Great Hymn to the Aten), and it draws upon the mythologies of various cultures surrounding the region of the Levant, such as Babylonian (the whole Epic of Gilgamesh thing). What do people here think of that?

That might be true with Judaism but it isn't true with the Hebraic religion.

 

[wavy]

It seems awfully likely that Judaism was based upon earlier religions such as atenism (some Psalm 104 seems to be based off The Great Hymn to the Aten), and it draws upon the mythologies of various cultures surrounding the region of the Levant, such as Babylonian (the whole Epic of Gilgamesh thing). What do people here think of that?

That might be true with Judaism but it isn't true with the Hebraic religion.

Which is what exactly?


Finis,
Eric

 

[wavy]

Hey Eric,

I don't think it's disputable that the ANE had an influence on Israel and I don't think it's disputable that Egypt had an influence on Israel. Actually, we don't have to look any further than the texts within our canon to see this fact. However, I think that the story is different than the stories in the ANE or in Egypt in many ways.

Take for example Abram who was called out from the heart of ANE culture and YHVH tells him to sacrifice his only son Isaac. Abram doesn't bat an eye partially I believe because in the ANE, human sacrifice was not uncommon and I'm sure you already know this, so, from Abram's perspective why would YHVH expect any less than the gods of his former land?

The difference I believe, is that YHVH does not allow the sacrifice which was revolutionary in Abraham's day and the culture that surrounded him... and there are many other distinctions like this that buck the norm of the ANE.

So I think anyway, that yes, there are a lot of common threads between the stories of the Bible and the ANE, but the way they are handled (e.g. creation {1 - 2 Genesis}) were revolutionary in their day.

In many respects, yes, I agree with you 100%. The best book I've read on this is Th. C. Vriezen, The Religion of Israel. What you said is precisely his thesis.

You should check it out one day. I think you'd like it. Josh too.


Finis,
Eric

 

[kenan]

It seems awfully likely that Judaism was based upon earlier religions such as atenism (some Psalm 104 seems to be based off The Great Hymn to the Aten), and it draws upon the mythologies of various cultures surrounding the region of the Levant, such as Babylonian (the whole Epic of Gilgamesh thing). What do people here think of that?

That might be true with Judaism but it isn't true with the Hebraic religion.

eh?

 

[RND]

It seems awfully likely that Judaism was based upon earlier religions such as atenism (some Psalm 104 seems to be based off The Great Hymn to the Aten), and it draws upon the mythologies of various cultures surrounding the region of the Levant, such as Babylonian (the whole Epic of Gilgamesh thing). What do people here think of that?

That might be true with Judaism but it isn't true with the Hebraic religion.

Which is what exactly?


Finis,
Eric

Judaism is based on rabbinic talmudism and not the Torah/Tanakh alone. The Hebraic religion was unique amongst the twelve tribes of Israel and not just one.

 

[RND]

It seems awfully likely that Judaism was based upon earlier religions such as atenism (some Psalm 104 seems to be based off The Great Hymn to the Aten), and it draws upon the mythologies of various cultures surrounding the region of the Levant, such as Babylonian (the whole Epic of Gilgamesh thing). What do people here think of that?

That might be true with Judaism but it isn't true with the Hebraic religion.

eh?

Exactly.

 

[kenan]

That might be true with Judaism but it isn't true with the Hebraic religion.

eh?

Exactly.

...umm...

What's the point you're trying to make here?

 

[RND]

...umm...

What's the point you're trying to make here?

That you don't seem to be paying too much attention to your own thread. That and you obviously don't know the difference between the Hebraic Torah and rabbinic talmudism.

 

[wavy]

That you don't seem to be paying too much attention to your own thread. That and you obviously don't know the difference between the Hebraic Torah and rabbinic talmudism.

Since when did the word 'Judaism' mean only rabbinical Judaism?

Finis,
Eric

 

[RND]

That you don't seem to be paying too much attention to your own thread. That and you obviously don't know the difference between the Hebraic Torah and rabbinic talmudism.

Since when did the word 'Judaism' mean only rabbinical Judaism?

Finis,
Eric

I would ask you then to define the difference then between the Hebraic of the Torah and rabbinical Judaism. Do you honestly believe them to be the same? And the answer to your question would have to be in relationship to when the Talmud became central in Judaism.

 

[wavy]

That you don't seem to be paying too much attention to your own thread. That and you obviously don't know the difference between the Hebraic Torah and rabbinic talmudism.

Since when did the word 'Judaism' mean only rabbinical Judaism?

Finis,
Eric

I would ask you then to define the difference then between the Hebraic of the Torah and rabbinical Judaism. Do you honestly believe them to be the same? And the answer to your question would have to be in relationship to when the Talmud became central in Judaism.

I don't have to 'define' anything. The point of my question wasn't for you to answer it but to realize that 'Judaism' can also mean ancient Judaism, i.e., ancient Israelite religion (what you call 'Hebraic Torah').

Finis,
Eric

 

[RND]

I don't have to 'define' anything. The point of my question wasn't for you to answer it but to realize that 'Judaism' can also mean ancient Judaism, i.e., ancient Israelite religion (what you call 'Hebraic Torah').

Finis,
Eric

Apples and oranges.