For thousands of years...

'no'
Read the bible again.

Yes the old testament was written after the Babylonian captivity. And the Assyrians were the first to have Abby dirty of monotheism that was widely accepted and laughed at as a crazy cult

*any sort of

Sorry about that my phone must of had a spasm

Moses was far older than the Babylonian captivity
So was Isaiah
Both strongly affirm Monotheism

Had nothing to do with Christianity.

The story was written after the Babylonian captivity dipshit

Moses and Isaiah are from the Old Testament, written after Babylonian captivity.

>There is one God people around the world can feel.
Elaborate

There is absolutely no historicity to Exodus.

It, along with the strict rules against out-group marriage, are due a part of Jewish society existing in Babylon. Due to Babylonian marriage policies the Babylonian dwelling segment of the Jewish population retreated inward, and came up with the Exodus myth as a hope for a hero to come and free Israel from Babylonian hegemony. The myth would later be altered after Cyrus the Great stuffed Babylon's shit in (The addition of the "The Pharaoh killed every first born son in Egypt" is remarkably similar to Cyrus' origin myth of being persecuted by the ruling Emperor and raised, hidden, unaware of his parentage).

Sargon had the same origin of being hidden away by his mom a high priestess in a basket down a river

Bullshit. It was written 3500 years ago; the Babylonian captivity was 2600 years ago.

lrn2maths

M8...

...

It's all exactly as the bible says it is.

>There is one God people around the world can feel.
What about the growing number of people like me who don't feel the presence of any god?

Moses denial = Exodus denial = Holocaust denial = 9/11 truthers

Why do you want to live that way?

Well, it's not fair to say it was written after the captivity. But the monotheistic revisionism of the texts was completed at that time. Some of the oldest hymns for example have very polytheistic undertones.

>want
I said nothing about "wanting". I tried very hard to believe in christianity. I would absolutely love for there to be a heaven (not too crazy about the other part where tons of people suffer in hell for eternity though)

You live the way you want.

You live without feeling the presence of God in your life.

I asked why you wanted to live that way.

Your answer implied you were helpless to live any other way.

You are actually right. I could have felt the presence of god. I knew that there was a way for me to feel it, talk to him even, but I decided not to. Believe me, I considered it. I knew that I could pray for hours and hours endlessly without food or drink and I would be guaranteed to hear God finally. But I would not discover the truth, and I would lose my sanity

>It was written 3500 years ago
Proofs?

All over the world you have religions. There isn't a single place on earth, where people didn't come up with gods or spirits and there isn't a single place on earth, where people didn't feel the presence of spirits or gods.(therefore : Consensus Gentium)

All these people are feeling the same, the experience of god. Various deitys or spirits don't really exist, because these feelings of the presence of god get mistaken and mixed up with cultural factors, such as concepts of death, honor, natural phenomena, the way of living or simply traditions.

But no

Whoa buddy

I understand the fear of losing your sanity waiting for God to speak to you.

False
Expectations
Appearing
Real

Work through your fear; love casts out fear. God wants to talk to you, and will not without your consent.

3500 years of annual Passover celebrations.

1. I didn't imply everyone can feel this presence, but everywhere it can be felt.

2. I've met many atheists, who still felt like there was something bigger from time to time and who felt that way through meditation or other such things. So many are at least capable of feeling this presence.

Well what if it's the other way around, and we take a monotheistic God to represent a polytheistic world?

We know that polytheistic religions, specifically the Indo-European ones, had a more abstract vision of the world, and the deities represented phenomenon more than they did literal beings (unlike Abrahamic religions).

How do we know this?

So when a Cargo Cult comes to the conclusion that the British royalty are gods is there something from the true God that emanates from the royal family, making their mistake understandable?

3500 years of Jewish record keeping.

Jesus quoting and upholding what Moses wrote, when Moses led the Exodus @ 1446 BC.

I'd like to see the intermittent copies that prove that jewish record keeping goes back that far. I'd also like to know why Moses wrote in 6th century style hebrew instead of the Proto-Sinaitic script script that existed in his day

*6th century BC

Study how the Jews preserved their torah.

You will not help but be impressed.

I can't exactly do that when they don't have any copies older than the Dead Sea Scrolls, which as recent as they are show tons of textual variants. However I do know about the Documentary Hypothesis which gives a very strong case for Torah being written over several centuries by several different authors

This agrees with archeological and other external evidences, which suggest that the first
writing2
of any Northwest Semitic language (which includes Hebrew and Canaanite as well as
Aramaic), and the first real alphabet anywhere in the world, was the Proto-Sinaitic alphabet used
to write various inscriptions in the Sinai Desert starting around 1850 B.C.

aschmann.net/BibleChronology/HebrewFirstWritten.pdf

I'd say those deities are more like a mix-up between the presence of god people feel, strive for and maybe fear and the lack of scientifical knowledge about natural pheomena or generally the world around them.

And, to make this clear, despite being a christian I'm not outright defending the abrahamic religions here, but more the concept of one god, that can be found in many religions. In Hinduism for example you've got the Trimurti, the sum of the three main gods, which represent the whole being and circle of the world.

Also I think the concept of monotheism vs polytheism isn't working very well as you can see in Buddhism, Catholicism and Hinduism.

Yes. They feel the presence of God and mistake this presence as coming from the royals, which is as we can see in human history pretty common and also understandable.

Europe was more powerful than ever at its most Christian
Pagan decadence destroyed it.

If the Bible actually was this old the hebrew that it's written in would be much more archaic. where is this copy of the Torah in Proto-Sinaitic?

You're discounting the existence of supernatural creatures we call angels and fallen angels.

I wouldn't suggest forgetting about them.

all you have is a conclusion that you have reached and no way to logically prove it or falsify it

Bullshit.

It may have even been the opposite correlation.

The cite I gave you says the Proto-Sinaitic dates to 1850 BC, not 600 BC.

Not only was it an alphabet, but it seems to have been the source of all later
Semitic alphabets like the 27-consonant Cuneiform Ugaritic alphabet (which is solidly attested as
early as 1400 B.C., shortly after Moses would have written the Pentateuch), and the 22-
consonant Cuneiform Short Alphabet, which dates to around the same time. The latter is
identical to the 22-letter Phoenician alphabet which is the parent or sister alphabet to the 22-letter
Hebrew alphabet, showing that there was an unbroken line of available alphabets for writing
Northwest Semitic languages from 1850 B.C. on

Ibid

(This is not my field)

You're arguing against the foundation of Western Civilization itself.

> the foundation of Western Civilization
Top Kek.

This is supposed to be a fucking history board.

that's my point. the Torah is in hebrew, not Proto-Sinaitic. let me give you an example of what you're doing essentially: Let's say have a document that claims to be an account written during the Roman Empire. It's written in Italian instead of Latin. Should I consider this document to actually be from during the Roman Empire?

The article I cited does not say that the Torah was written in Hebrew.

Read it. It's very interesting.

aschmann.net/BibleChronology/HebrewFirstWritten.pdf

>and the deities represented phenomenon more than they did literal beings (unlike Abrahamic religions).

Abrahmic religions don't view God as a literal being though.

I'm reading it right now and it is nothing but pure conjecture. it even says "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"! well you know what, you certainly can't prove the claim either. fact is we only know of the Torah in hebrew, primarily 6th century BC hebrew or later. there are portions that are actually more archaic and thus likely to be older. The Song of Moses for one. but for this the furthest back of an estimate that linguists give us is 10th century BC, long after the Exodus. In fact this archaic language proves that the Torah wasn't simply translated into more modern hebrew from its predecessors, but that they were documents that evolved over the centuries

NONONO, just wait, Europa had it's peak under christianiti?
In what way?
Didn't Europe have it's peak when Illuminism came in, AKA when people started caring less and less about christian dogmas?
Also, how can you say Europe peaked under Christianity? You are literally saying that EVENTUALLY 800 years after the fall of Rome Europe reached a somewhat slightly superior level to the roman Empire's period.
Not only, but are you literally assuming that without christianity Europe would have been a worse place in 1200 DC or smth?
Because that's just bullshit, since Christianity destroyed the empire ancd didn't bring anything else than divisions in Europe.

So tell me, in what way did Christianity contribute to Eurpe's development?

I'm pretty sure all the Christcucks are going to jump on you now.

They clearly do.

Though your right, please learn to type. There's no reason to get so frantic with your writing over such shitty bait.

You're reading the same article I am?

This agrees with archeological and other external evidences, which suggest that the first
writing of any Northwest Semitic language (which includes Hebrew and Canaanite as well as Aramaic), and the first real alphabet anywhere in the world, was the Proto-Sinaitic alphabet used to write various inscriptions in the Sinai Desert starting around 1850 B.C.

Not only was it an alphabet, but it seems to have been the source of all later semitic alphabets like the 27-consonant Cuneiform Ugaritic alphabet (which is solidly attested as early as 1400 B.C., shortly after Moses would have written the Pentateuch), and the 22-
consonant Cuneiform Short Alphabet, which dates to around the same time.

So your problem is you don't have a torah that dates from 1446 BC?

And lacking that, you assume that the torah evolved over centuries via different languages?

is this an intellectually honest approach, especially considering the care and concern the Jews took copying each and every jot and tittle?

KEEEEEEK
An Abrahamic cult coming from Middle-East has now reached the level of "VERY FOUNDATION OF EUROPEAN CULTURE".
Absurd, european are Greco-Latinism, Druidism, Iberian cults, Celtic cults, Germanic culta, Romuva cults, Slavic cults, etc..

Oh it's just really dark, I indeed am a basement dweller.

diepagandie

Can you actually read? Or have you replied to the wrong post?

No. European values are directly from Christianity.

May our Ladies the Fates bless you.

Regarding the last bit of your post, one could say that for a time, at least before the protestant reformation, the idea of Christendom was a Europe-uniting idea.

One could also say that interpetatio romana/greaca or whatever made religion less of a contentious subject.

I'm not a fucking Neopagan it's just how it is.
Chritianism is an offspring of Judaism originated, according to to the Gospel books, from the teachings of a Palestinian man.
Deny that...

I am well aware of the Proto-Sinaitic alphabet. I was the first person to mention in it in this thread for God's sake. in no way does this prove that the Torah was written in the 1400s BC. In fact it does the opposite. As I have already said, the Torah is in hebrew. hebrew didn't even exist in 1446 BC.

>So your problem is you don't have a torah that dates from 1446 BC?
I don't need a Torah from 1446 BC. I need good reason to believe that the Torah wasn't first written in hebrew and later edited and added onto in hebrew. The archaic hebrew in the Song of Moses shows just this.

>is this an intellectually honest approach, especially considering the care and concern the Jews took copying each and every jot and tittle?
The Dead Sea Scrolls disagree with the masoretic which disagrees with the Septuagint. and none of these are older than the 3rd century BC, when you are claiming that the Torah was written over a thousand years previously

Go home

>correct God

They are trolling us you know.

They all turned up here from reddit about three months ago, because they must have been banned from there.

You can tell that's where they came from because they respond to everything with r/atheism.

I wouldn't call Europe-uniting a religion that required endless struggles for convertions in the germanic world and a fucking crusade against the baltic state to achieve a precarious unity that was broken just a bit later by Marthing Luther even more than what it had already been by the Eastern Scism...
Not only, but ultimately, the fourth Crusade was the reason for Byzantium's fall to Islam, so it wasn't even a successful religion at all.
If Christianity was a successful religion it would still holt the whole Mediterranean basin, but the truth is that it destroyed that sense of unity the Roman Empire had, ultimately leading to it's fall.
I'm gonna point out all the Disuniting scisms of Christianity.
1-Struggle against paganism
2-Arian heresy
3-Orthodox scism
4-The Inquisition cult (As a manifestation of barbarousness)
5-The Calvinist, Lollard, Fraticelli heresies...
6-The Protestant scism
7-The Anglican scism
8-The struggles for power of the popes and the most prominent non Catholic kings
9-The hatred for ALL diversity

Agreed desu

The problem with that dress is that its symmetrical while the slits are on the front.

If there was just one slit it would look good.

dieneopagandie

>Though your right, please learn to type
>Though your right
>please learn to type

Dam this is degenerate as fuck?

Is this Wonder Womyn?

what is there left to wonder about?

religion trends to reflect the understanding the human has of its own individual nature be it mostly apsychological internal monologue & its place in the world & in relation to others

its also a means of transfering collective knowledge from one generation to the next which gives rise to the creation of societal framework

Holy shit user you aren't writing for an academic journal. say what you mean plainly and not in that god awful long-winded style

Yes. Billions of people today are still worshipping false gods/the devil. In fact, the vast majority of the people on the planet are being tricked by the devil right now.

YHWH is still #1 though.

He did nothing wrong

Idk, but it gets me (you)s

>& humanities was a mistake itt

Christianity is the church nothing else, the church is the word of God.

this

Veeky Forums is the stupidest board

if we made it pure history it would still be kinda bad, but the humanities aspect is just cucking shit up.

I propose changing the rules and handing out mandatory 2 week bans for any humanities threads.

then go somewhere else. religion threads can have some great discussion even if you have to dig through some fundie shit to find it