Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

***Warlord*** · 09-08-2019, 11:10 AM

Gay_Sayer, every time you ask a question that has already been answered, I'm just going to re-post what I've already written. You can respond if you'd like. And if you ask the question again, I will re-post the exact same answer again and again for you. So fire away.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Please provide evidence for the existence of Abraham, Issac and Jacob.

(09-06-2019 10:39 PM)Warlord Wrote: Whether or not you think Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob existed is irrelevant to the claim that Judaism is an ancient religion, and was an ancient religion before the Roman Empire ever existed.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: As has already been demonstrated, Judaism and Christianity are both products of the Nile Valley.

(09-06-2019 10:39 PM)Warlord Wrote: Again, tell me which older religious traditions you think they come from. And please don't post some ridiculous afrocentric jpegs you found on some third-rate, garbage tier blog and think it an acceptable substitute for a coherent argument.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: "Internal Evidence"? LOL. I'm sorry but your circular reasoning doesn't work here. The Torah isn't true just because it says it's true. You need to provide some extra-biblical evidence to support your arguments. The Torah is *NOT* a history book.

(09-06-2019 10:39 PM)Warlord Wrote: That's not even close to what I said, shitbrain. I said that ancient documents contain internal evidence. As expected, it was a complete waste of time. It went completely over your head.

Some examples of internal evidence:

1.) Moses, Phinehas, Hophni, and Hur (all from the Exodus period in Jewish history) are Egyptian names, not Hebrew names. No other group of Israelites have/had Egyptian names in the Bible. This is an example of internal evidence which is consistent with external sources.

2.) The tribe Moses belonged to were the Levites. The Levites were the priestly class in Judaism. The architecture of the Jewish Tabernacle and its surrounding courtyard described in the Torah matches that of the battle tent of Pharaoh Rameses II exactly. Again, this is internal evidence which is consistent with external sources.

3.) In the Song of Deborah (written at least as early 1100-1200 BC) the Torah records the defeat of the Canaanites at the hands of the Israelites, mentioning every tribe by name except one -- the Levites. If one were to assume the Biblical timeline regarding Jewish captivity is accurate, and that Moses (with his Egyptian name) and the Levites (with their Egyptian influences) came from Egypt, this would match up with the New Kingdom era of Egyptian history, where Ramesses II (the man most scholars commonly believe would have been Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus, and the same man mentioned in point 2) ruled. Again, internal evidence. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/cultu...ished-god/

4.) The Song of Miriam, conversely, mentions the Levites but no other tribes of Israel, because it was written by the diaspora during the Exodus. Again, internal evidence.

Again, as I mentioned earlier, you can find ample internal evidence of the Torah's historicity that matches up to what we already know about ancient history. The New Testament of the Bible is perhaps even more impressive with its knowledge of the ancient world.

You can claim that none of the figures mentioned in the Torah existed, or even the New Testament, it doesn't matter to me. But you're absolutely beyond absurd if you want to claim the books themselves are not ancient.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: If the Torah is ancient then you should have no problem providing us with evidence which says as much. I'm waiting...

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/ancient
Ancient: of or in time long past, especially before the end of the Western Roman Empire a.d. 476

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: According to whom exactly? Where is your evidence?

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hebrew-language

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: The question remains unanswered so I will ask again; Where were the Israelites 4000 years ago?

(09-06-2019 04:31 PM)Warlord Wrote: 4,000 years ago would put you in the time of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob), who settled in Canaan, or what would later be known as Israel.

Warlord Wrote:I answered, you dumb fuck. I said they were in Canaan (in what would later be known as Israel.)

Warlord Wrote:Are you retarded? You ask me where Israel was 4,000 years ago, and then you provide the evidence yourself, you dumb shit. Assuming that Israel came into existence 5 seconds before the Merneptah Stele was created, that already puts Israel in the Middle East at a minimum of 3,200 years ago.

But you're right, dumb shit. Even the ancient Egyptians are in on this 3,500-year-old conspiracy to convince the world that the Israelites are 4,000 years old, instead of the true number, which is 3,200.

You really proved your point, you stupid fucking idiot.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: The 42 Negative Confessions are the source material for the so-called "Ten Commandments" taken almost word for word. The Torah and the Old Testament are full of examples of plagiarism of Egyptian and other religious texts. Like I said, there is *nothing* unique about the Torah or Judaism. They both come from older religious traditions.

Warlord Wrote:No. They weren't. Judaism, and later Christianity, contained and still contain values never before espoused by any other religion on Earth.

The Judeo-Christian bible introduced the idea of monotheism, the idea that God was outside nature, the idea that God was the uncreated first cause, and the idea that God was a universal God to all people, and not simply a tribal God or an elemental God.

The Judeo-Christian religion was the first (and only) religion in the ancient world that forbade human sacrifice, and mandated ethical treatment of not only humans, but also slaves, and even animals.

The 10 commandments and the 7 Noahide laws were also unique. How many other religions before Judeo-Christianity forbade you from coveting your neighbor's wealth? I'll wait for your exhaustive list, dipshit.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: Show me a god of Judaism who doesn't fit the same criteria.

Yahweh, the God of the Torah. In Judaism, Yahweh was not a tribal god. Yahweh was a universal god, concerned with the well being of all mankind, which places him outside the bounds of a tribal god.

Yahweh was not a nature god. He was not associated with the elements, as the gods of other religions. He was not a god of thunder like Zeus or Thor. He was not a god of the sun like Ra or the Aten. He was not a fertility god like Isis. Yahweh created the earth from nothing, and could command the elements, but he was not thought to be in those elements, nor was he associated with those elements.

Yahweh existed outside the physical universe, pre-existed the physical universe, and created the physical universe by speaking it into existence. He did not fashion the earth out of pre-existing material, as did the gods of other religions. Nor was Yahweh himself a physical being, but instead a spirit.

Yahweh did not exist within a pantheon of gods. He did not consort with gods, co-create with gods, or share earthly responsibilities over nature as other gods. Yahweh explicitly declared himself as the one and only god, and forbade the worship of pagan gods.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: It proves that there is nothing unique about the Christian religion, Einstein. Try paying attention.

You think a picture of a mother holding a child proves there is nothing original about the Christian religion? Could you elaborate on that point?

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: "Isis" and "Horus" are Greek words, Einstein. Now, ask yourself this question, why would Egyptian deities have Greek names?

Chew on that for a while...

So you think the names from an afrocentric coloring book are more accurate?

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: The people of Ancient Egypt were not semites.

Oh? What were they, then? And please don't say black. I know you motherfuckers think you wuz kangz, but you wazn't. You wuz dick washers.

(09-07-2019 11:59 AM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: We will get to your questions soon enough.

No you won't, you fucking bitch. You'll continue to deflect because you're a fucking pussy. We were talking about evidence of white privilege and systemic racism, but you bitched out because you have nothing and decided instead to fixate on Jews and Christians because you're an insecure, rabid leftist afrocentric douchetard racist who hates Jews and Whites because they reinforce your own insecurities about yourself, and your place in history.

But if for some reason you ever do manage to overcome your own insecurities and grow a pair, and decide to get back to the topic at hand, here are those questions again.

1.) What rights or privileges do white Americans have that any other race doesn't under the law?

2.) If America is systemically racist, or white Americans enjoyed any special privilege or right in America that other minorities don't, why do so many minorities in America receive better educations and earn more money than whites, and why are whites incarcerated in much higher percentages than those minority races?

3.) How many Japanese citizens did the United States murder in their "Nazi style" concentration camps?

4.) How is the verb "discover" racist, and which non-racist verb do you think better describes what Columbus did?

5.) How did American Indians get to the Americas?

6.) Which black African country was a democracy or a republic before Greece/Rome?

7.) Which "Nile Valley" religion outlawed human sacrifice or forbade a man from coveting his neighbor's possessions?

8.) Which "Nile Valley" religion mandated ethical treatment of strangers, slaves, and animals?

9.) Which "Nile Valley" religion featured a monotheistic God who was a universal god, not a tribal god or an elemental god?

10.) What is the "Amen" you mentioned earlier? And what is the Papyrus of Anu that you mentioned earlier?

***Nay_Sayer*** · 09-08-2019, 08:31 PM

Nay_Sayer Wrote:The question remains unanswered so I will ask again; Where were the Israelites 4000 years ago?

Warlord Wrote:4,000 years ago would put you in the time of the patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob), who settled in Canaan, or what would later be known as Israel.

Warlord Wrote:I answered, you dumb fuck. I said they were in Canaan (in what would later be known as Israel.)

So I'm just supposed to take your word that the so-called "Israelites" were in Canaan 4000 years ago? Lol. What kind of drugs are you smoking? Provide us with extra-biblical evidence of "Israel" in the historical record from 4000 years ago or concede that you are clueless on the issue, Einstein.

Warlord Wrote:Yahweh did not exist within a pantheon of gods. He did not consort with gods, co-create with gods, or share earthly responsibilities over nature as other gods. Yahweh explicitly declared himself as the one and only god, and forbade the worship of pagan gods.

Wrong again, Einstein. YHWH is originally one of many Canaanite deities who was later adopted by the Israelites:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ancient.eu/amp/1-616/

Quote:Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El. Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that “the Most High, El, gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel’s development in Canaan.

Warlord Wrote:You think a picture of a mother holding a child proves there is nothing original about the Christian religion? Could you elaborate on that point?

Aset and Heru prove that the story of the central figures of the Christian religion were taken almost word for word from somewhere else.

Warlord Wrote:So you think the names from an afrocentric coloring book are more accurate?

The terms "Aset" and "Heru" are not Greek. Those terms belong to the language of Ancient Egypt. "Isis" and "Horus" are terms the Greeks used when referring to Aset and Heru. The Ancient Egyptians never used the terms "Isis" and "Horus".

Warlord Wrote:Oh? What were they, then? And please don't say black. I know you motherfuckers think you wuz kangz, but you wazn't. You wuz dick washers.

Egypt is geographically part of Africa's Nile Valley. The Ancient Egyptians were Nile Valley Africans who shared a common language, culture and origin with other Nile Valley Africans who were their contemporaries.

Warlord Wrote:No you won't, you fucking bitch. You'll continue to deflect because you're a fucking pussy. We were talking about evidence of white privilege and systemic racism, but you bitched out because you have nothing and decided instead to fixate on Jews and Christians because you're an insecure, rabid leftist afrocentric douchetard racist who hates Jews and Whites because they reinforce your own insecurities about yourself, and your place in history.

We can expand our discussion when you're ready to have an intellectually honest debate and not represent yourself as a 5 year old little girl who can't get her way.

***Warlord*** · 09-09-2019, 01:49 PM

(09-08-2019 08:31 PM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: So I'm just supposed to take your word that the so-called "Israelites" were in Canaan 4000 years ago? Lol. What kind of drugs are you smoking? Provide us with extra-biblical evidence of "Israel" in the historical record from 4000 years ago or concede that you are clueless on the issue, Einstein.

You already provided the evidence yourself, dumbfuck. Where do you think a desert-dwelling tribe of Middle Easterners from the Middle East were in 2000 B.C. if they were still in the Middle East in 1200 B.C.? You think they were out sailing with the American Indians to the Americas?

Seriously, how fucking retarded are you?

Gay_Sayer: Where were the Jews 4,000 years ago?
Me: Canann, in what would later be known as Israel.
Gay_Sayer: Answer the question, Adolf! Where were the Jews 4,000 years ago?
Me: Canaan, dumbfuck.
Gay_Sayer: I'll ask again, since you still haven't bothered to answer. Where were the Jews 4,000 years ago?
Me: Cannan!
Gay_Sayer: Bullshit! Prove it! Here's an over 3,000-year-old stele from Egypt talking about Israel, dumbfuck, hahahahahaha! Now where's your evidence to disprove my evidence that proves your statement, dumbshit! Hahahahahahahaha! Ur so dumb!

Quote:Wrong again, Einstein. YHWH is originally one of many Canaanite deities who was later adopted by the Israelites:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ancient.eu/amp/1-616/

This is why I hate arguing with afrocentric leftist turds like you. You don't know what you're talking about, and you don't even read the links you provide. You google a keyword, read maybe one sentence (if even that) of the article that you think affirms your charge, and then post it.

Yaweh was NOT "originally one of many Canaanite deities" later adopted by the Israelites. Not even the article you linked to makes that argument, dumb fuck. Let's go through this line by line.

1.) The first paragraph describes Yahweh, the God of the Torah. No one has yet made any claim that Yahweh was a Canaanite god.

2.) The stipulations they are referring to being added later include the name 'Yaweh' (YHWH), and the substitute 'adonai' (Lord). This is true. These stipulations concerning the name of God were not added until the post-Exodus period. But it should be noted at no point, either before or after Moses, was God ever addressed or spoken of by name. Even today Jews still refer to God primarily as "adonai" (Lord.) *Nor does this statement still have anything to do with Yahweh being a Canaanite God.*

While we are on the subject, the first word used for God in the Torah is "Elohim." It's obvious you don't speak Hebrew (you can barely speak English), so let me explain what this does (and does not mean.)

"Elohim" by itself can be a singular or plural noun, like "fish." Many amateurs like yourself, with little to no linguistic training, typically get tripped up here, assuming "Elohim" means gods, in the plural sense, as that is exactly how it was used throughout the Middle East in ancient times.

The verb that follows "Elohim" in the Torah is "bara" (to create). Bara is used in the singular form here. For example: "The fish was beautiful." Here, the verb 'was' tells us fish is being used in its singular form. If I were to say "the fish were beautiful", the verb here tell us the fish are plural.

In the Torah, "Elohim bara" (God created) refers to God as a singular being. These are the first words of Genesis, and already, we see the first unique properties of Judaism. Here, unlike the rest of the Middle Eastern religions (and every other religion on Earth) Elohim (God) is referred to a singular being. Specifically, he is a singular god outside nature who created the Earth from nothing ('bara' means to create from nothing, versus make, which means to construct with pre-existing materials). The God of the Torah had many other unique characteristics as well. Yahweh existed outside of nature (unlike other gods), was not a sexual being (unlike other gods, who engaged in sex), and did not act in concert with other gods (again, unlike all other gods.)

3.) Here is an admission by the website you have sourced admitting that nothing else is known about "Yahweh", including where these stories first originated, assuming they did not originate with the Hebrews. (There is no evidence they came from anywhere else.)

Why would they introduce the Hebrew God, and then say they don't know where the stories came from, and then cite two scholars who agree? It's because of the claims being made by Nissim Amzallag, who they are about to cite, who has recently put forward a theory as to where he thinks those stories might have originated. Amzallag's theories are not widely accepted, but the website you linked to included them for balance. Unlike you, here is a source willing to look at the facts (at least somewhat) objectively.

4.) You can see here where you source has separated facts from theories. The first date they provide (3200 BC - 1200 BC) clearly states "Yahweh possibly develops from Canaanite god of metallurgy." Possibly is the operative word, as it has been suggested by Amzallag, but not proven (and not even close to being proven. In fact, most scholars disagree with his hypothesis.)

Though the article goes into great detail regarding Amzallag's theory, the source has in no way endorsed this theory. You have either failed to understand this, or more likely, you never knew it, because you never actually read the article. You googled a term, found it in the article, and just assumed it would make your argument for you. But it didn't, and doesn't.

5.) If you had continued reading, you would know why the source (and most scholars) can't agree with Amzallag's theory -- because the oldest archaeological evidence we have with Yahweh's name on it came from the Moabite stone (840 BC), which explicitly refers to Yahweh as the God of Israel.

Later in the article, you will read about an earlier Egyptian reference to Yahweh (the Shasu of Yhw) on a column from 1250BC. Even assuming this is indeed referring to YHWH (Yahweh), it in no way validates the Canaanite origin hypothesis, as Shasu in Egyptian refers to people (wandering nomads), not land, nor nations. The Egyptians referred to the Canaanites by name, both as a people and as a nation.

The term "Shasu" is most likely describing the Hebrews themselves, or a sub-branch of Hebrews, as they were scattered throughout the Middle East at this time. Amzallag of course disagrees with this theory (because it doesn't fit his narrative), but posits no reason why. After all, "Shasu" is a generic term (like wanderer or nomad), and not a proper noun (Canaanite). It could literally describe any group. Since all the evidence we have shows Yahweh as the God of the Israelites, Occam's Razor suggests the wandering nomadic people being referred to as "the Shasu of Yahweh" would be the wandering, nomadic Israelite sheep-herders who worshipped Yahweh.

Quote:Aset and Heru prove that the story of the central figures of the Christian religion were taken almost word for word from somewhere else.

Really? What is the story of Aset and Heru? Could you show me which passages from the New Testament you think were taken word for word from this story? Pick the 5 most similar passages and list them.

Quote:The terms "Aset" and "Heru" are not Greek.

Who said they were?

Quote:Those terms belong to the language of Ancient Egypt.

What language did the Ancient Egyptians speak?

Quote:"Isis" and "Horus" are terms the Greeks used when referring to Aset and Heru. The Ancient Egyptians never used the terms "Isis" and "Horus."

Are you an ancient Egyptian? Assuming "Aset" and "Heru" are correct, why would you feel the need as an English speaker to use non-English names? Do you call Japan "Nippon"? Do you call China "Zhongguo"?

Is this one of those peculiar traits common to afrocentrics where black Americans feel offended to hear English speakers using Greek names to talk about imaginary Semitic gods who black Americans pretend were black, sub-saharan negroes?

Quote:Egypt is geographically part of Africa's Nile Valley. The Ancient Egyptians were Nile Valley Africans who shared a common language, culture and origin with other Nile Valley Africans who were their contemporaries.

I'm sorry. I know the question is difficult. I'll ask it again, in as many different ways as I can. Do you think Ancient Egyptians were black Africans, i.e. black-skinned sub-Saharans, i.e. negroes? Do you think they looked more like this:

or this:

Quote:We can expand our discussion when you're ready to have an intellectually honest debate and not represent yourself as a 5 year old little girl who can't get her way.

I don't want to expand the discussion, retard. I want to get back to the original topic, before your anti-semitism forced your dumb ass to go off on a ridiculous tangent.

Why are we talking about Jews and Jewish history when the topic was white privilege and systemic racism? Oh yeah, because you were getting torched and embarrassed. You'll never return to that topic again, because you know it is a losing issue. All you want to do now is degrade Jews because other than whites, it's the thing leftist scumbags like you hate most in this world.

But if you ever do decide to get back on topic (you won't), and/or grow a pair of balls (you can't), this is where we left off:

1.) What rights or privileges do white Americans have that any other race doesn't under the law?

2.) If America is systemically racist, or white Americans enjoyed any special privilege or right in America that other minorities don't, why do so many minorities in America receive better educations and earn more money than whites, and why are whites incarcerated in much higher percentages than those minority races?

3.) How many Japanese citizens did the United States murder in their "Nazi style" concentration camps?

4.) How is the verb "discover" racist, and which non-racist verb do you think better describes what Columbus did?

5.) How did American Indians get to the Americas?

6.) Which black African country was a democracy or a republic before Greece/Rome?

7.) Which "Nile Valley" religion outlawed human sacrifice or forbade a man from coveting his neighbor's possessions?

8.) Which "Nile Valley" religion mandated ethical treatment of strangers, slaves, and animals?

9.) Which "Nile Valley" religion featured a monotheistic God who was a universal god, not a tribal god or an elemental god?

10.) What is the "Amen" you mentioned earlier? And what is the Papyrus of Anu that you mentioned earlier?

***Nay_Sayer*** · (This post was last modified: 09-09-2019 03:00 PM by Nay_Sayer.)

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: You already provided the evidence yourself, dumbfuck. Where do you think a desert-dwelling tribe of Middle Easterners from the Middle East were in 2000 B.C. if they were still in the Middle East in 1200 B.C.? You think they were out sailing with the American Indians to the Americas?

The Merneptah Stele dates back to ~ 1200 BC. You claim that Judaism is a 4000 year old religion.

I hope you realize that 2000 BC is 800 years *before* 1200 BC.

The Merneptah Stele only suggests that Israelites were near Egypt ~ 1200 BC, 800 years AFTER 2000 BC. It doesn't even prove that said Israelites were practicing Judaism, only that they were *possibly* there. 800 years is a LONG time, Genius...

So, if you still wish to claim that Judaism is 4000 years old, please present your evidence or concede that you're clueless on the issue, Einstein. I'm waiting...

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: 5.) If you had continued reading, you would know why the source (and most scholars) can't agree with Amzallag's theory -- because the oldest archaeological evidence we have with Yahweh's name on it came from the Moabite stone (840 BC), which explicitly refers to Yahweh as the God of Israel.

Ok, if then by your own admission there is no mention of YHWH in the historical record prior to 840 BC - how then is the religion of Judaism 4000 years old?

Can't wait to hear your answer...

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: 2.) The stipulations they are referring to being added later include the name 'Yaweh' (YHWH), and the substitute 'adonai' (Lord). This is true. These stipulations concerning the name of God were not added until the post-Exodus period. But it should be noted at no point, either before or after Moses, was God ever addressed or spoken of by name. Even today Jews still refer to God primarily as "adonai" (Lord.) *Nor does this statement still have anything to do with Yahweh being a Canaanite God.*

While we are on the subject, the first word used for God in the Torah is "Elohim." It's obvious you don't speak Hebrew (you can barely speak English), so let me explain what this does (and does not mean.)

So, are you saying that "God" changed his name from "Elohim" to "YHWH" and this apparent name change occurred sometime around 840 BC? Is that your argument?

Please explain...

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: 2.) The stipulations they are referring to being added later include the name 'Yaweh' (YHWH), and the substitute 'adonai' (Lord). This is true. These stipulations concerning the name of God were not added until the post-Exodus period. But it should be noted at no point, either before or after Moses, was God ever addressed or spoken of by name. Even today Jews still refer to God primarily as "adonai" (Lord.) *Nor does this statement still have anything to do with Yahweh being a Canaanite God.*

And BTW, you haven't given us a shred of evidence for Abraham, Issac, Jacob or Moses. Am I just supposed to take your word?

Stop smoking the Crack.

Provided evidence that these characters ever lived. Superstition doesn't fly here...

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: 3.) Here is an admission by the website you have sourced admitting that nothing else is known about "Yahweh", including where these stories first originated, assuming they did not originate with the Hebrews. (There is no evidence they came from anywhere else.)

So, it's as fair to assume that "YHWH" originated with the Canaanites as it is to assume it originated with your missing from the historical record prior to 1200 BC "Israelites", correct?

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: What language did the Ancient Egyptians speak?

Shouldn't you know? Aren't you the linguist?

Hint: It wasn't "Hebrew" or any other so-called "semetic" language.

(09-09-2019 01:49 PM)Warlord Wrote: I'm sorry. I know the question is difficult. I'll ask it again, in as many different ways as I can. Do you think Ancient Egyptians were black Africans, i.e. black-skinned sub-Saharans, i.e. negroes?

The Ancient Egyptians were Nile Valley Africans no different than other Nile Valley Africans from that time..

***Warlord*** · 09-09-2019, 04:20 PM

(09-09-2019 02:14 PM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: The Merneptah Stele dates back to ~ 1200 BC. You claim that Judaism is a 4000 year old religion.

I hope you realize that 2000 BC is 800 years *before* 1200 BC.

Yes. The stele in Egypt proves the Israelites are at least 3,2000 years old, assuming they came into existence out of thin air 5 seconds before the stele was created.

Do you think they came into existence 5 seconds before the stele was created, or is it reasonable to assume that a group of people with their own distinct language, religion, customs, and standing army probably required more than 5 seconds to spring into existence?

Quote:The Merneptah Stele only suggests that Israelites were near Egypt ~ 1200 BC, 800 years AFTER 2000 BC. It doesn't even prove that said Israelites were practicing Judaism, only that they were *possibly* there. 800 years is a LONG time, Genius...

It does prove they were practicing Judaism, because Israel (שְׂרָאֵל) in ancient Hebrew literally means "to contend [with] God." As I explained in my previous post concerning the verb 'bara' (a verb used in the singular form), so to is the verb sarah (שָׂרָה) used in the singular form. I know linguistics isn't your strong suit, and ancient Hebrew certainly isn't, but try to bear with me.

"Israel" literally means "to contend (struggle) with God", again, referring to God in the singular form. If the Jews weren't practicing their uniquely singular monotheistic religion at that time, but were instead practicing a Canaanite religion, they would not be referring to God in the singular, but to god in the plural form, just as every other race, tribe, and nation on Earth was.

In the Torah, the name "Israel" is said to have come from the patriarch Jacob. If Jacob was a mythological figure, and not an actual historical figure, you're actually forced to argue against the point you're trying to make (that Judaism existed 3,200 years ago, but not 4,000 years ago), because myths/religions don't spring up overnight, or even over decades. Myths develop over centuries, sometimes even millennia.

It isn't tenable to claim that all of the patriarchs of the Torah were mythical if you also want to argue that the Israelites (who were already being attested to 3,200 years ago) weren't around 4,000 years ago. 800 years simply isn't enough time for the patriarchs to pass from whatever form they started as into the mythical form they became in Judaism.

I know you are likely the type of person who thinks religions are created suddenly and out of thin air by evil rulers looking to control a dumb and ignorant populace, but that is not how religion or myths work. Both religion and myth require centuries to develop, not hours.

If you think the Israelites sprang into existence in the 800 year interim between 1200 BC and 2000 BC, tell me when and where they sprang into existence, how, and why.

And then tell me why it is so important to you. Because to me it seems the only reason you are arguing this is because you are offended by me labeling Judaism as an "ancient" religion. You didn't and don't know the history of the Jewish people, but as an afrocentric leftist you start with a premise (whites and Jews are evil, immoral, and stole everything they had from black Africans) and then search for affirmation in the minutiae, while ignoring the preponderance of evidence to the contrary.

Quote:So, if you still wish to claim that Judaism is 4000 years old, please present your evidence or concede that you're clueless on the issue, Einstein. I'm waiting...

All available evidence points to the the conclusion already. Even the earliest extant historical evidence we have from antiquity (1200 BC ) shows the Jews as a fully developed ethnic group with their own language, customs, religion, and army.

How long do you think it takes for an ethnic group to develop their own language, customs, religion, and army? Do you think it happens in a matter of days, weeks, months, years, decades, or centuries?

You're arguing against common sense if you think the Israelites existed 3,200 years ago, but not 4,000. Again, you aren't even having an honest discussion. You're just arguing because I made a point you don't like, because it offends your afrocentric sensibilities. And because you don't dare get back on the actual topic we were discussing to begin with.

Quote:Ok, if then by your own admission there is no mention of YHWH in the historical record prior to 840 BC - how then is the religion of Judaism 4000 years old?

Can't wait to hear your answer...

There is no mention of YHWH outside of the Torah older than the Moabite stone (840 BC) and the column in Egypt (1250 BC). That only adds to the evidence that Yahweh was an Israelite god, and not a Canaanite god. I'm not sure how you think you're helping your argument that Yahweh was a Canaanite god by acknowledging that he wasn't, at least not according to the evidence.

And I'm not sure how you think you're arguing that the Israelite God Yahweh was the invention of a brand new religion in 1250 BC if even the Ancient Egyptians and the Moabites were aware of Him, and knew the Israelites worshiped Him.

If Yahweh was a Canaanite God that pre-existed Israel, why is the only evidence of Yahweh discovered always in association with Israel and not Canaan? Furthermore, why are Israelites specifically referred to by their enemies as the people oh Yahweh, and why is Yahweh specifically referred to as the God of the Israelites? And why is Yahweh the only god ever mentioned in association with the Israelites? Even Israel's enemies refer to Israel as a monotheistic people, with Yahweh as their God.

If Israel had just sprang up in 1250 BC out of thin air, how would the Egyptians know about them, and for what earthly reasons would they need to attack the Israelites?

So I ask again, how long do you think it took Israel to develop a unique language, religion, culture, and standing army prior to being attacked by Egyptians in 1250 BC?

Quote:So, are you saying that "God" changed his name from "Elohim" to "YHWH" and this apparent name change occurred sometime around 840 BC? Is that your argument?

Please explain...

No, I am explaining the second point of the source you linked to, which talked about stipulations to God's name being added during the time of Moses.

God never referred to himself as "Elohim." The Hebrews did. The Hebrews, as a general rule, never refer to God as Yahweh, as they believe it to be too sacred to speak (which is why you see his name, even in the Torah, abbreviated to its consonant sounds YHWH).

"Elohim" (supreme one) is similar to 'adonai' (Lord) in that it is a generic name (which often functions as a proper noun) that allowed the Hebrews to refer to God without saying his name. It is a common practice in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. (For example, Christians also call YHWH "God" or "Lord", even in English, not by his proper name. Muslims call God "Allah", which again, is not a proper name.)

In short, God never changed his name. The Hebrews simply elected not to address God by his name. This practice is a historical norm, and goes beyond religion. You don't call your mom or dad by their names. You don't even call your boss by his first name unless you're an uncultured afrocentrist, you call him Mr. Jones, or whatever his surname is, out of respect.

Same thing for old people and/or customers and clients. It's Sir or Ma'am, or Mr. or Mrs.

World leaders are also called by various names, for example your excellency, your highness, or Mr. President.

Does this make sense to you, or are you now going to argue that President Trump didn't exist prior to 2016 because no historical record ever mentioned President Trump before 2016?

Once again I have answered each and every one of your poorly worded, ill conceived, ill-intentioned arguments honestly and to the best of my ability. If you are intelligent enough, honest enough, and/or brave enough to do the same, I still have some questions about our original topic I would like answered, before you went off on your anti-semitic tangent.

1.) What rights or privileges do white Americans have that any other race doesn't under the law?

2.) If America is systemically racist, or white Americans enjoyed any special privilege or right in America that other minorities don't, why do so many minorities in America receive better educations and earn more money than whites, and why are whites incarcerated in much higher percentages than those minority races?

3.) How many Japanese citizens did the United States murder in their "Nazi style" concentration camps?

4.) How is the verb "discover" racist, and which non-racist verb do you think better describes what Columbus did?

5.) How did American Indians get to the Americas?

6.) Which black African country was a democracy or a republic before Greece/Rome?

7.) Which "Nile Valley" religion outlawed human sacrifice or forbade a man from coveting his neighbor's possessions?

8.) Which "Nile Valley" religion mandated ethical treatment of strangers, slaves, and animals?

9.) Which "Nile Valley" religion featured a monotheistic God who was a universal god, not a tribal god or an elemental god?

10.) What is the "Amen" you mentioned earlier? And what is the Papyrus of Anu that you mentioned earlier?

(09-09-2019 02:14 PM)Nay_Sayer Wrote: And BTW, you haven't given us a shred of evidence for Abraham, Issac, Jacob or Moses. Am I just supposed to take your word?

I never argued they were real people. I don't care if you think they were or weren't. Their existence doesn't have anything to do with how old Judaism is. Are you seriously trying to go off your initial off-topic question? Or do you not even remember what the hell you're talking about anymore, just questioning anything and everything.

You really are a piss poor debater.

Quote:So, it's as fair to assume that "YHWH" originated with the Canaanites as it is to assume it originated with your missing from the historical record prior to 1200 BC "Israelites", correct?

No, because there is no historical evidence that the Canaanites ever worshiped a god by the name of YHWH. You've already provided the evidence that the Hebrews did.

As for how old the Israelites are, I've already addressed this above.

Quote:Shouldn't you know? Aren't you the linguist?

Hint: It wasn't "Hebrew" or any other so-called "semetic" language.

What language was it then?

Quote:The Ancient Egyptians were Nile Valley Africans no different than other Nile Valley Africans from that time..

Were other "Nile Valley Africans" from that time sub-Saharan negroes or not?

***the ollie reed fan club*** · 09-09-2019, 04:49 PM

Warlord delivers incredibly detailed responses with links and historical references.

Naysayer delivers pithy two line responses, yet believes he is winning the argument.

Me: lol

P.S I am interested to find out from Naysayer just what language the ancient Egyptians spoke. maybe he'll tell me? Does he think ancient Egyptians were black Africans? These shouldn't be difficult questions to answer, as he has hinted he knows the answers.

***Warlord*** · 09-09-2019, 04:53 PM

I think “terse” might describe his replies better. To be pithy his replies would need to be brief and meaningful. I’ve seen no evidence of the latter.

***TheTeddyBear*** · 09-09-2019, 05:11 PM

I have spent countless hours on wikipedia and other information stations since this began. I will admit this has been quite the journey and I have learned a shit load on a subject I thought I knew. But if you guys want some answers check out Roms book.

https://m.barnesandnoble.com/w/the-lifte...1126608304

***Warlord*** · 09-09-2019, 05:15 PM

I don’t recommend Wikipedia, as a general rule, as it is user-edited and has an extreme left-wing bias.

If you are really interested in the subject, I highly recommend the Rational Bible by Dennis Prager.

The only thing Nay-Sayer has proven is what I already knew, which is that leftists argue feelings rather than facts.

Their debate style is attack, attack, attack. Accusation after accusation. When any of their assertions are proven wrong, they ignore it and move on to the next accusation. They demand evidence but never provide it themselves. They answer no questions, substantiate no claims, and admit no error.

The debate begins and ends with endless attacks and deflections. Rinse and repeat, until finally they tire out, call you a racist, and proclaim complete and total victory.

***Nay_Sayer*** · (This post was last modified: 09-09-2019 07:10 PM by Nay_Sayer.)

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: Yes. The stele in Egypt proves the Israelites are at least 3,2000 years old, assuming they came into existence out of thin air 5 seconds before the stele was created.

Do you think they came into existence 5 seconds before the stele was created, or is it reasonable to assume that a group of people with their own distinct language, religion, customs, and standing army probably required more than 5 seconds to spring into existence?

YOU are the one here who made the claim that Judaism is 4000 years old. A claim that is utterly ridiculous as has already been demonstrated. So, if you wish to maintain that claim - please provide us with supporting evidence. There is 800 years between the time you claim Judaism rose and the Mernerptah Stele. 800 years represents a HUGE gap in time, Einstein. You had better get to filling it in. I'm waiting..

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: It does prove they were practicing Judaism, because Israel (שְׂרָאֵל) in ancient Hebrew literally means "to contend [with] God." "Israel" literally means "to contend (struggle) with God", again, referring to God in the singular form. If the Jews weren't practicing their uniquely singular monotheistic religion at that time, but were instead practicing a Canaanite religion, they would not be referring to God in the singular, but to god in the plural form, just as every other race, tribe, and nation on Earth was.

LMAO

The diety being espoused in the term "Israel" is none other than the Canaanite diety "EL"- and the Canaanite religion is the very definition of Polytheism, Genius. "EL" is a single deity among the Canaanite pantheon of deities. Again, you have proven NOTHING other than the FACT that you are seriously divorced from reality. Please remove your head from your ass and try selling the snake oil somewhere else. We ain't buying.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: In the Torah, the name "Israel" is said to have come from the patriarch Jacob.

Where is the extra-biblical evidence for Jacob?

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: If Jacob was a mythological figure, and not an actual historical figure, you're actually forced to argue against the point you're trying to make (that Judaism existed 3,200 years ago, but not 4,000 years ago),

I *never* argued that Judaism existed 3,200 years ago, Genius, seeing as I'm not an idiot - like you. My contention IS that "Israel" is missing from the historical record prior to the Mernerptah Stele and that there is NO evidence for Judaism from 4000 years ago. Do yourself a favor and LEARN HOW TO READ. And even if you do have Israelites running around near Egypt ~ 1200 BC, which is FAR from certain, that in and of itself does NOT prove they were practicing Judaism, Einstein. You still have LOTS of work to do...

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: because myths/religions don't spring up overnight, or even over decades. Myths develop over centuries, sometimes even millennia.

Maybe but idiots pop up almost instantaneously..

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: It isn't tenable to claim that all of the patriarchs of the Torah were mythical if you also want to argue that the Israelites (who were already being attested to 3,200 years ago) weren't around 4,000 years ago.

WHERE is the *evidence* for these so-called "patriarchs"? WHERE?

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: 800 years simply isn't enough time for the patriarchs to pass from whatever form they started as into the mythical form they became in Judaism.

Why? Because YOU say so? LOL.

Go sell that snake oil somewhere else, Einstein. We ain't buying.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: I know you are likely the type of person who thinks religions are created suddenly and out of thin air by evil rulers looking to control a dumb and ignorant populace, but that is not how religion or myths work. Both religion and myth require centuries to develop, not hours.

LMAO

I can create a new religion just sitting here. We can call it the Church of Warlord, the Most High Drooling Retard.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: If you think the Israelites sprang into existence in the 800 year interim between 1200 BC and 2000 BC, tell me when and where they sprang into existence, how, and why.

LOL. Just because you *may* have had "Israelites" ~ 1200 BC does NOT mean they were practicing Judaism, Genius...

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: And then tell me why it is so important to you. Because to me it seems the only reason you are arguing this is because you are offended by me labeling Judaism as an "ancient" religion.

Not important and I'm not offended.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: You didn't and don't know the history of the Jewish people,

And yet I'm the one who realizes that, according to the historical record, Judaism doesn't go back 4000 years and neither do the "Israelites". Go figure...

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: but as an afrocentric leftist you start with a premise (whites and Jews are evil, immoral,

I never made such an assertion.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: and stole everything they had from black Africans)

Western Civilization, Christianity, Judaism are all functions of the Nile Valley. The Trinity concept, circumcision, Monotheism, the so-called "Ten Commandments", the Ark of the Covenant, Crucifixion/Resurrection - ALL came out of the Nile Valley LONG before any Christians or Jews set pen to paper in an attempt to plagiarize African Spiritual concepts..

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: and then search for affirmation in the minutiae, while ignoring the preponderance of evidence to the contrary.

ROTFLMMFAO

Preponderance of evidence? You still haven't provided a single shred of evidence for your alleged "patriarchs" - and yet want to accuse me of "ignoring the preponderance of evidence"? LOL

I see now that I'm dealing with a brain dead idiot. Lay off the Crack..

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: All available evidence points to the the conclusion already. Even the earliest extant historical evidence we have from antiquity (1200 BC ) shows the Jews as a fully developed ethnic group with their own language, customs, religion, and army.

LMAO

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: How long do you think it takes for an ethnic group to develop their own language, customs, religion, and army? Do you think it happens in a matter of days, weeks, months, years, decades, or centuries?

Are you going to give us any evidence for Judaism 4000 years ago?

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: You're arguing against common sense if you think the Israelites existed 3,200 years ago, but not 4,000.

LMAO

800 years is a LONG time, Einstein, and the historical record is dead silent.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: Again, you aren't even having an honest discussion. You're just arguing because I made a point you don't like, because it offends your afrocentric sensibilities. And because you don't dare get back on the actual topic we were discussing to begin with.

We can get back on topic as soon as you're ready to have an intellectually honest discussion.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: There is no mention of YHWH outside of the Torah older than the Moabite stone (840 BC) and the column in Egypt (1250 BC). That only adds to the evidence that Yahweh was an Israelite god, and not a Canaanite god.

Did you forget this part?

Quote:Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El. Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that “the Most High, El, gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh’s portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel’s development in Canaan.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: I'm not sure how you think you're helping your argument that Yahweh was a Canaanite god by acknowledging that he wasn't, at least not according to the evidence.

LMAO

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: And I'm not sure how you think you're arguing that the Israelite God Yahweh was the invention of a brand new religion in 1250 BC if even the Ancient Egyptians and the Moabites were aware of Him, and knew the Israelites worshiped Him.

I never claimed that YHWH was invented in 1250 BC and you have not presented us with a SHRED of evidence that "Israelites" worshipped YHWH in 1250 BC. Not a single shred.

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: If Yahweh was a Canaanite God that pre-existed Israel, why is the only evidence of Yahweh discovered always in association with Israel and not Canaan?

Perhaps because the Israelites are a splinter group of Canaanites...

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: Furthermore, why are Israelites specifically referred to by their enemies as the people oh Yahweh, and why is Yahweh specifically referred to as the God of the Israelites?

Nobody has denied that the "Israelites" worshipped YHWH at some point. The only question is; WHEN? So far, you have given us ZERO evidence that anyone worshiped YHWH or practiced Judaism 4000 years ago..

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: And why is Yahweh the only god ever mentioned in association with the Israelites? Even Israel's enemies refer to Israel as a monotheistic people, with Yahweh as their God.

Probably because they began to worship YHWH at some point when they broke away from the rest of the Canaanites and ceased practicing their Polytheism...

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: So I ask again, how long do you think it took Israel to develop a unique language, religion, culture, and standing army prior to being attacked by Egyptians in 1250 BC?

There was and is *nothing* unique about the "Israelites" in 1250 BC. They were in all likelihood a bunch of reject Canaanites..

(09-09-2019 04:20 PM)Warlord Wrote: God never referred to himself as "Elohim." The Hebrews did.

The exact term used is "EL" - which is consistent with the Canaanite diety and tradition from which the original "Israelite" religion came...

Seeing that I'm having a discussion with a pre-programmed automaton who is unable to think critically - I've wasted too much of my valuable time trying to explain simple mathematics to a drooling retard who keeps proving an inability to comprehend. As such,I have no interest in wasting anymore of my time and give you permission to have the last word...

(09-09-2019 04:49 PM)the ollie reed fan club Wrote: Warlord delivers incredibly detailed responses with links and historical references.

Naysayer delivers pithy two line responses, yet believes he is winning the argument.

Only in your mind.

(09-09-2019 04:49 PM)the ollie reed fan club Wrote: P.S I am interested to find out from Naysayer just what language the ancient Egyptians spoke.

It is sometimes referred to as Mdu Ntr.

(09-09-2019 04:49 PM)the ollie reed fan club Wrote: Does he think ancient Egyptians were black Africans?

The term "Black African" is equivalent to saying "White Snow" or "Wet Water". All indigenous African people are tropically adapted. The people of Ancient Egypt, being indigenous to the African continent, were no different than any other group of indigenous Africans in that regard.