iss da bible a myth? stories versus histaree

[jah_yout]

mii shood natt ave start usinn dr barashango pon yah cah now yuh tryinn fe use imm fe prove yu pint

aftah mi a watch dr. shango long long before yuh post him...
yu mussi tink man a johnny-come-lately;

dr. shango bruk dung di ting fi all di ones dem who don't overstand what the bible is all about

[jah_yout]

da real master rasta peter tosh

the only master "rasta" is ras tafari haile selassie I

Cause you know most people think
A great God will come from the skies
Take away every little thing
And left everybody dry
But if you know what life is worth
You would look for yours on right here on earth
And now we see the light
We gonna stand up for our rights

peter tosh was/is rastafari bredrin;
he used the bible---
he just did not use certain interpretations which would have people believing that great god would come flying through the air like clark kent superman;
or the concept of reaching heaven only after you die---
you see, tosh read the same bible as people who believe those things;
he just read the bible with a different concept and meditation than those people---bible fanatics who think god wrote the bible and threw it down from the sky

[Emperah]

Archaeologists Carbon-Date Camel Bones, Discover Major Discrepancy In Bible Story


Posted: 02/06/2014 3:05 pm EST Updated: 02/06/2014 6:59 pm EST
Print Article

• share 2k
• tweet 126
  
• 2
• Email 44
  
• Comment 890
  

• 

More:

Bible Camels Camel Bones Bible Erez Ben Yosef Lidar Sapir Hen Camel Bone Carbon Dated Bible Camel Archaeology Camels Bible Biblical History Camel Carbon Dating Bible Camel Bone Carbon Dating Religion News


Researchers Lidar Sapir-Hen and Erez Ben-Yosef from Tel Aviv University have discovered what may be a discrepancy in the history laid out in the Bible.
Using carbon-dating to determine the age of the oldest-known camel bones, the researchers determined that camels were first introduced to Israel around the 9th century BCE.
The Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament refers to camels as pack animals as early as the story of Abraham. Though there is no archaeological evidence of Abraham's life, many in the religious and scientific communities, including Chabad and the Associates For Biblical Research, cite the 20th century BCE as his time of birth. If the new evidence is correct, however, this suggests discrepancies between the Bible and human history as explained by science.
The researchers scoured ancient copper production sites in the Aravah Valley, where camel bones were only present in sites active in the last third of the 10 century and the 9th century BCE. Sapir-Hen and Ben-Yosef write in their report:

"[The camel bones] demonstrate a sudden appearance of camels at the site, following a major change in the organization of production in the entire region."

This suggests that camels were introduced to the region abruptly, perhaps by Egyptians along Mediterranean trade routes.
Dr. Robert Harris, an Associate Professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary, says this shouldn't come as a shock to the theological community.
“While these findings may have been published recently, those of us on the inside have known the essential facts for a generation now," Harris conveyed to HuffPost Religion through associates at JTS. "This is just one of many anachronisms in the Bible, but these do not detract from its sanctity, because it is a spiritual source, not a historical one.”
Biblical archaeology is understandably an imperfect science. Archaeologist William Dever explained in an interview with PBS several years ago:
"We want to make the Bible history. Many people think it has to be history or nothing. But there is no word for history in the Hebrew Bible. In other words, what did the biblical writers think they were doing? Writing objective history? No. That's a modern discipline. They were telling stories. They wanted you to know what these purported events mean."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/06/carbon-dated-camel-bones-bible_n_4737437.html

[blugiant]

Archaeologists Carbon-Date Camel Bones, Discover Major Discrepancy In Bible Story


Posted: 02/06/2014 3:05 pm EST Updated: 02/06/2014 6:59 pm EST
Print Article

• share 2k
• tweet 126
  
• 2
• Email 44
  
• Comment 890
  

• 

More:

Bible Camels Camel Bones Bible Erez Ben Yosef Lidar Sapir Hen Camel Bone Carbon Dated Bible Camel Archaeology Camels Bible Biblical History Camel Carbon Dating Bible Camel Bone Carbon Dating Religion News


Researchers Lidar Sapir-Hen and Erez Ben-Yosef from Tel Aviv University have discovered what may be a discrepancy in the history laid out in the Bible.
Using carbon-dating to determine the age of the oldest-known camel bones, the researchers determined that camels were first introduced to Israel around the 9th century BCE.
The Hebrew Bible, or Old Testament refers to camels as pack animals as early as the story of Abraham. Though there is no archaeological evidence of Abraham's life, many in the religious and scientific communities, including Chabad and the Associates For Biblical Research, cite the 20th century BCE as his time of birth. If the new evidence is correct, however, this suggests discrepancies between the Bible and human history as explained by science.
The researchers scoured ancient copper production sites in the Aravah Valley, where camel bones were only present in sites active in the last third of the 10 century and the 9th century BCE. Sapir-Hen and Ben-Yosef write in their report:

"[The camel bones] demonstrate a sudden appearance of camels at the site, following a major change in the organization of production in the entire region."

This suggests that camels were introduced to the region abruptly, perhaps by Egyptians along Mediterranean trade routes.
Dr. Robert Harris, an Associate Professor at the Jewish Theological Seminary, says this shouldn't come as a shock to the theological community.
“While these findings may have been published recently, those of us on the inside have known the essential facts for a generation now," Harris conveyed to HuffPost Religion through associates at JTS. "This is just one of many anachronisms in the Bible, but these do not detract from its sanctity, because it is a spiritual source, not a historical one.”
Biblical archaeology is understandably an imperfect science. Archaeologist William Dever explained in an interview with PBS several years ago:
"We want to make the Bible history. Many people think it has to be history or nothing. But there is no word for history in the Hebrew Bible. In other words, what did the biblical writers think they were doing? Writing objective history? No. That's a modern discipline. They were telling stories. They wanted you to know what these purported events mean."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4737437.html

great find

more stories butt sum peeps still a trii fe gawn like itt biblikkal histaree. ting juss natt addinn upp fe da bible as a credible source aff historee

[jah_yout]

it's way over your heads...

you're still relying on white people to define reality for you...

in the abundance of water the fool is thirsty

[blugiant]

it's way over your heads...

you're still relying on white people to define reality for you...

in the abundance of water the fool is thirsty

yurugu argument oww kulcha relate to tinkinn and da afrikkan wurld view widd regard to religiosity .

ar awl yuh critique ann analysis cumm fram da afrikkam paradigm?

nah lie da furst thyme mii read itt itt was ova mii head


Yurugu by Marimba Ani

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOZndAlCwYY

[jah_yout]

2nd Kings; 19:9

Now Sennacherib received a report that Tirhakah, the king of Cush,^[a] was marching out to fight against him. So he again sent messengers to Hezekiah with this word:


Isaiah 37:9

When he heard them say concerning Tirhakah king of Cush, "He has come out to fight against you," and when he heard it he sent messengers to Hezekiah, saying, 10"Thus you shall say to Hezekiah king of Judah,

Taharqa, a son and third successor of King Piye, was the greatest of the Nubian pharaohs. His empire stretched from Palestine to the confluence of the Blue and White Niles. About 684 B.C. the Nile rose in a great flood. Taharqa's kingdom brought an exceptional harvest that year, and the kingdom grew rich. He ordered many construction projects, and built or renewed many fine temples in Egypt. The early years of his reign were very prosperous

image25.jpg

[jah_yout]

there you go again with the version ting...i don't deal with versions...i study and cross-reference history and then pick sense out of nonsense...those blinded by religion or by big-bang-ism will see things the way they choose to see things; if someone wants to think two people named adam & eve started humanity and chatted with a snake, that is their prerogative; if others want to think an explosion created the universe & life, that is their right---this is their interpretation of all the information they have gathered throughout their lives...
but i refuse to see "the bible" through the lens which the beast has presented to the mainstream sheep

history= his story

whose histories yuh cood use fe cross reference da accuracee cah da social location aff peeps shape dem perspectives. iff yuh kno yuh chose natt to look at scripture troo oyinbo lens den woose lens yuh lookinn troo ann oww does dat shape yuh perspective

it's like if you were investigating something---let's say a theft or a murder...
i would want to speak to as many witnesses as possible and any other ones linked to the suspects or victims...only by listening to all accounts and examining all possible evidence could i start to formulate what really happened--even though i might get a completely different account depending on the witness i am speaking to---

number one the so-called bible starts out in alkebulan/kush/afrika...the most famous character of the old testament is an afrikan---"moses"---born in egypt, africa...
another famous character from the bible went a short distance westward deeper into afrika to hide and to mature---"jesus";
so off the bat we are dealing with a mainly afrikan ting....
cross-referencing history is not as hard as you think as the ancients did not view ones and ones through the same racist prism as modern-humans...
for example greek historian herodotus spoke plainly about the greatness of the afrikans of antiquity...the bible names kush (nubia-ethiopia) and kemet (mizraim-rahab) as black people lands...which can be cross-referenced and verified...

ones and ones have violated and mis-translated as well as mis-interpreted scripture throughout time...
it is not the scribe's fault if his words are twisted or misconstrued...
it is for the children to remove the veil and discover what the ancients are trying to reveal to us

[blugiant]

it's like if you were investigating something---let's say a theft or a murder...
i would want to speak to as many witnesses as possible and any other ones linked to the suspects or victims...only by listening to all accounts and examining all possible evidence could i start to formulate what really happened--even though i might get a completely different account depending on the witness i am speaking to---

number one the so-called bible starts out in alkebulan/kush/afrika...the most famous character of the old testament is an afrikan---"moses"---born in egypt, africa...
another famous character from the bible went a short distance westward deeper into afrika to hide and to mature---"jesus";
so off the bat we are dealing with a mainly afrikan ting....
cross-referencing history is not as hard as you think as the ancients did not view ones and ones through the same racist prism as modern-humans...
for example greek historian herodotus spoke plainly about the greatness of the afrikans of antiquity...the bible names kush (nubia-ethiopia) and kemet (mizraim-rahab) as black people lands...which can be cross-referenced and verified...

ones and ones have violated and mis-translated as well as mis-interpreted scripture throughout time...
it is not the scribe's fault if his words are twisted or misconstrued...
it is for the children to remove the veil and discover what the ancients are trying to reveal to us

ann yet yuh kno eyewitness testimonies ar usuallee unrealieable

wear iss da proof dat moses xxisted? yuh figgit moses awlso putt imm hand inna imm robe ann wen imm tekk itt out iss was white dat awlso pint to moses beinn a blakk man. wan aff dem former egyptian pm sed wen sa jews leff egypt dem was blakk butt wen dem returned to isreal dem was oyinbo.

tink pon diss dna tests runn pon da dogon peeps matched da ancient egyptians ann dem ave rituals ann beeleefs dat dem claimed ar ancient secret rituals. oyinbo iss spendinn billions to studee dem beeleefs ann yet wii ave blakk peeps still arguinn weddar moses ann jesus ar real ar myths cah aff wat was witten ann mistransulated numerous thymes

again mii ask yuh cross referencinn fram woo perspectives? yuh affii ovatand yuh social ann kultural locateshan fe ovatand da game being played.ah iff da dogons ar da desendants aff da ancients woo still possess sum aff da ancient knowledge, oww cum dem natt arguinn ova da bible ann instead chatt bout dem own system aff beeleefs ann dem rituals

[jah_yout]

it's like if you were investigating something---let's say a theft or a murder...
i would want to speak to as many witnesses as possible and any other ones linked to the suspects or victims...only by listening to all accounts and examining all possible evidence could i start to formulate what really happened--even though i might get a completely different account depending on the witness i am speaking to---

number one the so-called bible starts out in alkebulan/kush/afrika...the most famous character of the old testament is an afrikan---"moses"---born in egypt, africa...
another famous character from the bible went a short distance westward deeper into afrika to hide and to mature---"jesus";
so off the bat we are dealing with a mainly afrikan ting....
cross-referencing history is not as hard as you think as the ancients did not view ones and ones through the same racist prism as modern-humans...
for example greek historian herodotus spoke plainly about the greatness of the afrikans of antiquity...the bible names kush (nubia-ethiopia) and kemet (mizraim-rahab) as black people lands...which can be cross-referenced and verified...

ones and ones have violated and mis-translated as well as mis-interpreted scripture throughout time...
it is not the scribe's fault if his words are twisted or misconstrued...
it is for the children to remove the veil and discover what the ancients are trying to reveal to us

ann yet yuh kno eyewitness testimonies ar usuallee unrealieable

which is why i said multiple witnesses---a form of cross-checking;
you're crazy if you don't know that witnesses are the strongest card for investigators...then circumstancial & forensic evidence can be used to corroborate or dismiss certain points...

wear iss da proof dat moses xxisted?

like i said you are still stuck in white-man-isms;
there is no proof that "moses" existed...but what i'm trying to tell you is that the bible is full of parables...you are taking the view that "moses" represents an actual person, but i have heard different metaphysical interpretations of moses; you already accept the premise that the bible is fiction so you will try to fit everything into that premise without even stopping to think of other possibilities...

yuh figgit moses awlso putt imm hand inna imm robe ann wen imm tekk itt out iss was white dat awlso pint to moses beinn a blakk man.

i didn't forget anything...i already told you "moses" is a black afrikan born in egypt, afrika...and due to the fact that i cross-check, i knew that the ruling egyptian dynasty of the time "moses" was allegedly born was decidedly afrikan...or black

wan aff dem former egyptian pm sed wen sa jews leff egypt dem was blakk butt wen dem returned to isreal dem was oyinbo.

so because an egyptian pm said it now what?
the egyptians currently ruling egypt are not the descendants of the original egyptians...they will say anything to cast confusion and continue to mislead humanity..only anwar sadat was a more accurate representation of the ancient egyptians..

tink pon diss dna tests runn pon da dogon peeps matched da ancient egyptians ann dem ave rituals ann beeleefs dat dem claimed ar ancient secret rituals. oyinbo iss spendinn billions to studee dem beeleefs ann yet wii ave blakk peeps still arguinn weddar moses ann jesus ar real ar myths cah aff wat was witten ann mistransulated numerous thymes

so how come yu a big up the dogon connection to ancient egypt yet still discount other things which came out of ancient egypt, like the hebrew story...just because you are allowing babylonia disciples to control the debate about the bible does not mean everyone accepts these asinine biblical perspectives put out by the mainstream...
by the way i've studied the dogon...

again mii ask yuh cross referencinn fram woo perspectives?

and i answer AGAIN...i use all perspectives and try to gather truth as much as possible by analyzing ALL sources...while being aware of each source's potential biases...
you would like me to say i only read black authors but that is absurd...there are white historians & authors who have told better truth than some black historians & authors...you have to research & use intelligence to gain knowledge...

yuh affii ovatand yuh social ann kultural locateshan fe ovatand da game being played.

i would tell you the same thing...they can make you dash weh yu ancestors things by putting foolish thoughts in your head...
you remind me of the type that says the bible is foolishness because eve talked to a snake...failing to realize that both eve & the snake are metaphors...and not actual people...moses may be the same thing...

ah iff da dogons ar da desendants aff da ancients woo still possess sum aff da ancient knowledge, oww cum dem natt arguinn ova da bible ann instead chatt bout dem own system aff beeleefs ann dem rituals

the dogons are not the only descendants of the ancients...the dogon have a different history than another people, but that does not mean they are perfect...if they told the things they do now 100 years ago everyone would have said they are insane & talking fiction...you forget that people can be brainwashed by religion...i would argue that white supremacy is right now a bigger religion than christianity or islam...
you think that just because certain ones have gone mad with religion you can blame that on the bible and attack the bible;
i find this questionable, because the bible has a lot of metaphysical ancient afrikan knowledge as well...so who you should be blaming are the people who have mis-interpreted & mis-translated the bible, not the bible itself...