deadken posted:

what do u mean by pre-mosaic judaism. it's pretty well established i think that the biblical patriarchs were invented around the 6/7th century bce & the exodus never "actually" happened in the banal sense of the term.... most ethnic narratives around the world involve the idea that the people arrived in their present home from somewhere else, hyperborea or troy, it's only in this manner that the land can be unequally apportioned

idk what i meant. so are you saying that the "fear of isaac" business was made up after the fact? if so, why would they do it that way?

roseweird posted:

deadken posted:

what do u mean by pre-mosaic judaism. it's pretty well established i think that the biblical patriarchs were invented around the 6/7th century bce & the exodus never "actually" happened in the banal sense of the term.... most ethnic narratives around the world involve the idea that the people arrived in their present home from somewhere else, hyperborea or troy, it's only in this manner that the land can be unequally apportioned

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merneptah_Stele

egypt expanded its control of the eastern mediterranean shores as far north as syria during the new kingdom period and captured slaves from a variety of semitic populations in that area (along with libyan and nubian slaves too). additionally semitic populations had been colonizing or at least migrating to northern egypt for centuries already at that point. since the tanakh records that israel forced any strangers staying in their lands to work on state projects, it doesn't seem unreasonable to believe that the egyptians did the same. maybe most ethnic narratives around the world involve the idea that people arrived in their present home from somewhere else because people actually move around a lot?

except iirc the egyptians had no real tradition for the mass relocation of enslaved populations. like with the babylonian and assyrian captivities we have detailed records from both sides, only the israelites attest an actual period of bondage within egypt. egypt had a large population whose status was hardly above slavery and the nile's tidal cycle allowed significant time for them to be worked on public projects... what's important is that the israelite conquest of canaan and the mass destruction described demonstrably never happened. obviously populations move but i think the insistence on a mythological origin point is an important component in the profitable exploitation of resources; if people imagine themselves to be autochtonous then the land belongs to everybody, abiogenesis introduces the right of the powerful

tpaine posted:

yeah. wouldn't want to tarnish something as sacred as a superstition

goonsay

tpaine posted:

yeah. wouldn't want to tarnish something as sacred as a superstition

Religions are more than just superstitions, they are core belief systems that define the moral values of their society, and the conflict between religions represents a conflict between moral values. Judaism practices ethno-nationalism whereas Christianity encourages universalism. Islam also promotes ethno-nationalism via its elevation of Arabic to a divine language. Atheism ultimately ends up focused on material utility and disregards the value of life itself as "superstition."

You can map the progress of human values by shifts in religion over time. If the Gnostics had won, then the material world would be viewed as evil right now in our society and asceticism would be the norm, however there was no chance for it to win because those values are totally unrealistic for society to function, and a superior religious system existed which was more in line with truth.