Contrary to Biblical History: Canaanites are alive and well

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Well, you said it is myth or someone else said it. So prove it. There is evidence that it is not myth. But I' doubt you're interested in that, Bob.

Nope. That's not how it works: IT IS AUTOMATICALLY MYTH, unless YOU are able to prove otherwise.

It is YOUR CLAIM that it's NOT fiction.

Prove it. If you cannot?

IT IS AUTOMATICALLY MYTH. That is how it works.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Well, you said it is myth or someone else said it. So prove it. There is evidence that it is not myth. But I' doubt you're interested in that, Bob.

Really? Let's see this ... ahem.... "evidence".

Hint: your bible isn't evidence, that's your claim.
Hint: personal anecdotes isn't evidence.
Hint: friend of a friend stories are not evidence.

 

[Socratic Berean]

Genesis 6:4, Numbers 13:33, Genesis 14:5, 14:20, Dueteronomy 2:11, 2:20, 3:11, Joshua 12:4, 13:12, 15:8, 18:16, 2 Sa 5:22, 1 Ch 20:4

Genesis 6:4 - Giants ( Nephele / Gigantes)
Numbers 13:33 ' Giants where the sons of Anak'
Joshua 15:14 ' Anak = Arba = Hebron'

'Hebron' derives from 'Iberian' , the native name of West Georgia, or Colchis,
Anak is 'Anakopia' ( West Georgia, Sukhumi).

Sukhumi, is the biblical 'Shechem', also known as Salam ( GH and L interchange in Armenina) , Abraham-Isaac-Jacob where buried in a Cave, in Hebron mountain.

- Cave of the Patriarchs
New Athos Cave, Iberian Mountain, Anakopia, Sukhumi ( Colchis )
Machpelah Cave, Hebron Mountain , Anak, Sheckem ( Bible)

According to Greek mythology, Arimaspoi (Arimaspians ) were a tribe of one-eyed men who lived at the foot of 'Rhipaean' Mountain , these 'Rhipaeans' appear in the Bible as 'Raphaim'

Rapaim -רְפָאִים- (old tribe of giants)
Genesis 1:1 (KJV)

Genesis 14:5
And in the fourteenth year came Chedorlaomer,
and the kings that were with him, and smote the Rephaim
( named for Kodori valley, in Colchis).

Exactly what Hebrew word are you translating as "cyclops" or "one eyed man?"

Why are you continuing to conflate "giant" with this other thing described by Herodotus?

If you want to make the argument that Herodotus' cyclopses are the Raphaim of the Bible, don't you find it odd that the Bible doesn't describe them as only having one eye (a rather shocking feature)? Of course, Herodotus has been proved mistaken on a number of his accounts.

I'm curious about your sources. You offer some interesting food for thought, but some of these claims (like the origin of Hebron) does not align with historical and linguistic research.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

The Bible has been around longer than 1700 years, Bob. People have been trying to prove it's myth for a long time now. So far no one has. Let's see if you can.

Nope. Not the **christian** bible. It was fabricated out of myths and other fairy tales in roughly 300 ACE, by Constantine's little pet committee.

Or did you conveniently forget that fact?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Indeed. You have a lot of apologizing to do, here.

 

[Magus]

Exactly what Hebrew word are you translating as "cyclops" or "one eyed man?" Why are you continuing to conflate "giant" with this other thing described by Herodotus? If you want to make the argument that Herodotus' cyclopes are the Raphaim of the Bible, don't you find it odd that the Bible doesn't describe them as only having one eye (a rather shocking feature)? Of course, Herodotus has been proved mistaken on many of his accounts.

Cyclops doesn't mean 'one eyed', it means 'Round eye', the root is 'Kuklos' (ring, circle or round ), it simply satire for a circumcised penis. The opening of the penis, was also known as an 'Eye' in ancient times, the term 'Circumcised' also derives from 'Kuklos' , In other words, the 'Jews' are Cyclops.

Giant, or Gigantes from Ge - Genes ( Earth Born), so-named for they produced from the Blood of Uranus that fell upon the Earth ( GE ), producing the Gigantes , so the word itself, isn't literally 'Giant people' and this is exactly what the ritual of Circumcision is, the removal of the foreskin and the subsequent release of blood ( it is a BLOOD offering )

The Blood of the penis was used to create a nation on the earth ( GE) or a Covenant.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Nope. That's not how it works: IT IS AUTOMATICALLY MYTH, unless YOU are able to prove otherwise.

Oh. my! So many capital letters yielding so little in the way of intelligent argument.

 

[Glaurung]

It's cute when you try to be serious about a subject that is an absolute joke at the most fundamental level.

Flipping the table over and declaring that you're above it all is fine. But then, why do you continue to post?

It's like a pair of comic book kids arguing who would win: Spiderman or Batman?

It's cute you think that snark and petty dismissal somehow hides the obvious fact that you don't have a clue about the subject.

You don't have any point to make, all you've done is to belittle. It's every bad stereotype of the smug and dogmatic atheist if I've ever seen it.

 

[Glaurung]

Nope. Not the **christian** bible. It was fabricated out of myths and other fairy tales in roughly 300 ACE, by Constantine's little pet committee.

Nope, the Council of Nicaea was convoked to address the issue of Arianism. Constantine had nothing to do with establishing the Christian canon.

Or did you conveniently forget that fact?

Do you know what facts even are?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... the **christian** bible. It was fabricated out of myths and other fairy tales in roughly 300 ACE, by Constantine's little pet committee.

Or did you conveniently forget that fact?

^ how embarrassing

 

[DavidFirth]

Nope. Not the **christian** bible. It was fabricated out of myths and other fairy tales in roughly 300 ACE, by Constantine's little pet committee.

Or did you conveniently forget that fact?

I asked to prove your allegations. Surely you can, you seem so sure the Bible is just a mythical book, shouldn't be hard to prove. So stop pussyfooting around and prove it.

 

[Muffled]

Ancient DNA offers clues to the Canaanites’ fate

For the first time, scientists have deciphered the complete genetic instruction manuals of Canaanites. By comparing five Canaanite genomes with those of other ancient and modern populations, the researchers identified the Canaanites’ ancestors and discovered their descendants, modern Lebanese people.

Researchers reconstructed the genomes of the 3,700-year-old remains of five Canaanites unearthed in Sidon.

The researchers also determined that modern Lebanese people can attribute about 93 percent of their ancestry to the Canaanites. The other 7 percent comes from Eurasians who probably arrived in the Levant 3,700 to 2,200 years ago.


Comparisons of these genomes with those of other ancient Eurasian peoples indicate that Canaanite ancestry was split roughly 50-50 between the early farmers who settled the Levant and immigrants of Iranian descent who arrived later, between 6,600 and 3,550 years ago.


Just goes to show... don't trust what old books tell you.

I believe your conclusion is false because your premise is false. One of your premises is that the Bible says no Canaanites survived. That is not true there is a story of survivors.

I believe the people of Sidon were not considered Canaanites. It would be like calling Hittites Canaanites. Now if a Canaanite could be found for certain and compared equally to the people of Sidon I would have to change my view. After all I am only going by History.

Is this a discrepancy?

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

It's like a pair of comic book kids arguing who would win: Spiderman or Batman?

The tomb of Cyrus the Great. Who would've thought? Not you.

Isn't Cyrus one of the Messiahs in the bible, though?

Not too long ago, people argued that the mention of "Hittites" and "Pontius Pilot" in the Bible were signs of unreliability, that these were fictitious, until archaeologists's spades silenced the criticism.

Proving existence of person or place is not the same thing as proving plot.

We have not found the resting places of Nefertiti

I thought currently they are thinking Tut's death mask was just a mask of Nefertiti with her son's beard plastered on at the last moment. There is also evidence that a sealed tomb near Tut's is hers.

Genesis does not provide an age of the earth; the author never intended such. There have been men who have tried to interpret genealogy sequences in the book to come up with a young earth model, and not all Christians agree with that. If you take issue with the 6,000 years, take issue with the men who came up with that figure, not a book that never says such a thing.

True, but ask what the Jewish calendar year currently is.

but the abode of the Cyclops was Colchis or Havilah, they are Blacksmiths

And it's not hard to imagine guys pounding iron and shards making them one-eyed.

 

[Muffled]

Where does it say they fulfilled this order? It doesn't; for instance, Joshua, Biblically, enters into a covenant of peace with the Gibeonites and allows them to live.

I believe they were supposed to kill them also but the Gibeonites deceived Joshua into thinking they were from a non-Canaanite tribe.

 

[Muffled]

And it also says that they don't. Apparently, when it was fabricated, nobody bothered with quality control, or Series Continuity.

Comic books do a better job...

I believe that is one way to tell it isn't fabricated.

 

[Muffled]

What I find rather sad is that an interesting scientific finding seems to have been shared, not because of what might be learned, but because someone felt that it demeaned a biblical narrative that the person never took the time to study.

Still, I was surprised to find the Canaanites located in Lebanon, and l look forward to further work in this area.

I believe Canaanite was an assumption on their part.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Oh. my! So many capital letters yielding so little in the way of intelligent argument.

We have to shout, when the reader has no brains to speak of.

The bible is and remains MYTH, until someone PROVES OTHERWISE.

And yes-- I am talking down to you-- why do you ask?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Oh. my! So many capital letters yielding so little in the way of intelligent argument.

Your comment is duly noted.

Also of note: STILL NO PROOF that the bible is NOT myth.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Flipping the table over and declaring that you're above it all is fine. But then, why do you continue to post?


It's cute you think that snark and petty dismissal somehow hides the obvious fact that you don't have a clue about the subject.

You don't have any point to make, all you've done is to belittle. It's every bad stereotype of the smug and dogmatic atheist if I've ever seen it.

STILL not proof the bible is NOT MYTH.

Nice.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Nope, the Council of Nicaea was convoked to address the issue of Arianism. Constantine had nothing to do with establishing the Christian canon.

LOL! I love it when a bible-worshiper has no clue how their idol (bible) was constructed.

Too funny!

Do you know what facts even are?

Yes. And you continue to fail to present any. Facts, that is.

Here? You wasted yet another opportunity to SHOW YOUR FACTS.

But, naturally, YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY.

Classic.