Welcome to Atheist Discussion, a new community created by former members of The Thinking Atheist forum.

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
#51

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(09-04-2020, 02:57 PM)Aliza Wrote:
(09-04-2020, 02:46 PM)mordant Wrote:
(09-04-2020, 02:12 PM)Aliza Wrote: I get the logic of why that might be done, but how did they sell the story to everyone? There would have been no past generations to vouch for it being something they witnessed, or something that has been in their tradition for generations. In fact, the past generations would have needed to collaborate with one another to fabricate the story to their kids and grandkids so everyone is reinforcing the same story.

It was far easier to do in the ancient world, where the vast majority of people were illiterate (and uneducated, even by the standards of the day) and poor, and where the preservation of records was inconsistent at best. In such an environment, anything that harkened further back than the living memory of the locals would go pretty much unchallenged (and when you think of it, maybe not even that: grandpop might be happy to regale the young'uns with stories of his glorious youth). Add to that the fact that such narratives were something people would want, perhaps even need to hear, and it's not a hard sell at all. Particularly if it's concocted by the priesthood and committed to writing so that it's consistent once introduced.

This would still take the cooperation of all the educated people, and all of the people who they educated. So everyone who went to Sunday school (so to speak) would have to be in on it and vouch that the Solomon story was one they had heard about before.

I don't think you can really convince any group of people to collaborate on that level. Someone's gonna be the whistle blower, and when they blow the whistle on something that everyone in the older generation was thinking "didn't sound right to begin with," the house of cards would fall. 

If the story is faked outright, it makes more sense that there existed a Jewish king that the story was based on, and that it was embellished slowly over multiple generations.

Too much of all religious texts are clearly fiction.  Do you really think that Lot's wife was turned into a pillar of salt?  Were there really Hindu godesses with 6 arms?  Was there a Zeus who could throw lightning bolts?   Big Grin
I am tying notes to balloons and tumble-weeds and sending them out to the world. Where they are found, I do not know...
Reply
#52

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(09-04-2020, 02:57 PM)Aliza Wrote:
(09-04-2020, 02:46 PM)mordant Wrote:
(09-04-2020, 02:12 PM)Aliza Wrote: I get the logic of why that might be done, but how did they sell the story to everyone? There would have been no past generations to vouch for it being something they witnessed, or something that has been in their tradition for generations. In fact, the past generations would have needed to collaborate with one another to fabricate the story to their kids and grandkids so everyone is reinforcing the same story.

It was far easier to do in the ancient world, where the vast majority of people were illiterate (and uneducated, even by the standards of the day) and poor, and where the preservation of records was inconsistent at best. In such an environment, anything that harkened further back than the living memory of the locals would go pretty much unchallenged (and when you think of it, maybe not even that: grandpop might be happy to regale the young'uns with stories of his glorious youth). Add to that the fact that such narratives were something people would want, perhaps even need to hear, and it's not a hard sell at all. Particularly if it's concocted by the priesthood and committed to writing so that it's consistent once introduced.

This would still take the cooperation of all the educated people, and all of the people who they educated. So everyone who went to Sunday school (so to speak) would have to be in on it and vouch that the Solomon story was one they had heard about before.

I don't think you can really convince any group of people to collaborate on that level. Someone's gonna be the whistle blower, and when they blow the whistle on something that everyone in the older generation was thinking "didn't sound right to begin with," the house of cards would fall. 

If the story is faked outright, it makes more sense that there existed a Jewish king that the story was based on, and that it was embellished slowly over multiple generations.

A conspiracy is not necessary. Just a ripping yarn and people embellishing it as they go.

We even have that today, in the form of things like QAnon, when you think about it. Does the pervasiveness of pizza-gate suggest that there's some substance to the notion that Democrats run sex rings with underage children and infants from the basement of a particular pizza joint? Is everyone conspiring to spread a story they know is false? Or are they just repeating something that they want or need, on some level, to be true?

Remember that religion's stock-in-trade is comforting lies. That people can earnestly believe in invisible sky wizards in the 21st century demonstrates that people will eagerly suspend disbelief for the right kind of personal validation.
The following 2 users Like mordant's post:
  • Minimalist, Alan V
Reply
#53

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(09-03-2020, 05:34 PM)Aliza Wrote: What exactly is it about Solomon's story that necessarily renders him a totally fictitious character?

We'll have to ask Paul Bunyan.
Don't mistake me for those nice folks from Give-A-Shit county.
The following 1 user Likes Old Man Marsh's post:
  • Fireball
Reply
#54

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(02-16-2021, 05:40 PM)Minimalist Wrote: Add in Romulus and Remus.


Quote:Romulus and Remus were born in Alba Longa, one of the ancient Latin cities near the future site of Rome. Their mother, Rhea Silvia, was a vestal virgin and the daughter of the former king, Numitor, who had been displaced by his brother Amulius. In some sources, Rhea Silvia conceived them when their father, the god Mars, visited her in a sacred grove dedicated to him.[2]

Seeing them as a possible threat to his rule, King Amulius ordered for them to be killed and they were abandoned on the bank of the river Tiber to die. They were saved by the god Tiberinus, Father of the River, and survived with the care of others, at the site of what would eventually become Rome. In the most well-known episode, the twins were suckled by a she-wolf, in a cave now known as the Lupercal.[3] Eventually, they were adopted by Faustulus, a shepherd.







Then add in Perseus.

Quote:The Oracle of Delphi tells King Acrisius that his daughter, Danae, will give birth to a son who'll kill him one day. Totally freaked out, Acrisius locks Danae in a bronze chamber that's open to the sky. Zeus sees Danae locked in the chamber and falls for her. The King of the Gods streams into the chamber as a shower of gold and impregnates Danae with little baby Perseus. Acrisius doesn't buy the whole Zeus-as-a-shower-of-gold story, so he locks his daughter and grandson in a chest and throws them into the sea. Luckily, it's a sea-worthy chest and the two float to the island of Serifos, where they're taken in by a friendly fisherman named Dictys.


Fucking "Moses" wasn't so special after all!

Sargon of Akkad (or Sargon the Great) reigned from 2334 - 2279  has the same baby-in-a-basket story except with him he was tossed into the Euphrades instead of the Nile.  He is found by a lowly palace worker and is raised by the royal family and becomes a great warrior and eventually a king.    Hummmmm, sounds familiar.

India also has a Baby-in-the-basket story of Karna who's mother is impregnated by a god and as an unmarried teenager she puts her baby in a basket in the Ganges river.  Karna's basket is found by an older couple who pull it out of the Ganges and raise him as their own.  Karna grows up to be a great warrior and eventually becomes a king.   There's a bunch of Indian prophecies involved in this story too. 

The Sargon birth story was found in the Library of Ashurbanipal which was unearthed in 1850 or thereabouts.  It contained 30,000 clay tablets. This is the same Library in which the Epic of Gilgamesh was found.  Many of these stories were circulating during the same time the Jews were exiled in Babylon which I'd bet my wonderful and spiffy Volvo car is how Moses and the flood story ended up in the damned bible.   Chuckle


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Ashurbanipal
                                                         T4618
The following 2 users Like Dancefortwo's post:
  • Alan V, Dānu
Reply
#55

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
So, either there were lots of babies being thrown in rivers.... where are the right-to-life jackoffs when you need them? - or people kept adapting stories to fit their own realities.

I lean towards "b."
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply
#56

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(08-11-2021, 04:06 AM)Minimalist Wrote: So, either there were lots of babies being thrown in rivers.... where are the right-to-life jackoffs when you need them? - or people kept adapting stories to fit their own realities.

I lean towards "b."

There were several stories of babies being put in rivers back then.  Most people lived near a river.  Even today a lot of people live near a body of water of some sort so "river stories"  are world wide and very ancient.  Part of the punishment for adulterous women in ancient cultures was to be taken down to the river and drowned.  It wasn't just a witch thing.   Then there's Baby Oedipus.   As a baby he is to be put in a river to drown to make darned sure the Oracle at Delphi prophecy doesn't come true but the servant instructed to do the deed can't bring himself to toss a baby in a river so he leaves baby Oedipus on a mountain side instead .....   and you know the rest of the story.  

There's a lot of traditional Amazon river stories from South America.  I'm not sure if there's anything similar to Moses, Sargon or Karna but I wouldn't be suprised if there was.
                                                         T4618
Reply
#57

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(09-03-2020, 05:02 AM)Minimalist Wrote: A take off on the Jesus thread above but this one with an OT slant.

Keeping in mind that there is no archaeological attestation for "Solomon" and that the only textual reference to him is in the OT this reduces him to little more than a character in a book of fiction.

Let the opinions fly!

Solomon features more prominently in ancient  books of the occult than he does in the Bible.
Reply
#58

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
Hey, man.  You the same Huggy Bear from AF.com?
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply
#59

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(08-16-2021, 03:16 PM)Minimalist Wrote: Hey, man.  You the same Huggy Bear from AF.com?

Yup
Reply
#60

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
(08-16-2021, 11:51 PM)Huggy Bear Wrote:
(08-16-2021, 03:16 PM)Minimalist Wrote: Hey, man.  You the same Huggy Bear from AF.com?

Yup

Nice to see you here, Huggy. I hope you enjoy the forum.
[Image: spy%2B02.jpg]
Reply
#61

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
Agreed.  It's been a while.
Robert G. Ingersoll : “No man with a sense of humor ever founded a religion.”
Reply
#62

Historical Solomon, Biblical Solomon
Thanks guys
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)