Judaism came from Christianity

[TibiasDad]

Thought" excludes any context of a "primary source"

“Thought” is the amalgamation of all possible primary sources into a general consensus of opinion across the spectrum.

Primary sources are literally the documents themselves

And this is what provides the consensus of “thought”. No extant “document” discredits the information that I have presented. Which is why it is your burden to show why my timeline cannot be trusted.


Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

I can determine what the primary source means myself.

That is fine, but your opinion in itself has nothing to cause me to find it credible. It’s just your opinion! Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but to designate it as fact, goes beyond the pale of reasonable expectation. Why is your opinion more substantial than, for instance, The British Museum’s?


Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

The Narmer Palette

https://smarthistory.org/palette-of-king-narmer/

Discovered among a group of sacred implements ritually buried in a deposit within an early temple of the falcon god Horus at the site of Hierakonpolis (a capital of Egypt during the Predynastic period), this large ceremonial object is one of the most important artifacts from the dawn of Egyptian civilization.

This is within the time period that I specified and you denied being true.


Doug

 

[praise_yeshua]

“Thought” is the amalgamation of all possible primary sources into a general consensus of opinion across the spectrum.

Ridiculous.

"an idea or opinion".

It is nothing more than an opinion. It carries no authority nor necessity of belief.

And this is what provides the consensus of “thought”. No extant “document” discredits the information that I have presented. Which is why it is your burden to show why my timeline cannot be trusted.


Doug

If you're going to mix my replies to you, I'm going to start doing it to you.

I have no burden of proof. You've provided nothing but opinions that you're conflating as primary sources.

 

[praise_yeshua]

That is fine, but your opinion in itself has nothing to cause me to find it credible. It’s just your opinion! Everyone has a right to their own opinion, but to designate it as fact, goes beyond the pale of reasonable expectation. Why is your opinion more substantial than, for instance, The British Museum’s?


Doug

Because it is MY opinion. My opinion is just as good any opinion you have or even more so because it is mine.

I know more about this topic than you do. My opinion is based upon a more substantive approach and better methodology. You've been conflating opinions as primary sources. Anyone can rightly recognize such.

 

[praise_yeshua]

https://smarthistory.org/palette-of-king-narmer/

Discovered among a group of sacred implements ritually buried in a deposit within an early temple of the falcon god Horus at the site of Hierakonpolis (a capital of Egypt during the Predynastic period), this large ceremonial object is one of the most important artifacts from the dawn of Egyptian civilization.

This is within the time period that I specified and you denied being true.


Doug

No it is not. Prove it is in the time period you mentioned. I'm many steps ahead of you. If you would have known this subject, you would already know why you're wrong.

In fact, I'll jump ahead a little.

Osiris is connected to this. Many people conflate the primary source of Horus with Osiris. The evidence for Osiris is much later. However, your "consensus".... the people you TRUST.... don't mention any of the evidence to the contrary for their dating. Osiris is supposedly the father of Horus.

Horus is literally found on the "The Narmer Palette".

Why are you avoiding the Rosetta Stone? There is no understand of the Egyptian culture without the Rosetta Stone.

 

[TibiasDad]

My opinion is just as good any opinion you have or even more so because it is mine

Ditto! Where does that leave us? We’re both right; which anyone can see that can’t be true!

Doug

 

[TibiasDad]

Why are you avoiding the Rosetta Stone?

Haven’t gotten there yet…have patience…

 

[TibiasDad]

Prove it is in the time period you mentioned

Go to the website where is shows the picture and gives to time period information. I tried to upload it but it was too large.


Doug

 

[praise_yeshua]

Ditto! Where does that leave us? We’re both right; which anyone can see that can’t be true!

Doug

I never said otherwise. Believe. Don't believe me. However, we haven't gotten into all the details of how our positions vary from one another. We are getting there.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Haven’t gotten there yet…have patience…

I'll "let you get up to speed". I'll wait.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Go to the website where is shows the picture and gives to time period information. I tried to upload it but it was too large.


Doug

I don't need your website reference. I already know the position. I knew it many years ago. Not that I can't learn from more details. Just realize when I say something, it is based upon meaningful knowledge concerning the topic.

If YOU will dig into how all this "fits together", you're going to be disappointed in what you've believed all this time is true.

There is ZERO evidence that places Osiris or Horus before Abraham. Zero.

Even if there were concrete evidence, there are many other reasons to believe what I presented in the OP as being true.

 

[TibiasDad]

I don't need your website reference

Of course not, it shows you’re wrong. Or at least it shows that the dates of Horus worship were well before Abraham was born.

Doug

 

[praise_yeshua]

Of course not, it shows you’re wrong. Or at least it shows that the dates of Horus worship were well before Abraham was born.

Doug

I know why they say such. The primary evidence they use to make that argument. It is a crazy argument. If you knew why, you'd think the same thing.

Okay. I clicked on the link and one of the first sentences is....

"Vitally important, but difficult to interpret"

That certainly instills confidence.... right?

There is nothing on that page at all that details why they "date" this tablet to 3100 BC. There is an appeal to the "Mace-Pose" without a single statement as to why they insist it is used for the next "3000+ years".

I hope you realize that "Egyptian Mythology" sells..... It makes the country of Egypt very rich.

Here is a estimate from "Grok".

2025 (record year): Nearly 19 million tourists (up 21% from 2024), generating roughly $16.7–18.8 billion in direct tourism revenues.

I wonder why they want to insist that the Egyptian culture is so influential in human history...... They'll fabricate anything to make their money.

 

[TibiasDad]

"Vitally important, but difficult to interpret"

Lest I fall into temptation, I will refrain from further comment other than to say that I will agree to disagree agreeably.

The quote above is the section title of the first part of the article summarizing the meaning of the artifact. It is so important that it never leaves Egypt, but the story the pictures are telling are difficult to interpret and understand. Thus, “vitally important, but difficult to interpret.” Not disconcerting in the least.

Thus, I leave you to your opinions.

Doug