The Book of Joshua
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-07-2013, 10:37 PM
The Book of Joshua
While the bible as a whole is quite vile, the Book of Joshua seems rather annoying to me. The main point I took out of it was the genocide due to the Israelites having dibs on the land. Now it was perfectly fine for all of these jews to kill everyone(minus a few virgins) and take over, but when Hitler does it a couple thousand years later(seemingly as payback) everyone gets all pissed off.

Anyone else taken a special interest in this book?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-07-2013, 10:51 PM
RE: The Book of Joshua
(22-07-2013 10:37 PM)Hitched_Gibson Wrote:  While the bible as a whole is quite vile, the Book of Joshua seems rather annoying to me. The main point I took out of it was the genocide due to the Israelites having dibs on the land. Now it was perfectly fine for all of these jews to kill everyone(minus a few virgins) and take over, but when Hitler does it a couple thousand years later(seemingly as payback) everyone gets all pissed off.

Anyone else taken a special interest in this book?

It's all mythology. The Archaeology of the area shows that the book of Joshua never happened as told. As to the morals of book it is sadly lacking in them and is a prime example of "God" being used to justify earthly actions of his spokesmen.

The entire early part of the bible are all reprehensible in their own ways, but yes Joshua does indeed say that Genocide is fine if it's against the right people, Rape is all good too as long as you marry the victim. How anyone can read this drivel and not be sickened is beyond me.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Revenant77x's post
22-07-2013, 10:56 PM
RE: The Book of Joshua
I remember being taught a song in Sunday school, "Joshua fought the battle of Jericho" and believed it was a glorious thing. Now that I've read the book, I can't believe that's what they teach kids to look up to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Hitched_Gibson's post
23-07-2013, 06:57 AM (This post was last modified: 23-07-2013 01:51 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: The Book of Joshua
If you dump the idea that anything in the OT is about what we think of as "religion" or "spirituality" today, and instead it's about political bias, propganda, PR, political intrigue, power, and "one-up-manship", it all starts to make sense.

Joshua is interesting because he was a figure from the Northern kingdom's ("E" source) myth system , (along with Moses), and is NEVER ONCE mentioned in the "J" source, (from the Southern Kingdom of Judah)... see the "Documentary Hypothesis". If you read Joshua with that bias in mind, you notice most of the names and places and heroes have to do with the Northern kingdom's places and heroes. It's really quite (purposely) insulting to the Southern kingdom. The North is (mythologically of course) "conquered" and divided into the tribal locations, (which we know had actually been settled in a long process). How is the South "divided", and where is that done ? At Shiloh. The central priestly center of the North (and the "E" source). And how is the South divided ? Not by conquest. By "lots". Those fucking wimps. They threw dice for it, "before the Lord in Shiloh" (18:9).
We know from archaeology that Jericho was destroyed at some point by an earthquake + a fire, thus the destruction of that city by conquest is false.
The "bones of Joseph" are (supposedly) brought up from Egypt. Where are they put ? In Jerusalem, (in Judah) ? Oh hell no. In Sheckem. An important NORTHERN worship site. Where was the covenant renewed ? At Sheckem, in the North. When the covenant is renewed there is a glaring, purposeful, omission in Chapter 24. No mention of the Ark of the Covenant, or the tablets of the law, the central identity symbols of the SOUTH, (which supposedly were in existence already). Why not ? Because they were accoutrements in the temple in the SOUTH. BTW the 24th chapter also refers to the "strange gods that are among you". More proof they were anything but monotheists.

Think about it. Why was there no mention of what happened to the staff of Moses or the tablets of the law, or the arc, either when the first temple was destroyed, or anytime later, and why was it not important to have them in the second temple, or what happened when all the temple artifacts were taken to Rome, and they were never mentioned ? They NEVER existed. They were as mythological as Moses and Joshua, and the Exodus. There likely was a gold covered box in the Southern kingdom's (Jerusalem) central site, in the "holy of holies", but why was no one ever allowed to look at it, touch it, or look in it ? One guess.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
23-07-2013, 07:58 AM
RE: The Book of Joshua
I've never looked at any of the bible politically. Really should give it a try.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2013, 08:42 AM
RE: The Book of Joshua
(23-07-2013 07:58 AM)Hitched_Gibson Wrote:  I've never looked at any of the bible politically. Really should give it a try.

http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...ble-Bull-s

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
"And you quit footing the bill for these nations that are oil rich - we're paying for some of their *squirmishes* that have been going on for centuries" - Sarah Palin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2013, 09:44 AM (This post was last modified: 23-07-2013 09:47 AM by shiranl.)
RE: The Book of Joshua
Except that Hitler did commit genocide, and the book of Joshua (much like the books of all the Torah) didn't really happen. Even if the story of Joshua did happen- it still isn't an excuse for what Hitler did. Understood?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2013, 09:55 AM
RE: The Book of Joshua
(23-07-2013 09:44 AM)shiranl Wrote:  Except that Hitler did commit genocide, and the book of Joshua (much like the books of all the Torah) didn't really happen. Even if the story of Joshua did happen- it still isn't an excuse for what Hitler did. Understood?
Thanks. I knew I was missing something. Now that we've covered day one of atheism 101, we can move on.

The point I was making was that those who are upset about the Holocaust(probably all Americans who are ~90% christian) and believe the bible shouldn't be too upset about it.

Just because someone is new to the forum doesn't mean they're new to thinking. Understood?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-07-2013, 10:02 AM
RE: The Book of Joshua
(22-07-2013 10:37 PM)Hitched_Gibson Wrote:  ...but when Hitler does it a couple thousand years later(seemingly as payback) everyone gets all pissed off...

You wrote that in a very ambiguously disturbing way...

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Raptor Jesus's post
23-07-2013, 10:21 AM
RE: The Book of Joshua
(23-07-2013 09:55 AM)Hitched_Gibson Wrote:  
(23-07-2013 09:44 AM)shiranl Wrote:  Except that Hitler did commit genocide, and the book of Joshua (much like the books of all the Torah) didn't really happen. Even if the story of Joshua did happen- it still isn't an excuse for what Hitler did. Understood?
Thanks. I knew I was missing something. Now that we've covered day one of atheism 101, we can move on.

The point I was making was that those who are upset about the Holocaust(probably all Americans who are ~90% christian) and believe the bible shouldn't be too upset about it.

Just because someone is new to the forum doesn't mean they're new to thinking. Understood?

Really? because I didn't see that point. The point I sow was justifying the Holocaust by a story about a genocide that was done by the Jews a couple thousands of years before the Holocaust.

Maybe you should make your points clearer.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: