Moebites and Ammonites

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
jgsg2210's picture
Moebites and Ammonites

The Moebites and the Ammonites are the descendants of Lot and his two virgin daughters. After the fall of Sodom and Gomorrah, the daughters had incest with father. Their offspring are the Moebites and the Ammonites, who now live in and around Jordon area to the East of Isreal.
This is mentioned in the Bible and today they are still there. If the Bible is wrong, how can you explain the coincidence.
The same holds true for the Jews and the Arabs, who claim to come from Abraham, as the story goes; and they are still here to prove that.

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

watchman's picture
@Joel.....

@Joel.....

What coincidence ?

The bible also mentions Hebrews...who live in Israel....and today they are still there..
The bible also mentions Egyptians...who live in Egypt....and today they are still there...
The bible also mentions Syrians ,Greeks ,Romans ,....etc....not to labour the point...
but just because some facts are mentioned does not validate the stories in your bible....the book that refers to unicorns ,cockatrices ,satyrs ,dragons ,flying fiery serpents....talking donkeys and serpents, walking dead.......

So ..to paraphrase your question .....if the bible is not wrong, how can you explain the claims of fantasy ,mythological beasts.

Addition......it is not surprising that the ancient hebrews knew that their neighbouring kingdom of Moab ...was inhabited by Moabites ,or indeed that the kindom of Amon was inhabited by Amonites....what more natural than to create myths that explain the presence of these foreign nations.

Many nations / cultures have similarly fanciful explanations for the presence of neighbouring peoples....

for example....

" Here is one account of the arrival of the Picts in the Book of
Invasions:

200 years after arrival of the Danaans in Ireland, people sailing from
Thrace through the Mediterranean and out into the Atlantic, landed in
Wexford Bay where they came into conflict with Danaans, but were
persuaded to pass out into Northern Britain, then called Albany. They
were known as Picts, or Painted Ones.
They are described as tattooed men with odd social habits like exogamy,
totemism, public coition, cannibalism, tattooing and having women
warriors.

There is another account told by the Venerable Bede in Ecclesiastical
History that the Picts came from Scythia to North Ireland where a king
advised them to go east to Britain and then north, which advice they took.
Since they had no women with them, the Irish king agreed to give them
wives provided they henceforth chose their rulers by the female rather
than the male ancestry of their kings. ‘And all know,’ wrote Bede, ‘that this
custom is still maintained among the Picts.’"

Equally fanciful ...equally picturesque....equally fabricated...

link:
http://www.kelleyheckart.com/thepicts.html

jgsg2210's picture
I have to agree with you.

I have to agree with you.

Pitar's picture
The pseudepigrapha of the

The pseudepigrapha of the bible's jesus period was on a timeline no earlier than 120 years after he was proposed to have existed. In other words, the contributing writers began making stuff up 120 years later. They attempted to read the history of the region and its story-telling, such as it was publicly recorded by the courts and historians of the time, and included it in their writings to give some factual qualification of the interspersed myths they contrived. There are no concurrent public documents bearing witness of the bible's content. Mostly, they authored their stories by reading those who wrote before them on the same subject. Hence, when the poor student of history writing under the pseudonym of Mark mistakenly translated the Hebrew name for Jesus of the Nazarene (a cult) as Jesus of Nazareth (a town), writers for 300 years after him, who used him as a reference, made the same mistake. There never was a town on the cartography of the time named Nazareth until Emperor Constantine learned of it and had an existing town renamed. This is a matter of public record found in the history of Constantine.

But, heck, let's talk some sense -

http://www.bidstrup.com/bible2.htm

an_order_of_magnitude's picture
@Joel Omar

@Joel Omar

Just because someone exists does not mean every story about them is true.

algebe's picture
When I saw the header I

When I saw the header I thought was going to be something interesting about giant snails from the Mesozoic era.

Instead it's just another piece of racist bullshit justified by the Bible, like Africans being under the curse of Ham.

jgsg2210's picture
It was not meant as a racist

It was not meant as a racist comment. I was sincere in my quest for more knowledge.

jgsg2210's picture
I am an Atheist Christian, I

I am an Atheist Christian, I'm A/C. (There was no category for that.) I am not a D/C, Devote Christian.
And also, I believe the Bible is bullshit for the most part. And, I believe that Christians are not all there. I do not believe in any church that is on earth. And to me, no church no God.
I had just read about the M & A people, the timeline that they have on them; and thought it was significant. But obviously, I was wrong.
Yet, there seems to be something mysterious about the Abraham Region.
Thanks for the comments.

miracleman12's picture
@Joel Omar Please define

@Joel Omar Please define "Atheist Christian". I've never heard of such. It seems to be a contradiction to me. Honestly, I am wondering if you "are not all there."

jgsg2210's picture
Just means I am an Atheist to

Just means I am an Atheist to the Christian God. Stands to reason that there is no neutral ground. You either believe are you don't. So if I am not on board 100% Christian, I might as well call myself an Atheist. I question everything in the Bible 100%. But, I am a die hard. I used to be messed up on drugs until I found the Lord, now I am messed up on the Lord. LOL. But, you right I am not all there. Thanks for the compliment!

jgsg2210's picture
Just means I am an Atheist to

Just means I am an Atheist to the Christian God. Stands to reason that there is no neutral ground. You either believe are you don't. So if I am not on board 100% Christian, I might as well call myself an Atheist. I question everything in the Bible 100%. But, I am a die hard. I used to be messed up on drugs until I found the Lord, now I am messed up on the Lord. LOL. But, you right I am not all there. Thanks for the compliment!

miracleman12's picture
@Joel Omar

@Joel Omar

You do seem quite split and irrational to me, but I won't hold it against you. What I am more interested in is understanding what you actually believe and why.

-- So you believe in God, but you are unsure of the Christian God? Is that right?
-- You don't trust the Bible? And that's why you feel the way you do about the Christian God?

an_order_of_magnitude's picture
@miricleman12

@miracleman12

"You do seem quite split and irrational to me, but I won't hold it against you."

You seem insensitive and rude, but I won't hold it against you.

The medicine you dole out doesn't taste too good does it?

jgsg2210's picture
No, I do not believe in any

No, I do not believe in any God. I do not try to be insensitive. I am an out of the closet Atheist. I study the Bible and people. I can find more than 10 things wrong on every story in the bible. But, aside from that. The fact that Jesus was suppose to walk on water; no need to go farther than that. This is a world in which most rational people would say, "Uh, I think I have heard enough".
Honestly I am more prone to believe in Aliens.
I have been to the extreme in both sides of this spectrum, Christian chat room and now here for the first time. I have pushed Christianity and even wrote a song. And, I find there is know it all's in both groups. No different than politics.
I just want to know my shit when I talk to people. I am rational, just a bad comic.

MCDennis's picture
How do we explain the

How do we explain the coincidence. Even if we could not explain it, that does not mean the bible is true and gods exist. But fortunately we have several explanations. Such as: It could be nothing more than a coincidence. Or: This could have been added to the bible later. Or: The authors knew the names of their neighbors.

Dave Matson's picture
That those people were

That those people were pictured as the offspring of Lot and his daughters is, no doubt, a put-down concocted long after they were in place. The Old Testament assigns fanciful origins to various nations, tracing them to various patriarchs, and those nations that were viewed as ungodly would naturally be assigned an origin story that would "explain" their status. So, there is no coincidence to explain! I think that's a reasonable explanation.

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.