Bible thinking

_____________________________________________________
Date Line May 10, 2007

When you were a child, you thought as a child. Who are the children?

One of the delights of life is Christian baiting and Christian bashing. There are a few who have the wisdom, knowledge and understanding necessary to afford themselves the right to be; but for the majority, there has been no change since the earliest period of superstition.

Today, I will focus on the Resurrection. If you come to it as a matter of faith, and belief in the unnatural, you come as antithesis of the all you profess to subscribe to. If you assert it was of this world in accordance with that neverland where nature originated; ah yes.

The Bible, the New Testiment, the oft translated, retranslated, edited and reedited work for which no original has been found, is the source of all. As we are not concerned with those chapters known to have been mistranslated, or intentionally changed, we have it easy.

What did the authors of the NEW version wish to have their readers understand and believe (in terms of Resurrection)? Were they talking about an event OF the natural world or the supernatural?

There was an affliction. Something which mimics death. Something for which there is a cure. Something which might be unique to the early farm regions, but which is not known beyond.

What is it? What slows the metabolism to imperceptible levels? What might not have been noticed as life to the untrained, but today might not even be seen, or thought of, as “death”.

Today we think of death as cessation of brain activity, the body is often killed so that the medical problem can be cured. The body is meaningless. Isn’t that what the New Book says?

What disease can “kill” the body, but leave the mind alive?

Date Line May 13, 2007
Ah yes, the thought ended and did not resume. Thinking through the scriptures, like thinking about the two versions of Moses: the first inferring he was a first born to a father who was not a Levite; and the second representing him as the second son to the parents of Aaron.

Thinking. Genetically was Moses a full sibling, or a half-sibling, to Aaron? There is a significance. A genetic one.

We know the DNA of those who are Cohanim; but it is not the DNA of the Levites. There are two ways to read that and each hinges on the mother and how many fathers.

I suspect, given the evidence of the rest of the text, that Moses was a Hyksos. Aaron was, for want of another term, a Bedouin. But their mother was a Levite and so they were both of the tribe of Levy.

The curiosity would be the discovery of the DNA for the Hyksos kings who ruled Egypt during the period associated with the Biblical period in which they “knew Joseph”; and ending with the period in which a Pharaoh came who did not know him.

There is another thing wandering my brain: When Abraham arrived in Egypt with Sarah, his wife, and passed her off as his sister, Pharaoh welcomed him to court. Pharaoh was smitten by Sarah’s beauty and wanted her.

We are told a deity came to Pharaoh in a dream and informed him that Sarah was the wife of Abraham, not the sister. Pharaoh becomes upset and infers, based on them having the SAME deity, that he would need to answer to their common deity for coveting his neighbors wife.

Abraham had feared acknowledging Sarah as his wife would have him killed. That infers a different deity, or cultural heritage, which made the coveting of the wife of another man acceptable; and that killing the husband to obtain the wife was also the norm.

What people of Egypt would have the same deity as Canaanites? What deity was in Canaan which was also in Egypt? Where did the rules, the commandments come from?

Clearly they were in place long before Moses. What Code of Laws is there available to us to compare to as the origin of Laws of Moses? _____________________________________________________