Abrahamic "god"?

[Birdjaguar]

I cant find the link but I saw a recent article about Pacific Coast Indians using archaeological discoveries on coastal islands in court to confirm their ancient ancestry... and their oral traditions going back into the ice age. They believe the big freeze drove their ancestors from their inland homes to the coast before the great flood. A geographical oddity called a hinge kept sea level relatively stable during the big meltdown in that region - basically land under and near ice sheets rise when ice melts and in some rare places that rise was more or less matched by sea level rise. People were there over 14 kya, sea level rise didn't cover their homes like it did with so many other peoples - and they still have a flood myth. They were there while seas were rising ~400 ft nearby.

Anyway, I'd argue the biblical myth of Eve is evidence of an oral tradition going back >100ky to our very beginning.

Her hominid ancestors didn't suffer as much pain in child birth, thats why Eve's pain was multiplied - God was comparing her pain to theirs... And what was Adam before the knowledge of good and evil? Innocent, unclothed, unashamed, he was so 'primitive' God even sought for him a 'helpmate' from among the other animals, but none was found suitable. Sounds to me like an oral tradition was written into the bible describing events that happened over 100,000 years ago when 'modern man' was born. Hell, even the MtDNA Eve was dated to about 200,000 years ago. I wonder if DNA studies on the apes show a similar age or if they go much further back.

Its a human paradox

Oral tradition beyond a few hundred years has some inherent problems beyond just lying about it. Language and word use is difficult to maintain over decades, let alone centuries or tens of thousands of years. Are there any spoken languages today that can be traced back reliably beyond a few hundred years? Languages change all the time. They diversify.

Spoiler :

There are approximately 296 spoken (or formerly spoken) indigenous languages north of Mexico, 269 of which are grouped into 29 families (the remaining 27 languages are either isolates or unclassified). The Na-Dené, Algic, and Uto-Aztecan families are the largest in terms of number of languages. Uto-Aztecan has the most speakers (1.95 million) if the languages in Mexico are considered (mostly due to 1.5 million speakers of Nahuatl); Na-Dené comes in second with approximately 200,000 speakers (nearly 180,000 of these are speakers of Navajo), and Algic in third with about 180,000 speakers (mainly Cree and Ojibwe). Na-Dené and Algic have the widest geographic distributions: Algic currently spans from northeastern Canada across much of the continent down to northeastern Mexico (due to later migrations of the Kickapoo) with two outliers in California (Yurok and Wiyot); Na-Dené spans from Alaska and western Canada through Washington, Oregon, and California to the U.S. Southwest and northern Mexico (with one outlier in the Plains). Several families consist of only 2 or 3 languages. Demonstrating genetic relationships has proved difficult due to the great linguistic diversity present in North America. Two large (super-) family proposals, Penutian and Hokan, look particularly promising. However, even after decades of research, a large number of families remain.

North America is notable for its linguistic diversity, especially in California. This area has 18 language families comprising 74 languages (compared to three families in Europe: Indo-European, Uralic and Turkic and one isolate: Basque). [8]

Another area of considerable diversity appears to have been the Southeastern United States[citation needed]; however, many of these languages became extinct from European contact and as a result they are, for the most part, absent from the historical record.[citation needed] This diversity has influenced the development of linguistic theories and practice in the US.

Indian tribes are always claiming that their tribe has an unbroken history from the present as far back as necessary to support one political claim or another. Oral tradition is the usual weapon, because it cannot be easily disputed. And when they claim that their ancient stories must be kept secret to preserve their power, it gets even tougher to reject them. The fragmentation of American Indian cultures over the past 2000 years alone makes any oral tradition claims suspect. Any colder than normal winter could have forced a tribe to move it homes from inland to the coast. that's what migratory people do; they move around. They were not farmers. Indian claims about their ancestry are not too different than Trumps claims about crowd size.

It is very easy to claim a tradition is old when there is no way to date it. But the logistics of language, culture, geography, war, death and human frailty all work against any kind of oral tradition actually documenting more than a couple of centuries. You certainly can believe that Eve goes back 100,000 years and that her story was told in...what language? Do the aborigines have an Eve in their myths? They left Africa first and have the cleanest line back to Africa.

IIRC The climax of the show Roots was based on an oral tradition that went back a few hundred years, maybe, and was only relevant to one tiny sliver of the hero's ancestry.

 

[Birdjaguar]

One more thought. Imagine Eve's descendants depicted as an ever growing tree from 100,000 years ago until 1000 BC. That is 5000 generations. That is 5000 parent child story telling and remembering across uncountable languages and dialects. And then you claim that in one spot along the eastern edge of the Mediterranean Sea some single person got the correct message. It's a very low probability. And there is one more problem. To tell the story of the first woman, call her Eve, Eve would have to know she was the first. Or someone would have to know and tell her that she was the first. Without that key information, the story is just "I had a mom."

You are beginning at the wrong end. MtDNA Eve was an idea conceived by looking backward through our DNA to a time when humans had their earliest common ancestor. She wasn't the only woman of her trime, just the one that led to us. In her time she was one of many and none of them knew whose offspring would survive. Eve's next door neighbor could have had kids whose DNA died out in a flood, so until that point there were two first moms. They couldn't tell a story and pass it on about our first mom, because she didn't exist until we figured out there was one. For all we know she died giving birth to her first baby, a little girl.

 

[Berzerker]

You were on about "existence". We all perceive "existence" from our own unique perspective. If I'd never been born, I wouldn't be here to contemplate "existence" and we wouldn't be having these arguments.

So my parents are responsible for my existence. You can credit whoever or whatever you want for yours, although if you trot out some sort of supernatural reason, I have to seriously question whether you ever took a biology class.

Here's what I asked: cant we learn about god by observing existence? Existence doesn't need you and me to exist, it'll be what it is minus 2 people. Whats responsible for biology?

You're going to have to provide the chapter and verse in the bible where the Pacific Coast Indians are mentioned. I don't remember seeing them anywhere.

You're going to have to provide the chapter and verse in that quote where I said they were in the Bible. I said archaeological evidence supporting their oral traditions has been introduced into the courts (Canadian). Thats evidence of oral traditions surviving well into the ice age. The Zulu have a tradition in which their ancient ancestors "the artificial ones" were at war with the apemen. How far back does that one go? The people of Flores have legends about the hobbits, their ancestors were in contact with homo erectus whose ancestors left Africa maybe a million years ago.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

You're going to have to provide the chapter and verse in that quote where I said they were in the Bible. I said archaeological evidence supporting their oral traditions has been introduced into the courts (Canadian).

You've been carrying on about the bible being "evidence" for the outlandish claims you make.

Anything involving the Canadian courts and oral tradition would have to do with land claims, and I fail to see what that has to do with anything regarding the bible.

 

[Berzerker]

Oral tradition beyond a few hundred years has some inherent problems beyond just lying about it. Language and word use is difficult to maintain over decades, let alone centuries or tens of thousands of years. Are there any spoken languages today that can be traced back reliably beyond a few hundred years? Languages change all the time. They diversify.

Oral traditions are unique though, they're treated with a reverence - the clan or tribe's history, beliefs etc. How old do you think flood myths are? The Tlingit date theirs to 14,000 yeas ago and now these excavations of Pacific coastal islands show an occupation >14ky - the tradition says their ancestors arrived along the coast before the great flood. Course these Indians are related to the Tlingit so I wouldn't be surprised if they share the same legend.

"If" people started out as a small group (~1,000? a few hundred? a few dozen?) somewhere in Ethiopia 200,000 years ago, wouldn't they speak the same language? Its possible some people left Africa but were absorbed into Neanderthal/Denisovan/Erectus cultures adopting their ways and language, but other wise all language should have a common origin. Of course over 200ky it'll diversify as you said.

Indian tribes are always claiming that their tribe has an unbroken history from the present as far back as necessary to support one political claim or another. Oral tradition is the usual weapon, because it cannot be easily disputed. And when they claim that their ancient stories must be kept secret to preserve their power, it gets even tougher to reject them. The fragmentation of American Indian cultures over the past 2000 years alone makes any oral tradition claims suspect. Any colder than normal winter could have forced a tribe to move it homes from inland to the coast. that's what migratory people do; they move around. They were not farmers. Indian claims about their ancestry are not too different than Trumps claims about crowd size.

It is very easy to claim a tradition is old when there is no way to date it. But the logistics of language, culture, geography, war, death and human frailty all work against any kind of oral tradition actually documenting more than a couple of centuries. You certainly can believe that Eve goes back 100,000 years and that her story was told in...what language? Do the aborigines have an Eve in their myths? They left Africa first and have the cleanest line back to Africa.

IIRC The climax of the show Roots was based on an oral tradition that went back a few hundred years, maybe, and was only relevant to one tiny sliver of the hero's ancestry.

The Indians have archaeological evidence supporting their oral tradition... They were living on coastal islands over 14,000 years ago - and they moved there because their inland home suffered under the big freeze. After arriving at their new home the great flood happened.

 

[Berzerker]

You've been carrying on about the bible being "evidence" for the outlandish claims you make.

Anything involving the Canadian courts and oral tradition would have to do with land claims, and I fail to see what that has to do with anything regarding the bible.

Yeah, I dont see chapter and verse... And I didn't say the courts are discussing the Bible, Jesus. They're considering ancestral claims to land and archaeological evidence supporting oral traditions dating back over 14,000 years has been introduced by Pacific Coast Indians.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Yeah, I dont see chapter and verse... And I didn't say the courts are discussing the Bible, Jesus. They're considering ancestral claims to land and archaeological evidence supporting oral traditions dating back over 14,000 years has been introduced by Pacific Coast Indians.

What part of "this thread is about your insistence that the bible is real history and the land claims have nothing to do with that" was too hard to understand?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Oral traditions are unique though, they're treated with a reverence - the clan or tribe's history, beliefs etc. How old do you think flood myths are? The Tlingit date theirs to 14,000 yeas ago and now these excavations of Pacific coastal islands show an occupation >14ky - the tradition says their ancestors arrived along the coast before the great flood. Course these Indians are related to the Tlingit so I wouldn't be surprised if they share the same legend.

"If" people started out as a small group (~1,000? a few hundred? a few dozen?) somewhere in Ethiopia 200,000 years ago, wouldn't they speak the same language? Its possible some people left Africa but were absorbed into Neanderthal/Denisovan/Erectus cultures adopting their ways and language, but other wise all language should have a common origin. Of course over 200ky it'll diversify as you said.

The Indians have archaeological evidence supporting their oral tradition... They were living on coastal islands over 14,000 years ago - and they moved there because their inland home suffered under the big freeze. After arriving at their new home the great flood happened.

The arrival pattern of paleo peoples into NA is a controversial mess. There is lots of disputed data. the currently earliest hearth fire type of remains date back to about 12,000 BCE (is that your 14,000 years?). But there is nothing to link those excavations to any particular modern tribe. Until 4000 BCE, tribes in NA were all hunter gatherer and unsettled. BTW you have never mentioned the tribe you are talking about. Which is it? I'm prettysure that the Tlingit date their myths to 14,000 years ago because it is the most accepted date for the first arrival of Asian peoples. I doubt that their actual oral tradition has any concrete way to count the generations, moons, winters or whatever to document 14,000 of anything. I'm pretty sure that they could not even count that high prior to meeting Europeans. Archaeological remains that consist of charcoal, bones, and stone tools cannot be be linked to anything 10,000+ years later.

The fact that oral traditions are treated with reverence by some means nothing. How old are flood myths? That depends upon where they originate. Houston is generating new ones as we post. If a flood myth is written down, then the date of the writing is a date certain for the myth. Now such a myth could be written down years after whatever event caused the flood story to be important. I would estimate that the oldest flood myths date back no more than a few hundred years before they were written down. I would also add that any oral tradition that is that long would be substantially different after a hundred or more years of pass along. Short stories become longer, names get changed, boring details get dropped, the purpose of the tradition changes, etc.