This is history. History works different than other sciences. You cannot just claim that it’s common knowledge/scholarly accepted that yahweh originated in a pantheon because one scholar puts forward a theory on it, which most scholars reject (but they get dismissed because they are “biased”)
Absolutely, definitely, totally, 100% incorrect. Just because I only provided one source does not mean that that’s the only source available claiming that Yaweh originated in a pantheon. To suggest that is laughably disingenuous, and more proof that you’re not approaching this discussion seriously or with honesty.
History isn’t replicable and observable like chemistry, physics or biology
Your close-minded definition of “history” isn’t, because it doesn’t allow you to update and believe new things based on new scientific discoveries and evidence. It’s stagnant, stuck in the past, rigid, and unwilling to change.
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
You’re either being obtuse or you don’t understand how science works if you think “he says it’s just a theory” is a gotcha
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 1 week ago
This is history. History works different than other sciences. You cannot just claim that it’s common knowledge/scholarly accepted that yahweh originated in a pantheon because one scholar puts forward a theory on it, which most scholars reject (but they get dismissed because they are “biased”)
zalgotext@sh.itjust.works 1 week ago
Absolutely, definitely, totally, 100% incorrect. Just because I only provided one source does not mean that that’s the only source available claiming that Yaweh originated in a pantheon. To suggest that is laughably disingenuous, and more proof that you’re not approaching this discussion seriously or with honesty.
Your close-minded definition of “history” isn’t, because it doesn’t allow you to update and believe new things based on new scientific discoveries and evidence. It’s stagnant, stuck in the past, rigid, and unwilling to change.