You're telling us the Bible's plot, which you know very well, but making no mention of who is directing the movie. The early Jewish tribes had something to prove and something to claim. They yearned for home. This is a people who lost their land in the Exile, and it has affected the Jewish psyche ever since. Even the story of Eden is about lost land.
This plot rings very familiar to us Americans as the Pilgrim story - hey, we need a place to worship, and there's some tribal people in this land who submitted to our authority, and then there was lots of wild empty space. The land is ours for the taking!
That's the documentary the Pilgrims would have directed. The indigenous people have a completely different documentary.
You can believe the Bible is the word of God, but do consider that those words of God still had to use human hands to put ink to parchment. And to me, once human hands are involved, all bets are off.
This is such a thoughtful reflection, and I really appreciate the literary and historical parallels you’re drawing… especially about Eden, exile, and the American myth. That pattern of longing-for-land really does show up over and over in human history.
Where we may differ is in how we interpret the source. I fully agree that human hands wrote Scripture, but I believe those hands were guided by God, and that the patterns in the text aren’t just narrative convenience… they’re prophetic.
I’m not denying that people can use spiritual language to justify conquest… history proves that. But in Genesis, what strikes me isn’t conquest but covenant. Abraham doesn’t take land by force. He waits. He negotiates. He believes a promise and walks in faith, not power.
So yeah… maybe the Bible is a documentary. But I’d argue it’s God-directed, not propaganda-produced.
That's a fair enough interpretation, and one shared by a whole lot of people, so I won't try to convince anyone otherwise. My own position is that the Bible is less a documentary and more a library of literature - some poetry, some history, some mythology - collected over 1000-ish years that reflect ancient Israel's highest cultural values. I used to call it fiction tbh but I now realize it's much, MUCH deeper than that. But much like art, and story, it has truth that goes beyond what facts can hold.
A documentary can only say so much. Literature can say EVERYTHING.
Fun fact I learned recently. The same mountain Abraham sacrificed his son Isaac would later be the same mountain Jesus died on the cross. Abraham named that mountain “the lord will provide”. 🤯
God had all lands, if you want to go that direction. The Creator did just that--created them. Therefore had them all first. I think the flaw in your argument lies in its use of Scripture as an infallible source. It may or may not be history ( historians don't give it the weight of historical record) because it was written long after the fact. So for those who believe in Scripture this may be a perfectly valid argument. But for those who don't, it isn't credible. But you certainly do know your Scripture!
Totally fair. I’m not assuming everyone shares my view of Scripture as infallible. You’re right: if you don’t see it that way, this post won’t carry the same weight.
My goal wasn’t to argue modern land rights based on theology, but to clarify what the text actually says, since so many people (on all sides) reference Abraham, Ishmael, and the “original claim” without reading the original source.
So this isn’t about proving the Bible is history… it’s about consistency when people cite it. If you’re going to use Genesis to justify or reject something, let’s at least start with what it actually says.
And thank you… I really appreciate the kind word at the end.
You're telling us the Bible's plot, which you know very well, but making no mention of who is directing the movie. The early Jewish tribes had something to prove and something to claim. They yearned for home. This is a people who lost their land in the Exile, and it has affected the Jewish psyche ever since. Even the story of Eden is about lost land.
This plot rings very familiar to us Americans as the Pilgrim story - hey, we need a place to worship, and there's some tribal people in this land who submitted to our authority, and then there was lots of wild empty space. The land is ours for the taking!
That's the documentary the Pilgrims would have directed. The indigenous people have a completely different documentary.
You can believe the Bible is the word of God, but do consider that those words of God still had to use human hands to put ink to parchment. And to me, once human hands are involved, all bets are off.
This is such a thoughtful reflection, and I really appreciate the literary and historical parallels you’re drawing… especially about Eden, exile, and the American myth. That pattern of longing-for-land really does show up over and over in human history.
Where we may differ is in how we interpret the source. I fully agree that human hands wrote Scripture, but I believe those hands were guided by God, and that the patterns in the text aren’t just narrative convenience… they’re prophetic.
I’m not denying that people can use spiritual language to justify conquest… history proves that. But in Genesis, what strikes me isn’t conquest but covenant. Abraham doesn’t take land by force. He waits. He negotiates. He believes a promise and walks in faith, not power.
So yeah… maybe the Bible is a documentary. But I’d argue it’s God-directed, not propaganda-produced.
That's a fair enough interpretation, and one shared by a whole lot of people, so I won't try to convince anyone otherwise. My own position is that the Bible is less a documentary and more a library of literature - some poetry, some history, some mythology - collected over 1000-ish years that reflect ancient Israel's highest cultural values. I used to call it fiction tbh but I now realize it's much, MUCH deeper than that. But much like art, and story, it has truth that goes beyond what facts can hold.
A documentary can only say so much. Literature can say EVERYTHING.
Fun fact I learned recently. The same mountain Abraham sacrificed his son Isaac would later be the same mountain Jesus died on the cross. Abraham named that mountain “the lord will provide”. 🤯
God had all lands, if you want to go that direction. The Creator did just that--created them. Therefore had them all first. I think the flaw in your argument lies in its use of Scripture as an infallible source. It may or may not be history ( historians don't give it the weight of historical record) because it was written long after the fact. So for those who believe in Scripture this may be a perfectly valid argument. But for those who don't, it isn't credible. But you certainly do know your Scripture!
Totally fair. I’m not assuming everyone shares my view of Scripture as infallible. You’re right: if you don’t see it that way, this post won’t carry the same weight.
My goal wasn’t to argue modern land rights based on theology, but to clarify what the text actually says, since so many people (on all sides) reference Abraham, Ishmael, and the “original claim” without reading the original source.
So this isn’t about proving the Bible is history… it’s about consistency when people cite it. If you’re going to use Genesis to justify or reject something, let’s at least start with what it actually says.
And thank you… I really appreciate the kind word at the end.