Ugarit

[shunyadragon]

Premise: Abe Lincoln didn't exist.

Stories were written about Abe Lincoln in the 1800's.
Stories were written about Abe Lincoln in the 1920's.
Stories were written about Abe Lincoln in the 2000's.

If I make the assumption that the stories in the 1800's are not based on any real events and then assume the stories in the 1920's and 2000's are derivatives of the initial story I may have participated in an interesting historical research exercise but I'm still pre-supposing what I hoped to prove.

This is a very very poor analogy to anything in history and how historians consider the evidence over time, and historians and scientists do not prove anything. The do not consider events and the lives of people in black and white true or false because accounts do not agree over time . Historians consider all the evidence found over time and work from a consensus perspective to develop the history of humanity. A new letter may be found today that changes what is considered an accurate history.

[shunyadragon]

An interesting note on the origins of the name 'Isreal.'

Source: https://people.brandonu.ca/nollk/canaanite-religion/

The name “Israel” makes an excellent example of the difficulties associated with Canaanite identity. This word suggests an unselfconsciously Canaanite worldview, since “Israel” means “El strives” (or perhaps “El is just”; cf. Margalith 1990), designating the bearer of the name as one who affirms the Canaanite god El, as in Genesis 33:20. If the Bible’s claim that the Israelites were non-Canaanite migrants to Palestine preserves any genuine memory, then obviously the name provides no evidence for this, nor does archaeology provide unambiguous ethnic data (Noll 2001a, p. 163; compare Zevit 2001, pp. 113–21, and Brett 2003). Moreover, trace data in the Bible (e.g., Yithra the Israelite in 2 Samuel 17:25 MT; see Noll 1999, p. 41 note 32) and ancient inscriptions (such as the Moabite stone’s reference to Gadites as a non-Israelite people; see Noll 2001a, p. 169 note 17) suggest that only some of the people now known as the ancient Israelites called themselves Israelites. The biblical texts were edited at a late date to create the false impression of a unified pan-Israelite ethnos (Noll 1999, 2001b). Thus, it is best to view Canaan as a geographic term and to define Israel as a limited ethnic or political identity within Canaan (Zevit 2001, p. 116 note 50). An Israelite was a Canaanite who was attacked by Pharaoh Merneptah somewhere in or near the Jezreel valley (Noll 2001a, pp. 124–7), or a Canaanite who was a subject of the kingdom called Israel, or a Canaanite who identified with the cultural memory of that kingdom after it ceased to exist.

© Copyright Original Source