• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Table of empires

From Scandanavia to India

View attachment 15632

I fail to see how that's relevant to your thesis. Yes, some Vikings sailed as far as India ... but that was thousands of years after the migrations to India happened in ancient times and not at all related to those migrations in any way, shape or form.

You may as well say that the migrations to Canada and Japan correspond with each other because I flew there on a trip a few years back. That's about the same relationship with the two.

Also, you're looking into how the lists in Genesis match to each other and then used a map of migrations which occurred thousands of years after those lists were written to back up those lists. That's not how backing things up works.

What do you mean THE migrations to India? There's no doubt been many migrations to India.

- - - Updated - - -

What? no China? A list of Empires without China? Why do Christians always ignore China?

I assume the Bible writers intended it to be understood that the Chinese were descended from Adam through some other line than Noah
 
Yes. There have been many migrations to India. Still fail to see the point of the map.

If a few small groups of Vikings sailed to India a couple thousand years after the lists in Genesis were written, what does that have to do with Scandinavia and India being grouped together on those lists?
 
Yes. There have been many migrations to India. Still fail to see the point of the map.

If a few small groups of Vikings sailed to India a couple thousand years after the lists in Genesis were written, what does that have to do with Scandinavia and India being grouped together on those lists?

I think this nonsense still needs to find Vikings getting to India. Viking raids in the Caspian sea can get one to the northern Iranian empire, but no where close to India.

Never mind that the Vikings would have needed to utilize a time travel machine, and George Orwell hadn't written the document yet...
 
Scandinavia
Sarmatians (red)
Turks
Media (Persia)
India

Scandinavians migrated and became
Sarmatians (red) who migrated and became
Turks who migrated and became
Medes who migrated and became
Aryan Indians
 
I assume the Bible writers intended it to be understood that the Chinese were descended from Adam through some other line than Noah

What? Someone other than Noah? What? Was there a SECOND Ark?
 
I assume the Bible writers intended it to be understood that the Chinese were descended from Adam through some other line than Noah

What? Someone other than Noah? What? Was there a SECOND Ark?

It's probably like Lost where you find out in Season 3 that there was this whole other group all along.

- - - Updated - - -

Scandinavia
Sarmatians (red)
Turks
Media (Persia)
India

Scandinavians migrated and became
Sarmatians (red) who migrated and became
Turks who migrated and became
Medes who migrated and became
Aryan Indians

What's this based on and what does it have to do with the map you provided?
 
It's probably like Lost where you find out in Season 3 that there was this whole other group all along.

- - - Updated - - -

Scandinavia
Sarmatians (red)
Turks
Media (Persia)
India

Scandinavians migrated and became
Sarmatians (red) who migrated and became
Turks who migrated and became
Medes who migrated and became
Aryan Indians

What's this based on and what does it have to do with the map you provided?

See post #1
 
See post #1

Post #1 doesn't provide that information - it's just the lists with no support given to them, which is why I asked you to expand upon that post and you did so by providing the map about the Vikings, saying that it showed a relation between these lists and ancient migrations. When it's pointed out that it doesn't do that, you seem to just want to sidestep the matter.

So again, why do you think that this list corresponds to any kind of ancient migrations? This is your premise but you haven't said why you feel it's the case.
 
A few improvements

MRqYNrP.png
 
See post #1

Post #1 doesn't provide that information - it's just the lists with no support given to them, which is why I asked you to expand upon that post and you did so by providing the map about the Vikings, saying that it showed a relation between these lists and ancient migrations. When it's pointed out that it doesn't do that, you seem to just want to sidestep the matter.

So again, why do you think that this list corresponds to any kind of ancient migrations? This is your premise but you haven't said why you feel it's the case.

Its my interpretation of Gen 10

The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.

Ashkenaz = Scandanavia
Riphath = Sarmatians
Togarmah = Turks
Medes = Media
Magog = India

Meshech = Basques
Tiras = Etruscans
 
The identification of Riphath with the Sarmatians is reasonable because:

The Rus' (Slavic: Русь, Greek: Ῥῶς) were an early medieval group, who lived in a large area of what is now Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and other countries, and are the ancestors of modern Russians and other related Slavic peoples. The Rus' came from what is today Roslagen of modern day Sweden. According to both contemporary Byzantine and Islamic sources and the Primary Chronicle of Rus', compiled in about A.D 1113, the Rus' were Norsemen who had relocated "from over sea",

So we know that vikings did travel into that region later on so they might have done so earlier too
 
Its my interpretation of Gen 10

The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.

Ashkenaz = Scandanavia
Riphath = Sarmatians
Togarmah = Turks
Medes = Media
Magog = India

Meshech = Basques
Tiras = Etruscans

But all scholarly evidence suggests that Aryan Indians came out of Central Asia. There's not only no reason to assume a migration from Scandinavia, but it directly contradicts what evidence is available.

Why would you interpret the passage that way and why would you assume any interpretation of the passage has a correspondence to historical events.
 
See post #1

Post #1 doesn't provide that information - it's just the lists with no support given to them, which is why I asked you to expand upon that post and you did so by providing the map about the Vikings, saying that it showed a relation between these lists and ancient migrations. When it's pointed out that it doesn't do that, you seem to just want to sidestep the matter.

So again, why do you think that this list corresponds to any kind of ancient migrations? This is your premise but you haven't said why you feel it's the case.
What? Of course this makes perfect sense. Ragnarök and his gang traveled from roughly 800AD into the future, and broke into Orson Welles' study and took the plans for the time machine. There they forced the people of Wessex to build the machine, and then they traveled back to right before 300BC, so they could migrate and become the Sarmatians who then migrated and turned into Turks.
 
See post #1

Post #1 doesn't provide that information - it's just the lists with no support given to them, which is why I asked you to expand upon that post and you did so by providing the map about the Vikings, saying that it showed a relation between these lists and ancient migrations. When it's pointed out that it doesn't do that, you seem to just want to sidestep the matter.

So again, why do you think that this list corresponds to any kind of ancient migrations? This is your premise but you haven't said why you feel it's the case.
What? Of course this makes perfect sense. Ragnarök and his gang traveled from roughly 800AD into the future, and broke into Orson Welles' study and took the plans for the time machine. There they forced the people of Wessex to build the machine, and then they traveled back to right before 300BC, so they could migrate and become the Sarmatians who then migrated and turned into Turks.

Well, FFS. If it's that straightforward, this could have just been included in the OP. :mad:
 
What? Of course this makes perfect sense. Ragnarök and his gang traveled from roughly 800AD into the future, and broke into Orson Welles' study and took the plans for the time machine. There they forced the people of Wessex to build the machine, and then they traveled back to right before 300BC, so they could migrate and become the Sarmatians who then migrated and turned into Turks.

Well, FFS. If it's that straightforward, this could have just been included in the OP. :mad:
Well, it is straightforward, but you have to first comprehend Fast Fourier Subterfuge.
 
Its my interpretation of Gen 10

The sons of Japheth; Gomer, and Magog, and Madai, and Javan, and Tubal, and Meshech, and Tiras.

3 And the sons of Gomer; Ashkenaz, and Riphath, and Togarmah.

Ashkenaz = Scandanavia
Riphath = Sarmatians
Togarmah = Turks
Medes = Media
Magog = India

Meshech = Basques
Tiras = Etruscans

But all scholarly evidence suggests that Aryan Indians came out of Central Asia. There's not only no reason to assume a migration from Scandinavia, but it directly contradicts what evidence is available.

Why would you interpret the passage that way and why would you assume any interpretation of the passage has a correspondence to historical events.

which Aryan Indians?
 
The identification of Riphath with the Sarmatians is reasonable because:
WTF? No it is not. The name Riphath is essentially lost in the dust bin of history.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riphath
According biblical scholar Donald Gowan, his identity is "completely unknown".

Insert random shit to explain something that is totally different (and not bothering with the Wiki link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rus'_people):
The Rus' (Slavic: Русь, Greek: Ῥῶς) were an early medieval group, who lived in a large area of what is now Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and other countries, and are the ancestors of modern Russians and other related Slavic peoples. The Rus' came from what is today Roslagen of modern day Sweden. According to both contemporary Byzantine and Islamic sources and the Primary Chronicle of Rus', compiled in about A.D 1113, the Rus' were Norsemen who had relocated "from over sea",

So we know that vikings did travel into that region later on so they might have done so earlier too
Sure, Nordic populations migrated into now Russian areas, which most certainly intersected with Sarmations. However, interaction is not the same thing as a population migrating into another area and morphing into a new cultural grouping. Either way, any dating that you are assuming is centuries off...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatians
The Sarmatians (Latin: Sarmatae, Sauromatae; Greek: Σαρμάται, Σαυρομάται) were a large Iranian confederation that existed in classical antiquity, flourishing from about the 5th century BC to the 4th century AD.

Originating in the central parts of the Eurasian Steppe, the Sarmatians started migrating westward around the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, coming to dominate the closely related Scythians by 200 BC. At their greatest reported extent, around 1st century AD, these tribes ranged from the Vistula River to the mouth of the Danube and eastward to the Volga, bordering the shores of the Black and Caspian seas as well as the Caucasus to the south. Their territory, which was known as Sarmatia to Greco-Roman ethnographers, corresponded to the western part of greater Scythia (mostly modern Ukraine and Southern Russia, also to a smaller extent north-eastern Balkans and around Moldova).
 
looks like you people have given up even pretending to engage in rational discussion so I guess I'm done here. Time to unsubscribe.
 
Back
Top Bottom