Questions for the religious

[kudzu]

The psalmist declared that God presides over an assembly of divine beings (Psa. 82:1). Who are they? What does it mean when those beings participate in God’s decisions (1 Kings 22:19–23)?

Why wasn’t Eve surprised when the serpent spoke to her?

Why are Yahweh and his Angel fused together in Jacob’s prayer (Gen. 48:15–16)?

How did descendants of the Nephilim (Gen. 6:4) survive the flood (Num. 13:33)? What are we to make of Peter and Jude’s belief in imprisoned spirits (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6)?

Why does Paul describe evil spirits in terms of geographical rulership (thrones, principalities, rulers, authorities)? Who are the “glorious ones” that even angels dare not rebuke (2 Pet. 2:10–11)?


The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Heiser, Michael S.
•
Lexham Press |2015

[Phantasmal]

The psalmist declared that God presides over an assembly of divine beings (Psa. 82:1). Who are they? What does it mean when those beings participate in God’s decisions (1 Kings 22:19–23)?

Why wasn’t Eve surprised when the serpent spoke to her?

Why are Yahweh and his Angel fused together in Jacob’s prayer (Gen. 48:15–16)?

How did descendants of the Nephilim (Gen. 6:4) survive the flood (Num. 13:33)? What are we to make of Peter and Jude’s belief in imprisoned spirits (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6)?

Why does Paul describe evil spirits in terms of geographical rulership (thrones, principalities, rulers, authorities)? Who are the “glorious ones” that even angels dare not rebuke (2 Pet. 2:10–11)?


The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Heiser, Michael S.
•
Lexham Press |2015
Thank you, another book for my reading list.

[kudzu]

Thank you, another book for my reading list.

Interesting questions, aren't they.. I have wondered about the Nephilim and how they survived the flood.

[Phantasmal]

He has written quite a few interesting sounding books, thanks. Have you read Karen Armstrong? Or Elaine Pagels?

[countryboy]

6483

[ThatOwlWoman]

Interesting questions, aren't they.. I have wondered about the Nephilim and how they survived the flood.

You might find this an interesting (and funny) read.

http://caw.org/content/?q=node/65

[kudzu]

You might find this an interesting (and funny) read.

http://caw.org/content/?q=node/65

LOL.. That's good.. "Other people" indeed.


Gen. 5:4 - Adam lived for eight hundred years after the birth of Seth and he became the father of sons and daughters.
5 In all, Adam lived for nine hundred and thirty years; then he died.

Hey, that's pretty good! Nine hundred and some odd years isn't bad for a man who's been told he's gonna die the next day!

[ThatOwlWoman]

LOL.. That's good.. "Other people" indeed.


Gen. 5:4 - Adam lived for eight hundred years after the birth of Seth and he became the father of sons and daughters.
5 In all, Adam lived for nine hundred and thirty years; then he died.

Hey, that's pretty good! Nine hundred and some odd years isn't bad for a man who's been told he's gonna die the next day!

Heheheheh -- really. That article has been around for quite a long time; he updated it to make it more relevant. He's the founder of Church of All Worlds, based on the religion in the sci-fi book "Stranger in a Strange Land" by Heinlein. We used to be neighbors with one of the co-founders, and have talked to Oberon in real life, although we never met in person. He is still writing and does occasional appearances at various pagan events. Sadly, Morning Glory passed away from cancer.

[Cypress]

He has written quite a few interesting sounding books, thanks. Have you read Karen Armstrong? Or Elaine Pagels?

Sorry to butt in on your dialog with Kudzu, but I am reading Karen Armstrong's "The Great Transformation: The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions"

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/mar/18/highereducation.news

It is outstanding, in my opinion!

Never understood how Noah built a boat big enough for every species of mammal, reptile, bird, insect, plant on the planet.
Probably because it never happened and the early Christians simply borrowed the myth of the great flood from the ancient Babylonians.

[Phantasmal]

Sorry to butt in on your dialog with Kudzu, but I am reading Karen Armstrong's "The Great Transformation: The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions"

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/mar/18/highereducation.news

It is outstanding, in my opinion!

Never understood how Noah built a boat big enough for every species of mammal, reptile, bird, insect, plant on the planet.
Probably because it never happened and the early Christians simply borrowed the myth of the great flood from the ancient Babylonians.
You aren’t butting in, you are always welcome. Her “A History of God” is another excellent read.

[kudzu]

He has written quite a few interesting sounding books, thanks. Have you read Karen Armstrong? Or Elaine Pagels?

I have read Pagels.. some. Haven't read Karen Armstrong.

[kudzu]

Sorry to butt in on your dialog with Kudzu, but I am reading Karen Armstrong's "The Great Transformation: The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions"

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/mar/18/highereducation.news

It is outstanding, in my opinion!

Never understood how Noah built a boat big enough for every species of mammal, reptile, bird, insect, plant on the planet.
Probably because it never happened and the early Christians simply borrowed the myth of the great flood from the ancient Babylonians.

Oh you're not butting in.. Welcome.

I too think they borrowed the myth from Sumer after the Babylonian exile. .. and I think the Gilgamesh myth is borrowed as well.. based on infrequent floods in the Euphrates River Basin... Noah was a petty king called Ziusudra.

[kudzu]

Heheheheh -- really. That article has been around for quite a long time; he updated it to make it more relevant. He's the founder of Church of All Worlds, based on the religion in the sci-fi book "Stranger in a Strange Land" by Heinlein. We used to be neighbors with one of the co-founders, and have talked to Oberon in real life, although we never met in person. He is still writing and does occasional appearances at various pagan events. Sadly, Morning Glory passed away from cancer.

How cool.. I think that the creation story of the Jews is only for the Jews.. tracing their ancestry to Adam.

[PostmodernProphet]

I think that the creation story of the Jews is only for the Jews.

is it maybe for God?....

[ThatOwlWoman]

How cool.. I think that the creation story of the Jews is only for the Jews.. tracing their ancestry to Adam.

Agree, just as all peoples have their own version of the creation story.

[kudzu]

is it maybe for God?....

The Hebrews didn't have any narratives or myths before their sojourn in Babylon... at least there is no evidence that they did.

Babylon has a very rich tradition of mythology etc.

Leviticus and Deuteronmy were written during and after the Babylon exile.. Genesis and Exodus were written later.

They went to a lot of effort thru their rituals and laws to maintain a separate identity from other people living in the Levant and Mesopotamia.

Further, the creation stories from Israel and Judah are not the same, but seem to have been combined around the time of King Omri.

[PostmodernProphet]

out of the five major religions of the world today three share the creation story of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam....
The Hindus believe the universe is eternal and was never created.....
The Buddhists believe the universe is a repeated cycle of births and deaths......that covers about 98% of religious people.......

[kudzu]

Agree, just as all peoples have their own version of the creation story.

Exactly.. Amerindians, Hawaiians, Chinese etc all have creation stories.

[PostmodernProphet]

The Hebrews didn't have any narratives or myths before their sojourn in Babylon...

I'm sorry you don't understand........when we say you are wrong we don't really mean you should continue to post about things you are wrong about......the Hebrews had narratives about creation even before they were Hebrews.......

[evince]

out of the five major religions of the world today three share the creation story of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam....
The Hindus believe the universe is eternal and was never created.....
The Buddhists believe the universe is a repeated cycle of births and deaths......that covers about 98% of religious people.......

have you ever taken a world religions class?

[Leonthecat]

The psalmist declared that God presides over an assembly of divine beings (Psa. 82:1). Who are they? What does it mean when those beings participate in God’s decisions (1 Kings 22:19–23)?

Why wasn’t Eve surprised when the serpent spoke to her?

Why are Yahweh and his Angel fused together in Jacob’s prayer (Gen. 48:15–16)?

How did descendants of the Nephilim (Gen. 6:4) survive the flood (Num. 13:33)? What are we to make of Peter and Jude’s belief in imprisoned spirits (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6)?

Why does Paul describe evil spirits in terms of geographical rulership (thrones, principalities, rulers, authorities)? Who are the “glorious ones” that even angels dare not rebuke (2 Pet. 2:10–11)?


The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Heiser, Michael S.
•
Lexham Press |2015

You may as well be asking how did Redridinghood's grandmother survive being devoured by the wolf.
What you question here are fantasy stories with no rational basis. Yet you are looking for rationality within them.
An exercise in futility.

[kudzu]

I'm sorry you don't understand........when we say you are wrong we don't really mean you should continue to post about things you are wrong about......the Hebrews had narratives about creation even before they were Hebrews.......

They have found thousands of clay tablets in Dilmun that are a thousand years older and tell the story of Gilgamesh..

Then there are the much older tablets at Ras Shamra.. The Hebrews borrowed Psalms from them.

[kudzu]

They have found thousands of clay tablets in Dilmun that are a thousand years older and tell the story of Gilgamesh..

Then there are the much older tablets at Ras Shamra.. The Hebrews borrowed Psalms from them.


They probably shared the Canaanite creation story.. since they originally were landless Canaanites.

Canaanite Creation Story (also known as Phoenician/Syrian Creation ...



www.academia.edu/.../Canaanite_Creation_Story_also_known_as_Phoenician_ Syrian...



Canaanite Creation Story (also known as Phoenician/Syrian Creation story) The entire world was once only Arapel (cloudy darkness) and Baad (wind). Baad then went onto produce Ruach, another type of wind, which instead of mingling with the darkness, blew it away to bring forth light. However, no field was yet formed, ...

[kudzu]

You may as well be asking how did Redridinghood's grandmother survive being devoured by the wolf.
What you question here are fantasy stories with no rational basis. Yet you are looking for rationality within them.
An exercise in futility.

I think the evolution of beliefs is fascinating.

[Leonthecat]

I think the evolution of beliefs is fascinating.

So is mental illness.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvDDZSAPeIA good ole billionaire pat robertson and the cbn dynasty.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

Thank you, another book for my reading list.

a must read. a comedy of religion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job:_A_Comedy_of_Justice

By robert heinlein.

[Frank Apisa]

I hope everyone realizes and acknowledges that considering whether the god of the Bible exists or is just a mythological character...

...is different from considering whether or not there are gods involved in the REALITY of existence. They are two different questions being considered.

The god of the Bible may be pure mythology...a pretend being interspersed in this book which seems primarily to be a rather self-serving history of the early Hebrew people. That, however, would have no impact on whether or not at least one "god" exists.

Said another way: The true nature of the REALITY of existence may or may not contain a being (beings) which transcends what we humans think of as "the reality."

We humans ought really to acknowledge our place in existence...which is: WE DO NOT KNOW HOW IMPORTANT OR UNIMPORTANT WE ARE.

We humans may be the ONLY living things anywhere.

On the other hand, what we humans call "the universe" MAY be teeming with other life.

We do not know.

We also do not know if any gods exist.

That is something we ought to keep in mind during discussions such as this.

Just sayin'!

[Phantasmal]

a must read. a comedy of religion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job:_A_Comedy_of_Justice

By robert heinlein.
I love Heinlein, thanks

[Leonthecat]

Tell me with a straight face that this guy is sane.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBejyHI6qr0

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

read this, i dare ya.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Source_(novel)

[ThatOwlWoman]

They have found thousands of clay tablets in Dilmun that are a thousand years older and tell the story of Gilgamesh..

Then there are the much older tablets at Ras Shamra.. The Hebrews borrowed Psalms from them.


They probably shared the Canaanite creation story.. since they originally were landless Canaanites.

Canaanite Creation Story (also known as Phoenician/Syrian Creation ...



www.academia.edu/.../Canaanite_Creation_Story_also_known_as_Phoenician_ Syrian...



Canaanite Creation Story (also known as Phoenician/Syrian Creation story) The entire world was once only Arapel (cloudy darkness) and Baad (wind). Baad then went onto produce Ruach, another type of wind, which instead of mingling with the darkness, blew it away to bring forth light. However, no field was yet formed, ...

I got "page not found" error from your link.

[kudzu]

read this, i dare ya.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Source_(novel)

I think I'll read it again......

[ThatOwlWoman]

read this, i dare ya.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Source_(novel)

Excellent novel!
And so is the Heinlein one you mentioned earlier.

[kudzu]

The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the ...



https://www.amazon.com/Unseen-Realm-Recovering-Supernatural-Worldview/.../157...






The thesis of "The Unseen World" is that the divine council forms one of, if not the major thread uniting biblical theology. God's council in the Old Testament is a host of created divine beings (like angels) surrounding God. Some of these beings went bad, and they sinned with human women in Genesis 6:1-4

[kudzu]

I got "page not found" error from your link.

Sorry about that.

This will work.

http://www.academia.edu/24246800/Canaanite_Creation_Story_also_known_as_Phoenician_ Syrian_Creation_story

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

This is the worst charlatan in organized fake religion today. He's a scary guy. One day he will become the next james baker.

http://www.ign.com/boards/threads/hurricane-harvey-has-been-terrible-but-the-city-on-joel-osteen-has-been-great.455019029/

[PostmodernProphet]

They have found thousands of clay tablets in Dilmun that are a thousand years older and tell the story of Gilgamesh..

Then there are the much older tablets at Ras Shamra.. The Hebrews borrowed Psalms from them.

/yawn.....sorry.....not true.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Canaanite Creation Story (also known as Phoenician/Syrian Creation story) The entire world was once only Arapel (cloudy darkness) and Baad (wind). Baad then went onto produce Ruach, another type of wind, which instead of mingling with the darkness, blew it away to bring forth light. However, no field was yet formed, ...

well I can see already why you think its identical to Genesis 1.....lol.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Sorry about that.

This will work.

http://www.academia.edu/24246800/Canaanite_Creation_Story_also_known_as_Phoenician_ Syrian_Creation_story


Yamm, upon hearing this is enraged. All fled before his fury but Ba-al, who with the help of his sister Anat 'goddess of war( defeated Yamm and his allies
Tannin (dragon of the sea) and Loran (the sea serpent with seven heads). The gods then built a magnificent house for Ba-al, so that he could rest and provide abundant rain for the earth.
dude.....you think the Hebrews copied that in Genesis 1?......should we take this as your admission you've never read Genesis 1?......

[Irish Exit]

The psalmist declared that God presides over an assembly of divine beings (Psa. 82:1). Who are they? What does it mean when those beings participate in God’s decisions (1 Kings 22:19–23)?

Why wasn’t Eve surprised when the serpent spoke to her?

Why are Yahweh and his Angel fused together in Jacob’s prayer (Gen. 48:15–16)?

How did descendants of the Nephilim (Gen. 6:4) survive the flood (Num. 13:33)? What are we to make of Peter and Jude’s belief in imprisoned spirits (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6)?

Why does Paul describe evil spirits in terms of geographical rulership (thrones, principalities, rulers, authorities)? Who are the “glorious ones” that even angels dare not rebuke (2 Pet. 2:10–11)?


The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Heiser, Michael S.
•
Lexham Press |2015

Not all religious people are Christians.

[Cypress]

Oh you're not butting in.. Welcome.

I too think they borrowed the myth from Sumer after the Babylonian exile. .. and I think the Gilgamesh myth is borrowed as well.. based on infrequent floods in the Euphrates River Basin... Noah was a petty king called Ziusudra.

Good intel.

Thank you for providing some much needed intellectual firepower and scholarly knowledge to this board. You would be actually surprised how much of this board is dedicated to racism, sexism, libel, and unadulterated Trump worship.

I watched some lectures recently on the Sumerians, and it gave me some much needed insight on how under-rated this civilization was on the road to human development. I appreciated your two cents, as well!

[Phantasmal]

Good intel.

Thank you for providing some much needed intellectual firepower and scholarly knowledge to this board. You would be actually surprised how much of this board is dedicated to racism, sexism, libel, and unadulterated Trump worship.

I watched some lectures recently on the Sumerians, and it gave me some much needed insight on how under-rated this civilization was on the road to human development. I appreciated your two cents, as well!
If you think how young archeology is, we have only just begun to discover our past. It is fascinating to me.

[Cypress]

If you think how young archeology is, we have only just begun to discover our past. It is fascinating to me.

You are right. It is incredible...and adventure of discovery really....

The destruction that is occurring in Iraq and Syria is especially tragic, given it place as the birthplace of civilization.

I have always thought that the worst day as an archeologist is better than the best day as an accountant....

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

He has written quite a few interesting sounding books, thanks. Have you read Karen Armstrong? Or Elaine Pagels?

No. Thanks for the tip. I'll check em out. lutz (definition 3 UD).

[Frank Apisa]

If you think how young archeology is, we have only just begun to discover our past. It is fascinating to me.

Absolutely. I notice several articles lately questioning whether there may have been civilization before our most recent evolution. The age of the universe is incredible...and no telling what we still have to learn about our history...and the possible histories of other civilizations that may have existed here...and nearby.

[Frank Apisa]

You are right. It is incredible...and adventure of discovery really....

The destruction that is occurring in Iraq and Syria is especially tragic, given it place as the birthplace of civilization.

I have always thought that the worst day as an archeologist is better than the best day as an accountant....

I was fortunate enough to visit two archeological sites during my lifetime. One was in southern England...at a site where they were excavating artifacts from a very primitive society that included stone tools...and the other was a more recent (at that time) excavation of some Egyptian influence area of Pompeii.

Just got to watch people at work at both those sites for a short while...and felt a thrill that I can feel again while typing these words.

[Ralph]

The psalmist declared that God presides over an assembly of divine beings (Psa. 82:1). Who are they? What does it mean when those beings participate in God’s decisions (1 Kings 22:19–23)?

Why wasn’t Eve surprised when the serpent spoke to her?

Why are Yahweh and his Angel fused together in Jacob’s prayer (Gen. 48:15–16)?

How did descendants of the Nephilim (Gen. 6:4) survive the flood (Num. 13:33)? What are we to make of Peter and Jude’s belief in imprisoned spirits (2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6)?

Why does Paul describe evil spirits in terms of geographical rulership (thrones, principalities, rulers, authorities)? Who are the “glorious ones” that even angels dare not rebuke (2 Pet. 2:10–11)?


The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible

by Heiser, Michael S.
•
Lexham Press |2015

Ps. 82:1? Divine beings? Read the entire Passage presented in Psalm 82......the author is speaking of the men who sit in judgment of the nation of Israel as he defines this tribe of judges/priests as "g"ods with a little "g".

All that you have presented requires nothing but maintaining the text's integrity in relation to context, content and subject matter.....Common Sense.

[kudzu]

Ps. 82:1? Divine beings? Read the entire Passage presented in Psalm 82......the author is speaking of the men who sit in judgment of the nation of Israel as he defines this tribe of judges/priests as "g"ods with a little "g".

All that you have presented requires nothing but maintaining the text's integrity in relation to context, content and subject matter.....Common Sense.

Psalm 82 King James Version (KJV)

82 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

(So much of psalms was Ugarit poetry.....)

[Ralph]

Psalm 82 King James Version (KJV)

82 God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.

2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.

3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.

4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked.

5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.

6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.

8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

(So much of psalms was Ugarit poetry.....)

Again....read it, comprehend it. Anytime gods with a little "g" is used the scriptures are speaking of authorities less than God..i.e., MEN.... such as the Royal Priesthood or when the Israelites were sinning and taking in marriage the daughters of those who were pagan's and worshiped many "g"ods.....false idols etc., some of the men began worshiping the gods with a little "g" of their wives....false gods. (Judges 3:5-7).

Again as was said....just a little common sense goes a long way in RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH. The scriptures will interpret themselves if allowed. The truth is found in scripture...there is only ONE GOD. "There is one body and one spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one LORD, one faith, one baptism; ONE GOD AND FATHER OF ALL, WHO IS ABOVE ALL, AND THROUGH ALL, AND IN YOU ALL." --Eph. 4:4-6

Read line 8 again......the authority that was the subject of this verse was Father God the Judge of the Word....with a "G"od, not false pagan "g"ods or men in authority.

When you take away the textual integrity of any subject matter you can cherry pick your own personal interpretation. A practice that is forbidden to any righteous Christian. When a Christian speaks or attempts to teach another they are commanded to speak doctrinal matters from the Oracles of God....the Holy Scriptures (1 Peter 4:11). Why? Private interpretation is forbidden as the prophets have already interpreted the scriptures by divine inspiration, ".....knowing this first, no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man; but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit..." -- 2 Peter 1:12-21

The scriptures are commanded to be used to teach, not the personal opinion of men, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." -- 2 Tim. 3:16-17

[kudzu]

Again....read it, comprehend it. Anytime gods with a little "g" is used the scriptures are speaking of authorities less than God..i.e., MEN.... such as the Royal Priesthood or when the Israelites were sinning and taking in marriage the daughters of those who were pagan's and worshiped many "g"ods.....false idols etc., some of the men began worshiping the gods with a little "g" of their wives....false gods. (Judges 3:5-7).

Again as was said....just a little common sense goes a long way in RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH. The scriptures will interpret themselves if allowed. The truth is found in scripture...there is only ONE GOD. "There is one body and one spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one LORD, one faith, one baptism; ONE GOD AND FATHER OF ALL, WHO IS ABOVE ALL, AND THROUGH ALL, AND IN YOU ALL." --Eph. 4:4-6

Read line 8 again......the authority that was the subject of this verse was Father God the Judge of the Word....with a "G"od, not false pagan "g"ods or men in authority.


I don't think so.. Most of Psalms are from the Ugaratic poetry.. north coast Canaanites from Ras Shamra.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

I don't think so.. Most of Psalms are from the Ugaratic poetry.. north coast Canaanites from Ras Shamra.

I have no idea what you mean but I agree 100%.

[kudzu]

I have no idea what you mean but I agree 100%.

The Hebrews borrowed the poetry of the Ugarit for Psalms which was much older.

[ThatOwlWoman]

If you think how young archeology is, we have only just begun to discover our past. It is fascinating to me.

Isn't it? I was going to minor in biology since I already have most of the required credits. But anthropology is calling my name. Our University has both a major and a minor in that subject.

ETA: And they are starting a "body farm"!
http://www.nmu.edu/mc/node/18?articleID=173795&&display=all

[PostmodernProphet]

I don't think so.. Most of Psalms are from the Ugaratic poetry.. north coast Canaanites from Ras Shamra.

uh.....as I recall you documented one sentence that was vaguely similar........that does not equate to "Most of the Psalms"......

[PostmodernProphet]

The Hebrews borrowed the poetry of the Ugarit for Psalms which was much older.

you have a vivid imagination, but it is based on ignorance.......

[kudzu]

uh.....as I recall you documented one sentence that was vaguely similar........that does not equate to "Most of the Psalms"......

Specifically Psalm 82.. but others as well.


Third, the fact that the psalm speaks of rendering justice to the poor and needy
does not argue for human judges, since the divine council terminology from Sumer,
Akkad, and Ugarit "referred originally to the political organ of a primitive democracy, a
phenomenon which can be discerned in the pantheons of various non-Israelite cultures." 8

Lastly, verses such as Isaiah 24:21 ("In that day the LORD will punish the powers
in the heavens above and the kings on the earth below") clearly distinguish between the
divine beings of Yahweh's host and earthly rulers. What this means is that the Hebrew
Bible had a definite way of distinguishing the divine beings (the powers - plural - in
heaven) from humans. It makes little sense to make Psalm 82 unclear if such a contrast
between gods and humans were the goal. Why confuse people by using elohim if you
wanted to refer to humans?


https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-KK1yU8Z4pc8MfGma/Divine%20Council%20101%20[Psalm%2082%20Overview]_djvu.txt

[hypGnosis]

you have a vivid imagination, but it is based on ignorance.......

In regard to the topic-at-hand, could there be a more egregious example of psychological projection ...

The pot calls the kettle black.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

Isn't it? I was going to minor in biology since I already have most of the required credits. But anthropology is calling my name. Our University has both a major and a minor in that subject.

ETA: And they are starting a "body farm"!
http://www.nmu.edu/mc/node/18?articleID=173795&&display=all

:eek2:

[kudzu]

In regard to the topic-at-hand, could there be a more egregious example of psychological projection ...

The pot calls the kettle black.

Fundamentalists tend to think the Bible is history and science... and that it is inerrant. But the texts evolved over a thousand years (or more).. borrowing from older, surrounding cultures.

Surely that means mankind has always needed God or gods.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

you have a vivid imagination, but it is based on ignorance.......

Yours is based on voodoo religion. which you plagiarized from africa

[kudzu]

you have a vivid imagination, but it is based on ignorance.......




The Hebrews were just Cannaanites who were landless and on the fringes of society. They were un affiliated with any of the established Canaanite cities in Egypt and Palestine.

The north coast Canaanites gradually moved inland to the hill country (of Canaan) as the Sea People arrived.. You have heard of the Phoenicians, haven't you?

[PostmodernProphet]

Why confuse people by using elohim

because YHWH was not a name that God had given to man prior to Moses.....

[PostmodernProphet]

In regard to the topic-at-hand, could there be a more egregious example of psychological projection ...

The pot calls the kettle black.
whatever.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Yours is based on voodoo religion. which you plagiarized from africa

can't be.....I stuck a pin in your eye and you're still here.......

[PostmodernProphet]

The Hebrews were just Cannaanites who were landless and on the fringes of society. They were un affiliated with any of the established Canaanite cities in Egypt and Palestine.

The north coast Canaanites gradually moved inland to the hill country (of Canaan) as the Sea People arrived.. You have heard of the Phoenicians, haven't you?

yes.....but the Israelites had more trouble with the Philistines......the Phoenicians were based farther north.......

[hypGnosis]

because YHWH was not a name that God had given to man prior to Moses.....

I witness a striking similarity to people ardently discussing something like details of a plotline in "Harry Potter and the ..."

Harry Potter is still a fantasy, no matter how carefully the tale(s) is constructed ... as is the myth-based sacred screed of Christianity.
.

[kudzu]

yes.....but the Israelites had more trouble with the Philistines......the Phoenicians were based farther north.......

The Philistines were five city-states of the southwestern Levant: Gaza, Ashkelon, Ashdod, Ekron, and Gath, from Wadi Gaza in the south to the Yarqon River in the north.

Phoenicia - Ancient History Encyclopedia



https://www.ancient.eu/phoenicia/



Phoenicia was an ancient civilization composed of independent city-states located along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea stretching through what is now Syria, Lebanon and northern Israel.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

can't be.....I stuck a pin in your eye and you're still here.......

get back in your cage, now!

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

yes.....but the Israelites had more trouble with the Philistines......the Phoenicians were based farther north.......

not anymore. there's a mcdonalds there now.

[Phantasmal]

because YHWH was not a name that God had given to man prior to Moses.....
Incorrect, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob all knew him as Yahweh. Everywhere in the Old Testament that it says, the Lord = Jehovah = Yahweh

Genesis 22:14 King James Version (KJV)14 And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the Lord it shall be seen.

http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=1051

[Phantasmal]

get back in your cage, now!
Nice, I see you got your help!

[PostmodernProphet]

I witness a striking similarity to people ardently discussing something like details of a plotline in "Harry Potter and the ..."

.

perhaps that's because you are a fool.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Incorrect, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob all knew him as Yahweh.

no.....that name was given to Moses when he asked who he should say sent him......

[kudzu]

no.....that name was given to Moses when he asked who he should say sent him......


And God spoke to Moses and said to him


I am Yahweh. And I showed to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as El-Shaddai, and by my name, 'Yahweh', I did not make myself known to them.

How can this be? Abraham hears/says Yahweh in Genesis 15:2,15:7,15:8,18:14,22:14, and his servants/relatives do in ch 24.

Isaac and Jacob use "Yahweh" less frequently, only in Gen 27:20 and 27:27.

Why does God say he didn't reveal his name "Yahweh", when he obviously glaringly did so in Genesis, many, many times?

[PostmodernProphet]

And God spoke to Moses and said to him


I am Yahweh. And I showed to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as El-Shaddai, and by my name, 'Yahweh', I did not make myself known to them.

How can this be? Abraham hears/says Yahweh in Genesis 15:2,15:7,15:8,18:14,22:14, and his servants/relatives do in ch 24.

Isaac and Jacob use "Yahweh" less frequently, only in Gen 27:20 and 27:27.

Why does God say he didn't reveal his name "Yahweh", when he obviously glaringly did so in Genesis, many, many times?
obviously you are mistaken......as usual......

[Ralph]

I don't think so.. Most of Psalms are from the Ugaratic poetry.. north coast Canaanites from Ras Shamra.

What's written is what's written......personal opinion has nothing to do with the actual text which reads the same for everyone who wishes to read it. As demonstrated, the scriptures self interpret if allowed.

When studying any subject found in scripture, "THE WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD....." should and must be considered when searching for scriptural truth (Acts 20:7). All passages must be studied and presented in the context recorded (not cherry picked from the entire passage). You must present evidence (other than just personal opinion) where that particular subject matter is addressed elsewhere in scripture (Book, Chapter and Verse). It helps to have a Greek and Hebrew dictionary loaded into your desktop in order to properly translate any word and its original root meaning and use.

[Phantasmal]

no.....that name was given to Moses when he asked who he should say sent him......
No, your third rate education needs updating.

[Phantasmal]

And God spoke to Moses and said to him


I am Yahweh. And I showed to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as El-Shaddai, and by my name, 'Yahweh', I did not make myself known to them.

How can this be? Abraham hears/says Yahweh in Genesis 15:2,15:7,15:8,18:14,22:14, and his servants/relatives do in ch 24.

Isaac and Jacob use "Yahweh" less frequently, only in Gen 27:20 and 27:27.

Why does God say he didn't reveal his name "Yahweh", when he obviously glaringly did so in Genesis, many, many times?
Poor PMP his Cracker Jack Trump university divinity degree fails him, once, again.

[PostmodernProphet]

No, your third rate education needs updating.

sorry you feel its over rated.....but it still beats yours.....


13 Moses said to God, “Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ Then what shall I tell them?”

14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am.[c] This is what you are to say to the Israelites: ‘I am has sent me to you.’”

15 God also said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites, ‘The Lord,[d] the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.’

“This is my name forever,
the name you shall call me
from generation to generation.

[PostmodernProphet]

Poor PMP his Cracker Jack Trump university divinity degree fails him, once, again.

uh, Rana.....I win, you lose......sorry.....you lie about my degree and you are wrong about scripture......

[kudzu]

What's written is what's written......personal opinion has nothing to do with the actual text which reads the same for everyone who wishes to read it. As demonstrated, the scriptures self interpret if allowed.

When studying any subject found in scripture, "THE WHOLE COUNSEL FO GOD....." should and must be considered when searching for scriptural truth (Acts 20:7). All passages must be studied and presented in the context recorded (not cherry picked from the entire passage). You must present evidence (other than just personal opinion) where that particular subject matter is addressed elsewhere in scripture (Book, Chapter and Verse). It helps to have a Greek and Hebrew dictionary loaded into your desktop in order to properly translate any word and its original root meaning and use.

I posted other passages earlier.

[PostmodernProphet]

I posted other passages earlier.

you were incorrect then and now.....

[Guno צְבִי]

What's written is what's written......personal opinion has nothing to do with the actual text which reads the same for everyone who wishes to read it. As demonstrated, the scriptures self interpret if allowed.

When studying any subject found in scripture, "THE WHOLE COUNSEL FO GOD....." should and must be considered when searching for scriptural truth (Acts 20:7). All passages must be studied and presented in the context recorded (not cherry picked from the entire passage). You must present evidence (other than just personal opinion) where that particular subject matter is addressed elsewhere in scripture (Book, Chapter and Verse). It helps to have a Greek and Hebrew dictionary loaded into your desktop in order to properly translate any word and its original root meaning and use.

So you read and understand biblical hebrew? Or the goyim mistranslation of Tanakh

[kudzu]

you were incorrect then and now.....

The consensus within modern critical scholarship sees within these Books two or more earlier, written sources, woven together, redacted, and amended over several centuries. The original sources can be distinguished, or at least hypothesized, by differences in vocabulary, tone, ideology, and historical detail. Such obvious inconsistencies and variations in the Bible often puzzle close readers ..

The two most popular names used for God in the Pentateuch – Jehovah (YHVH) and Elohim – were among the first and most consequential differences to be explored and mapped by source critics. The obvious discrepancy between the use of the name YHVH by the Patriarchs (e.g. Gen.15.7, 28.13) and the revelation of the divine name to Moses centuries later ostensibly for the first time ..


https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1461/why-does-god-say-he-only-revealed-his-name-yahweh-to-moses

[ThatOwlWoman]

Poor PMP his Cracker Jack Trump university divinity degree fails him, once, again.

LMAO!!

You know, if all that stuff some of these guys espouse is valid, why does their god pick such shitty messengers?

Pick your messenger:

https://i.imgur.com/bTIoGrr.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/Eaa4wye.jpg

or this one:

https://i.imgur.com/rKYFX1d.jpg
(above image courtesy of https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2015/01/13/koran-burning-florida-pastor-doubles-as-fry-cook/)

[Truth Detector]

No, your third rate education needs updating.


Poor PMP his Cracker Jack Trump university divinity degree fails him, once, again.

Well that didn't take long; from civil to incivility in three or four posts. :rofl2:

[PostmodernProphet]

The consensus within modern critical scholarship sees within these Books two or more earlier, written sources, woven together, redacted, and amended over several centuries. The original sources can be distinguished, or at least hypothesized, by differences in vocabulary, tone, ideology, and historical detail. Such obvious inconsistencies and variations in the Bible often puzzle close readers ..

The two most popular names used for God in the Pentateuch – Jehovah (YHVH) and Elohim – were among the first and most consequential differences to be explored and mapped by source critics. The obvious discrepancy between the use of the name YHVH by the Patriarchs (e.g. Gen.15.7, 28.13) and the revelation of the divine name to Moses centuries later ostensibly for the first time ..


https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1461/why-does-god-say-he-only-revealed-his-name-yahweh-to-moses

sorry dude, the written text of Genesis is an amalgamation of oral history, poetry, and fable.......it was gathered from many sources including pre and post Moses Israel......that explains the intertwining of the two names......what I don't understand is why you are aware of this and even provide proof, but you fail to see the logical consequences.......the passages in which YHWH is used are taken from a post-Moses source......

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

Nice, I see you got your help!

thanks to you, darling.

[Guno צְבִי]

A minister, maybe sincere, and maybe simply mentally unstable or delusional can hide in the ministry much better than he can hide at IBM. A minister that is prolific, charismatic while also dictatorial and delusional looks spiritual and obedient. The quirkiness is mistaken for spirituality and obedience to God. They have the ability to be deceivingly compassionate one minute and intensely angry at anything and everyone the next. They don’t like to be contradicted, corrected nor have their mental processes questioned. They NEVER take personality tests! How is it that normal human beings, who have accurate perceptions about the mental instability of some at work, then lose that instinct at church? The quirkiness at work becomes the spiritually desirable trait in church!

thousands of years ago that has been the basis for so much religious zealotry is simply better understood in the context of mental illness? We always say if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and swims like a duck, there is a good chance we may be dealing with a duck. When it comes to religion however we change our perceptions. If it walks like a narcissist, if it talks like a Para or schizophrenic and if it has all the symptoms of temporal lobe epilepsy, it must be a man of God!

[kudzu]

A minister, maybe sincere, and maybe simply mentally unstable or delusional can hide in the ministry much better than he can hide at IBM. A minister that is prolific, charismatic while also dictatorial and delusional looks spiritual and obedient. The quirkiness is mistaken for spirituality and obedience to God. They have the ability to be deceivingly compassionate one minute and intensely angry at anything and everyone the next. They don’t like to be contradicted, corrected nor have their mental processes questioned. They NEVER take personality tests! How is it that normal human beings, who have accurate perceptions about the mental instability of some at work, then lose that instinct at church? The quirkiness at work becomes the spiritually desirable trait in church!

thousands of years ago that has been the basis for so much religious zealotry is simply better understood in the context of mental illness? We always say if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and swims like a duck, there is a good chance we may be dealing with a duck. When it comes to religion however we change our perceptions. If it walks like a narcissist, if it talks like a Para or schizophrenic and if it has all the symptoms of temporal lobe epilepsy, it must be a man of God!

Explains a lot.. Thanks.

[Ralph]

I posted other passages earlier.

And I presented the reason that its "worthless" to debate someone that parrots the OPINION of others in relation to the actual text, context and subject matter of Book, Chapter and Verse. Why bother with more of your parroted shopping list when the first was easily "dispatched" with just a little documentation from scripture applied with common sense? Truth: This is a common practice of seculars attempting to discredit the authority of the Holy Bible....they present a shopping list in the hope of wasting the time of others. I simply debunk and refute the first....establishing the validity of the entirety as being just as worthless. ;) When you are incapable of defending your first argument because you parroted it from another.....where's the BEEF?

One more as an example? The serpent and Eve for instance? Why was Eve not surprised to hear the snake communicate with her? Search the Scriptures in relation to that subject matter. The Serpent: Sure was not God....incarnate in the form of Jesus....or, Father God Himself. How do we know this? The scriptures enlighten us, God cannot be tempted nor tempt others with EVIL (James 1:13) So who was this lying creature that tempted Eve in the garden? The scriptures again enlighten anyone that wishes to know this revelation. "The great dragon (the ultimate form of a serpent) was thrown down, the old serpent (see? Self interpreting, requiring NO OPINION), HE WHO IS CALLED SATAN AND THE DEVIL...THE DECEIVER OF THE WHOLE WORLD. He was thrown down to earth, and his angels were thrown with him." -- Rev. 12:9

Was Eve surprised when the old serpent communicated with her in the form of a lie? Of course not...why? "You are of your father, the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the BEGINNING, and does not stand in truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie he speaks on HIS OWN (inferring that God does not whisper in his ear in order to tempt mankind); for he is a liar and the father of it." -- John 8:44

[ThatOwlWoman]

And I presented the reason that its "worthless" to debate someone that parrots the OPINION of others in relation to the actual text, context and subject matter of Book, Chapter and Verse. Why bother with more of your parroted shopping list when the first was easily "dispatched" with just a little documentation from scripture applied with common sense? Truth: This is a common practice of seculars attempting to discredit the authority of the Holy Bible....they present a shopping list in the hope of wasting the time of others. I simply debunk and refute the first....establishing the validity of the entirety as being just as worthless. ;) When you are incapable of defending your first argument because you parroted it from another.....where's the BEEF?

Indeed. We've seen in the discussions involving evolution vs "intelligent design" that the religious are adept at finding and adopting pseudo-scientists who then proceed to use the Bible to "prove" that ID is the correct explanation and that evolution is just bunkum. The same happens when anything else in the Bible is questioned. Verses are chosen, then the faithful quotes his/her pastor and/or other human source as to how it should be properly considered. See the discussion regarding the Pope and atheists for one example of this phenomenon.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

He has written quite a few interesting sounding books, thanks. Have you read Karen Armstrong? Or Elaine Pagels?

I've read about them on wikipedia. I know what they wrote about because I went to catholic school the first seven years of my life. I also have read a lot of "knights templar "novels and sniffed the fumes at the oracle of delphi.

Jesus was mortal, he married mary magdalene, his brother was james, and they protect his ancestors from the pope. Also, they know the 3rd secret of the catholic popes.

[Ralph]

Indeed. We've seen in the discussions involving evolution vs "intelligent design" that the religious are adept at finding and adopting pseudo-scientists who then proceed to use the Bible to "prove" that ID is the correct explanation and that evolution is just bunkum. The same happens when anything else in the Bible is questioned. Verses are chosen, then the faithful quotes his/her pastor and/or other human source as to how it should be properly considered. See the discussion regarding the Pope and atheists for one example of this phenomenon.

I find it very amusing....when someone...anyone attempts to use the Bible in order to refute the Bible. When its demonstrated that the actual text of the Bible does not come close to relaying the message pretended to be presented by the questioner.....there is a sudden 180 degree about facE, once again the Bible cannot defend itself because of the content actually located within it? Really? Sounds kind'a secular and circular to me. First the Bible is the best thing since sliced bread when you think you have found a GOTCHA! But worthless to be used IN ITS OWN DEFENSE? :laugh:

When anyone is attempting to defend Christian Doctrine.....is there a more authoritarian source than the Holy Scriptures....as that is were all of Christianity is founded, THE WORD? Priceless amusement. What you are attempting is just as logical as saying, "I wish to debate you on the merits of the US Constitution in relation to the US rule of law......but you cannot use the Constitution to prove your argument. Funny as hell...oophs.

[ThatOwlWoman]

I find it very amusing....when someone...anyone attempts to use the Bible in order to refute the Bible. When its demonstrated that the actual text of the Bible does not come close to relaying the message pretended to be presented by the questioner.....there is a sudden 180 degree about fact, once again the Bible cannot defend itself because of the content actually located within it? Really? Sounds kind'a secular and circular to me. First the Bible is the best thing since sliced bread when you think you have found a GOTCHA! But worthless to be used IN ITS OWN DEFENSE? :laugh:

You misunderstood my point. Let's reiterate. Unless the person using the Bible to prove some point can read the original languages in which it was written, they are merely parroting some other human's interpretation of what was written. To make it even more confusing, some of the faithful use the opinions of their own pastor or a non-Bible author to explain chosen passages. One good example of this was the recent discussion on the meaning of Matthew 25:31-46. The argument was that these verses relate Jesus describing how you get to Heaven -- good works (feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, visiting the imprisoned, etc.). The counter argument was that it doesn't say that at all, and you're only saved by faith (which Jesus does not mention at all in these passages). So then the interpretation by others gets hauled out to "prove" that you're not saved by good works despite Jesus's own words saying just that.

See?

[PostmodernProphet]

A minister, maybe sincere, and maybe simply mentally unstable or delusional can hide in the ministry much better than he can hide at IBM. A minister that is prolific, charismatic while also dictatorial and delusional looks spiritual and obedient. The quirkiness is mistaken for spirituality and obedience to God. They have the ability to be deceivingly compassionate one minute and intensely angry at anything and everyone the next. They don’t like to be contradicted, corrected nor have their mental processes questioned. They NEVER take personality tests! How is it that normal human beings, who have accurate perceptions about the mental instability of some at work, then lose that instinct at church? The quirkiness at work becomes the spiritually desirable trait in church!

thousands of years ago that has been the basis for so much religious zealotry is simply better understood in the context of mental illness? We always say if it walks like a duck, looks like a duck and swims like a duck, there is a good chance we may be dealing with a duck. When it comes to religion however we change our perceptions. If it walks like a narcissist, if it talks like a Para or schizophrenic and if it has all the symptoms of temporal lobe epilepsy, it must be a man of God!

what do you say when someone walks like an uneducated, bigoted rabbi?........

[Guno צְבִי]

I find it very amusing....when someone...anyone attempts to use the Bible in order to refute the Bible. When its demonstrated that the actual text of the Bible does not come close to relaying the message pretended to be presented by the questioner.....there is a sudden 180 degree about facE, once again the Bible cannot defend itself because of the content actually located within it? Really? Sounds kind'a secular and circular to me. First the Bible is the best thing since sliced bread when you think you have found a GOTCHA! But worthless to be used IN ITS OWN DEFENSE? :laugh:

When anyone is attempting to defend Christian Doctrine.....is there a more authoritarian source than the Holy Scriptures....as that is were all of Christianity is founded, THE WORD? Priceless amusement. What you are attempting is just as logical as saying, "I wish to debate you on the merits of the US Constitution in relation to the US rule of law......but you cannot use the Constitution to prove your argument. Funny as hell...oophs.

Same with trying to use your buy bull to prove your buy bull, must be tough when someone shows it's contradictions and mistranslations, stange the jesus story is not found in any contemporary time of jesus except in that book a few hundred years later

The goyim church even tried to insert The forged Josephus Testimonium to try to validate the jesus story

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/7437


JESUS CHRIST - NO HISTORICAL EVIDENCE

IN ONE OF THE MOST CAREFULLY DOCUMENTED PERIODS OF ROMAN AND ANCIENT HISTORY


When discussing the alleged existence of Jesus Christ, one piece of "evidence" that frequently gets mentioned is the account of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from 37 to 100 C.E. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews there is a notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavium."

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (Whitson, 379).

This brief piece of evidence which supposedly contributed the best "proof" of Jesus's existence has actually been proven to be a fraud. It has been demonstrated continuously over the centuries that "Testamonium Flavium" was a forgery manufactured by the Catholic Church,(liars for jesus) and was inserted into Josephus's works. The Testamonium Flavium account is so thoroughly refuted, that biblical scholars since the 19th century have refused to refer to it, unless to mention its false nature.

But wait, there's more!!

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/History/jesushistory.html

[Ralph]

You misunderstood my point. Let's reiterate. Unless the person using the Bible to prove some point can read the original languages in which it was written, they are merely parroting some other human's interpretation of what was written. To make it even more confusing, some of the faithful use the opinions of their own pastor or a non-Bible author to explain chosen passages. One good example of this was the recent discussion on the meaning of Matthew 25:31-46. The argument was that these verses relate Jesus describing how you get to Heaven -- good works (feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, visiting the imprisoned, etc.). The counter argument was that it doesn't say that at all, and you're only saved by faith (which Jesus does not mention at all in these passages). So then the interpretation by others gets hauled out to "prove" that you're not saved by good works despite Jesus's own words saying just that.

See?

Sure....there are no valid TRANSLATIONS from Hebrew into Greek and then into English....its just a Conspiracy. And Jesus Himself never taught from a Greek translation? Strange is the fact that seculars question the validity of translating the Bible into modern English while its easy to compare those translations with the 5800 original manuscripts in existence from the 1st and 2nd century AD....when many of secular written works of antiquity are used to document WORLD HISTORY....when there are only a handful of original texts in existence.

Do you not think that if a modern translation such as the New American Standard varied from the actual context and subject matter of that which was being translated....SOMEONE WOULD NOT NOTICE A SUPPOSED "PERSONAL OPINION" INSERTED IN PLACE OF THE ORIGINAL CONTEXTUAL CONTENT? Really? Simply because English words are used to relay the original context does not make any valid translation JUST AN OPINION.

Now back to the secular books of antiquity that are used on a daily basis to teach world history to our snowflakes. Compare the number of original scriptural manuscripts of the Holy Bible (some 5800 whole and 13000 partial fragments of original manuscripts that can be and are used to compare any modern translation in relation to the TRUTH found in the originals)......now compare the number of original secular works used to teach our supposed students of HIGHER LEANRING.

Take for instance the historical work "The Annals of Tacitus...the Roman historian" how many original manuscripts exist? 2 in the entire world. Next: The writings of Plato? 7 existing in the entire world

The records of Herodotus? 8. The same number for the works of Thucydides. For instance the Roman author and historian Livy drafted over 140 manuscripts...today only 35 exist in the world.


you get the idea. The secular world does not want to apply the same standards to the demonstrably valid translations of the Holy Bible....but ignore their own 800lb. Gorilla in the room, they have a far less critical standard that validates subject texts taught as truth everyday in the world of Academia. Again....very strange.

[ThatOwlWoman]

you get the idea. The secular world does not want to apply the same standards to the demonstrably valid translations of the Holy Bible....but ignore their own 800lb. Gorilla in the room, they have a far less critical standard that validates subject texts taught as truth everyday in the world of Academia. Again....very strange.

Again, you either intentionally or unintentionally disregard the point I was making. I'll make it painfully simple. Almost all Xtians use the opinions of others to interpret a chosen passage, so that it says what they want it to say. No matter how much you all claim that the entire tome contains the inerrant words of god, when interpreting bits and pieces, you (group you) rely on human opinions of what those bits really mean. I used Matthew 25:31-46 as an example.

I doubt if very few use Tacitus, Livy, or Plato to validate their religion. lol

I'm done; enjoy your day.

[kudzu]

I find it very amusing....when someone...anyone attempts to use the Bible in order to refute the Bible. When its demonstrated that the actual text of the Bible does not come close to relaying the message pretended to be presented by the questioner.....there is a sudden 180 degree about facE, once again the Bible cannot defend itself because of the content actually located within it? Really? Sounds kind'a secular and circular to me. First the Bible is the best thing since sliced bread when you think you have found a GOTCHA! But worthless to be used IN ITS OWN DEFENSE? :laugh:

When anyone is attempting to defend Christian Doctrine.....is there a more authoritarian source than the Holy Scriptures....as that is were all of Christianity is founded, THE WORD? Priceless amusement. What you are attempting is just as logical as saying, "I wish to debate you on the merits of the US Constitution in relation to the US rule of law......but you cannot use the Constitution to prove your argument. Funny as hell...oophs.

Snake cults existed for a thousnd years in the Indus Valley, Arabian peninsula, the Levant, Mesopotamia and Egypt where the snake represented widom, fertility, death and rebirth.

The snake also appears in the story of Moses.. Numbers 21:9.

[iolo]

I always wonder whether Jesus spoke any other languages than Aramaic. The joke about Peter being the rock on which he will build his Church ( and the subsequent Papal claims) seem to depend on his speaking Greek in quite a usual way, doesn't it?

[kudzu]

Sure....there are no valid TRANSLATIONS from Hebrew into Greek and then into English....its just a Conspiracy. And Jesus Himself never taught from a Greek translation? Strange is the fact that seculars question the validity of translating the Bible into modern English while its easy to compare those translations with the 5800 original manuscripts in existence from the 1st and 2nd century AD....when many of secular written works of antiquity are used to document WORLD HISTORY....when there are only a handful of original texts in existence.

Do you not think that if a modern translation such as the New American Standard varied from the actual context and subject matter of that which was being translated....SOMEONE WOULD NOT NOTICE A SUPPOSED "PERSONAL OPINION" INSERTED IN PLACE OF THE ORIGINAL CONTEXTUAL CONTENT? Really? Simply because English words are used to relay the original context does not make any valid translation JUST AN OPINION.

Now back to the secular books of antiquity that are used on a daily basis to teach world history to our snowflakes. Compare the number of original scriptural manuscripts of the Holy Bible (some 5800 whole and 13000 partial fragments of original manuscripts that can be and are used to compare any modern translation in relation to the TRUTH found in the originals)......now compare the number of original secular works used to teach our supposed students of HIGHER LEANRING.

Take for instance the historical work "The Annals of Tacitus...the Roman historian" how many original manuscripts exist? 2 in the entire world. Next: The writings of Plato? 7 existing in the entire world

The records of Herodotus? 8. The same number for the works of Thucydides. For instance the Roman author and historian Livy drafted over 140 manuscripts...today only 35 exist in the world.


you get the idea. The secular world does not want to apply the same standards to the demonstrably valid translations of the Holy Bible....but ignore their own 800lb. Gorilla in the room, they have a far less critical standard that validates subject texts taught as truth everyday in the world of Academia. Again....very strange.


The dominant languages of the day were Greek and Aramaic... not Hebrew. Hebrew wasn't the spoken language after the Babylonian exile.

You have framed the debate as secular versus scripture .. where the intent is to look at the evolution of the religion.

[kudzu]

I always wonder whether Jesus spoke any other languages than Aramaic. The joke about Peter being the rock on which he will build his Church ( and the subsequent Papal claims) seem to depend on his speaking Greek in quite a usual way, doesn't it?

I am sure he did.. The Decapolis was far more cosmopolitan and prosperous .. just as Israel was more prospersous than Judah. I think the Greeks (Alexander) conquered Palestine around 332 BC.

[Ralph]

Again, you either intentionally or unintentionally disregard the point I was making. I'll make it painfully simple. Almost all Xtians use the opinions of others to interpret a chosen passage, so that it says what they want it to say. No matter how much you all claim that the entire tome contains the inerrant words of god, when interpreting bits and pieces, you (group you) rely on human opinions of what those bits really mean. I used Matthew 25:31-46 as an example.

I doubt if very few use Tacitus, Livy, or Plato to validate their religion. lol

I'm done; enjoy your day.

Again....a legitimate translation uses comparison of the existing 5800 original and 13,000 partial manuscripts of the New Testament and Old to validate the translation. There is no opinion involved, in essence the same message that was being delivered by Peter, John, Paul, Luke, Mark...etc. holds the same contextual integrity as does any modern translation....with the exception of some loosely based Para Phrased translations such as the New Living Bible...etc., where there is no contextual integrity followed whatsoever.

Its a valid historical reality that Jesus himself taught from a Greek Translated version of the Old Law (testament)......the Septuagint Greek Translation which has existed 200-300 years before the Birth of the Christ. Many of the people during and leading up to the time of the Christ did not read Hebrew but used the universal language of the day GREEK which is comparable to the use of English today as a Universal language most taught around the world, as English is the primary language of Business today.

Its best to be informed before laughing and exposing your own ignorance on any given subject. ;) Are there "mistakes" in the bible due to translation? Indeed but they are always found to be TYPEOs instead of some OPINION leading away from the entire contextual integrity of the subject message being delivered, which is always the same regardless of the language its translated to or from as the subject matter and context must always remain intact.

And no the secular world attempts use these works of antiquity (the ones mentioned previously) to validate their "HIGHER LEARNING" skills based upon the religion of Secular Humanism.........:whoa: And as demonstrated THE BILBE has more evidence of textual integrity than all those works put together....that are accepted as a Universal Absolute Truth. You have accomplished nothing other than giving us a demonstration of your ignorance based upon your Intolerance and BIGOTRY toward Christianity. A typical fascist LEFTIST.....the trait of Socialism that demands that their neighbors owe them something for being born HUMAN.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Again....a legitimate translation uses comparison of the existing 5800 original and 13,000 partial manuscripts of the New Testament and Old to validate the translation. There is no opinion involved, in essence the same message that was being delivered by Peter, John, Paul, Luke, Mark...etc. holds the same contextual integrity as does any modern translation....with the exception of some loosely based Para Phrased translations such as the New Living Bible...etc., where there is no contextual integrity followed whatsoever.

Its a valid historical reality that Jesus himself taught from a Greek Translated version of the Old Law (testament)......the Septuagint Greek Translation which has existed 200-300 years before the Birth of the Christ. Many of the people during and leading up to the time of the Christ did not read Hebrew but used the universal language of the day GREEK which is comparable to the use of English today as a Universal language most taught around the world, as English is the primary language of Business today.

Its best to be informed before laughing and exposing your own ignorance on any given subject. ;) Are there "mistakes" in the bible due to translation? Indeed but they are always found to be TYPEOs instead of some OPINION leading away from the entire contextual integrity of the subject message being delivered, which is always the same regardless of the language its translated to or from as the subject matter and context must always remain intact.

And no the secular world attempts use these works of antiquity (the ones mentioned previously) to validate their "HIGHER LEARNING" skills based upon the religion of Secular Humanism.........:whoa: And as demonstrated THE BILBE has more evidence of textual integrity than all those works put together....that are accepted as a Universal Absolute Truth. You have accomplished nothing other than giving us a demonstration of your ignorance based upon your Intolerance and BIGOTRY toward Christianity. A typical fascist LEFTIST.....the trait of Socialism that demands that their neighbors owe them something for being born HUMAN.

It sounds as though you're more eager to prove the Bible translation shit and your own alleged '"HIGHER LEARNING" skills' = you are right and everyone else is wrong, than you are in discussing the points I made in my post.

Again, I'm done. Enjoy your life.

[PostmodernProphet]

Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post
Unless the person using the Bible to prove some point can read the original languages in which it was written,

easy enough....

Hebrew interlinear....
http://biblehub.com/interlinear/

Greek interlinear....
https://www.logosapostolic.org/bibles/interlinear_nt.htm

don't be afraid, just do it....


So then the interpretation by others gets hauled out to "prove" that you're not saved by good works despite Jesus's own words saying just that.


its a shame you fell for kudzu's bullshit......the simple truth is that everything he has posted here is wrong, intentionally so......

[PostmodernProphet]

. where the intent is to look at the evolution of the religion.

???....religion hasn't "evolved"....its just that you are misrepresenting it......

[Frank Apisa]

Again....a legitimate translation uses comparison of the existing 5800 original and 13,000 partial manuscripts of the New Testament and Old to validate the translation. There is no opinion involved, in essence the same message that was being delivered by Peter, John, Paul, Luke, Mark...etc. holds the same contextual integrity as does any modern translation....with the exception of some loosely based Para Phrased translations such as the New Living Bible...etc., where there is no contextual integrity followed whatsoever.

Its a valid historical reality that Jesus himself taught from a Greek Translated version of the Old Law (testament)......the Septuagint Greek Translation which has existed 200-300 years before the Birth of the Christ. Many of the people during and leading up to the time of the Christ did not read Hebrew but used the universal language of the day GREEK which is comparable to the use of English today as a Universal language most taught around the world, as English is the primary language of Business today.

Its best to be informed before laughing and exposing your own ignorance on any given subject. ;) Are there "mistakes" in the bible due to translation? Indeed but they are always found to be TYPEOs instead of some OPINION leading away from the entire contextual integrity of the subject message being delivered, which is always the same regardless of the language its translated to or from as the subject matter and context must always remain intact.

And no the secular world attempts use these works of antiquity (the ones mentioned previously) to validate their "HIGHER LEARNING" skills based upon the religion of Secular Humanism.........:whoa: And as demonstrated THE BILBE has more evidence of textual integrity than all those works put together....that are accepted as a Universal Absolute Truth. You have accomplished nothing other than giving us a demonstration of your ignorance based upon your Intolerance and BIGOTRY toward Christianity. A typical fascist LEFTIST.....the trait of Socialism that demands that their neighbors owe them something for being born HUMAN.

Anyone who considers the teachings of Jesus to be valuable...whether Christian or not...who has an opinion of socialism that even comes close to yours...is a fool.

You are all words...and no knowledge, Ralph. Jesus was closer to a communist than a capitalist...and if he had lived today would almost certainly have been a socialist.

If your opinion of the textural aspects of the Bible are as perverse as your opinion of socialism (and I think they are)...your opinion is not truly worth consideration.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

It sounds as though you're more eager to prove the Bible translation shit and your own alleged '"HIGHER LEARNING" skills' = you are right and everyone else is wrong, than you are in discussing the points I made in my post.

Again, I'm done. Enjoy your life.

Definition of ralph: "to throw up, to lurch". how appropriate

[kudzu]

???....religion hasn't "evolved"....its just that you are misrepresenting it......

It most certainly has evolved.. The Jews simply wittled down the Canaanite pantheon.

[kudzu]

Again....a legitimate translation uses comparison of the existing 5800 original and 13,000 partial manuscripts of the New Testament and Old to validate the translation. There is no opinion involved, in essence the same message that was being delivered by Peter, John, Paul, Luke, Mark...etc. holds the same contextual integrity as does any modern translation....with the exception of some loosely based Para Phrased translations such as the New Living Bible...etc., where there is no contextual integrity followed whatsoever.

Its a valid historical reality that Jesus himself taught from a Greek Translated version of the Old Law (testament)......the Septuagint Greek Translation which has existed 200-300 years before the Birth of the Christ. Many of the people during and leading up to the time of the Christ did not read Hebrew but used the universal language of the day GREEK which is comparable to the use of English today as a Universal language most taught around the world, as English is the primary language of Business today.

Its best to be informed before laughing and exposing your own ignorance on any given subject. ;) Are there "mistakes" in the bible due to translation? Indeed but they are always found to be TYPEOs instead of some OPINION leading away from the entire contextual integrity of the subject message being delivered, which is always the same regardless of the language its translated to or from as the subject matter and context must always remain intact.

And no the secular world attempts use these works of antiquity (the ones mentioned previously) to validate their "HIGHER LEARNING" skills based upon the religion of Secular Humanism.........:whoa: And as demonstrated THE BILBE has more evidence of textual integrity than all those works put together....that are accepted as a Universal Absolute Truth. You have accomplished nothing other than giving us a demonstration of your ignorance based upon your Intolerance and BIGOTRY toward Christianity. A typical fascist LEFTIST.....the trait of Socialism that demands that their neighbors owe them something for being born HUMAN.

Jesus read Greek scrolls yet never wrote a thing down. How do you know this "historical reality"?

Greek was the language of commerce.. Aramaic was the lingua franca.

[PostmodernProphet]

It most certainly has evolved.. The Jews simply wittled down the Canaanite pantheon.

getting rid of false gods isn't evolution...unless you are thinking of survival the the One Fit God.........

[PostmodernProphet]

Jesus read Greek scrolls yet never wrote a thing down. How do you know this "historical reality"?

Greek was the language of commerce.. Aramaic was the lingua franca.

odd.....I've never thought of it but I expect an omniscient God would have no problem with any language out there......as I recall at the age of 12 he amazed the elders at the synagogue in Jerusalem with his knowledge of the torah........that would, of course, mean fluency in Hebrew.........as for Greek, I expect the average person knew both Greek and Aramaic at the time......

[ThatOwlWoman]

Anyone who considers the teachings of Jesus to be valuable...whether Christian or not...who has an opinion of socialism that even comes close to yours...is a fool.
You are all words...and no knowledge, Ralph. Jesus was closer to a communist than a capitalist...and if he had lived today would almost certainly have been a socialist.
If your opinion of the textural aspects of the Bible are as perverse as your opinion of socialism (and I think they are)...your opinion is not truly worth consideration.

Why do so many supposedly devout Xtians act like Ralph? They claim to worship a god "who so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son," and which son commanded his followers to "love thy neighbor as thyself," yet they seem to hate half the ppl in said world.

If Jesus returned tomorrow with the exact same message as before, accompanied by all the signs and wonders depicted in the Bible, they'd turn their backs or throw stones (or bullets from their ARs).

[kudzu]

getting rid of false gods isn't evolution...unless you are thinking of survival the the One Fit God.........

The Canaanite pantheon is pretty interesting.

Like other people of the Ancient Near East Canaanite religious beliefs were polytheistic, with families typically focusing on veneration of the dead in the form of household gods and goddesses, the Elohim, while acknowledging the existence of other deities such as Baal and El, Asherah and Astarte.

The Gods and Goddesses of Canaan | Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of ...



https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/cana/hd_cana.htm




by I Spar - ‎Related articles
Ugaritic mythological tablets describe the activities of the main gods and goddesses of the Canaanite pantheon. Although there existed no single state theology, the major gods reflect local geographical concerns about the fertility of the earth and the importance of water as well as relationships to the sky and the underworld.



It must have taken a long, long time to become monotheism.. 4000 Asherah statuettes have been found in Jerusalem. Women worshipped them re: childbearing.

[PostmodernProphet]

not sure why you bothered to post a list of false gods.......is this another effort to post a facade of relevancy?........

[kudzu]

odd.....I've never thought of it but I expect an omniscient God would have no problem with any language out there......as I recall at the age of 12 he amazed the elders at the synagogue in Jerusalem with his knowledge of the torah........that would, of course, mean fluency in Hebrew.........as for Greek, I expect the average person knew both Greek and Aramaic at the time......


In many ways ancient Hebrew was quite limited.

The Philosophy of the Hebrew Language - Ancient Hebrew Research ...



www.ancient-hebrew.org/language_philosophy.html






The language of the Hebrews is a concrete language, meaning that it uses words that express something that can be seen, touched, smelled, tasted or heard and ... work, Hebrew thought compared with Greek, states; "The thinking of the Old Testament is primitive and hence can be compared only with the thinking of other ...

[kudzu]

not sure why you bothered to post a list of false gods.......is this another effort to post a facade of relevancy?........

Monotheism evolved from the Canaanite pantheon of gods.. Early on every tribe had their own god which they carried from place to place on a litter...

[PostmodernProphet]

In many ways ancient Hebrew was quite limited.

I expect the Torah was in Hebrew......

[PostmodernProphet]

Monotheism evolved from the Canaanite pantheon of gods.. Early on every tribe had their own god which they carried from place to place on a litter...

monotheism didn't evolve......it was dropped on the head of Israel by order of God all in one single act........

[kudzu]

monotheism didn't evolve......it was dropped on the head of Israel by order of God all in one single act........

You should read your Bible.

Exodus 32:28

And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.

Israel was called the great harlot because she was always chasing other goods.

[Frank Apisa]

Why do so many supposedly devout Xtians act like Ralph? They claim to worship a god "who so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son," and which son commanded his followers to "love thy neighbor as thyself," yet they seem to hate half the ppl in said world.

If Jesus returned tomorrow with the exact same message as before, accompanied by all the signs and wonders depicted in the Bible, they'd turn their backs or throw stones (or bullets from their ARs).

Precisely.

Jesus would be an outcast...someone spurned and held in contempt by the people who most claim love and devotion to him today.

[domer76]

Tell me with a straight face that this guy is sane.



I loved that guy! Robert Tilton. A classic “give me your money” preacher. Better than Jim Bakker. He would often break into tongues. Here he is with a little extra sound added.


https://youtu.be/28FoOutRAj0

[domer76]

obviously you are mistaken......as usual......

^Folks, this is a great theological ass-kicking in progress. Pee-pee at the receiving end.

[kudzu]

^Folks, this is a great theological ass-kicking in progress. Pee-pee at the receiving end.

There is no question that monotheism evolved.. Even the name Israel is derived from the Canaanite god EL.

https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.premium.MAGAZINE-how-the-jews-invented-god-and-made-him-great-1.5392677

[domer76]

odd.....I've never thought of it but I expect an omniscient God would have no problem with any language out there......as I recall at the age of 12 he amazed the elders at the synagogue in Jerusalem with his knowledge of the torah........that would, of course, mean fluency in Hebrew.........as for Greek, I expect the average person knew both Greek and Aramaic at the time......

So says your book....

[domer76]

monotheism didn't evolve......it was dropped on the head of Israel by order of God all in one single act........

So says your book.....

[domer76]

There is no question that monotheism evolved.. Even the name Israel is derived from the Canaanite god EL.

https://www.haaretz.com/archaeology/.premium.MAGAZINE-how-the-jews-invented-god-and-made-him-great-1.5392677

I am thoroughly enjoying your learned references. I appreciate your insight and extensive knowledge.

Refreshing.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Precisely.
Jesus would be an outcast...someone spurned and held in contempt by the people who most claim love and devotion to him today.

Just as He was in His own times.

[kudzu]

I am thoroughly enjoying your learned references. I appreciate your insight and extensive knowledge.

Refreshing.

To me the Bible is endlessly fascinating.. and so is the ancient history of the Middle East. The Jews were not monotheistic by a long shot.

[domer76]

To me the Bible is endlessly fascinating.. and so is the ancient history of the Middle East. The Jews were not monotheistic by a long shot.

The historical aspects of it, as well as the origins and evolution of it are fascinating to me as well. But I haven’t spent the time immersed in it as you have. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge.

[kudzu]

The historical aspects of it, as well as the origins and evolution of it are fascinating to me as well. But I haven’t spent the time immersed in it as you have. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge.

This thread goes into it.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?94963-How-the-Jews-Invented-God-and-Made-Him-Great

[Leonthecat]

I loved that guy! Robert Tilton. A classic “give me your money” preacher. Better than Jim Bakker. He would often break into tongues. Here he is with a little extra sound added.


https://youtu.be/28FoOutRAj0

That's funny!
Cristians are such assholes.

[Leonthecat]

monotheism didn't evolve......it was dropped on the head of Israel by order of God all in one single act........

Speak in tongues, PmP.
You are so insane.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Tp4ENcSvFc

[kudzu]

That's funny!
Cristians are such assholes.

Really .. they aren't all assholes.. Many are of course..

[Leonthecat]

Really .. they aren't all assholes.. .

You would have to prove that to me.

[kudzu]

You would have to prove that to me.

LOLOL.. I have known "christians" that I'd like to throttle and others who are the real thing.

Wasn't it Gandhi who said that he liked our Jesus but Christians.. . not so much.

[PostmodernProphet]

You should read your Bible.

Exodus 32:28

And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men.

Israel was called the great harlot because she was always chasing other goods.

and does that not prove that the religion of the OT and the NT was monotheism?.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Quote Originally Posted by ThatOwlWoman View Post

If Jesus returned tomorrow with the exact same message as before, accompanied by all the signs and wonders depicted in the Bible, they'd turn their backs or throw stones (or bullets from their ARs)..
the atheists, of course would proclaim him God and build him a church........lol......

[PostmodernProphet]

Quote Originally Posted by domer76 View Post
^Folks, this is a great theological ass-kicking in progress. Pee-pee at the receiving end.

you got yourself a follower, kudz......better baptize him before he wanders away from the fold.....

[PostmodernProphet]

the Canaanite god - god


lol.....was that different from the Phonecian god -god and the Mesopotamian god - god and the philistine god - god?.....

[PostmodernProphet]

The Jews were not monotheistic by a long shot.

Judaism was......

[Truth Detector]

That's funny!
Cristians are such assholes.

Wrong; Liberals are the assholes. Buy a mirror asshat.

[kudzu]

Judaism was......

This will explain it.

https://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?94963-How-the-Jews-Invented-God-and-Made-Him-Great

[PostmodernProphet]

This will explain it.


the problem with that is it totally ignores the history of Israel......sorry.....Judaism has always been a monotheistic religion.....I will concede there were people in the middle east that did not worship YHWH.....that's why God told the Israelites to drive them out.....

[Frank Apisa]

You would have to prove that to me.

C'mon, Leon...you are better than this.

[kudzu]

the problem with that is it totally ignores the history of Israel......sorry.....Judaism has always been a monotheistic religion.....I will concede there were people in the middle east that did not worship YHWH.....that's why God told the Israelites to drive them out.....

You talking about Joshua? That didn't happen either... The Canaanite cities prospered and paid tribute to pharoah.. They have been excavated and were never disturbed or interrupted.

[PostmodernProphet]

You talking about Joshua? That didn't happen either... The Canaanite cities prospered and paid tribute to pharoah.. They have been excavated and were never disturbed or interrupted.

lol....sure.....and I suppose that atheists didn't provide you with that information?.......

[Ralph]

It sounds as though you're more eager to prove the Bible translation shit and your own alleged '"HIGHER LEARNING" skills' = you are right and everyone else is wrong, than you are in discussing the points I made in my post.

Again, I'm done. Enjoy your life.

And indeed YOU ARE DONE.....why? Simply because you attempt to pin wings on a hog does not make that hog a bird. What's this the 3rd time YOU HAVE BEEN DONE? :laugh:

A fact is a fact. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript........an "OPINION" is subjective void of any objective findings of factual evidence. As the facts point out....a "translation" is not based upon the opinion of anyone but rather a scientific process known as a "comparative analysis" that consists first of applying the laws of logical reference when comparing any data in order to determine the factual truth in relation to the subject of study. This process is used throughout the scientific world when searching for evidential findings of fact in CIMINOLOGY, FORENSICS, ECONOMICS, ...etc.

As the scientific facts point out. A "valid" translation from Hebrew, to Greek and then to any other language around globe.....transmits the same contextual integrity as any of the original scriptural Books found in the Holy Bible...especially a valid translation from the New Testament where the universal language of choice used by the authors was GREEK. ;)

Science Confirms the promise made by the Christ in the 1st century. "For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law, until all is fulfilled." -- Matthew 5:18. The same promise applies to the New Testament Law of Grace. To this day the Scriptures (Law) remain unbroken.

Are there "mistakes" found in our modern translations? Of course...why? They were translated by MEN....there are famous mistakes/typeos....but these mistakes are easily found, why? All one has to do is compare the error with the subject matter and remaining text and the error sticks out like the proverbial sore thumb.

[kudzu]

lol....sure.....and I suppose that atheists didn't provide you with that information?.......

No.. serious scholars and archaeologists provided the information. Egypt controlled Sinai and Canaan in the Exodus years and Egyptian garrisons were stationed in Sinai.. Canaanite towns were well established and prosperous in the business of mining, metallury and pottery making.

Solomon never had copper mines.. Those were Canaanite and copper was an essential commodity from the beginning of the bronze age..

[kudzu]

And indeed YOU ARE DONE.....why? Simply because you attempt to pin wings on a hog does not make that hog a bird. What's this the 3rd time YOU HAVE BEEN DONE? :laugh:

A fact is a fact. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript........an "OPINION" is subjective void of any objective findings of factual evidence. As the facts point out....a "translation" is not based upon the opinion of anyone but rather a scientific process known as a "comparative analysis" that consists first of applying the laws of logical reference when comparing any data in order to determine the factual truth in relation to the subject of study. This process is used throughout the scientific world when searching for evidential findings of fact in CIMINOLOGY, FORENSICS, ECONOMICS, ...etc.

As the scientific facts point out. A "valid" translation from Hebrew, to Greek and then to any other language around globe.....transmits the same contextual integrity as any of the original scriptural Books found in the Holy Bible...especially a valid translation from the New Testament where the universal language of choice used by the authors was GREEK. ;)

Then you must be familiar with Samuel Noah Kramer's work over 50 years.

[PostmodernProphet]

No.. serious scholars and archaeologists provided the information.

I'm sorry.....did you actually find someone who isn't part of an AtheistsRUs blog?.....I doubt it.....but feel free to provide a link.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Then you must be familiar with Samuel Noah Kramer's work over 50 years.

and does he have proof the Bible is wrong?.......or this just another irrelevant throw away.......

[Leonthecat]

C'mon, Leon...you are better than this.

I will never concede that delusional insanity is okay.
Promoting it is worse than living it.

[Ralph]

Then you must be familiar with Samuel Noah Kramer's work over 50 years.

Truth: There can be many opinion based theories in relation to any subject. Take 100 of those speculations that can be supported by fragmented archeological finds...... you can have only "one truth" out of any given number....or you can have the entire 100 be wrong. The truth cannot exist in more than one reality according to one of the first laws of logic....the Excluded Middle. Why believe and accept as truth the historical record found to exist in the Judeo/Christian Religion? Because its never been subject to any type of confirmed falsehood based upon Applied Science or History Actual.

Please explain how an attempted historical record application from antiquated Sumerian literature negates any truth found in the Holy Bible. It does not. Put the scriptures to the test and present any archeological find that proves one historical record found in scripture to be in error. Recorded history only has a range of some 5000 years....most certainly many histories recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures came from an oral historical record, but that does not make any of the inspired record false.

Why accept the Holy Scriptures as a truthful historical record? Its called "prima facie" truth.....a truth based upon of having a lack of any reasonable doubt void of any objective evidence to the contrary. Meaning? The fact that the Bible can be tested by History Actual and Applied Science (any record of that which is not self professed to be SUPER NATURAL.....that exists outside the bounds of Science to either prove or disprove based upon the laws of physics that God put into place upon creation).....The majority of the writings can be tested for such historical and scientific truth and the record has never been found lacking in TRUTH.

More? We know that the Bible was written by at least 40 different authors, many uneducated, some educated, some kings, some simple carpenters, some simple fishermen, some physicians and some lawyers of that time period. We know from History Actual (that the record covered some 5000 years in total) but was written over a 1500 year period.

It claims to be divinely inspired. What would you expect from a collection of Books that were self professed to be inspired by the God of Creation void of corruption? You would expect total agreement among all the books. These Books from different authors all agree on one subject matter. ALL MEN SIN....even the ones that were inspired to write this historical record found in the Holy Bible. The Bible itself contains all the history, the Good, The Bad, and the Ugly. What man made book on history would include all the skeletons in the closet? Not one.....history by men is always recorded by those who are victorious to those they have subdued....you can find no wrong. Just look at the History of the Untied States.....which contains many outrageous lies and omissions of facts.

If you took 40 different men and told them to present an accurate historical record of just one event.....you would come up with 40 different stories and thousands of direct contradictions of historical facts based upon the personal opinions of the ones writing this supposed history of something like the Civil War, WW1, or WW2...etc.,

Moses is credited with recording the first 5 books of the Holy Bible. Clearly Moses was no scholar in relation to Hebrew history as he was educated by the Egyptians nor did he posses any expert writing skills....just read some the record of Moses, for example Ex. 4:10 where he professes to being ineloquent. He recorded his own sins (Numbers 10:11-12). The adulterous sins of David and Bathsheba (2 Sam. 11,12)

How do men record their histories? They always come out smelling like roses. All these 40 some authors agree.....men sin, but all agree ONE MAN did not sin, Jesus the Christ....i.e, the Messiah, the Son of God, the son of man. -- 1 Cor. 1:18-31.

Take the record of David. It included all his dirty secrets, his hypocrisy. That record is included for a reason, because its THE TRUTH. And what nation (like the nation of Biblical Israel) would include in its history a Book like that recorded by Jeremiah? That Book made Israel look foolish and stupid. Most of the 39 books of the Old Testament make Israel look bad in relation to the laws set forth by God. The record includes unheeded prophecies/warnings like the book of Isiah (53:1-3).

When men make up stories they are the center of attention, the perfect hero that overcomes....yet all the kings in this actual history are found lacking in righteousness in some form or another.

Would Human Wisdom have prophesied about a Messiah that would come and be rejected by his own people and be the sacrificial lamb that would offer salvation to the world? No men would have you believe that Judaism is still the law of the land today and you must abide by that covenant that was fulfilled by the Messiah. Yet....they refuse to offer animal sacrifice, be ruled by a king appointed by God, or have their laws enforced by a tribe of ROYAL PREISTS. I wonder why? Sound familiar? They are ruled by a government established by MEN.

The Bible records a prophecy that was fulfilled due to the rejection of the Christ by Israel.....Jesus warned them that very generation would not pass until the city of Jerusalem would be totally destroyed by outside forces, and that prophecy is record by history actual. Rome destroyed the holy city of Jerusalem and eventually the nation of Biblical Israel in totality in the first century AD. The nation of Israel was warned that it would be broken up and never be made whole again.

Now look at some other supposed HOLY BOOKS from around he world. Such as the Quran.....it has many contradictions within its pages. It profess to the truth that the Holy Bible is a book from God....yet it rejects many of the precepts found therein. It imposes rules on everyone except the one that drafted it. Muhammad. Thus it a book that you expect to be authored by a man with human wisdom.

Take another example of a supposed Holy Book. The Book of Mormon. All its record is bound directly to just one version of the Holy Bible...the King James Version translation....strange that was the in vogue translation of the day when that supposed inspired record was first drafted....after the King James Bibles declares that we have the complete Bible Record, all that is needed to find salvation -- Jude 3.

This particular book records many of the false histories of our native American tribes...that have since been debunked in modern history, as if the book was taking history from the point of view from Free Masons..etc.,


As the scriptures declare....put the God of Creation to the test.

[kudzu]

Truth: There can be many opinion based theories in relation to any subject. Take 100 of those speculations that can be supported by fragmented archeological finds...... you can have only "one truth" out of any given number....or you can have the entire 100 be wrong. The truth cannot exist in more than one reality according to one of the first laws of logic....the Excluded Middle. Why believe and accept as truth the historical record found to exist in the Judeo/Christian Religion? Because its never been subject to any type of confirmed falsehood based upon Applied Science or History Actual.

Please explain how an attempted historical record application from antiquated Sumerian literature negates any truth found in the Holy Bible. It does not. Put the scriptures to the test and present any archeological find that proves one historical record found in scripture to be in error. Recorded history only has a range of some 5000 years....most certainly many histories recorded in the Hebrew Scriptures came from an oral historical record, but that does not make any of the inspired record false.

Why accept the Holy Scriptures as a truthful historical record? Its called "prima facie" truth.....a truth based upon of having a lack of any reasonable doubt void of any objective evidence to the contrary. Meaning? The fact that the Bible can be tested by History Actual and Applied Science (any record of that which is not self professed to be SUPER NATURAL.....that exists outside the bounds of Science to either prove or disprove based upon the laws of physics that God put into place upon creation).....The majority of the writings can be tested for such historical and scientific truth and the record has never been found lacking in TRUTH.

More? We know that the Bible was written by at least 40 different authors, many uneducated, some educated, some kings, some simple carpenters, some simple fishermen, some physicians and some lawyers of that time period. We know from History Actual (that the record covered some 5000 years in total) but was written over a 1500 year period.

It claims to be divinely inspired. What would you expect from a collection of Books that were self professed to be inspired by the God of Creation void of corruption? You would expect total agreement among all the books. These Books from different authors all agree on one subject matter. ALL MEN SIN....even the ones that were inspired to write this historical record found in the Holy Bible. The Bible itself contains all the history, the Good, The Bad, and the Ugly. What man made book on history would include all the skeletons in the closet? Not one.....history by men is always recorded by those who are victorious to those they have subdued....you can find no wrong. Just look at the History of the Untied States.....which contains many outrageous lies and omissions of facts.

If you took 40 different men and told them to present an accurate historical record of just one event.....you would come up with 40 different stories and thousands of direct contradictions of historical facts based upon the personal opinions of the ones writing this supposed history of something like the Civil War, WW1, or WW2...etc.,

Moses is credited with recording the first 5 books of the Holy Bible. Clearly Moses was no scholar in relation to Hebrew history as he was educated by the Egyptians nor did he posses any expert writing skills....just read some the record of Moses, for example Ex. 4:10 where he professes to being ineloquent. He recorded his own sins (Numbers 10:11-12). The adulterous sins of David and Bathsheba (2 Sam. 11,12)

How do men record their histories? They always come out smelling like roses. All these 40 some authors agree.....men sin, but all agree ONE MAN did not sin, Jesus the Christ....i.e, the Messiah, the Son of God, the son of man. -- 1 Cor. 1:18-31.

Take the record of David. It included all his dirty secrets, his hypocrisy. That record is included for a reason, because its THE TRUTH. And what nation (like the nation of Biblical Israel) would include in its history a Book like that recorded by Jeremiah? That Book made Israel look foolish and stupid. Most of the 39 books of the Old Testament make Israel look bad in relation to the laws set forth by God. The record includes unheeded prophecies/warnings like the book of Isiah (53:1-3).

When men make up stories they are the center of attention, the perfect hero that overcomes....yet all the kings in this actual history are found lacking in righteousness in some form or another.

Would Human Wisdom have prophesied about a Messiah that would come and be rejected by his own people and be the sacrificial lamb that would offer salvation to the world? No men would have you believe that Judaism is still the law of the land today and you must abide by that covenant that was fulfilled by the Messiah. Yet....they refuse to offer animal sacrifice, be ruled by a king appointed by God, or have their laws enforced by a tribe of ROYAL PREISTS. I wonder why? Sound familiar? They are ruled by a government established by MEN.

The Bible records a prophecy that was fulfilled due to the rejection of the Christ by Israel.....Jesus warned them that very generation would not pass until the city of Jerusalem would be totally destroyed by outside forces, and that prophecy is record by history actual. Rome destroyed the holy city of Jerusalem and eventually the nation of Biblical Israel in totality in the first century AD. The nation of Israel was warned that it would be broken up and never be made whole again.

Now look at some other supposed HOLY BOOKS from around he world. Such as the Quran.....it has many contradictions within its pages. It profess to the truth that the Holy Bible is a book from God....yet it rejects many of the precepts found therein. It imposes rules on everyone except the one that drafted it. Muhammad. Thus it a book that you expect to be authored by a man with human wisdom.

Take another example of a supposed Holy Book. The Book of Mormon. All its record is bound directly to just one version of the Holy Bible...the King James Version translation....strange that was the in vogue translation of the day when that supposed inspired record was first drafted....after the King James Bibles declares that we have the complete Bible Record, all that is needed to find salvation -- Jude 3.

This particular book records many of the false histories of our native American tribes...that have since been debunked in modern history, as if the book was taking history from the point of view from Free Masons..etc.,


As the scriptures declare....put the God of Creation to the test.

The point is the Hebrews really had no history or national narrative until they experienced the exile in Babylon and learn the stories of Sumer.

Joshua never had a huge army nor did he conquer the Canaanites and destroy their cities.

Moses is a myth or literary device.. and it their was an exodus, it probably was a trickle of people. And, Moses didn't write the Pentateuche.

[Ralph]

The point is the Hebrews really had no history or national narrative until they experienced the exile in Babylon and learn the stories of Sumer.

Joshua never had a huge army nor did he conquer the Canaanites and destroy their cities.

Moses is a myth or literary device.. and it their was an exodus, it probably was a trickle of people. And, Moses didn't write the Pentateuche.

The point is.....the majority of history was passed down first through an oral path and making a claim void of any archeological findings of fact proves what? Simply because something has not been found YET makes that history a lie? Really? The majority of your parroted attempt to discredit the Bible is based upon "things not found"....I prefer to concentrate on the reality of what the science of Archeology has produced instead of what it has not produced.

Joshua 6 details how the nation of Biblical Israel conquered the double walled city of "Jericho". The bible records that the Israelites marched for 6 days once around the city fortress. On the 7th day they marched around the city 7 times. The priests blew their trumpets, the people shouted and cried out in one voice, and when they did THE WALL FELL DOWN (Joshua 6:20). You claim that this could not have happened because Joshua had no army and never faced such a walled city fortress....yet the science of Archeology tells a different story.

Beginning in 1929 Dr. John Garstang excavated the ancient ruins of Jericho and confirmed the Biblical account of the battle.....with a confirmation that this area was prone to earthquakes with evidence that the walls of the city did fall at one time. Of course you find the seculars screaming bloody murder and making a CLAIM that a consensus OPINION by many other archeologists (void of any findings of factual artifacts) differ as to the date assigned by Dr. Garstang. What's new under the sun? Nothing....some making claims about THINGS not found as if not finding NOTHING disproves anything.

For years the same Consensus opinions called the Bible a book of lies because there had been no evidence of a powerful warlike kingdom mentioned in the scriptures......the Hittites. This nation is mentioned some 48 times in scripture. Again....for years and decades NO ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE existed....so the consensus by the seculars was this made up nation never existed it was just another bible story. Until.........George Smith found the capital city of the Hittites in 1876....a city called Carchemish.

Thus...simply because no evidence has not been found YET...does not preclude a history from being true. Real Science has the mule pulling the plow....not the inversion of attempting to claim that things not in evidence disproves the possibility of truth from existing....i.e., having the mule push the plow. Why should anyone not believe certain parts of the scripts due to a lack of archeological evidence when archeology has proven through the finding of evidence that the biblical account has been truthful? Its called prima facie truth....and it exists until OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is found that actually contradicts the record.

[PostmodernProphet]

The point is the Hebrews really had no history or national narrative until they experienced the exile in Babylon and learn the stories of Sumer.

Joshua never had a huge army nor did he conquer the Canaanites and destroy their cities.

Moses is a myth or literary device.. and it their was an exodus, it probably was a trickle of people. And, Moses didn't write the Pentateuche.

Israel has a longer history than atheists.........

[kudzu]

The point is.....the majority of history was passed down first through an oral path and making a claim void of any archeological findings of fact proves what? Simply because something has not been found YET makes that history a lie? Really? The majority of your parroted attempt to discredit the Bible is based upon "things not found"....I prefer to concentrate on the reality of what the science of Archeology has produced instead of what it has not produced.

Joshua 6 details how the nation of Biblical Israel conquered the double walled city of "Jericho". The bible records that the Israelites marched for 6 days once around the city fortress. On the 7th day they marched around the city 7 times. The priests blew their trumpets, the people shouted and cried out in one voice, and when they did THE WALL FELL DOWN (Joshua 6:20). You claim that this could not have happened because Joshua had no army and never faced such a walled city fortress....yet the science of Archeology tells a different story.

Beginning in 1929 Dr. John Garstang excavated the ancient ruins of Jericho and confirmed the Biblical account of the battle.....with a confirmation that this area was prone to earthquakes with evidence that the walls of the city did fall at one time. Of course you find the seculars screaming bloody murder and making a CLAIM that a consensus OPINION by many other archeologists (void of any findings of factual artifacts) differ as to the date assigned by Dr. Garstang. What's new under the sun? Nothing....some making claims about THINGS not found as if not finding NOTHING disproves anything.

For years the same Consensus opinions called the Bible a book of lies because there had been no evidence of a powerful warlike kingdom mentioned in the scriptures......the Hittites. This nation is mentioned some 48 times in scripture. Again....for years and decades NO ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE existed....so the consensus by the seculars was this made up nation never existed it was just another bible story. Until.........George Smith found the capital city of the Hittites in 1876....a city called Carchemish.

Thus...simply because no evidence has not been found YET...does not preclude a history from being true. Real Science has the mule pulling the plow....not the inversion of attempting to claim that things not in evidence disproves the possibility of truth from existing....i.e., having the mule push the plow. Why should anyone not believe certain parts of the scripts due to a lack of archeological evidence when archeology has proven through the finding of evidence that the biblical account has been truthful? Its called prima facie truth....and it exists until OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is found that actually contradicts the record.

Have you ever been to Jericho? Its way below sea level and has been inhabited off and on for 11,000 years.. First evidence is of the Natufian culture. There are seven levels of ruins because it has been felled by earthquakes, not horns, many times over the years.

Exodus is a myth. The Bible says that there were 700,000 able bodied men .. Unless they left their wives, children, parents and sisters behind in Egypt.. they numbered 3 million plus livestock... and two midwives.

Lets say a bare minimum of two goats per person makes 6 million livestock.. and there is no water or pasture in Sinai.... and the climate hasn't changed in 3000 years.

That was 2/3rds of the population of Egypt... yet the Egyptians never noticed.

[Ralph]

Have you ever been to Jericho? Its way below sea level and has been inhabited off and on for 11,000 years.. First evidence is of the Natufian culture. There are seven levels of ruins because it has been felled by earthquakes, not horns, many times over the years.

Exodus is a myth. The Bible says that there were 700,000 able bodied men .. Unless they left their wives, children, parents and sisters behind in Egypt.. they numbered 3 million plus livestock... and two midwives.

Lets say a bare minimum of two goats per person makes 6 million livestock.. and there is no water or pasture in Sinai.... and the climate hasn't changed in 3000 years.

That was 2/3rds of the population of Egypt... yet the Egyptians never noticed.

As I said.....I prefer to base my conclusion of "truth" on that which is found via the SCIENCE OF ARCHELOGOY instead of some biased secular "opinion" of things NOT IN EVIDENCE. Even those who would attempt to refute the evidence presented by the archeological finds of Dr. Garstang have to admit to the geological evidence of that particular area being prone to movements of the earth (earthquakes) and flooding due to the fact of this City being below sea level and the evidence points to the fact that the city found by Dr. Garstang was a doubled wall city with evidence of the Walls (with the exception of the north wall) collapsing in an instant (of course they will never admit this evidence corresponds to the Biblical account in several places in the scriptures....as this supposedly "new" evidence from a dig which began in 1994....SUGGESTS, as they admit they have no actual evidence to support their claim, that the "timelines" of these geological events don't match with the Biblical history of this even (who'd thunk it?). This 1994 secular team base their conclusions on what....can we guess? They have found NOTHING so they base their (wink, wink) SUGGESTION on things "not found". Priceless.

I did take note that you knocked me down with "your" objective evidence. ;) You have presented nothing but speculation, conjecture backed by "nothing" but opinion. Question? If recorded history dates but 5000 years....just what modern math did you use to calibrate this 11,000 year old date? Another question? What about the evidence of the north wall alone standing which supports the history of the bible where the person (Rahab...a Canaanite prostitute who helped the Israelites defeat their enemy and they were promised they would not come to harm in the attack? Its just a quinky ding this one wall was unarmed by the event?

The first rule of real science is based upon "observation"...the 2nd rule is based upon reproducible evidence (like archeological findings) and the 3rd rule of applying science in order to determine FACTS is its consistency when tested by "anyone". What do you call a supposed science that does not welcome actual evidence but attempts to suppress any opposing findings to what the secular world wants to present? Pseudo Science. You sound like some bigoted Muslim....instead of a supporter of Hinduism or follower of Buda. How many "g"ods do you have?

http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a011.html

[leaningright]

The point is.....the majority of history was passed down first through an oral path and making a claim void of any archeological findings of fact proves what? Simply because something has not been found YET makes that history a lie? Really? The majority of your parroted attempt to discredit the Bible is based upon "things not found"....I prefer to concentrate on the reality of what the science of Archeology has produced instead of what it has not produced.

Joshua 6 details how the nation of Biblical Israel conquered the double walled city of "Jericho". The bible records that the Israelites marched for 6 days once around the city fortress. On the 7th day they marched around the city 7 times. The priests blew their trumpets, the people shouted and cried out in one voice, and when they did THE WALL FELL DOWN (Joshua 6:20). You claim that this could not have happened because Joshua had no army and never faced such a walled city fortress....yet the science of Archeology tells a different story.

Beginning in 1929 Dr. John Garstang excavated the ancient ruins of Jericho and confirmed the Biblical account of the battle.....with a confirmation that this area was prone to earthquakes with evidence that the walls of the city did fall at one time. Of course you find the seculars screaming bloody murder and making a CLAIM that a consensus OPINION by many other archeologists (void of any findings of factual artifacts) differ as to the date assigned by Dr. Garstang. What's new under the sun? Nothing....some making claims about THINGS not found as if not finding NOTHING disproves anything.

For years the same Consensus opinions called the Bible a book of lies because there had been no evidence of a powerful warlike kingdom mentioned in the scriptures......the Hittites. This nation is mentioned some 48 times in scripture. Again....for years and decades NO ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE existed....so the consensus by the seculars was this made up nation never existed it was just another bible story. Until.........George Smith found the capital city of the Hittites in 1876....a city called Carchemish.

Thus...simply because no evidence has not been found YET...does not preclude a history from being true. Real Science has the mule pulling the plow....not the inversion of attempting to claim that things not in evidence disproves the possibility of truth from existing....i.e., having the mule push the plow. Why should anyone not believe certain parts of the scripts due to a lack of archeological evidence when archeology has proven through the finding of evidence that the biblical account has been truthful? Its called prima facie truth....and it exists until OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is found that actually contradicts the record.

Ralph has done an excellent job in this thread so I’ll just add this about the bolded above: Everything archaeology and science has found to be true supports the biblical record.

[domer76]

Ralph has done an excellent job in this thread so I’ll just add this about the bolded above: Everything archaeology and science has found to be true supports the biblical record.

Tell us about that boat with the animals on it. Where is that record? Where is the archaeological record of wombats, koalas and kangaroos trekking from Turkey to Australia?

[domer76]

The point is.....the majority of history was passed down first through an oral path and making a claim void of any archeological findings of fact proves what? Simply because something has not been found YET makes that history a lie? Really? The majority of your parroted attempt to discredit the Bible is based upon "things not found"....I prefer to concentrate on the reality of what the science of Archeology has produced instead of what it has not produced.

Joshua 6 details how the nation of Biblical Israel conquered the double walled city of "Jericho". The bible records that the Israelites marched for 6 days once around the city fortress. On the 7th day they marched around the city 7 times. The priests blew their trumpets, the people shouted and cried out in one voice, and when they did THE WALL FELL DOWN (Joshua 6:20). You claim that this could not have happened because Joshua had no army and never faced such a walled city fortress....yet the science of Archeology tells a different story.

Beginning in 1929 Dr. John Garstang excavated the ancient ruins of Jericho and confirmed the Biblical account of the battle.....with a confirmation that this area was prone to earthquakes with evidence that the walls of the city did fall at one time. Of course you find the seculars screaming bloody murder and making a CLAIM that a consensus OPINION by many other archeologists (void of any findings of factual artifacts) differ as to the date assigned by Dr. Garstang. What's new under the sun? Nothing....some making claims about THINGS not found as if not finding NOTHING disproves anything.

For years the same Consensus opinions called the Bible a book of lies because there had been no evidence of a powerful warlike kingdom mentioned in the scriptures......the Hittites. This nation is mentioned some 48 times in scripture. Again....for years and decades NO ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE existed....so the consensus by the seculars was this made up nation never existed it was just another bible story. Until.........George Smith found the capital city of the Hittites in 1876....a city called Carchemish.

Thus...simply because no evidence has not been found YET...does not preclude a history from being true. Real Science has the mule pulling the plow....not the inversion of attempting to claim that things not in evidence disproves the possibility of truth from existing....i.e., having the mule push the plow. Why should anyone not believe certain parts of the scripts due to a lack of archeological evidence when archeology has proven through the finding of evidence that the biblical account has been truthful? Its called prima facie truth....and it exists until OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE is found that actually contradicts the record.

lol

Garsten only sought to bolster his Biblical beliefs with the archaeological record His bias is evident throughout his work.

"Garstang was a Christian and accordingly sought to validate his beliefs with archeological proof. He connects as much evidence as possible to the Bible, even when the connection is tenuous at best. Things found in the ground from thousands of years ago have so many different potential meanings, it is nearly impossible to conclude anything from them with certainty. Each archeologist's interpretations will vary, and Garstang's were guided by his interest in the Bible.

His bias is evident in many of his interpretations of the ruins, for he uses the evidence from the dig to support the Bible whenever remotely possible. When he sees ruined walls and signs of fire, he links them with Joshua's victory, offering no other possible explanations for the destruction. After quoting the sixth chapter of Joshua, which describes the collapse of the walls and the Israelites' burning of the city, he states:

"These episodes are confirmed in all material particulars: the fallen walls have been laid bare, while the burning of demolished buildings is found to have been general and so conspicuous as to suggest a deliberate holocaust." (Garstang, 6)

It is certainly possible that such evidence supports the biblical story, but it is equally possible that the walls were tumbled in connection with something else entirely, and Garstang fails to present all the options.

Garstang's faith in the Bible's accuracy is clear from his view of the biblical narrative as suitable for the referencing of history. He quotes extensively from Exodus and Joshua when trying to give the proper historical perspective on Jericho. This view of the Bible as equitable with other history was hardly questioned at the time Garstang was writing (1939), but has since been widely questioned or condemned by modern culture.

Garstang's view of archeology becomes evident in his discussion of its application to biblical history. He devotes a whole chapter at the end of his book to connections between archeology and the Bible. His position on the role of archeology is clarified in the following passage:

"At Jericho two worlds meet, the world which lives for us still in the imperishable records of the Old Testament, and the world of modern scientific research which lifts it out of the darkness of semi-legend and sets it in the full light of history." (Garstang, 157-58)

He sees archeology as a tool by which to validate biblical history.

http://facultysites.vassar.edu/jolott/old_courses/class%20of%2051/jericho/garstang.html

Another failure, Ralphie!

[kudzu]

There was NO Jericho at the time of Joshua.

The archaeologists agree on that.

[kudzu]

lol

Garsten only sought to bolster his Biblical beliefs with the archaeological record His bias is evident throughout his work.

"Garstang was a Christian and accordingly sought to validate his beliefs with archeological proof. He connects as much evidence as possible to the Bible, even when the connection is tenuous at best. Things found in the ground from thousands of years ago have so many different potential meanings, it is nearly impossible to conclude anything from them with certainty. Each archeologist's interpretations will vary, and Garstang's were guided by his interest in the Bible.

His bias is evident in many of his interpretations of the ruins, for he uses the evidence from the dig to support the Bible whenever remotely possible. When he sees ruined walls and signs of fire, he links them with Joshua's victory, offering no other possible explanations for the destruction. After quoting the sixth chapter of Joshua, which describes the collapse of the walls and the Israelites' burning of the city, he states:

"These episodes are confirmed in all material particulars: the fallen walls have been laid bare, while the burning of demolished buildings is found to have been general and so conspicuous as to suggest a deliberate holocaust." (Garstang, 6)

It is certainly possible that such evidence supports the biblical story, but it is equally possible that the walls were tumbled in connection with something else entirely, and Garstang fails to present all the options.

Garstang's faith in the Bible's accuracy is clear from his view of the biblical narrative as suitable for the referencing of history. He quotes extensively from Exodus and Joshua when trying to give the proper historical perspective on Jericho. This view of the Bible as equitable with other history was hardly questioned at the time Garstang was writing (1939), but has since been widely questioned or condemned by modern culture.

Garstang's view of archeology becomes evident in his discussion of its application to biblical history. He devotes a whole chapter at the end of his book to connections between archeology and the Bible. His position on the role of archeology is clarified in the following passage:

"At Jericho two worlds meet, the world which lives for us still in the imperishable records of the Old Testament, and the world of modern scientific research which lifts it out of the darkness of semi-legend and sets it in the full light of history." (Garstang, 157-58)

He sees archeology as a tool by which to validate biblical history.

http://facultysites.vassar.edu/jolott/old_courses/class%20of%2051/jericho/garstang.html

Another failure, Ralphie!


Yes, for 150 years archaeologist tried to prove the Bible.. and they have failed utterly. Archaeology has now come to stand on its ow.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

Sorry to butt in on your dialog with Kudzu, but I am reading Karen Armstrong's "The Great Transformation: The Beginning of Our Religious Traditions"

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2006/mar/18/highereducation.news

It is outstanding, in my opinion!

Never understood how Noah built a boat big enough for every species of mammal, reptile, bird, insect, plant on the planet.
Probably because it never happened and the early Christians simply borrowed the myth of the great flood from the ancient Babylonians.

and so becameith the births of modern luxury liners, and the diseases within them.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

just think. All this shit started when adam grabbed eve's pussy.

[Cypress]

Ralph has done an excellent job in this thread so I’ll just add this about the bolded above: Everything archaeology and science has found to be true supports the biblical record.

Holy smoke. Absolutely gobsmacked.
From a self professed school teacher, no less.

[Cypress]

Tell us about that boat with the animals on it. Where is that record? Where is the archaeological record of wombats, koalas and kangaroos trekking from Turkey to Australia?

I do not see how it is even possible to build a boat large enough to carry every species of mammal, bird, insect, and reptile on the Earth.

I can't even believe in the 21st century we are even having the conversation that the Bible represents literal history.

It is a series of stories, written by men, some of which are borrowed from the oral traditions of earlier pagan religions.

That does not diminish the importance of the bible as a piece of literature, as a metaphorical source of moral inspiration, for its spiritual value. You would have to be a very weak person to be threatened by the concept that the Bible may not literally be a historical document.

I personally have always wanted to know exactly how it is that Jonah lived inside the belly of a whale.

[kudzu]

I do not see how it is even possible to build a boat large enough to carry every species of mammal, bird, insect, and reptile on the Earth.

I can't even believe in the 21st century we are even having the conversation that the Bible represents literal history.

It is a series of stories, written by men, some of which are borrowed from the oral traditions of earlier pagan religions.

That does not diminish the importance of the bible as a piece of literature, as a metaphorical source of moral inspiration, for its spiritual value. You would have to be a very weak person to be threatened by the concept that the Bible may not literally be a historical document.

I personally have always wanted to know exactly how it is that Jonah lived inside the belly of a whale.


Some Christians claim that if you don't believe the Bible is literal, you aren't a real Christian.

[Cypress]

Some Christians claim that if you don't believe the Bible is literal, you aren't a real Christian.

I think it is something some American protestants and evangelicals care about, but is not that important in much of the rest of the world.

I went to Eastern Orthodox service as a child and young adult. They are the oldest and most traditional Christian sect, with theological and religious roots far deeper than American evangelicals. And, while I am sure there are differences of opinion in a body of religion as vast as Eastern Orthodoxy, I do not remember it being made clear to me that the bible was an accurate and literal version of historical events.

[kudzu]

I think it is something some American protestants and evangelicals care about, but is not that important in much of the rest of the world.

I went to Eastern Orthodox service as a child and young adult. They are the oldest and most traditional Christian sect, with theological and religious roots far deeper than American evangelicals. And, while I am sure there are differences of opinion in a body of religion as vast as Eastern Orthodoxy, I do not remember it being made clear to me that the bible was an accurate and literal version of historical events.

There were also Nestorian Christians as early as the first century in Syria and Persia. There are a few ancient Nestorian sites in Arabia... They two had bishops.

The story of Jonah is a comic nouvella to show that God also loved the people of Ninevah.

[kudzu]

I think it is something some American protestants and evangelicals care about, but is not that important in much of the rest of the world.

I went to Eastern Orthodox service as a child and young adult. They are the oldest and most traditional Christian sect, with theological and religious roots far deeper than American evangelicals. And, while I am sure there are differences of opinion in a body of religion as vast as Eastern Orthodoxy, I do not remember it being made clear to me that the bible was an accurate and literal version of historical events.

There were also Nestorian Christians as early as the first century in Syria and Persia. There are a few ancient Nestorian sites in Arabia... They too had bishops.

The story of Jonah is a comic nouvella to show that God also loved the people of Ninevah.

[domer76]

Yes, for 150 years archaeologist tried to prove the Bible.. and they have failed utterly. Archaeology has now come to stand on its ow.

That’s what people like Ralphie do. They have their Biblical views and try to wrap everything else in the world to explain and validate that. It crosses and violates every field in science, not just archaeology. Biology, genetics, evolution, physics, engineering....

[kudzu]

That’s what people like Ralphie do. They have their Biblical views and try to wrap everything else in the world to explain and validate that. It crosses and violates every field in science, not just archaeology. Biology, genetics, evolution, physics, engineering....

Archaeology contradicts the Bible.. yet they will claim archaeology validates the OT stories.


For the most part the Bible stories are morality tales like Aesops' Fables.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

I do not see how it is even possible to build a boat large enough to carry every species of mammal, bird, insect, and reptile on the Earth.

I can't even believe in the 21st century we are even having the conversation that the Bible represents literal history.

It is a series of stories, written by men, some of which are borrowed from the oral traditions of earlier pagan religions.

That does not diminish the importance of the bible as a piece of literature, as a metaphorical source of moral inspiration, for its spiritual value. You would have to be a very weak person to be threatened by the concept that the Bible may not literally be a historical document.

I personally have always wanted to know exactly how it is that Jonah lived inside the belly of a whale.

He didn't actually live there. he was invited to dinner.

[domer76]

Archaeology contradicts the Bible.. yet they will claim archaeology validates the OT stories.


For the most part the Bible stories are morality tales like Aesops' Fables.

Of course they are. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence realizes that. I can’t recall my age at the time, maybe 10 or 12, when I began to say to myself, “Wait, now. A bunch of this stuff just doesn’t make sense.”

It never ceases to amaze me that there are functioning adults who buy it.

[kudzu]

Of course they are. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence realizes that. I can’t recall my age at the time, maybe 10 or 12, when I began to say to myself, “Wait, now. A bunch of this stuff just doesn’t make sense.”

It never ceases to amaze me that there are functioning adults who buy it.

Probably around ten... Same for me. I think forcing children to believe stories like Jonah drives them away from religion.

[Cypress]

Probably around ten... Same for me. I think forcing children to believe stories like Jonah drives them away from religion.

There was undoubtedly a historical person that was an avatar for Jesus, likely some sort of political and theological radical.

But, I never understood why it is so threatening to consider much of the bible parable, and metaphor. It can stand on its own in that very way.

Asking people to accept Noah's Arc and Jonah in the whale's belly as historical fact is absurd. And I am not even sure this mindless fealty to the bible as historical narrative exists widely outside certain strains of American Protestant churches....so I even hesitate to think the belief in the bible as an accurate historical account is really even a "Christian" thing.

[Fentoine Lum]

There was undoubtedly a historical person that was an avatar for Jesus, likely some sort of political and theological radical.

But, I never understood why it is so threatening to consider much of the bible parable, and metaphor. It can stand on its own in that very way.

Asking people to accept Noah's Arc and Jonah in the whale's belly as historical fact is absurd. And I am not even sure this mindless fealty to the bible as historical narrative exists widely outside certain strains of American Protestant churches....so I even hesitate to think the belief in the bible as an accurate historical account is really even a "Christian" thing.

Unless of course religion is ultimately about submission to this notion of a male dominator god which in turn gives this male dominator god's adherents dominion over all theyencounter including the natural world and all of humanity.

[Leonthecat]

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/3d/80/ee/3d80ee749e7f4bea250be026fc1a0aab.jpg

:truestory:

[PostmodernProphet]

There was NO Jericho at the time of Joshua.

The archaeologists agree on that.

link the archaeologists engaging in agreement.......(we know you can't, but its fun to watch you squirm).....

[PostmodernProphet]

I do not see how it is even possible to build a boat large enough to carry every species of mammal, bird, insect, and reptile on the Earth.

I can't believe you still think it had to.....

[PostmodernProphet]

some of which are borrowed from the oral traditions of earlier pagan religions. .

how many times does that claim have to be proven false before you give up?.....

[PostmodernProphet]

Some Christians claim that if you don't believe the Bible is literal, you aren't a real Christian.

and some idiots believe that if you choose the Bible you forfeit any claim to intelligence......

[PostmodernProphet]

Archaeology contradicts the Bible..

can you give us a valid example?......you haven't been too successful so far......

[domer76]

I can't believe you still think it had to.....

This coming from a person who said 'if it's in the Bible, it happened.'

Which is it, pimple?

[kudzu]

can you give us a valid example?......you haven't been too successful so far......

Solomon's stables aren't stables unless they were minature horses.. and the weren't built by Solomon.

[kudzu]

link the archaeologists engaging in agreement.......(we know you can't, but its fun to watch you squirm).....

You can start by reading Kenyon or some of the links I already posted.

[Guno צְבִי]

and some idiots believe that if you choose the Bible you forfeit any claim to intelligence......

And, that's a given

[PostmodernProphet]

Solomon's stables aren't stables unless they were minature horses.. and the weren't built by Solomon.

and your proof of this is what?...

[PostmodernProphet]

You can start by reading Kenyon or some of the links I already posted.

document, child......document.....

[PostmodernProphet]

And, that's a given

then we are in complete agreement?....

[kudzu]

document, child......document.....

You won't get an education from soundbites, but here's a start.


https://www.britannica.com/place/Jericho-West-Bank

[PostmodernProphet]

You won't get an education from soundbites, but here's a start.


https://www.britannica.com/place/Jericho-West-Bank

wasn't it your goal to prove the biblical account was false?....

[kudzu]

wasn't it your goal to prove the biblical account was false?....

The population of Palestine was never large.. perhaps 700,000 tops.. There were no huge armies.

[PostmodernProphet]

The population of Palestine was never large.. perhaps 700,000 tops.. There were no huge armies.

first of all, your source says nothing about the population of Palestine; second, you were trying to prove Jericho never existed and gave a source documenting its existence.......

[kudzu]

first of all, your source says nothing about the population of Palestine; second, you were trying to prove Jericho never existed and gave a source documenting its existence.......

You didn't read what I wrote.. There were seven Jerichos dating back to the Natufian culture because there was a spring.. and there were long periods of time when it was uninhabited. .. Earthquakes are pretty common in the area.

As for the population.. In the early 19th century the population of all of Palestine was less than 400,000.. 94% Arab. It was too stony and arid to support a large population especially in Judah. Joshua's HUGE armies are exaggeration.

[PostmodernProphet]

You didn't read what I wrote.. There were seven Jerichos dating back to the Natufian culture because there was a spring.. and there were long periods of time when it was uninhabited. .. Earthquakes are pretty common in the area.

As for the population.. In the early 19th century the population of all of Palestine was less than 400,000.. 94% Arab. It was too stony and arid to support a large population especially in Judah. Joshua's HUGE armies are exaggeration.

so.....1) shouldn't you provide documentation that Jericho didn't exist in the era of Exodus.......2) shouldn't you prove the population of palestine?.......3) shouldn't you prove that Israel did not have a large army.......

[domer76]

so.....1) shouldn't you provide documentation that Jericho didn't exist in the era of Exodus.......2) shouldn't you prove the population of palestine?.......3) shouldn't you prove that Israel did not have a large army.......

Why aren't you offering proof other than "if the Bible says so, it happened"?

You're getting a theological ass-whoopin' and it's amusing to observe.

[PostmodernProphet]

lol....domer's stupid enough to think kudz is winning this argument......

[domer76]

lol....domer's stupid enough to think kudz is winning this argument......

lol

He's kicking your ass and the best you can come up with is

"what it states, happened....."

[PostmodernProphet]

and you think, "Kudz said so, so it happened" is a stronger argument?.....

[Damocles]

Heheheheh -- really. That article has been around for quite a long time; he updated it to make it more relevant. He's the founder of Church of All Worlds, based on the religion in the sci-fi book "Stranger in a Strange Land" by Heinlein. We used to be neighbors with one of the co-founders, and have talked to Oberon in real life, although we never met in person. He is still writing and does occasional appearances at various pagan events. Sadly, Morning Glory passed away from cancer.

Too bad she didn't know Martian, she could have cured herself. I wonder if they cannibalize the bodies of their dead as those who followed the teachings of that church did in Stranger in a Strange Land. I grok that they probably do not.

[Damocles]

a must read. a comedy of religion. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job:_A_Comedy_of_Justice

By robert heinlein.

Heinlein is one of my favorite authors, I have read every one of his books, several of them multiple times. This is one of those that I've read more than once. Also Stranger in a Strange Land, The Number of the Beast, and Farnham's Freehold (there are others but he was a prolific writer).

[Damocles]

out of the five major religions of the world today three share the creation story of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam....
The Hindus believe the universe is eternal and was never created.....
The Buddhists believe the universe is a repeated cycle of births and deaths......that covers about 98% of religious people.......

Only a specific type of Buddhist would believe in reincarnation. Theravada Buddhists understand that Buddha's teachings didn't touch on any of that, he taught about this life only and not about Gods or Creation.

[Damocles]

read this, i dare ya.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Source_(novel)

You dare me to read a novel? Oh no... Boy wouldn't it be embarrassing if I did just that?

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

Too bad she didn't know Martian, she could have cured herself. I wonder if they cannibalize the bodies of their dead as those who followed the teachings of that church did in Stranger in a Strange Land. I grok that they probably do not.

I'm down with the grok.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

You dare me to read a novel? Oh no... Boy wouldn't it be embarrassing if I did just that?

I would have suggested it to PeePee but he can't read but he can plant his seed.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

Heinlein is one of my favorite authors, I have read every one of his books, several of them multiple times. This is one of those that I've read more than once. Also Stranger in a Strange Land, The Number of the Beast, and Farnham's Freehold (there are others but he was a prolific writer).

https://www.google.com/search?q=youtube+leon+russell+stranger+in+a+strang e+land&oq=you+tube+leon+russell+stranger&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l2.25127j0j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hjy7RAu8TJ4

[Damocles]

because YHWH was not a name that God had given to man prior to Moses.....

Enosh, the first son of Seth (third son of Adam and Eve) knew God as Yahweh (Jehovah).

Genesis 4:26
Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the name of the LORD.

[Damocles]

no.....that name was given to Moses when he asked who he should say sent him......

Still wrong. The name he gave to Moses was "I AM"... Not Jehovah. Exodus 3:14: God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM"; and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"…

[Damocles]

There was NO Jericho at the time of Joshua.

The archaeologists agree on that.

https://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/22/world/believers-score-in-battle-over-the-battle-of-jericho.html

No, they do not. They used to, but that has begun to change. Shoot, it began to change sometime before 1990... The story I posted from the NY Times is from February 1990.

[Damocles]

Probably around ten... Same for me. I think forcing children to believe stories like Jonah drives them away from religion.

Nah, for me it was the evidence of my eyes. In the Bible when the Spirit came upon Jesus' followers they were able to Speak in Tongues, which allowed them to say something and EVERYONE understood in their own language, but nowadays speaking in tongues is babble-speak only understood by somebody else touched by God who seems to continue to speak as if he was from the 16th century. I remember being frustrated by a being who supposedly knew everything speaking, "Yea I say unto you that if you speak with Me I will tell thee..." So forth. I also was always amazed that either the person speaking in tongues spoke for 10 minutes for a 30 second translation, or the translation was like 20 minutes of ancient English for 42 seconds of tongues-speak where they said "Ashumdelalah" 16 times.

Then the "three in one" frustration was a big player in my huge doubt that began nearly when I first heard it. This played into the Sacrifice story that was also frustrating to me. God, who knows everything and is everywhere sends himself to "die" on the cross knowing that he would rise again in "3 days" that were counted as a full day if any part of it happened in any day... Also this God would know that an eternal spirit can't be killed. Then this God holds a conversation with himself and forsakes himself? I was nonplussed. It just doesn't seem like a sacrifice or even a game if you already know you are going to win. It's like playing chess with a 3 year old who doesn't yet know how the pieces move, how is that a challenge?

I was told that if you even had the "faith" of a mustard seed you could do anything Christ did, like walk on water, heal the sick, etc. Shoot Christ said you could move mountains, I have seen none moved. I've met nobody, and I really do mean nobody at all, that could do any of it. Apparently nobody at all has any faith, not even as much as that tiny mustard seed... Thousands of people pouring forward at our church for healing prayer and their record was O for Thousands of hopefuls... nobody ever was healed... Well, some of them were eventually healed by modern medicine and simply their bodies healing. Nary a blind person could ever see, wheelchairs were still necessary for those who needed them before, nada...

The story of Jonah... That was nothing but a story to me, but if Miracles could happen, then m'eh... that's a pretty normal sounding "miracle"...

Then there were stories of God's seeming uncaring attitude. When kids come out to mock one of his prophets for his baldness and he gets frustrated and curses them, a bear comes and kills all those kids? Really? I thought it said God is love, how is that love?

I can go on and on. So many of these discrepancies between what I saw and what I read/heard led me to just flat tell the people at the church and my mother that i simply didn't believe sometime around 9 years old. Which was a mistake, but that's a whole different story for a different time.

[PostmodernProphet]

Still wrong. The name he gave to Moses was "I AM"... Not Jehovah. Exodus 3:14: God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM"; and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, 'I AM has sent me to you.'"…

YHWH was the Jewish way of expressing "I am" so that they could avoid using the words themselves, as they believed it was a breach of the commandment "Do not not take the name of the Lord in vain" to even use the words I am......


Enosh, the first son of Seth (third son of Adam and Eve) knew God as Yahweh (Jehovah).
when the oral traditions that we know as Genesis was finally set down as a written text, stories from various sources were combined in a chronological order......some of those sources used the post-Moses form of the name of God, some used the pre-Moses form of El which simply means God....

[PostmodernProphet]

Nah, for me it was the evidence of my eyes. In the Bible when the Spirit came upon Jesus' followers they were able to Speak in Tongues, which allowed them to say something and EVERYONE understood in their own language, but nowadays speaking in tongues is babble-speak only understood by somebody else touched by God who seems to continue to speak as if he was from the 16th century. I remember being frustrated by a being who supposedly knew everything speaking, "Yea I say unto you that if you speak with Me I will tell thee..." So forth. I also was always amazed that either the person speaking in tongues spoke for 10 minutes for a 30 second translation, or the translation was like 20 minutes of ancient English for 42 seconds of tongues-speak where they said "Ashumdelalah" 16 times.

Then the "three in one" frustration was a big player in my huge doubt that began nearly when I first heard it. This played into the Sacrifice story that was also frustrating to me. God, who knows everything and is everywhere sends himself to "die" on the cross knowing that he would rise again in "3 days" that were counted as a full day if any part of it happened in any day... Also this God would know that an eternal spirit can't be killed. Then this God holds a conversation with himself and forsakes himself? I was nonplussed. It just doesn't seem like a sacrifice or even a game if you already know you are going to win. It's like playing chess with a 3 year old who doesn't yet know how the pieces move, how is that a challenge?

I was told that if you even had the "faith" of a mustard seed you could do anything Christ did, like walk on water, heal the sick, etc. Shoot Christ said you could move mountains, I have seen none moved. I've met nobody, and I really do mean nobody at all, that could do any of it. Apparently nobody at all has any faith, not even as much as that tiny mustard seed... Thousands of people pouring forward at our church for healing prayer and their record was O for Thousands of hopefuls... nobody ever was healed... Well, some of them were eventually healed by modern medicine and simply their bodies healing. Nary a blind person could ever see, wheelchairs were still necessary for those who needed them before, nada...

The story of Jonah... That was nothing but a story to me, but if Miracles could happen, then m'eh... that's a pretty normal sounding "miracle"...

Then there were stories of God's seeming uncaring attitude. When kids come out to mock one of his prophets for his baldness and he gets frustrated and curses them, a bear comes and kills all those kids? Really? I thought it said God is love, how is that love?

I can go on and on. So many of these discrepancies between what I saw and what I read/heard led me to just flat tell the people at the church and my mother that i simply didn't believe sometime around 9 years old. Which was a mistake, but that's a whole different story for a different time.
apparently your Christian experience was with a Pentacostal style church......it is sad that extremism turned you away from God.........

[Guno צְבִי]

Interesting

The very words of the ten commandments clearly tells us that the commandments were for the Jewish people ONLY

The hebrew god never brought the goyim or their ancestors out of Egypt! Ex 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery."
The hebrew god has not given the gtoyim the promised land of Canaan! Ex 20:12 "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the Lord your God gives you"
Since the Sabbath is a sign between hebrews god and fleshly Israel, there is nothing requiring goyim to keep it! (Ex. 31:13,17; Ezek. 20:12, 20)
If it was intended for all mankind, then why specifically say "strangers within your gates". Obviously the goyim (strangers) were never required at any point in earth history to keep the Sabbath or commandements!

And why are the goyims version of the ten commandment not like the hebrew ten commandments?


http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/2007/03/chart-comparing-the-ten-commandments.aspx

[PostmodernProphet]

Interesting

The very words of the ten commandments clearly tells us that the commandments were for the Jewish people ONLY



odd then that God said this about the Ten Commandments.....

Exodus 4:5 See, I have taught you decrees and laws as the Lord my God commanded me, so that you may follow them in the land you are entering to take possession of it. 6 Observe them carefully, for this will show your wisdom and understanding to the nations, who will hear about all these decrees and say, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” 7 What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the Lord our God is near us whenever we pray to him? 8 And what other nation is so great as to have such righteous decrees and laws as this body of laws I am setting before you today?


there is nothing requiring goyim to keep it!
on the other hand Jesus specifically said we should.....

Matthew 7:6 He answered and said to them, Well has Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. 7 However, in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. 8 For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things you do. 9 And he said to them, Full well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your own tradition.


And why are the goyims version of the ten commandment not like the hebrew ten commandments?

interesting point.....the Jewish version, the Catholic/Lutheran version, and most of the other Christian churches version treat the commandments differently....
The Jewish version says the first commandment is I am the Lord your God........the RCA/Lutherans don't use this as #1, since it doesn't actually call for any action.....they call it an introduction.......but for some reason they have two separate "do not covet" commandments......Calvin found that problematic, especially since the Exodus and Deuteronomy versions don't list "coveting" in the same order.....he viewed "have no other gods" and "make no idols" as two separate commandments, unlike the Catholics and Lutherans.....

so probably the most interesting fact about the Ten Commandments is that they are actually the Nine Commandments.......

[Damocles]

YHWH was the Jewish way of expressing "I am" so that they could avoid using the words themselves, as they believed it was a breach of the commandment "Do not not take the name of the Lord in vain" to even use the words I am......


when the oral traditions that we know as Genesis was finally set down as a written text, stories from various sources were combined in a chronological order......some of those sources used the post-Moses form of the name of God, some used the pre-Moses form of El which simply means God....

The third son of Adam was not born after Moses. It's absurd.

[Damocles]

apparently your Christian experience was with a Pentacostal style church......it is sad that extremism turned you away from God.........

While the speaking in tongues may have not been in my experience, I'm reasonably sure that I would run into almost all of that mess in any Christian church out there, unless there is one that teaches that faith is meaningless and that when Christ told the "faith of the mustard seed" story he was just writing fiction...

[iolo]

Interesting

The very words of the ten commandments clearly tells us that the commandments were for the Jewish people ONLY

The hebrew god never brought the goyim or their ancestors out of Egypt! Ex 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery."
The hebrew god has not given the gtoyim the promised land of Canaan! Ex 20:12 "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be prolonged in the land which the Lord your God gives you"
Since the Sabbath is a sign between hebrews god and fleshly Israel, there is nothing requiring goyim to keep it! (Ex. 31:13,17; Ezek. 20:12, 20)
If it was intended for all mankind, then why specifically say "strangers within your gates". Obviously the goyim (strangers) were never required at any point in earth history to keep the Sabbath or commandements!

And why are the goyims version of the ten commandment not like the hebrew ten commandments?


http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/2007/03/chart-comparing-the-ten-commandments.aspx

As I understand it, the Church was the 'New Israel', and had replaced the old.

[PostmodernProphet]

The third son of Adam was not born after Moses. It's absurd.

????....nobody said he was......are you high today?.....

[PostmodernProphet]

While the speaking in tongues may have not been in my experience, I'm reasonably sure that I would run into almost all of that mess in any Christian church out there, unless there is one that teaches that faith is meaningless and that when Christ told the "faith of the mustard seed" story he was just writing fiction...

really?.....because I expect less than 10% of Christian churches have any experience with speaking in tongues and the rest would not think it has anything to do with faith...... I've never even been in a church that thought someone was going to speak in tongues......

[Damocles]

really?.....because I expect less than 10% of Christian churches have any experience with speaking in tongues and the rest would not think it has anything to do with faith...... I've never even been in a church that thought someone was going to speak in tongues......

Yet everything else I listed doesn't strike you as problematic at all, eh? Speaking in tongues was not what led me to question things, it was just one aspect of a whole tapestry.

I said, had I gone to churches where speaking in tongues was not present I would still run into all the rest.

[Oracle Of JPP 714]

You might find this an interesting (and funny) read.

http://caw.org/content/?q=node/65

Definitely worth a bookmark. That is some heady stuff.

[Guno צְבִי]

really?.....because I expect less than 10% of Christian churches have any experience with speaking in tongues and the rest would not think it has anything to do with faith...... I've never even been in a church that thought someone was going to speak in tongues......

Speak in Tongues in 5-Days or Your Money Back!



Our Pastors are very excited about a new Hooked on Phonics DVD being made available exclusively through the Landover Baptist Church. "For the last few years, we've been assisting the folks at Hooked on Phonics in coming up with a quality product," says Landover Pastor, Deacon Fred. "I'm confident that we've created something that will have you babbling in so many tongues you'll damn Pentecostals to Hell with their corrosive envy."

The DVD allows beginners to start out the easy, backwoods Pentecostal way -- by copying what the person in the next pew is yapping. Within a day, you will learn to make up things that even you can't understand while in a hot-footed hillbilly trance. You'll get a hundred page handy translation guide along with the DVD:

TONGUES: shun-doo-lah!

ENGLISH: "Look at me!

TONGUES: shun-doo-lah, mah-shundah!

ENGLISH: "Look at me! Look'it what I can do!"

DVD extras include: Basic Snake-Handling, Pew-Jumping Safety, Beginner's Chandelier Swinging, and the popular short instructional film, Slayed in the Spirit: Failsafe Protocals - When You're in the Wrong Church and the Congregation Goes for the Gun Rack, It's Time to Play Dead.

Not included in this offer: Singing in Tongues and Healing Below the Belt.

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1204/tongues.html

[Leonthecat]

Speak in Tongues in 5-Days or Your Money Back!



Our Pastors are very excited about a new Hooked on Phonics DVD being made available exclusively through the Landover Baptist Church. "For the last few years, we've been assisting the folks at Hooked on Phonics in coming up with a quality product," says Landover Pastor, Deacon Fred. "I'm confident that we've created something that will have you babbling in so many tongues you'll damn Pentecostals to Hell with their corrosive envy."

The DVD allows beginners to start out the easy, backwoods Pentecostal way -- by copying what the person in the next pew is yapping. Within a day, you will learn to make up things that even you can't understand while in a hot-footed hillbilly trance. You'll get a hundred page handy translation guide along with the DVD:

TONGUES: shun-doo-lah!

ENGLISH: "Look at me!

TONGUES: shun-doo-lah, mah-shundah!

ENGLISH: "Look at me! Look'it what I can do!"

DVD extras include: Basic Snake-Handling, Pew-Jumping Safety, Beginner's Chandelier Swinging, and the popular short instructional film, Slayed in the Spirit: Failsafe Protocals - When You're in the Wrong Church and the Congregation Goes for the Gun Rack, It's Time to Play Dead.

Not included in this offer: Singing in Tongues and Healing Below the Belt.

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1204/tongues.html


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBejyHI6qr0

What kind of mental illness would you have to have to give this asshole your money?
He earned 80 million a year with this act, preying on deranged Christians.
Tilton is only one of many.

[Leonthecat]

Want proof that Christianity requires insanity?
Must see:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUP7r5S6rRw

[Leonthecat]

Nah, for me it was the evidence of my eyes. In the Bible when the Spirit came upon Jesus' followers they were able to Speak in Tongues, which allowed them to say something and EVERYONE understood in their own language, but nowadays speaking in tongues is babble-speak only understood by somebody else touched by God who seems to continue to speak as if he was from the 16th century. I remember being frustrated by a being who supposedly knew everything speaking, "Yea I say unto you that if you speak with Me I will tell thee..." So forth. I also was always amazed that either the person speaking in tongues spoke for 10 minutes for a 30 second translation, or the translation was like 20 minutes of ancient English for 42 seconds of tongues-speak where they said "Ashumdelalah" 16 times.

Then the "three in one" frustration was a big player in my huge doubt that began nearly when I first heard it. This played into the Sacrifice story that was also frustrating to me. God, who knows everything and is everywhere sends himself to "die" on the cross knowing that he would rise again in "3 days" that were counted as a full day if any part of it happened in any day... Also this God would know that an eternal spirit can't be killed. Then this God holds a conversation with himself and forsakes himself? I was nonplussed. It just doesn't seem like a sacrifice or even a game if you already know you are going to win. It's like playing chess with a 3 year old who doesn't yet know how the pieces move, how is that a challenge?

I was told that if you even had the "faith" of a mustard seed you could do anything Christ did, like walk on water, heal the sick, etc. Shoot Christ said you could move mountains, I have seen none moved. I've met nobody, and I really do mean nobody at all, that could do any of it. Apparently nobody at all has any faith, not even as much as that tiny mustard seed... Thousands of people pouring forward at our church for healing prayer and their record was O for Thousands of hopefuls... nobody ever was healed... Well, some of them were eventually healed by modern medicine and simply their bodies healing. Nary a blind person could ever see, wheelchairs were still necessary for those who needed them before, nada...

The story of Jonah... That was nothing but a story to me, but if Miracles could happen, then m'eh... that's a pretty normal sounding "miracle"...

Then there were stories of God's seeming uncaring attitude. When kids come out to mock one of his prophets for his baldness and he gets frustrated and curses them, a bear comes and kills all those kids? Really? I thought it said God is love, how is that love?

I can go on and on. So many of these discrepancies between what I saw and what I read/heard led me to just flat tell the people at the church and my mother that i simply didn't believe sometime around 9 years old. Which was a mistake, but that's a whole different story for a different time.

You were too sane to be a Christian, Damo.
Good for you.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Heinlein is one of my favorite authors, I have read every one of his books, several of them multiple times. This is one of those that I've read more than once. Also Stranger in a Strange Land, The Number of the Beast, and Farnham's Freehold (there are others but he was a prolific writer).

May you never thirst, Brother.

[PostmodernProphet]

Yet everything else I listed doesn't strike you as problematic at all, eh? Speaking in tongues was not what led me to question things, it was just one aspect of a whole tapestry.

I said, had I gone to churches where speaking in tongues was not present I would still run into all the rest.

thinking humans can do the things God did if they had faith?.......no, you would not run into that in 90+% of Christian churches?....

this?....

Then the "three in one" frustration was a big player in my huge doubt that began nearly when I first heard it. This played into the Sacrifice story that was also frustrating to me. God, who knows everything and is everywhere sends himself to "die" on the cross knowing that he would rise again in "3 days" that were counted as a full day if any part of it happened in any day... Also this God would know that an eternal spirit can't be killed. Then this God holds a conversation with himself and forsakes himself? I was nonplussed. It just doesn't seem like a sacrifice or even a game if you already know you are going to win. It's like playing chess with a 3 year old who doesn't yet know how the pieces move, how is that a challenge?

yeah, you're going to find that.......but to me it isn't a fake sacrifice just because he had knowledge he would be victorious over death.......it was a sacrifice because a God was willing to suffer the restriction of being merely human, was willing to have himself nailed to a block of wood.....just because he wanted me to love him without hesitation.....

[PostmodernProphet]

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news1204/tongues.html

you do know that's an Onion-type site, right?.....

[Leonthecat]

you do know that's an Onion-type site, right?.....

Do you believe that because of your faith, that you are going to live forever?

[Leonthecat]

you do know that's an Onion-type site, right?.....

It is hilariously funny, and so are you, PmP.

[Damocles]

thinking humans can do the things God did if they had faith?.......no, you would not run into that in 90+% of Christian churches?....

So you think that when God Himself said (Matt. 17:20): He replied, “Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” [21] [a]

He was just faking you out then?



yeah, you're going to find that.......but to me it isn't a fake sacrifice just because he had knowledge he would be victorious over death.......it was a sacrifice because a God was willing to suffer the restriction of being merely human, was willing to have himself nailed to a block of wood.....just because he wanted me to love him without hesitation.....

Right, so limited... You informed me that mankind cannot do what "God" did earlier and think that nobody in any church but the one I grew up in would believe Christ when he said things, then tell me that he was "limited" to being human. You cannot have it both ways. Either God came to earth to tell you stories that weren't true and be human, or he was God the whole time, knew it, and told you the Truth but you don't have the faith of even a mustard seed. By this measure nobody at all really believes.

Anyway, I questioned stuff even before then, it was only 9 or 10 when I got the courage to tell people. These are just the largest examples.

[PostmodernProphet]

So you think that when God Himself said (Matt. 17:20): He replied, “Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” [21] [a]

He was just faking you out then?

nope, I'm just thinking he didn't expect people to be stupid enough to play with poisonous snakes or pick up mountains and move them to the next country........or expect to speak in mysterious languages........the "tongues" spoken on Pentacost by the apostles were the native languages of the foreigners in the audience.......not manic babblings.....



Right, so limited... You informed me that mankind cannot do what "God" did earlier and think that nobody in any church but the one I grew up in would believe Christ when he said things, then tell me that he was "limited" to being human. You cannot have it both ways.
to be honest, I can't even see that the two claims are even in the same ball park let along a parallel......no......mankind cannot do what God can............yes, Jesus was limited by his incarnation........that does not mean that you and I can command God to heal people or make him let us walk on water.......

[kudzu]

nope, I'm just thinking he didn't expect people to be stupid enough to play with poisonous snakes or pick up mountains and move them to the next country........or expect to speak in mysterious languages........the "tongues" spoken on Pentacost by the apostles were the native languages of the foreigners in the audience.......not manic babblings.....


to be honest, I can't even see that the two claims are even in the same ball park let along a parallel......no......mankind cannot do what God can............yes, Jesus was limited by his incarnation........that does not mean that you and I can command God to heal people or make him let us walk on water.......

So matthew 17:20 is a lie?

[Leonthecat]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3j1GVwrlzg

Combine hillbilly ignorance , induced insanity and Christian faith and this what you get.
If a little insanity is required to be a Christian a lot of insanity must be more Christian, right?

[PostmodernProphet]

So matthew 17:20 is a lie?

not at all......what you want to pretend it means is a lie.....

[kudzu]

not at all......what you want to pretend it means is a lie.....

Matthew 17:20


“And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.”

King James Version (KJV)

[PostmodernProphet]

Matthew 17:20


“And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.”

King James Version (KJV)

and do you believe this verse was about mountains?......

[kudzu]

and do you believe this verse was about mountains?......


I think its saying that if the mountain doesn't move, you don't have enough faith.

[PostmodernProphet]

I think its saying that if the mountain doesn't move, you don't have enough faith.

is that because you believe it was written before metaphors were created?.....

[Frank Apisa]

Matthew 17:20


“And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.”

King James Version (KJV)

Yeah, supposedly they can move mountains with their "faith" and "prayers."

I'm willing to allow them to use all the ministers, priests, rabbis, imams, cardinals, and the pope...to move a mountain with faith and prayer...

...and I will use one agnostic or atheist using a teaspoon to move one...

...and place a huge bet on the agnostic or atheist moving more of the mountain.

Only thing is...there would be no takers.

[kudzu]

is that because you believe it was written before metaphors were created?.....

So what is he calling a "mountain"?

[kudzu]

Yeah, supposedly they can move mountains with their "faith" and "prayers."

I'm willing to allow them to use all the ministers, priests, rabbis, imams, cardinals, and the pope...to move a mountain with faith and prayer...

...and I will use one agnostic or atheist using a teaspoon to move one...

...and place a huge bet on the agnostic or atheist moving more of the mountain.

Only thing is...there would be no takers.


Its a "gotcha".. If you have enough REAL faith you can walk on water or cure diseases.

[PostmodernProphet]

So what is he calling a "mountain"?

that which we feel we cannot deal with........for example lib'rul ignorance may appear to be a mountain, but through faith we turn you into a sand pile and brush you aside......

[domer76]

Its a "gotcha".. If you have enough REAL faith you can walk on water or cure diseases.

It’s true. As a kid, I watched Oral Roberts do it on TV.