FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-24-2009, 07:30 AM   #11
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southwest USA
Posts: 4,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan Scott View Post
Genesis is, as we all know here in BC&H, a compilation of earlier texts which most likely evolved from "caveman" religions.
What is that based on?
It evolved from caveman religions, which is not to say that there were caveman religions and the next day there was Genesis. It seems obvious to me that from the earliest recorded history-cave drawings, that there have been gods. To the cavemen and early hunter gatherers there were gods to explain what man did not understand-sky gods, water gods earth gods moon gods, weather gods, etc. As man began to undrstand these things, their corresponding gods disappeared until sometime during the so-called Axial Age, starting at about 1000 BCE, gods turned inward and the concept of a personal god came to be more commonly accepted, basically to answer the question: "why are we here?" It was during this time that most scholars believe that the Torah was most likely compiled from earlier writings, some of which clearly evolved from the earlier Canaan, Sumerian and Babylonian myths. It was an evolution-for example, there can be little doubt that the flood story is an adaption of the flood story in the Gilgamesh. Read the two and it is obvious even to a novice like me. There are also many similarities, less obvious perhaps, to the creation story and the tower of Babel story with the Enuma Elish (When on High).
Quote:
My reading of the Hebrew religion's origins are based on 100% logical doctrines and a clear separation from caveman and humanity's hitherto past. Abraham left his country and religion because of a thought which changed not only humanity but the universe itself: Monotheism. This factor alone makes all other religions, philosophies and ideologies mythical.
As an adherent to your religion I would expect nothing less. These are your beliefs, and they do not neccessarily have to be at odds with the facts. As long as we understand that what was written, regardless of the writer's wisdom at the time, was written by ancient people with limited knowledge. Even if their writings were guided by God, God would have to take their limits into account. These texts were written for them, for the ancients-we absolutely know they were not all written for all time. If we were to follow the letter of the Law today, we would be in prison.
Tristan Scott is offline  
Old 07-24-2009, 01:01 PM   #12
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

I blame Cyrus.
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 07-24-2009, 08:04 PM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan Scott View Post
It evolved from caveman religions,
This begs the Q what constitutes a BREAK from ancient caveman religions. How about an invisable, undescribable God which cannot be alligned with caveman images? I put it to you this was an advanced premise, even for much later religions like ancient Egypt, Greece and Rome, who saw such a belief as bizarre. However, this is perhaps the only belief premise which is vindicated today: no belief's provisions, and no descriptions and images, have ever been vindicated, while none can question the Abrahamic premise - because it never resorted to caveman beliefs.

Nor is this a 'personal' God. It is the first time we find the premise of ONE creator for all and everything - which cannot be said to be 'personal'.

Quote:
It seems obvious to me that from the earliest recorded history-cave drawings, that there have been gods. To the cavemen and early hunter gatherers there were gods to explain what man did not understand-sky gods, water gods earth gods moon gods, weather gods, etc.
This too is wanting, despite the well intentioned coherence it strives for. It is evidenced that early humanity resorted to mythical Gods, and this is not a mark of their lack of intelligence - this was the only scientific premise they could latch onto from the knowledge available. In fact these are the first impressions where both science and Monotheism stemmed from: the need to understand the universe and its origins, and these constitute pivotal wonderings of the greatest questions. It's reasonable answer is found nowhere but in the Hebrew - I mean by this that this is the only premise which can stand up to science and all other thoughts. It is advanced because it cannot be refuted, and its non-proof does not negate but empowers it. Here, a proof in a bottle would KO its premise. I would not redicule early caveman wonderings, nor reduce the follow-up Abraham premises, but see its deeper cadence.

Quote:

As man began to undrstand these things, their corresponding gods disappeared until sometime during the so-called Axial Age, starting at about 1000 BCE, gods turned inward and the concept of a personal god came to be more commonly accepted, basically to answer the question: "why are we here?" It was during this time that most scholars believe that the Torah was most likely compiled from earlier writings, some of which clearly evolved from the earlier Canaan, Sumerian and Babylonian myths.
Canaan did not harbour any beliefs similar to the Abrahamic one, nor the sumer and babylonians. The date 1000 BCE is too close to the Mosaic period to be entertained as a new observation, other than it affirms the Mosaic books began around this period, ushering a whole new set of wars, beliefs and new thoughts - namely inalienable human rights, liberty and monotheism. These were the MC2's of the ancient world.

Quote:


It was an evolution-for example, there can be little doubt that the flood story is an adaption of the flood story in the Gilgamesh.
The reverse applies. Gilgamesh is post-Abraham, and even its later datings is heavily disputed. We know that those Gmesh laws were never observed or followed in Babylon as per real history. Otherwise, the flood story only gets an affirmation here - not in its global occurence, but as a regional flood, making its recording in genesis a non-myth, and not evolutionary.

Quote:
As long as we understand that what was written, regardless of the writer's wisdom at the time, was written by ancient people with limited knowledge. Even if their writings were guided by God, God would have to take their limits into account. These texts were written for them, for the ancients-we absolutely know they were not all written for all time. If we were to follow the letter of the Law today, we would be in prison.
We cannot say how these were derived [no proof is available, despite the charges how and when they appeared], while these writings defy logic - they are not limited to ancient man but its provisions, premises and laws are all valid and active today, and stand up to every state of art science and logic. Its dislodging can only come from proof the universe is not finite, that there is no universe maker, or that its laws are absolete today: these are the fulcrum factors of the Hebrew bible, as opposed caveman religions, personal Gods, Noah, etc. And these stand today - exactly as portrayed, namely it is so and that it cannot be proven. Now that's not just clever - its reality and vndicated, and not seen elsewhere.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 07-24-2009, 11:57 PM   #14
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Who is Abraham?

I've forgotten the reference, but the idea of the emergence of self consciousness seems very relevant to the change from polytheistic to one god thinking.
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 07-25-2009, 03:56 AM   #15
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
Who is Abraham?

I've forgotten the reference, but the idea of the emergence of self consciousness seems very relevant to the change from polytheistic to one god thinking.
Abraham introduced Monotheism; Moses introduced the criteria what this premise constitutes and how it is alligned with.
IamJoseph is offline  
Old 07-25-2009, 04:25 AM   #16
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
Default

Bible Unearthed - and various forms of onegodisms are found in Egypt, Greece and Persia - and a little colony of those empires.

Actually, is that the issue with this little bit of the ane -- that it had more different rulers than anywhere else?
Clivedurdle is offline  
Old 07-25-2009, 07:27 AM   #17
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post

I'd rather think the story is a tribal legacy with Adam as the first tribal chieftan taking his wife from a kindred tribe. Their begotten sons were confederate peoples who joined the Adam's family, much the same as Hebrews and other tribal people joined themselves to the house of Abraham.
The standout factors of the Genesis adam/eve story is:

1. Humans begat a higher consciousness, transcendent from other life forms. VINDICATED.

2. That this occured via the unique trait of speech. VINDICATED.

3. That there is a controversy about 'WHEN & HOW' this occured - not IF this occured. According to the Genesis Calendar, this happened less than 6000 years ago, and we have here the evidential back-up of history [non-existant outside 6000], speech [ditto], a diarized calendar [powerful evidence], a listed geneaology [ditto], authentic contemporary 'names' [a scientific factor], and not a single disputational evidence outside recent ToE science views.

The above vindicated factors, inroduced for the first time, takes the subject well outside the 'myth' category, and is the first scientific, historical and mathematical positations of humanity's origins.

The disputational factors, all made recently, are related to fossils being ratified as all life occured from one life millions of years ago, and that humans evolved from an animal millions of years ago, and that speech is an evolutionary elevation from an animal. The evidence for this is far less than that of genesis, while only Genesis can vindicate its factors today.

No matter which of those two one inclines with - the myth factor is more heavily inclined with ToE.

Quote:
Humans existed many thousands of years before the story of Adam and Eve, the happy tribal couple, whereof the Hebrews laid claim to that heritage.
If they did, this is not determinable by fossils. We do NOT have a 'NAME' older than 6000.

The standard factors of Genesis is MYTH.

Are you saying man learned to speak less than 6000 years ago?
storytime is offline  
Old 07-25-2009, 07:40 AM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 2,608
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivedurdle View Post
Who is Abraham?

I've forgotten the reference, but the idea of the emergence of self consciousness seems very relevant to the change from polytheistic to one god thinking.
Abraham introduced Monotheism; Moses introduced the criteria what this premise constitutes and how it is alligned with.
And Jacob recognized three gods in his new name "IS" "RA" "EL". I don't know how you cannot see this as polythestism. But I'm sure you have some myth and magic up your sleeve.
storytime is offline  
Old 07-25-2009, 08:07 AM   #19
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: nowhere
Posts: 15,747
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post

Abraham introduced Monotheism; Moses introduced the criteria what this premise constitutes and how it is alligned with.
And Jacob recognized three gods in his new name "IS" "RA" "EL". I don't know how you cannot see this as polythestism. But I'm sure you have some myth and magic up your sleeve.
Did you know STO was the name of a Swahili god, that RYTI means "he has sex" in Quechua and ME is an accusative self reference in English? All together it means the god "Sto screws with me".

Actually, I've never heard of a god "IS"; "RA" is just an English representation of the Egyptian god and "EL" is a similar representation of a Semitic god, so you should avoid selling such baseless stuff. THe only buyers will know less than you.

Try using biblical sources like Ps 82. It starts, Elohim stands in the council of El. Who is "Elohim" and who is "El"? He judges among the gods, but if monotheistic, who are these "gods"? Verse 6 says, And I (Elohim) have said, you are gods and all sons of the most high." Umm, monotheists have to fiddle with translation here. The most high is obviosly not Elohim, but certain the El of the first verse.


spin
spin is offline  
Old 07-25-2009, 12:57 PM   #20
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by storytime View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by IamJoseph View Post

Abraham introduced Monotheism; Moses introduced the criteria what this premise constitutes and how it is alligned with.
And Jacob recognized three gods in his new name "IS" "RA" "EL". I don't know how you cannot see this as polythestism. But I'm sure you have some myth and magic up your sleeve.
Israel [Yisrael/hebrew] = one who strived with God.
IamJoseph is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:24 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.