Freethought & Rationalism Archive

IamJoseph · 07-26-2009, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

I doubt your Mr. Smith ever practiced Monotheism or understands it. What is important is that most nations were once polytheistic, and one became montheistic - since their birth, never having been polytheistic. While Abraham's ancesters were polytheistic, his descendents via Isaac and Jacob were not. The laws which monotheism demands was not acceptable to most people - specially so with Europe.

I doubt that he shared your keen understanding of the subject.

The paper I was referring to is The Common Theology of the Ancient Near East, in Essential Papers on Israel and the Ancient Near East.

Morton_Smith

Quote: Accusations of forgery
Right from the start, various scholars opined that the letter is not authentic, and that it was either an ancient or medieval forgery. In 1975, Quentin Quesnell published a lengthy article in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly[3], where he even suggested that Smith had forged the document himself, and then photographed his alleged forgery. An incensed Smith issued a furious rebuttal[4], whereupon Quesnell disclaimed any personal accusations against Smith.[5] While Smith was alive, nobody had ever accused him publicly of any serious wrongdoing, although some rumors persisted, tarnishing his reputation somewhat. The situation had changed after his death.

Scholars such as Philip Jenkins, and Robert M. Price pointed out parallels between The Secret Gospel of Mark and a novel by James Hunter published in 1940 entitled The Mystery of Mar Saba.[6]

I'm unaware of Smith's personal veracity, however he is resting his claims on a document perporting to be about John. Better if he first evidences John as a real historical figure before making claims about Monotheism and resting this issue with the Gospels. Monotheism predates the Gospels more than 2000 years - why go there?

semiopen · 07-27-2009, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

I doubt that he shared your keen understanding of the subject.

The paper I was referring to is The Common Theology of the Ancient Near East, in Essential Papers on Israel and the Ancient Near East.

Morton_Smith

Quote: Accusations of forgery
Right from the start, various scholars opined that the letter is not authentic, and that it was either an ancient or medieval forgery. In 1975, Quentin Quesnell published a lengthy article in the Catholic Biblical Quarterly[3], where he even suggested that Smith had forged the document himself, and then photographed his alleged forgery. An incensed Smith issued a furious rebuttal[4], whereupon Quesnell disclaimed any personal accusations against Smith.[5] While Smith was alive, nobody had ever accused him publicly of any serious wrongdoing, although some rumors persisted, tarnishing his reputation somewhat. The situation had changed after his death.

Scholars such as Philip Jenkins, and Robert M. Price pointed out parallels between The Secret Gospel of Mark and a novel by James Hunter published in 1940 entitled The Mystery of Mar Saba.[6]

I'm unaware of Smith's personal veracity, however he is resting his claims on a document perporting to be about John. Better if he first evidences John as a real historical figure before making claims about Monotheism and resting this issue with the Gospels. Monotheism predates the Gospels more than 2000 years - why go there?

The subject we were discussing is the difference between monotheism and polytheism. I found his article thought provoking. You are discussing a famous incident in his life that is unrelated to this.

The validity of his comments in this area are self evident. If we look at Baal worship in Israel, Baal had prophets similar to YHWH and the prayers to Baal were structured the same as those addressed to YHWH. At this level, it is difficult to see a tangible difference between Baal and YHWH worship.

A key difference was demonstrated by Elijah in 1 Kings 18:17-40 where he defeated the prophets of Baal and proved the superiority of YHWH. However this incident is not completely clear to me; that is, what made Baal different than YHWH? Today, many prayers refer to god as Baal (master in Hebrew).

I wonder if this difference was essentially a political clash between the YHWH and Baal cults, where the theological underpinnings of each were basically equivalent.

The claim of monotheism dating back to the patriarchs is highly idealized, and frankly an extreme view.

The claim that Judaism is the origin of monotheism is more respectable. My suggestion was that individual monotheism may apply to most early religions, even in those societies which featured the worship of more than one god. I pointed out that in the present, our society accepts the worship of what are arguably different gods. This might make our society polytheistic even though each individual theist may consider himself a monotheist.

Tristan Scott · 07-27-2009, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

The subject we were discussing is the difference between monotheism and polytheism. I found his article thought provoking. You are discussing a famous incident in his life that is unrelated to this.

The validity of his comments in this area are self evident. If we look at Baal worship in Israel, Baal had prophets similar to YHWH and the prayers to Baal were structured the same as those addressed to YHWH. At this level, it is difficult to see a tangible difference between Baal and YHWH worship.

I agree with this, and I believe it supports a transition in Canaan from the time of Abraham to the time that the Pentateuch was written 1000 years later. We know from other writings that took place in Canaan and Babylon during the period of Abraham, which was probably around the mid nineteenth to the mid twentieth c. BCE, that the people in this region were definitly making a transition. I think it is logical that a transition from polytheism to mono-theism would include a hybrid mdel where there are major and minor gods, but that their is a main god. This is the model the Canaanites had during this post Abramic period. They had main gods Ea and El in the Canaan and Babalonian writings. The individual stories in these writings bear a lot of similarities in the stories later told in Genesis. This would make sense if the writers of the Pentateuch were going to amalgamte the myths of the area into one.

This can be taken to the next step with the Moses figure in Exodus, who probably really started to finalize the one-god process in Canaan sometime around the mid 14th c BCE, this set the stage for the final part of the transition which was, of course, violent.

Clivedurdle · 07-27-2009, 02:13 PM

Bible unearthed.

Tristan Scott · 07-27-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Bible unearthed.

I haven't read that one yet, but looking at the reviews it looks like its all on the same page, especially about the theory about the writers of the Pentateuch-I realize that this theory is certainly not universally accepted, particularly by Jewish scholars, but I have yet to find anyone come up w/ a better explanation.

semiopen · 07-27-2009, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tristan Scott

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Bible unearthed.

I haven't read that one yet, but looking at the reviews it looks like its all on the same page, especially about the theory about the writers of the Pentateuch-I realize that this theory is certainly not universally accepted, particularly by Jewish scholars, but I have yet to find anyone come up w/ a better explanation.

This has become a mainstream view, maybe tilted a little to the left.

There are no ultra orthodox Jews in biblical studies. It would be hard to find a single Jewish scholar (including orthodox) who would date the bible to before the kingdoms.

My personal guess is that the bible was probably not in anyway close to completion until the Persian period.

tradewinds · 07-27-2009, 04:59 PM

I would assume most persons would know the aetiology or entomology of the word 'pagan'

tradewinds · 07-27-2009, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IamJoseph

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

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.

Look between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, tranlastion "the earth wss' or 'the earth became' here one might speculate an unknown length of time. An ice-age, or billions of years. Look at Gensis 6:2 the 'sons of God' here might be polythiem, rater reconciled by Moses as the fallen angels. One must wonder, was Moses faced with making a religion that once explained polythism, making it something evil, something the great god destroyed?

Surly monotheism must have had its own genesis by resolving the conflict with polytheism. The gods of past generations, told in folklore were revised and written into a law by Moses. The beginning of Moses was the beginning of a singular god where one ruled over all, the god of kings.

Tristan Scott · 07-27-2009, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semiopen

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tristan Scott

I haven't read that one yet, but looking at the reviews it looks like its all on the same page, especially about the theory about the writers of the Pentateuch-I realize that this theory is certainly not universally accepted, particularly by Jewish scholars, but I have yet to find anyone come up w/ a better explanation.

This has become a mainstream view, maybe tilted a little to the left.

There are no ultra orthodox Jews in biblical studies. It would be hard to find a single Jewish scholar (including orthodox) who would date the bible to before the kingdoms.

My personal guess is that the bible was probably not in anyway close to completion until the Persian period.

Yes I agree, as far as the pentateuch goes anyway, and I think it a work that evolved from other writings. What we have is the "final draft" that was accepted and probably commissioned by a king, perhaps Hezekiah or even Josiah. And sure it coul have been the Persian period, it wouldn't even be that far fetched to, as cliverdurdle suggested, "blame Cyrus".

Wouldn't that be something? The final compilation of Torah completed by Messianic Jews, commissioned by the "God's annointed" Persian, Cyrus!

tradewinds · 07-27-2009, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by storytime

Quote:

Originally Posted by tradewinds

Edenic, or Ednic dispensation, Garden of Eden
Age of positive volition, creation of mankind to fall, it is not known as to its time of beginning

This began in the age when human’s were animals, they had no thinking ability much beyond modern chimpanzee, but they evolved into a more intelligent creature and when this occurred, the humanoid became aware of itself, self-conscious and aware of death. This was the loss of paradise and the beginning of religion. From this point on, humans have feared for themselves and had the urge to control each other, as animals do through dominance, but humans used the ability to communicate abstractly, they could convince other of reasons to fear them.

The myth of the Ednic dispensation was that humans fell from grace; this explains the fate of human nature. The most well known story is god made a man then a woman and they were more than human, but fell from grace. Then their first sons were the names of the two ways of human cultural beginnings, the domestication of animals and the growing of crops. The greater culture was agricultural, thus Cain killed Able. In reality, many humanoids came to the state of consciousness and this led to the making of mythology and later organised into religion.

Humans have the ability to explain themselves, by rational mythmaking and this also served to justify a corrupt social system, because god made it so. Now with science, these myths have little validity or use because even those who believe it, will not choose freely to be enslaved by it, thus it has lost its purpose and now it is a rational learned elite that rules, not absolutely. No humans today worship the rich and powerful, although they admire media stars.

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.

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.

I would agree and add that it was an Adamic age lasting about 900 years, or so folklore memory informs us. The nature of folk lore is that it changes people into icons. Folklore is iconic, thus each age of these early figures in Genesis are actually periods of time.

Consider, Moses had to bring the beginning to the present and could hardly account for this much time since folklore is iconic and one age becomes a man’s age. Now we know that under the best circumstances, humans would not have lived much more than 75 of our years.

Much of the early folklore was revised many times and over time, since humans could tell stories, to the first written words, the telling of many became few and were concise, or abbreviated into a ‘readers digest’ version of tales that filled nights.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-27-2009, 02:13 PM	#34
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Bible unearthed.

07-27-2009, 04:59 PM	#37
tradewinds Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tucson Arizona Posts: 380	I would assume most persons would know the aetiology or entomology of the word 'pagan'

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.