Freethought & Rationalism Archive

-Jay- · 10-07-2007, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

I do believe he's moved on to his next new thread, leaving questions unanswered as usual.

Where'd he go? Gotta make sure anyone in a new thread knows the baggage he's towing behind...

regards,

NinJay
(2=/=14)

-Jay- · 10-07-2007, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VoxRat

Hey, this is kind of interesting, kind of beside the point, and yet not...

Being kind of a fan of low-brow humor, I looked up this movie review.

I get the distinct impression it's actually two separately composed reviews sutured together. See if you can spot why. See if you can spot the parallel to Genesis, as dissected by the DH.

4th paragraph. D'oh. Sorry. Dave, forget I answered. Where's the colophon here?

regards,

NinJay
(2=/=14)

Silent Dave · 10-07-2007, 06:57 PM

Watch as Dave never again brings up the subject of 2/14 animals.

VoxRat · 10-07-2007, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cege

VoxRat, I think the context points to eating of the cursed ground for all the days of their life (wasn't that a soap opera?) rather than eating anything else from that darned (pardon my French) tree.

Yes, I appreciate that. It's just that from the first verse, it sure looked like there weren't going to be any more days of their life:

Quote:

Originally Posted by J(2:17)

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

VoxRat · 10-07-2007, 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent Dave

Watch as Dave never again brings up the subject of 2/14 animals.

Oh, I think you can take that prediction to the bank.

He will, however, claim to have thoroughly dealt with that little problem, and will claim to have utterly refuted the skeptics on it. (He will, however, neglect to supply links to the relevant posts.)

Just a prediction, mind you, based on my hypotheses about Fundementia, which are, in turn, based on observation.

Cege · 10-07-2007, 07:30 PM

VoxRat, are you going to believe your lying eyes or The Word of Cege?

Dean Anderson · 10-07-2007, 11:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VoxRat

It seems there are still weirdnesses/inconsistencies even within the teased-apart narratives, though:

Quote:

Originally Posted by J(3:17)

And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;

So what's up with Yahweh?
ADD?
Changed his mind?
Bought the talking snake excuse and commuted the sentence?

There's no internal inconsistency there.

Yahweh gives Adam an empty threat, telling him that the fruit will kill him, in order to keep him from eating it.

The serpent tells Eve the truth - that it won't poison them but will give them wisdom and make them more god-like.

Yahweh is annoyed that Adam saw through his lies and ate the fruit anyway, because now they have become enlightened and god-like and are no longer the servile garden workers they were created to be - so he banishes them before they can truly become his equals by also eating the fruit of immortality.

There is no inconsistency in the story itself - providing you realise that the story is not about the omni-whatever Christian God but is about Yahweh the local Canaanite tribal god.

In other words, the Ancient Hebrew story itself is not contradictory. It is only the Christian re-interpretation of it that is contradictory.

By the way; like the Genesis 1 creation story, the elements of this story - "food of the gods" which the gods eat to maintain their immortality, gods lying to humans to about the food (fruit in this case) being poisonous in order to dissuade them from also eating it and keep them mortal - occur in the older Babylonian/Sumerian tale that this story is loosely derived from (or at least heavily influenced by).

I wouldn't normally pimp my blog - but it seems to be very on-topic, so here is an article I wrote going through the Genesis 2-3 story verse by verse, showing how different the original story is to the Christian re-interpretation.

Sauron · 10-08-2007, 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent Dave

Watch as Dave never again brings up the subject of 2/14 animals.

The 2/14 animal is a newly discovered species of colophaunt. :devil:

Pappy Jack · 10-08-2007, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent Dave

Watch as Dave never again brings up the subject of 2/14 animals.

But at least he's given us a new acronym: PMWIFOMCL

Pappy Jack · 10-08-2007, 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VoxRat

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silent Dave

Watch as Dave never again brings up the subject of 2/14 animals.

Oh, I think you can take that prediction to the bank.

He will, however, claim to have thoroughly dealt with that little problem, and will claim to have utterly refuted the skeptics on it. (He will, however, neglect to supply links to the relevant posts.)

Just a prediction, mind you, based on my hypotheses about Fundementia, which are, in turn, based on observation.

Well, the relevant post is the 2 clothes' changes = 4 socks' changes, isn't it? It's not Dave's fault if we're too dumb to follow the reasoning power of Creo Logic™

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

10-07-2007, 06:57 PM	#713
Silent Dave Banned Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Bloomington, MN Posts: 2,209	Watch as Dave never again brings up the subject of 2/14 animals.

10-07-2007, 07:30 PM	#716
Cege Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: 36078 Posts: 849	VoxRat, are you going to believe your lying eyes or The Word of Cege?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.