Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
09-26-2007, 03:36 PM | #361 |
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 416
|
Now stevie, you now how seriously I take evidence, and that I also am the very soul of generosity. Perhaps the reconciliation can be found there?
Or perhaps it is that there are things which, even taken in pairs, are too flaccid to generate sparks no matter how hard they are rubbed? (Perhaps if they were to be struck by flints?) But this would all be entirely off topic of course. Why are we here conversing when certain alleged humans are off romping in other threads rather than addressing open issues in prior threads? Inquiring minds and all that... hugs, Shirley Knott |
09-26-2007, 03:56 PM | #362 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Let's avoid the insults, however humerous, and stick to the subject.
|
09-26-2007, 04:43 PM | #363 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,037
|
So Dave, under your version, when did Noah and family enter the ark? A week before the rain started, or the same day that the rain started?
Quote:
|
|
09-26-2007, 06:40 PM | #364 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
09-26-2007, 07:32 PM | #365 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 3,890
|
I honestly have to go with afdave on this one. Sorry, but it sounds pretty much like god says
"Bring two of all the animals...Well wait, seven for this type, and 2 for that type" It sounds like god miffs it a bit, or it's a general explanation followed by a more specific one. poretending this is some "Big hit" against dave makes the fact virtually everything else dave is silly seem less credible, and more like picking on him. for the sake of argument validty, vcut it out. I got this when i read the bible the first time through for Mithra's sake. |
09-26-2007, 10:13 PM | #366 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,027
|
Nobody said it was hard to spot. But Dave obviously didn't see it.
|
09-26-2007, 10:54 PM | #367 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2007
Location: California
Posts: 1,395
|
But any explanation still requires going beyond the actual text of the Bible into a realm of pure speculation.
Dave is presenting opinion - not reason. |
09-26-2007, 11:51 PM | #368 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Hungary
Posts: 1,666
|
|
09-27-2007, 12:10 AM | #369 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brighton, England
Posts: 6,947
|
Quote:
As split by the DH, the J flood story talks about 2 of each unclean animal and 7 of every clean animal - and Noah then sacrifices the extra clean animals. The P flood story merely talks about 2 of each animal, and makes no mention of sacrifices. However, the J source uses older Hebrew than the P source. Is this a problem for the DH? One can understand a later version of a story expanding on the earlier version and adding extra details, but why would a later version remove details like the sacrifice? The answer would seem to be that the P author keeps stressing that only Aaronid priests are allowed to do sacrifices, and Noah is not an Aaronid priest. So the difference in the two stories is consilient with the interests of the P author, and we can speculate that the P author probably dropped the references to sacrifice because they did not match his theology/agenda. A similar piece of consilience is that - as I have mentioned earlier - God is portrayed in the P sources as much more remote than in the J and E sources, and never shows human traits such as sympathy, compassion, grace and so on. And when we look in the two flood stories, what do we see? In the P story, God is simply displeased with humanity except for Noah, who is described as being "just" and "perfect". So God decides to kill everyone except Noah. God shows no human-like emotion in all of this. He is remote and aloof, simply dispensing "justice" to those who offend him, and saving the one who hasn't offended him. In the J story, however, God repents of creating humans, and shows grief that humans are so wicked. He first says he is going to kill them all, but then sees grace in Noah, so decides to spare him. This version of God shows much more human emotions - he is capable of grief and repentance, and can have his wrath softened by compassion for good and righteous people. Sure - by today's standards, God's character is still far from good, but at least he has some character in this version. Additionally, the more personal nature of J's version of God is also seen in that, unlike P's more aloof and remote version, J's God personally closes the Ark for Noah. Again, this difference between the two texts is consilient with the way that the J and P authors depict God throughout each of their texts. |
|
09-27-2007, 02:52 AM | #370 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Athens, Greece
Posts: 1,057
|
Excellent point, Dean.
And the fact that my story was in jest does not mean I don't believe in it, kinda. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|