FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Non Abrahamic Religions & Philosophies
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-08-2004, 10:31 AM   #331
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dado
that statement has zero basis in Judaism. everybody has a share in the afterlife, whatever form it turns out to take.

everybody.
Was I talking about Judaism? We are discussing Christianity, not Judaism. And so you are stating that Hitler will get to enjoy the afterlife? Possibly be in Heaven if there is one? No justice, no redemption, no point in following the law, no point in obeying God?
Magus55 is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:31 AM   #332
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faith
You didn't ask me, Magdlyn, but my understanding is that El and Elohim, also used in reference to angels, are common terms for God while Yahweh is a proper and personal name for God Almighty, the one true eternal God and Creator of all things. So the use of separate names doesn't indicate a changing God, but is merely a shift from common to proper name.
See the following link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_name_of_God_in_Judaism

As to the Documentary Hypothesis:

According to the Documentary Hypothesis, Gen 1-2:3 is from the "P" (the Priestly source) which provided the first chapter of Genesis, and which used El or Elohim to refer to God until Exodus 3.

Gen 2-3 (and much of the rest of Genesis) is from the "J" (Jahwist or Jerusalem source) which used YHWH to refer to God.

The two separate myths were later combined into the book we now call "Genesis", along with other stories from the various sources (there were four, J, E (Elohist, or Ephraimic, which used "El" until Exodus), P (Priestly, which used "YHWH") and D (Deuteronomist, which used "YHWH").

See the following link:

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html

or, better yet, see Who Wrote the Bible? by Richard Friedman.

This link provides an analysis of the Flood account according to the Documentary Hypothesis:

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jp-flood.html
Mageth is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:33 AM   #333
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,952
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
What makes your interpretation correct, and not mine? Oh, thats right. Atheists are always right, even when they are wrong.
My irony meter just exploded in my face
Plognark is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:35 AM   #334
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plognark
My irony meter just exploded in my face
Its impossible to win on this board. Atheists will always be right, because they will always have tons of people backing them up to go against the theist. All the atheist has to do is state something, and everyone backs them up - regardless if its right or not.
Magus55 is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:35 AM   #335
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
What makes your interpretation correct, and not mine? Oh, thats right. Atheists are always right, even when they are wrong.
Didn't notice the little "smiley", huh? But I'd note that in saying "Atheists are always right, even when they are wrong", you are implying that your interpretation is correct and mine is incorrect. Pot, kettle, black.

In any case, the Documentary Hypothesis fits what we see in the Torah quite nicely. It's a good explanation for the various conflicts and contradictions that are seen there. You really should read the material I provided above and make up your own mind. It's convinced me that the Documentary Hypothesis is correct.
Mageth is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:37 AM   #336
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
Its impossible to win on this board. Atheists will always be right, because they will always have tons of people backing them up to go against the theist. All the atheist has to do is state something, and everyone backs them up - regardless if its right or not.
I backed my interpretation up. Now back up your "right" interpretation.
Mageth is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:37 AM   #337
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 7,204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mageth

In any case, the Documentary Hypothesis fits what we see in the Torah quite nicely. It's a good explanation for the various conflicts and contradictions that are seen there. You really should read the material I provided above and make up your own mind. It's convinced me that the Documentary Hypothesis is correct.
Its one explanation, doesn't mean its the right explanation. I don't see it as a contradiction. The explanation that Gen 1 is an overview of God's creation, while Gen 2 is in more detail from humanities perspective works for me.
Magus55 is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:39 AM   #338
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Europe
Posts: 132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
Was I talking about Judaism? We are discussing Christianity, not Judaism. And so you are stating that Hitler will get to enjoy the afterlife? Possibly be in Heaven if there is one? No justice, no redemption, no point in following the law, no point in obeying God?


And you?

You are saying that Hitler, should he have had accepted Christ (and it doesn't matter when), is going to heaven, too.

And isn't by accepting Christ everything forgiven? So what is the point in following the law etc?
Lord Emsworth is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:40 AM   #339
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
He didn't change His name. Its God in Chapter 1, and the Lord God in chapter 2. Its still the same name. God is called many things in the Bible. Later He is called Jehovah.
It's El or Elohim in chapter one, and YHWH in chapter 2. Not the same name.


As to Jehovah, from the Wikipedia link I provided above:

Quote:
Jews also call God Adonai, or "my Lord." Since pronouncing YHVH is considered sinful, Jews would use Adonai instead in prayers. When the Masoretes added vowel pointings to the text of the Tanakh in the first century A.D., they gave the word YHVH the vowels of Adonai, to remind the reader to say Adonai instead. Many Christian bible translators misinterpreted this to mean that God's name was Jehovah, which is the result of combining Adonai's vowels with YHVH's consonants, written using Latin orthography in which "J" is pronounced as the English "Y." This name is cognate to the Phoenician god Adonis (Tammuz).
Mageth is offline  
Old 06-08-2004, 10:43 AM   #340
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Arizona
Posts: 4,294
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magus55
Its impossible to win on this board. Atheists will always be right, because they will always have tons of people backing them up to go against the theist. All the atheist has to do is state something, and everyone backs them up - regardless if its right or not.
What, exactly, are you trying to "win" here?

It seems you're just getting your panties in a wad because we refuse to accept your arguments which are ALL based upon "because the Bible says so and the Bible is the Word of God therefore nothing can possibly ever prove me wrong because I use the Bible!"

If you think you can "win" an argument here by invoking your holy book as the Ultimate Truth, then perhaps you need to seriously reconsider why you're here.
cjack is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:37 PM.

Top

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