Amaleq13

How did you determine his list was correct?

Modern scientists continue to debate that question, how could you know this is the correct answer?

This is simply not true but continues to be an inappropriate topic for BC&H.

Why is this essentially arbitrary demarcation of time amazing?

All of which are rather obviously necessary for civilization to succeed (ie no murder, no theft), thus requiring no miraculous introduction, but we shouldn't ignore the objectively useless and thoroughly self-serving majority of the laws provided by Hebrew Scripture (ie no other god, enforcing Judaic beliefs).

Julio

And, please, don’t underestimate the contradiction here, between verse 1 and 28 of chapter 34, Exodus. Jehovah does clearly say, “I will write on the tablets.”
He didn’t! Moses did. There are possibly three liars in this drama: Jehovah, Moses or the scribe who carelessly wrote the script. Maybe a fourth one: CENTURIES later, some unobtrusive compiler was too drunk to check the mistake.

Exo 34:1 Yahweh said to Moses, "Chisel two stone tablets like the first: and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke.
Exo 34:28 And he was there with Jehovah forty days and forty nights; he did not eat bread and he did not drink water. And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments.

Julio

And, is it not funny, that the Jehovah of Moses only introduces the Law of “DON’TS” when the crisis in the human race reached uncontrollable levels?!… “Thou shalt not kill” after being killing for millennia!! A perverse and dishonest god.

IamJoseph

I agree if someone steals anther's land - it is wrong and bad. However...

Moses was a Hebrew, of Hebrew parents and ineage [the texts]. The Hebrew canaanites came from Canaan - born and incepted there, as with the non-hebrew canaanites - several belief systems prevailed there. They, like all nations in the area, were compelled by a regional famine to go to the only place where water was available [the Nile never ran dry, being lowly embedded]. They were forcefully quagmired and not allowed to leave Egypt. When they could leave, they did. The law says, the statutory period does not apply if one is dispossesed forcefully. The Hebrews had the right of return, and they returned only to the land they knew before. This is not actually the same as stealing anyone else's lands.

We must read very different books! My version of the hebrew bible says that Moses fully respected his father in law Yitro, even serving him food as a servant when he visited Moses in he deserts. My version also says that it was the Medianites who attacked Israel enroute to canaan. They would attack the Hebrews in the desert at night, the last weakest camps of children and aged, take hostages, and also send their women to poison the men at night. My version also says the hebrews did NOT steal a cubit of anyone's lands - even those they conquered en route - the borders of their land is very clearly given in my book, namely west of Jordan to the Med, with the command, YOU SHALL NOT TAKE ONE CUBIT OF ANYONE ELSE'S LAND.




More than $10M. The egytptians were glad to pay [the texts!] for 210 years of not paying wages and get rid of the hebrews.

You missed the texts which demands the Hebrews be 'LET MY PEOPLE GO'?


OK, so make up your mind. I cannot prove one you think never existed is also not a hero. Its a tough call.

IamJoseph

You have the right to your description of the term FINITE. However, Genesis refers only to an absolute finite - with no embelishments or exceptions. In this case, everything in the universe is deemed finite and never existed at one time. My understanding is that an infinite component cannot fit into a finite whole. Apples and oranges apply.

IamJoseph

I believe if the BBT is considered, it could not have occured without an external impact. An absolute singular entity cannot perform any action - not even an explosion or an expansion. It is one reason why anti-creationists reject the finite premise, or embellish it with qualifications. In a finite realm - there is no aternative to Genesis' mode of Creationism - and none here can argue the point by putting an alternative on the table.


Correction - that is what you believe. I agree with genesis that both had to appear together and simultainiously, as a duality, then separate [mutate?], imparting both male and female propencity in their offspring.

IamJoseph

By the only path possible: determining the names are authentic, then the arithmetic; and the lack of disputing or contrary evidence.

The operative factor here is 'continue to debate the question' - making it a non-negatable, sustainable issue today. This makes it a legitimate premise.




Whatever is useless to you [NO OTHER GODS] must be enjoined by the fact it cannot be disputable, via logic, science or math: this law is prefixed by 'unto you' - and is not enforceable - it can only be by free choice.

The notion of laws which you see as "obviously necessary for civilization to succeed (ie no murder, no theft), thus requiring no miraculous introduction," - should be enjoined with correct impactations: this is the only list of comprehensive laws followed by the world - which does not contain ancient laws which were clearly discarded. Anyone can copy Einstein's Theory of Relativity - but how many can edit and correct it? Note the critical difference as opposed the commonlities here: gone are the head bashing deities battling for surpemecy; gone are the rights to supreme rule by a king, prophet or messiah - they become subserviant to the law; gone is the right of a parent to kill off a baby they deem not handsome enough; gone is the right of a citizen to have a law favoring him against another innocent person. IOW, the law, not a name, shall rule.

Nor are the Hebrew laws self-serving when correctly examined. None have immunity for or from them, they do not favor the Hebrews/jews - they are generic and pristine with no personalised names attached therein. These laws clearly transcend all others - the reason YOUR judical institution has enshrined them in preference of any other, and deemed those who do not follow these laws as being 'outside the law'.

The law for equal justice for all - poor and rich, stranger and inhabtant; only the soul that sinnth it shall pay; etc - comes exclusively from the Hebrew bible - the acceptance of this law is what made America a super power [morally and ethically!], and the reason of her discourse with European christianity [which the Constitution disavowed]. Admit it or not, disdain or hate it - the Hebrew laws rule - and it happened by default and with no indulgence by its original adherants.

IamJoseph

The text says only the first two commandments were given directly, and the people begged Moses this be stopped and given via him. All other transmissions were via dictation or inspiring.

The Hebrew bible clearly understands the import of no consumption and sustainance for 40 days and nights - and that this cannot be accepted imperically speaking - else why would it be made in the texts? However one defines this, it cannot be one of lies or error - that would be blatantly naive, no? :huh:

Julio

Well, it is a contradiction of terms. “I will write the law myself again on the tablets; bring them here!”
But next:
“Well, Moses, you know what? I’ve changed my mind: YOU write the law yourself on the tablets; sorry for the misinterpretation!”
That’s the Bible. Then you and other exegetes arrive in a hurry in the forum to try to blindfold intelligence and smokescreen simple observation. It is ugly. Moses lied to his readers.
Then we have the patriarch fasting for 40 days, drinking nothing. He would not survive! He was an exhibitionist, a pretender to patriarchood.
Then you arrive here very quickly to try to defend the precious Holy Book with conjecture and gobbledygook explaining that it wasn’t to mean literally! Where’s the clause at the “Introduction” explaining that when we REASON against the book we are supposed to LOSE to the allegorical? It is ugly and dishonest.

Julio

“The text says only the first two commandments were given directly, and the people begged Moses this be stopped and given via him. All other transmissions were via dictation or inspiring.”

Folkloric stuff! Inappropriate for intelligent consumption, sorry.
It is a Tribal Deity incapable of straightforwardness. A desert illusion, if you prefer, in the minds of deluded patriarchs and their scribes!