Vinnie

If angels look like that then why don't you come with me to heaven

Vinnie

Volker.Doormann

There is a town in France, Europe, Paris. In a house with name 'Louvre' each one who is in doubt of the origin of the moses commandments, can read a sentence, written on a stone table: "If a man knock out the teeth of his equal, his teeth shall be knocked out. [ A tooth for a tooth ]"
doormann.org/hammur.htm It is one of commandments not given by god to Moses, but written by the Semite Hammurabi in Mesopotamia in about 1800 B.C.E.

The commandments given by Hammurabi in No. 200 of Commandments are claimed in part by the OT writers were written by god. This is provable not true.

Together with other commandment, like No. 196 "If a man put out the eye of another man, his eye shall be put out. [ An eye for an eye ]"

The commandments given by Hammurabi in No. 196 of Commandments are claimed in part by the OT writers were written by god. This is provable not true.

This is well known for 'experts' for long.

Moses is a figure of a myth. His biography is taken from the Legend of 'Sargon of Akkad'. [Ancient Near Eastern Texts 119]

"Sargon, the mighty king, king of Agade, am I.
My mother was a changeling, my father I knew not.
The brother(s) of my father loved the hills.
My city is Azupiranu, which is situated on the banks of the Euphrates.
My changeling mother conceived me, in secret she bore me.
She set me in a basket of rushes, with bitumen she sealed My lid.
She cast me into the river which rose not (over) me,
The river bore me up and carried me to Akki, the drawer of water.
Akki, the drawer of water lifted me out as he dipped his e[w]er.
Akki, the drawer of water, [took me] as his son (and) reared me.
Akki, the drawer of water, appointed me as his gardener,
While I was a gardener, Ishtar granted me (her) love,
And for four and [ ... ] years I exercised kingship,
The black-headed [people] I ruled, I gov[erned];
Mighty [moun]tains with chip-axes of bronze I conquered,
The upper ranges I scaled,
The lower ranges I [trav]ersed,
The sea [lan]ds three times I circled.
Dilmun my [hand] cap[tured],
[To] the great Der I [went up], I [. . . ],
[ . . . ] I altered and [. . .].
Whatever king may come up after me,
[. . .]
Let him r[ule, let him govern] the black-headed [peo]ple;
[Let him conquer] mighty [mountains] with chip-axe[s of bronze],
[Let] him scale the upper ranges,
[Let him traverse the lower ranges],
Let him circle the sea [lan]ds three times!
[Dilmun let his hand capture],
Let him go up [to] the great Der and [. . . ]!
[. . .] from my city, Aga[de ... ]
[. . . ] . . . [. . .].
(Remainder broken away.)"

Source: From: George A. Barton, Archaeology and The Bible, 3rd Ed., (Philadelphia: American Sunday-School Union, 1920), p. 310. Scanned by: J. S. Arkenberg, Dept. of History, Cal. State Fullerton. Prof. Arkenberg has modernized the text.
doormann.org/sargon01.htm (see bottom of page).

The Biography of Moses is claimed by the OT writers a genealogy of the tribes of Israel. This is provable not true.

Noah is a figure of a myth. His experience in a dark 'vessel' (It is the same Hebrew name as the 'vessel' in that Moses was 'sealed') is taken in detail from the Gigamesh Epos. The Gilgamesh Epos is written about 2700 B.C.E. A german version of this Epos can be read at doormann.org/gil23.htm.

I have written here about the spiritual meaning of the stories. But there is no doubt, that there are - prior to the Semitic development in Sumer - dated tables in hardware to read.

Over more then 3000 years there are rules and commandments written in in OT- claimed as laws of god - which suppress the spiritual freedom of woman. This rules are taken by the OT writers from the 'Laws of Manu' called the 'ManuSmriti'. doormann.org/manuslaw.txt,

Manu, has grounded this woman discrediting laws:



IX – 3 . Her father protects (her) in childhood, her husband protects
(her) in youth and her sons protect (her) in old age; a woman is never
fit for independence.

IX – 18. Women have no business with the text of the veda.

IX – 189. The property of a Brahmana must never be taken by the king,
that is a settled rule; but (the property of men) of other castes the
king may take on failure of all (heirs).

IX – 317. A Brahmin, whether learned or ignorant, is a powerful
divinity.

X – 121. If a shudra (unable to subsist by serving brahmanas) seeks a
livelihood, he may serve kshatriyas, or he may also seek to maintain
himself by attending on a wealthy viashya.

X – 122. But let a shudra serve brahmans, either for the sake of
heaven or with a view to both this life and the text, for he who is
called the servant of a Brahmana thereby gains all his ends.

X – 123. The service of the Brahmana alone is declared to be an
excellent occupation for a shudra; for whatever else besides this he
may perform will bear no fruit."



There are well known historic reports to read of olive skinned people called 'S(r)emites' and their culture discrediting woman in about 2300 B.C.E in Sumer.

There a no theories necessary to explain reality. Manu as most of all Semites in Mesopotaimia and all other religious authorities have mistaken spiritual theachings as claim to 'guide' in a social manner. It was the biggest mistaking in history.

I think there are primary sources enough outside the OT to prove the historic bible claims wrong. But more it seems, that recognition of truth is necessary than personal sceptic without any meaning.

Volker

Marduk

"Marduk,

The show DID identify the speakers by their degrees of expertise, and the universities they are associated with. So their comments are not to be taken with a grain of salt, but are to be seriously considered. Excuse me for not taking notes while I watched TV."

now now, I wasn't picking on you, just the type of shows they often have on TV. Was this the one where they delved into the "Black Sea Project"? After the last Ice Age it is believed the Mediterranean Sea overflowed into the Black Sea (which was a fresh water lake at the time) creating a huge flood, causing the residents to move south with exciting flood stories.
That show was pretty good for TV.

Carrie

Marduk,
Yeah it was the one about the Black Sea and they talked about how the Mediterranean overflowed into it. And it was a pretty good show. But I saw one about aliens the other day that really sucked. They were saying that Moses got the Ten Commandments from aliens, and the pillar of cloud was a space ship in the sky. It was totally retarded. And please excuse my rudeness. I was in a foul mood.

Volker,
Thanks for the info. Good stuff! I’ll check it out further.

Kosh,
No Fundies in New Zealand?? Maybe I can give Tercel a break then. So, is Fundamentalism pretty much only an American phenomenon? Apparently my knowledge of the world outside the U.S. really sucks.

SanDiegoAtheist

Heh. I'd hope aliens could do a more impressive job than stone tablets for their Godly Commandments. Maybe something a bit more DURABLE (and impressive) like a titanium plaque with fluorescing ink - heck, if *I* was to try to convince a bunch of ancient goatherders of MY godhood, I could certainly do better than a stone tablet with chiseled writing on it - and MY testament wouldn't be breakable in a fit of pique.

Fundamentalism isn't unknown outside of the US, but it is much less common. I know both the UK and Australia have a reasonably sized contingent of resident nuts, but it's nothing like the 20-30% of the US population that we have here. Pretty sure that most undeveloped nations Christianity tends towards the fundamentalist though - probably the fact that evangelical fundamentalists tend to send out the most missionaries, combined with a lack of education in most underdeveloped nations makes them ripe for conversion to an utterly uncritical biblical worldview.

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

Tercel

On the contrary: there are, and I have plenty of experience of them. However, New Zealand society is pretty much completely and utterly secular. The fundies form about 10% of the population and apart from the occasional letter to the editor your average Joe probably wouldn't know they existed.

Largely so. America seems to be the root of most religious nonsense. Europe is all but entirely liberal. Countries like New Zealand and Australia have quite strong fundamentalist tendencies within the younger generations in the church due to American influence. As far as I can determine, fundamentalism is an American phenonemon which you guys have managed to export.

Vinnie

Better in Tercel's backyard than Vinnie's is my motto

Tercel

Okay, say that then. I generally do.

Hmm, I'll have to take exception to that as "exaggeration".

Of course I do. Read it the way it really reads, try to find out what the author really meant. Just realise that there are many shades of grey between all right and all wrong.

It's called interpretation. I don't support random interpretations, or interpretations where you try to force-fit it to agree with you: Always try and determine what was really said and really happened.
In this case it's clear no global flood ever happened. Science shows this with geological data, and the idea that all the animals in the world could fit on a boat and then migrate to the corners of the earth is just stupid. The idea of taking the story as literally factually true can be discarded without further consideration.
Did a minor flood really happen ever? Probably. Lots of cultures have flood myths. In all likelihood this is based on some real event in the distant past that nobody cares about.

The point of any part in the Bible is not "is it true". -Who cares apart from an unsatisfied curiosity? Who gives a damn whether some random event thousands of years ago really happened or not? In general: no one. The use of the Bible is its use to us. That's what it's for: To help us. As the writer of Timothy noted, the Scripture can be profitable in many ways to us. Hence the question to ask is: How is this relevant to us? ie. What ideas relevant to us are being expressed by the author here? Are the ideas right? Challenging? Wrong? Why? How does these answers or out position on this affect our lives? etc.
(Of course, you'll note that in a very few situation the literal truth of a passage will be important in the answers to such questions. eg If Jesus really is the Son of God who died and was really resurrected, then that is important)

For example, take the flood. Would God really ever do something like that? I personally don't think so, it doesn't square with my beliefs about the goodness and love of God. I think that God in his love treats the wicked as he does the righteous, he doesn't just love or do good to those who love him, but his love is for all. (See Matthew 5:43-48 for an expression of this sentiment in the mouth of Jesus) I don't think God would punish people just for the sake of punishment: I believe that what punishment God does bring is according to his desire for our correction, not destruction. (See Wisdom 11:21-12:2) But I think God does take sin seriously. The wrongdoing of mankind is real, and no efforts should be made to blithly explain away man's inhumanity to man. The author(s) of early Genesis depicts a man killing his brother, one of his descendents singing a song about how he will do even worse etc. I find this to be a true representation of mankind's evil. I believe God does take this evil seriously and wishes to destroy it. He does not wish to destroy us so does not, but if you take the flood as an analogy for God's timeless judgement on the horror of evil then I am with you all the way.
One commentator I have read (William Neil) suggested that the compiler of Genesis really meant for chapters 1-11 to be taken metaphorically in this sort of way, having theological meanings similar to that described above. I am certainly sympathetic to such a position (no doubt the compiler was a smart cookie theologically and probably had all sorts of theological intents we miss completely), but whether it is actually true and the writer deliberately selected ancient stories such as the garden of eden, the flood etc and used them to convey what he thought of as theological Truth, or whether the writer really believed in the stories - I don't think we'll ever know. But who cares: it doesn't matter a whit to us.

Sure, I can't be absolutely certain. But exaggerations generally makes themselves conspicous in the form of pointless miracles, clearly overblown numbers, absurd events etc.

Yes. I was not providing defenses I actually believed, merely pointing out that you seemed to have some large gaps in some of your logic.

I don't get why you think that.

Lol. Sorry, that's a bit much to swallow.
In my fairly large experience, the better the argument, the more voluable the opposition. People don't generally respond to stupid arguments except a couple who say "that's utterly stupid here's why:" but do respond in depth to arguments they feel threaten their position.

Vorkosigan

It's only going to get worse, too. I feel for you. I often complain that we only export our crap.

Vorkosigan

Kosh

My ACD (Accute Cognitive Dissonance) meter just pegged off the scale...