Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Peter Kirby · 06-04-2002, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus_Finch:


If you read closely, I indicated that I believe we have good copies of the autographs. God placed his word into a literate world (Roman Empire) with a single dominant language (Greek) and a unified political system over a very large area. I think that was nice work.

But it took 1400 years for any folks in the Americas to get 'his word'. Oops.

best,
Peter Kirby

King Arthur · 06-04-2002, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by foursquareman:


Just one thing, alma means virgin, young woman who is of marriageable age, or maid, or newly married. At crosswalk.com it notes that there are no instances of this word where it describes a woman who is not a virgin. Isaiah is giving more info than the girl being a virgin. So your point isn't really.

[ June 04, 2002: Message edited by: foursquareman ]

Yeah. Apparently the Septuagint has 'parthenos' or 'virgin' in the Greek, too.

So, a 'virgin' gave birth. Now explain it if you can.

King Arthur · 06-04-2002, 05:31 PM

Dude, Bede! First, your 'Who I am' section didn't really answer the question you were asked.

Second, you believe that all religions are given by God?

You say you are an Orthodox Christian, but do you really believe in those creeds you cite? How can you believe in those tenets of Christian faith and say that other religions are right too?

Does that mean there'll be big-eyed, big-breasted women lying on green cushions waiting eagerly to please you (Islam)? Or that you'll actually be a God with your own little planet one day too (Mormonism)?

If, when you die, you think you'll experience a 'Christian afterlife', then what will those of other religions experience? Do Moslems who crash into buildings because they believe it's right go to Muslim heaven?

I'm not sure I understand what you really believe. You sound no better a 'Christian' than JD Crossan (i.e. nominal only).

sidewinder · 06-05-2002, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus_Finch:


Obviously, we do not have the autographs so it would be difficult to prove that there was any error in them. However, the manuscript evidence allows use to have great confidence that the versions of the bible generally used today are largely consistent with the autographs. Where there is doubt, most translations make a note of the fact.

Regards,

Finch

But we still don't have the originals so how do you have great confidence that these copies are largely consistent with the originals?

Kosh · 06-05-2002, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by peterkirby:

But it took 1400 years for any folks in the Americas to get 'his word'. Oops.

The Mormons made up more mythology to solve that problem....

Atticus_Finch · 06-05-2002, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sidewinder:


But we still don't have the originals so how do you have great confidence that these copies are largely consistent with the originals?

The analysis is well known so I won't go into great detail here. Suffice it to say that we have numerous independent copies and lines of copies. By comparing the different independent copies you can determine a great deal about the original because the same errors or redactions would not be made in independent copies.

Regards,

Finch

Atticus_Finch · 06-05-2002, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by hezekiahjones:
Hey Atticus, actually we do have the "autograph" for the Noah's fludd myths. It's called Tablet XI.

<a href="http://www.hist.unt.edu/ane-09.htm#Gilgamesh_on_the_Web" target="_blank">Gilgamesh on the Web</a>

[ June 04, 2002: Message edited by: hezekiahjones ]

A more likely explanation is that Gilgamesh and the numerous other world-wide flood stories reflect a common memory of humankind of a massive and devastating world-wide flood.

Regards,

Finch

Kosh · 06-05-2002, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus_Finch:


A more likely explanation is that Gilgamesh and the numerous other world-wide flood stories reflect a common memory of humankind of a massive and devastating world-wide flood.

Regards,

Finch

But.... if the Flood did occurr, and therefore all
of us are descended from Noah, including the
Babylonians, why would all the details (like the
name Ut-Napishtim) be wrong compared to Genesis?

Jayhawker Soule · 06-05-2002, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Atticus_Finch:
A more likely explanation is that Gilgamesh and the numerous other world-wide flood stories reflect a common memory of humankind of a massive and devastating world-wide flood.

Regards,

Finch

I would be very interested to read your arguments for this "more likely explanation", since I have always speculated that just the opposite was the case. For example, there was apparently a rather significant event that impacted the Black Sea area roughly 5600 BCE. But, so what? This occurred some 3000 BG (before Gilgamesh). That's a hell of a long time to hold onto a memory.

Not surprisingly, Early Bronze Age civilization was wholly reliant on an accessible source of fresh water. Occasionally, but inevitably, this source became the source of significant (though local) flood catastrophy. As I have suggested elsewhere, all disaster, much like all politics, is local. The EB tribesmen lacked the perspective provided by CNN. For them, the local flood disaster and the "devastating world-wide flood" would look very much the same - unexpected, unimaginable, and unexplainable. That those effected would weave tales of their experiences with such frightening catastophy seems inevitable, as does the likelihood that, as people mingled, they would conflate and exaggerate these stories to mythical proportions.

Any web search on "flood disaster" should provide ample evidence of just how catastrophic such an event can be. And you don't have to be an Early Bronze Age farmer to view such things with awe: even today they're commonly called "acts of God." Again, this is pure speculation on my part, but I see no requirement for a world-wide flood to explain common flood myths.

godfry n. glad · 06-06-2002, 07:25 AM

Bede did state:

Quote:

I think the bible was inspired by God in the way that a kid's efforts at forming clay could be inspired by Michaelangelo. David is perfect (bar his toe) but a five year old trying to express that is likely to produce something of a mess, even if directly guided by Michaelangelo himself.

"David is perfect"? Just where did you get this?
Any Jew viewing the statue by Michelangelo can tell you it ain't any representation of the David of Biblical Goliath-slaying fame. They'll tell you the schmuck is gentile...proving that the fellow represented is not Jewish, much less David.
Thus, it's not "perfect" by any measure.

The creator of the exemplar got it wrong and throngs of ignorant sycophants perpetuate the lie...how typical.

godfry n. glad

Say, while we're on Michelangelo, can you tell me why he represented Moses with the tablets as having horns?

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

06-04-2002, 05:31 PM	#23
King Arthur Banned Join Date: May 2002 Location: Camelot Posts: 290	Dude, Bede! First, your 'Who I am' section didn't really answer the question you were asked. Second, you believe that all religions are given by God? You say you are an Orthodox Christian, but do you really believe in those creeds you cite? How can you believe in those tenets of Christian faith and say that other religions are right too? Does that mean there'll be big-eyed, big-breasted women lying on green cushions waiting eagerly to please you (Islam)? Or that you'll actually be a God with your own little planet one day too (Mormonism)? If, when you die, you think you'll experience a 'Christian afterlife', then what will those of other religions experience? Do Moslems who crash into buildings because they believe it's right go to Muslim heaven? I'm not sure I understand what you really believe. You sound no better a 'Christian' than JD Crossan (i.e. nominal only).

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.