100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Does God even care? | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Sat 01/08/11 11:57 PM
|
|
it would be interesting to discuss the difference between 'arguing' and 'discussing' or 'sharing' or even 'healthy debate' An "argument" does not have to be a brawl; an argument is simply one's thesis. When I give instructions to my students on writing a persuasive paper, we discuss their "arguments": i.e. what their stance will be on their topic. The Christians in this forum are arguing. Perhaps you are not or feel that you are not, but that doesn't take away from what others are doing. I know I wouldn't want a parent like the Christian god, for sure  another beautiful thing is that you dont HAVE to accept him,,,, life is a balance of choices,, for all of us Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . not accepting the Christian god is a "beautiful thing"? So, being cast into the fiery pit of hell for not accepting Jesus is beautiful? According to Christianity, there is NO balance of choices . . . no, wait, there is: you choose Jesus and go to heaven or say, "No, thanks" and go to hell. That IS a balance. having choice is a beautiful thing, consequences are a thing of reality I dont believe the heaven and hell concept are so clear cut, but I do believe that BLATANT disregard and rejection of God is probably grounds for a less than blissful eternity,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hmmm, I wonder why stone would be older that parchment... Gilgamesh made a box, Noah made an ark. Which one seems more believable, myth or not? The number is an easy reconciliation, but I'll leave it for the readers to ponder. Hint, you quoted enough verse to figure it out... Now, question for you... If there was a flood, did it cover the entire earth or was it just local? Hmmm . . . guess you didn't read the Epic, did you? Gilgamesh didn't build the boat. There have always been floods, but there is no evidence in the fossil record that a worldwide flood occurred. I did have a brilliant paper by a student that suggested the flood tales originated during the retreat of the glaciers in the last ice age. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
having choice is a beautiful thing, consequences are a thing of reality I dont believe the heaven and hell concept are so clear cut, but I do believe that BLATANT disregard and rejection of God is probably grounds for a less than blissful eternity,,, Rejecting which god? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
having choice is a beautiful thing, consequences are a thing of reality I dont believe the heaven and hell concept are so clear cut, but I do believe that BLATANT disregard and rejection of God is probably grounds for a less than blissful eternity,,, Rejecting which god? the one who CREATED life(whatever one might call him) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you assume I believe Jesus is God? LMAO! I referred to Christians; you inferred that I included you in their league. LOL!!! It doesn't matter? Why, so you can refute either way? Just change your position to argue, eh? Now that is a contradiction. While you may have impressed me a few months ago with your knowledge of the Pagan origins of some of the "tenets", for you to now assert that they are original and part of the Bible is laughable... Seriously, use the internet, find out where and what "hell" is... It doesn't matter because hell doesn't exist. And are you talking about Sheol, the early Jewish concept of hell, or the Christian concept? Some modern Christians say that hell is separation from god--a chosen separation by those who do not believe in Jesus as the savior. The origins of myth are shrouded in time; based on what I have read, I think that religion and god belief began in the Paleolithic and strengthened in the Neolithic. However, since the people of those time periods were preliterate, we can only examine their iconography. The myth of ancient literate societies (the first were Egypt and Sumeria) were doubtless based upon older, oral tales. So, no, their myths were not "original." The Jews most certainly adapted and adopted pagan myth into their books--so did the Christians. You keep talking about hell: both the Christian idea of heaven and hell are largely based on Greek myth and Platonic philosophy. The creation myth of the Jews echoes older creation myths: a void or abyss (usually watery) from which god (or goddess) arises. God/dess creates the universe and separates the firmaments. There is often a serpent and a world tree--the Jewish myth has both. The deity invariably makes humans from clay or mud. The theme of brothers fighting--Cain and Abel or Esau and Jacob--is also a motif in older myth. I suggest that you read J.F. Bierlein's book titled Parallel Myths. Hmmm, I wonder why stone would be older that parchment... I forgot to address this in my other post. Since your "wonder" is not explicit, I suppose you are insinuating the Jews wrote on parchment and the Sumerians wrote on stone. Actually, the latter wrote on clay tablet which they baked to preserve AND on parchment from about the 6th century BCE. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parchment The earliest--though not the most complete--copies of Gilgamesh date circa 2150-2000 BCE. The Egyptians wrote on papyrus, reportedly circa 2600 BCE. If papyrus fragments can last that long, I see no reason why Jewish writings from that time period couldn't have lasted, as well. But perhaps that isn't what you are wondering about. You need to be more explicit. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the one who CREATED life(whatever one might call him) Let's see . . . in Egyptian myth, Atum created life. In Sumeria, it was Nammu. (There are variant myths with variant god/desses, take your pick.) Greece has several different myths, but I like the Pelasgian tale wherein Eurynome creates the universe. In Norse myth, Ymir is the first to arise from their version of the abyss. There are dozens of gods and/or goddesses who reportedly created life. I like the oldest ones the best, so I guess I don't have a problem with the creatrix of the universe, eh? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the one who CREATED life(whatever one might call him) Let's see . . . in Egyptian myth, Atum created life. In Sumeria, it was Nammu. (There are variant myths with variant god/desses, take your pick.) Greece has several different myths, but I like the Pelasgian tale wherein Eurynome creates the universe. In Norse myth, Ymir is the first to arise from their version of the abyss. There are dozens of gods and/or goddesses who reportedly created life. I like the oldest ones the best, so I guess I don't have a problem with the creatrix of the universe, eh? only you and your 'creatrix' knows,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
only you and your 'creatrix' knows,,, We are in agreement on that. Now, convince the Bible toters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Old Testament is knock off of Zoroastrianism, Summerian Epics and Vedas, The New Testament rips their stories from everything else that was before it it's a miracle to me how so many people put faith in that simple book
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Old Testament is knock off of Zoroastrianism, Summerian Epics and Vedas, The New Testament rips their stories from everything else that was before it it's a miracle to me how so many people put faith in that simple book Everyone believes in something! And most beliefs come from simple books. Even the religion of evolution comes from a simple book! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gwendolyn, with the sparse posts and screwed up quotes of text, I'll address as many points as I can here instead.
You refered to Christians, well that includes myself. You said: "I have read the Bible cover to cover. I have taught the Bible in Sunday School." As you seemed well-versed in Pagan myths, this should have been a huge red flag to you. Worshiping on the Pagan sun-god's day of worship? Same thing goes with the virgin birth myth. That should have been a red flag, no? And the "trinity" concept. Then you go on to ask me if I'm talking about the Jewish concept of hell? You may have read the Bible, but you didn't study it, did you? The Hebrews didn't believe in "hell", but they did believe in Gehenna, a dump... And Sheol, the grave or pit. If you knew anything about the Hebrews, then you should know that they didn't take the Torah as %100 litteral, so why do you? Especially after you made this claim: "Personally, I think Christians who take the Bible literally are foolish..." Is that any way to debate? Assume your opponent's position on a given subject? The flood myth... It's been awhile since I read the Epic of Gilgamesh. Is your only objection to my words that of not remembering who built the boat? You said: "I have studied and taught myth for years." Then you should know about the native American Indians' flood myths too. I find it facinating that people who supposedly didn't have contact with whom you claim are the originators of these myths have similar stories. These similarities goes beyond just flood stories too. Back to Noah... The ark described in the Bible is plausible as a sea-worthy vessel, while the boat in the Epic of Gilgamesh is not. Anyways, let me take your literal stand and address your question of the varying examples of the number of animals. "And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you" and "Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate" I bolded the pertinent words so that you might see what may have been meant. I take the first as the basic command, "to keep them alive with you" and the second as implying the extra five pairs were for food and of course the sacrifices they performed after the receding of the waters. As long as they kept two pairs alive... But then again, who knows??? And you go on to say: "There have always been floods, but there is no evidence in the fossil record that a worldwide flood occurred." There is plenty of evidence that a worldwide flood could have occured. Marine fossils on mountain tops, huge deposits (graveyards) of fossils and tactonic movements as geologists believe all land was once connected. I remember Scientific America did a story about several "fossil graveyards" in the 80's that were used as "proof" of the great flood. To deny the possibility is outrageous. Now look at the Hebrew tale. Particularly the passage here: "And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth (H*127) Did you know that "earth" has several meanings? From Strong's concordance: #127 'adamah 1) ground, land a) ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance) b) piece of ground, a specific plot of land c) earth substance (for building or constructing) d) ground as earth's visible surface e) land, territory, country f) whole inhabited earth g) city in Naphtali So to take the "litteral" stance from the English version, one could assume that the entire Earth was flooded. But to look at the true meaning, that's not the case. I'll refer you to Psalms for proof that it shouldn't be taken to mean "world-wide". Psalm 104:7-9 (New International Version 1984, ©1984) 7 But at your rebuke the waters fled, at the sound of your thunder they took to flight; 8 they flowed over the mountains, they went down into the valleys, to the place you assigned for them. 9 You set a boundary they cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth. As for the papyrus... I think the oldest papyrus is circa 3000 bc, found in an Egyptian tomb. The preservation of that is quite likely due to the arid climate and their burial practices. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest Hebrew papyrus found so far. (600-300 BC?) The Hebrews were nomadic, and their texts were used extensively. They had to be copied as they wore out and detiorated rather quickly. To assume one myth predates another simply because the Hebrews didn't use clay tablets isn't wise. Seriously, which do you think would stand the passage of time better? That's it for now, hope you have fun checking these facts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then you go on to ask me if I'm talking about the Jewish concept of hell? You may have read the Bible, but you didn't study it, did you? The Hebrews didn't believe in "hell", but they did believe in Gehenna, a dump... And Sheol, the grave or pit. Perhaps not in the same way that Christians drew from the Greeks about hell, but evidence still exists: "...my life draws near To Sheol. I am reckoned among those who go down to the Pit; I am a man who has no strength, like one forsaken among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, like those whom thou dost remember no more, for they are cutoff from thy hand.“ Psalms 88:3-5 "You [God] restored me to health and let me live...In your love you kept me from the pit of destruction...For...those who go down to the pit cannot hope for your faithfulness." Isaiah 38:16-18. (NIV) Sheol is: A "land of gloom and deep shadow... where even the light is like darkness." Job 10:21-22 "...the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward..." Ecclesiastes 9:5. "...in the grave [Sheol] where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom." Ecclesiastes 9:10. Daniel 12:2 says, "many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake, some to everlasting life and some to the reproach of eternal abhorrence." "Hell," as in the sense I used, does not necessarily mean a place of eternal burning. In fact, the Christians took the name from the Norse goddess of the dead, Hel. Like someone else, you argue semantics. In addition, you never clarified WHOSE concept of "hell" you meant--not until now. I can't address aspects that are not clearly delineated. In addition, the Hebrew Scriptures are contradictory. Ecclesiastes 3:21 asks, "Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth?" Yet an apocryphal Jewish book, The Wisdom of Solomon (circa 50 BCE), states, "...the souls of the just are in God's hand; no torment will touch them...they are at peace...they have a sure hope of immortality; and after a little chastisement they will receive great blessings...They will be judges and rulers over nations and peoples, and the Lord will be their King forever." The Jewish belief in the afterlife evolved and changed over time, especially after the stay in Babylon. I have asked three Jewish people about their concept of the afterlife: each one gave a different account of who gets to go to “Olam Ha-Ba.” If you knew anything about the Hebrews, then you should know that they didn't take the Torah as %100 litteral, so why do you? I don't believe that I spoke of Jewish beliefs but Christian beliefs that are BASED on Christian interpretation of Jewish beliefs. I wouldn't "debate" Jewish beliefs with a Christian. In the modern world, there are varying Jewish denominations--they believe different things. It's been awhile since I read the Epic of Gilgamesh. Is your only objection to my words that of not remembering who built the boat? My objection was that you said Gilgamesh built a box and Noah built an ark--what was your point? Then you should know about the native American Indians' flood myths too. I find it facinating that people who supposedly didn't have contact with whom you claim are the originators of these myths have similar stories. These similarities goes beyond just flood stories too. Native Americans also had used the image of the swastika pre-European; some North American tribes had a trickster god named Loki--the same name as the Norse trickster god. You make the logical fallacy of assuming that because there are worldwide flood myths, they MUST originate from the Noah flood or from the same flood. If we are going into fantastical lengths to link these myths, I will take Jung's archetypal thesis over religion. Marine fossils on mountain tops, huge deposits (graveyards) of fossils and tactonic movements as geologists believe all land was once connected. I remember Scientific America did a story about several "fossil graveyards" in the 80's that were used as "proof" of the great flood. To deny the possibility is outrageous. Marine fossils on mountain tops are the result of the tectonic movements that you mention. Ancient sea beds were shifted upwards when the plates ran into each other. This is the scientific explanation for these fossil beds--not that they were once underwater. Tell me how I can access the "report" in Scientific American, issue and year and whether it can be accessed online since I am not going to search for a print copy. I have the feeling that you interpreted their data incorrectly. Pangaea is a well respected theory in science, but this super continent existed in the "Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras about 250 million years ago," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea). This was long before ANY humans existed to build a boat. You also confuse what the scriptures SAY as opposed to how people interpret them--my points have largely been based on common beliefs on the scriptures, not what the actually say! I pointed out that there are two versions of the creation and the flood (your explanation for the difference in the animals is not satisfactory), yet I have met few Christians that even know the different versions exist. As for the papyrus... I think the oldest papyrus is circa 3000 bc, found in an Egyptian tomb. The preservation of that is quite likely due to the arid climate and their burial practices. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest Hebrew papyrus found so far. (600-300 BC?) The Hebrews were nomadic, and their texts were used extensively. They had to be copied as they wore out and detiorated rather quickly. To assume one myth predates another simply because the Hebrews didn't use clay tablets isn't wise. Seriously, which do you think would stand the passage of time better? Pure conjecture on your part. Um, and isn't Israel arid? And of which time period do you speak? The Jews were not always nomadic! Are you talking about nomadic tribes PRIOR to the supposed exodus from Egypt or AFTERWARD? Really, you need to specifically state the time periods of which you speak. As for the Dead Sea Scrolls. they were largely written on parchment, not papyrus: "They are written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, mostly on parchment, but with some written on papyrus. These manuscripts generally date between 150 BCE and 70 CE." (wikipedia) or "The Dead Sea Scrolls were most likely written by the Essenes during the period from about 200 B.C. to 68 C.E./A.D." (http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html). If you have a reputable source dating them to 600 BCE, let me know it. That's it for now, hope you have fun checking these facts. You didn't give any facts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Old Testament is knock off of Zoroastrianism, Summerian Epics and Vedas, The New Testament rips their stories from everything else that was before it it's a miracle to me how so many people put faith in that simple book Everyone believes in something! And most beliefs come from simple books. Even the religion of evolution comes from a simple book!  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then you go on to ask me if I'm talking about the Jewish concept of hell? You may have read the Bible, but you didn't study it, did you? The Hebrews didn't believe in "hell", but they did believe in Gehenna, a dump... And Sheol, the grave or pit. Perhaps not in the same way that Christians drew from the Greeks about hell, but evidence still exists: "...my life draws near To Sheol. I am reckoned among those who go down to the Pit; I am a man who has no strength, like one forsaken among the dead, like the slain that lie in the grave, like those whom thou dost remember no more, for they are cutoff from thy hand.“ Psalms 88:3-5 "You [God] restored me to health and let me live...In your love you kept me from the pit of destruction...For...those who go down to the pit cannot hope for your faithfulness." Isaiah 38:16-18. (NIV) Sheol is: A "land of gloom and deep shadow... where even the light is like darkness." Job 10:21-22 "...the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no further reward..." Ecclesiastes 9:5. "...in the grave [Sheol] where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom." Ecclesiastes 9:10. Daniel 12:2 says, "many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth will awake, some to everlasting life and some to the reproach of eternal abhorrence." "Hell," as in the sense I used, does not necessarily mean a place of eternal burning. In fact, the Christians took the name from the Norse goddess of the dead, Hel. Like someone else, you argue semantics. In addition, you never clarified WHOSE concept of "hell" you meant--not until now. I can't address aspects that are not clearly delineated. In addition, the Hebrew Scriptures are contradictory. Ecclesiastes 3:21 asks, "Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down into the earth?" Yet an apocryphal Jewish book, The Wisdom of Solomon (circa 50 BCE), states, "...the souls of the just are in God's hand; no torment will touch them...they are at peace...they have a sure hope of immortality; and after a little chastisement they will receive great blessings...They will be judges and rulers over nations and peoples, and the Lord will be their King forever." The Jewish belief in the afterlife evolved and changed over time, especially after the stay in Babylon. I have asked three Jewish people about their concept of the afterlife: each one gave a different account of who gets to go to “Olam Ha-Ba.” If you knew anything about the Hebrews, then you should know that they didn't take the Torah as %100 litteral, so why do you? I don't believe that I spoke of Jewish beliefs but Christian beliefs that are BASED on Christian interpretation of Jewish beliefs. I wouldn't "debate" Jewish beliefs with a Christian. In the modern world, there are varying Jewish denominations--they believe different things. It's been awhile since I read the Epic of Gilgamesh. Is your only objection to my words that of not remembering who built the boat? My objection was that you said Gilgamesh built a box and Noah built an ark--what was your point? Then you should know about the native American Indians' flood myths too. I find it facinating that people who supposedly didn't have contact with whom you claim are the originators of these myths have similar stories. These similarities goes beyond just flood stories too. Native Americans also had used the image of the swastika pre-European; some North American tribes had a trickster god named Loki--the same name as the Norse trickster god. You make the logical fallacy of assuming that because there are worldwide flood myths, they MUST originate from the Noah flood or from the same flood. If we are going into fantastical lengths to link these myths, I will take Jung's archetypal thesis over religion. Marine fossils on mountain tops, huge deposits (graveyards) of fossils and tactonic movements as geologists believe all land was once connected. I remember Scientific America did a story about several "fossil graveyards" in the 80's that were used as "proof" of the great flood. To deny the possibility is outrageous. Marine fossils on mountain tops are the result of the tectonic movements that you mention. Ancient sea beds were shifted upwards when the plates ran into each other. This is the scientific explanation for these fossil beds--not that they were once underwater. Tell me how I can access the "report" in Scientific American, issue and year and whether it can be accessed online since I am not going to search for a print copy. I have the feeling that you interpreted their data incorrectly. Pangaea is a well respected theory in science, but this super continent existed in the "Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras about 250 million years ago," (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pangaea). This was long before ANY humans existed to build a boat. You also confuse what the scriptures SAY as opposed to how people interpret them--my points have largely been based on common beliefs on the scriptures, not what the actually say! I pointed out that there are two versions of the creation and the flood (your explanation for the difference in the animals is not satisfactory), yet I have met few Christians that even know the different versions exist. As for the papyrus... I think the oldest papyrus is circa 3000 bc, found in an Egyptian tomb. The preservation of that is quite likely due to the arid climate and their burial practices. The Dead Sea Scrolls are the oldest Hebrew papyrus found so far. (600-300 BC?) The Hebrews were nomadic, and their texts were used extensively. They had to be copied as they wore out and detiorated rather quickly. To assume one myth predates another simply because the Hebrews didn't use clay tablets isn't wise. Seriously, which do you think would stand the passage of time better? Pure conjecture on your part. Um, and isn't Israel arid? And of which time period do you speak? The Jews were not always nomadic! Are you talking about nomadic tribes PRIOR to the supposed exodus from Egypt or AFTERWARD? Really, you need to specifically state the time periods of which you speak. As for the Dead Sea Scrolls. they were largely written on parchment, not papyrus: "They are written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, mostly on parchment, but with some written on papyrus. These manuscripts generally date between 150 BCE and 70 CE." (wikipedia) or "The Dead Sea Scrolls were most likely written by the Essenes during the period from about 200 B.C. to 68 C.E./A.D." (http://www.centuryone.com/25dssfacts.html). If you have a reputable source dating them to 600 BCE, let me know it. That's it for now, hope you have fun checking these facts. You didn't give any facts. "you can't argue with people who know everything..." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Old Testament is knock off of Zoroastrianism, Summerian Epics and Vedas, The New Testament rips their stories from everything else that was before it it's a miracle to me how so many people put faith in that simple book It just shows that evolution is indeed true and that the human masses haven't evolved much beyond the monkeys. Fortunately we do see signs of intelligence sparkling on the sea of humanity in the great thinkers who have contributed to scientific knowledge and who have also shown that the biblical stories cannot possibly be true. It'll take time for the masses to evolve, but they'll get there eventually. Give them a few more millennia to fully wake up. We're actually making great progress. These ancient religions have totally lost any serious power and their silliness is being recognized by more and more people with every passing century. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Old Testament is knock off of Zoroastrianism, Summerian Epics and Vedas, The New Testament rips their stories from everything else that was before it it's a miracle to me how so many people put faith in that simple book It just shows that evolution is indeed true and that the human masses haven't evolved much beyond the monkeys. Fortunately we do see signs of intelligence sparkling on the sea of humanity in the great thinkers who have contributed to scientific knowledge and who have also shown that the biblical stories cannot possibly be true. It'll take time for the masses to evolve, but they'll get there eventually. Give them a few more millennia to fully wake up. We're actually making great progress. These ancient religions have totally lost any serious power and their silliness is being recognized by more and more people with every passing century. Fortunately we do see signs of intelligence sparkling on the sea of humanity in the great thinkers who have contributed to scientific knowledge and who have also shown that the biblical stories cannot possibly be true. They have shown no such thing. This can not be shown for it isn't true. They will NEVER totally disprove the bible. Their attempts will be totally in vein and without the results they are looking for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Old Testament is knock off of Zoroastrianism, Summerian Epics and Vedas, The New Testament rips their stories from everything else that was before it it's a miracle to me how so many people put faith in that simple book It just shows that evolution is indeed true and that the human masses haven't evolved much beyond the monkeys. Fortunately we do see signs of intelligence sparkling on the sea of humanity in the great thinkers who have contributed to scientific knowledge and who have also shown that the biblical stories cannot possibly be true. It'll take time for the masses to evolve, but they'll get there eventually. Give them a few more millennia to fully wake up. We're actually making great progress. These ancient religions have totally lost any serious power and their silliness is being recognized by more and more people with every passing century. Fortunately we do see signs of intelligence sparkling on the sea of humanity in the great thinkers who have contributed to scientific knowledge and who have also shown that the biblical stories cannot possibly be true. They have shown no such thing. This can not be shown for it isn't true. They will NEVER totally disprove the bible. Their attempts will be totally in vein and without the results they are looking for. You don't even need science to see that the biblical tales are false, they expose their own fallacies via their very own claims. The biblical scriptures have both the Egyptians and the Canaanites supposedly rejecting God. But those same scriptures also acknowledge that both of those cultures were indeed worshiping "god".  That's just one blatant example. But the stories are clearly false via their contradictions. There's no need to even bring science into it. However, if we want to exam those conflicts we can do that too. Just like with Greek Mythology we today accept that science has shown us that there are no Gods on Mt. Olympus. So we accept that those fables have been 'proven' to be false. Well the same thing goes for the Bible. Science has shown us that all the things that we associate with 'evil' have always existed in nature long before mankind ever evolved. Therefore the accusation that mankind is responsible for the diseased and dog-eat-dog nature of the universe is clearly a false fable. Yet this is the very premise that the entire biblical fables stand on. Mankind is supposedly at fault here and in dire need to 'repentance'.  So the whole mythology falls apart and has no more merit than Greek Mythology. Of course, there are far more examples. The biblical fables are filled with absurdities. Sorry to have to expose this truth for anyone who was wishing they might be true.  But seriously, why would anyone want a fable to be true that has them at serious odds with their creator, who supposedly had to have his very own son crucified just so he could offer them the "grace" of an eternal life that they are clearly unworthy of on the own merit? You should be jumping up and down with joy to finally realize that these fables were never anything more than a big fat lie. It's the GREATEST NEWS ever!  Spread the GOOD NEWS! The biblical fables are false!  We should all be singing "Hallelujah!" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Peter_Pan69
on
Sun 01/09/11 07:15 PM
|
|
Gwendolyn, I don't think you understand what it is you did...
You think I'm arguing semantics? Let's examine what you did. You said: Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . not accepting the Christian god is a "beautiful thing"? So, being cast into the fiery pit of hell for not accepting Jesus is beautiful? According to Christianity, there is NO balance of choices . . . no, wait, there is: you choose Jesus and go to heaven or say, "No, thanks" and go to hell. That IS a balance. Hmmm, calling it "the fiery pit of hell"? Seems pretty clear to me. To which I responded "Hell is NOT real..." And then you backpedal to this statement: It doesn't matter if hell is not real; it doesn't even matter if the Bible contradicts itself; it doesn't matter because Christians decide what the Bible says and what it means, eh? A basic tenet of MOST Christian denominations is that hell is a real place. It may not matter if hell is real, but you asserting that there's only two choices for a Christian does. Then to cover your tracks you say "MOST". Also, you said: You also confuse what the scriptures SAY as opposed to how people interpret them--my points have largely been based on common beliefs on the scriptures, not what the actually say! Sorry, but this is a strawman arguement. I'm not common and you don't speak for anyone except yourself. Intellectual honesty demands that you debate from your own interpretations or what the scriptures actually say. This whole debate could have been avoided had you specified that, but this is common with quite a few around here. I told you to use the internet to find out about hell to which you replied: It doesn't matter because hell doesn't exist. And are you talking about Sheol, the early Jewish concept of hell, or the Christian concept?... An interesting note is that your link to the Dea Sea Scrolls had this to say: "They show Christianity to be rooted in Judaism and have been called the evolutionary link between the two." The Jewish people didn't have a "concept of hell" and your so-called Christian concept is Pagan. So for some of us Christians, Sheol is the same, we do not deviate like the Pagans do. I gave you some clues as to where "hell" originated from and I assume you went and did some research because you came back and acted like that's what you meant. If you would have referenced the 3rd word that was translated to "hell", I would be more apt to believe that you knew what you were talking about. You made the claim: And not only that, the myth of Noah is based on earlier myths! The Jews stole it from other religions. You question the dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls when I said 600-300 BC? Now that's just nit-picking... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating_the_Dead_Sea_Scrolls And you also made an irrelevant point that some were on parchment. (The texts are most commonly made of animal skins, but also papyrus and one of copper.) http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gevil <Gevil (parchment) Of course my implication that you can't know which came first was conjecture. I wasn't around that era to witness these things, but neither were you, so how can you be sure? Because of clay tablets? I mentioned other flood stories to show you that you can't know which was first, only that the Gilgamesh story is the oldest written evidence. So all that you can be sure of is which documents are older... And here's my reasoning for questioning your claim of which myth was first: "Papyrus had the advantage of being relatively cheap and easy to produce, but it was fragile and susceptible to both moisture and excessive dryness." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus You then implied that the flood was "worldwide". To which I gave you evidence that the Noah flood account never implies a worldwide flood. Plus I gave you some points to ponder on the possibility of it being worldwide. Scientific America, Sept. 1988 if you want to look it up. But again, just for the possibility of there being a worldwide flood, the Noah tale was not worldwide. Sorry, but I got to point this error out: Marine fossils on mountain tops are the result of the tectonic movements that you mention. Ancient sea beds were shifted upwards when the plates ran into each other. This is the scientific explanation for these fossil beds--not that they were once underwater. Here you assert that the fossil beds were not underwater. I'm sure it was a mistake and you meant the "mountain tops", but even the mountain tops at one time were under water. It's kinda funny when you think about it. Gwendolyn, please do me a favor and assume that I know everything because god told me what I know. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Redykeulous
on
Sun 01/09/11 08:20 PM
|
|
Gwendolyn, I don't think you understand what it is you did... You think I'm arguing semantics? Let's examine what you did. You said: Whoa, whoa, whoa . . . not accepting the Christian god is a "beautiful thing"? So, being cast into the fiery pit of hell for not accepting Jesus is beautiful? According to Christianity, there is NO balance of choices . . . no, wait, there is: you choose Jesus and go to heaven or say, "No, thanks" and go to hell. That IS a balance. Hmmm, calling it "the fiery pit of hell"? Seems pretty clear to me. To which I responded "Hell is NOT real..." And then you backpedal to this statement: It doesn't matter if hell is not real; it doesn't even matter if the Bible contradicts itself; it doesn't matter because Christians decide what the Bible says and what it means, eh? A basic tenet of MOST Christian denominations is that hell is a real place. It may not matter if hell is real, but you asserting that there's only two choices for a Christian does. Then to cover your tracks you say "MOST". Also, you said: You also confuse what the scriptures SAY as opposed to how people interpret them--my points have largely been based on common beliefs on the scriptures, not what the actually say! Sorry, but this is a strawman arguement. I'm not common and you don't speak for anyone except yourself. Intellectual honesty demands that you debate from your own interpretations or what the scriptures actually say. This whole debate could have been avoided had you specified that, but this is common with quite a few around here. I told you to use the internet to find out about hell to which you replied: It doesn't matter because hell doesn't exist. And are you talking about Sheol, the early Jewish concept of hell, or the Christian concept?... An interesting note is that your link to the Dea Sea Scrolls had this to say: "They show Christianity to be rooted in Judaism and have been called the evolutionary link between the two." The Jewish people didn't have a "concept of hell" and your so-called Christian concept is Pagan. So for some of us Christians, Sheol is the same, we do not deviate like the Pagans do. I gave you some clues as to where "hell" originated from and I assume you went and did some research because you came back and acted like that's what you meant. If you would have referenced the 3rd word that was translated to "hell", I would be more apt to believe that you knew what you were talking about. You made the claim: And not only that, the myth of Noah is based on earlier myths! The Jews stole it from other religions. You question the dates of the Dead Sea Scrolls when I said 600-300 BC? Now that's just nit-picking... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dating_the_Dead_Sea_Scrolls And you also made an irrelevant point that some were on parchment. (The texts are most commonly made of animal skins, but also papyrus and one of copper.) http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/dead-sea-scrolls.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gevil <Gevil (parchment) Of course my implication that you can't know which came first was conjecture. I wasn't around that era to witness these things, but neither were you, so how can you be sure? Because of clay tablets? I mentioned other flood stories to show you that you can't know which was first, only that the Gilgamesh story is the oldest written evidence. So all that you can be sure of is which documents are older... And here's my reasoning for questioning your claim of which myth was first: "Papyrus had the advantage of being relatively cheap and easy to produce, but it was fragile and susceptible to both moisture and excessive dryness." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus You then implied that the flood was "worldwide". To which I gave you evidence that the Noah flood account never implies a worldwide flood. Plus I gave you some points to ponder on the possibility of it being worldwide. Scientific America, Sept. 1988 if you want to look it up. But again, just for the possibility of there being a worldwide flood, the Noah tale was not worldwide. Sorry, but I got to point this error out: Marine fossils on mountain tops are the result of the tectonic movements that you mention. Ancient sea beds were shifted upwards when the plates ran into each other. This is the scientific explanation for these fossil beds--not that they were once underwater. Here you assert that the fossil beds were not underwater. I'm sure it was a mistake and you meant the "mountain tops", but even the mountain tops at one time were under water. It's kinda funny when you think about it. Gwendolyn, please do me a favor and assume that I know everything because god told me what I know. Well PP - as a Christian what EXACTLY are YOUR basic beliefs about: God (characteristics & nature) The messiah? (who is and what is the purpose of the Messiah) Jesus - New Testament (completely mortal with two sets of DNA,or one with God - messiah or profit? Did he fulfill 'the law', did he change 'the law'?) Did he start a new religion or continue with the old one? If the bible is not to be taken literally then how does it influence the morals poeple associate with it? If the bible is not to be taken literally, then why would you think the flood actually occured world-wide? Who decides when a bible story is a story or a truth? How do you decide? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well PP - as a Christian what EXACTLY are YOUR basic beliefs about: God (characteristics & nature) The messiah? (who is and what is the purpose of the Messiah) Jesus - New Testament (completely mortal with two sets of DNA,or one with God - messiah or profit? Did he fulfill 'the law', did he change 'the law'?) Did he start a new religion or continue with the old one? If the bible is not to be taken literally then how does it influence the morals poeple associate with it? If the bible is not to be taken literally, then why would you think the flood actually occured world-wide? Who decides when a bible story is a story or a truth? How do you decide? Did you know that both psychopaths and sociopaths are considered to be masters of manipulation - but one is extremely intelligent (a scary beast), the other one makes a lot of foolish mistakes and thinks that others don't notice. Unless you think I'm making a lot of foolish mistakes, then you think I'm extremely intelligent. I'll say thank you now... What is everyone's obsession with PP anyways? C'mon, admit it, you know you love PP... |
|
|
|
|
