Aantares    Aantares BB  Hop To Forum Categories  Your Lifestyle & Culture  Hop To Forums  Religion & Spirituality    Biblical Scholar: Dont take Bible literally
      Page: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 37
Go To
Post
Search BB
Notify Me
TOS/Tools/Smilies
Reply
  
Biblical Scholar: Dont take Bible literally
 Login/Register
 
Here to stay...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Allan:
Why does Judaism never blame Adam, or Eve for that matter, for every sin the Israelites performed, sins which, we are told, caused their deity to smash them time after time?

Who decided, after the return from exile, to make Adam the fall guy?

What is the real cause of this distortion?


Hesiod has Pandora's jar, that's OK backing for me. After the exile they had a Zoroaster-like appreciation for devious daevas; it's not overly important who opens the jar or eats a fruit; the idea is that humans can get themselves in trouble when it comes to shiny new tech/concepts if they aren't careful or think in selfish terms tower of babel-like.

quote:
For me, there is no point in trying to work out the origins of these concepts while ignoring the simple fact of entheogens. Stripped to their basics, every single Bible story of visions can be matched by those taking entheogens such as ayahuasca, ergot, the sacred mushroom, and so on.

Religionists studiously avoid any research showing how easily, given the few trees identified in the Tanakh, the symbiotic mushroom was indeed the "fruit" of the Tree of Knowledge.


Well modern channeling says Leary was careful and had a wonderful transition to the afterlife; McKenna and his brain tumor perhaps not so much. Channeling just said he had contact with some devious energy of sorts related to this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Operato...hrenic/dp/0615509282

Channeling/visions with or without drugs is something to do very carefully aka you will never see me try out a Ouija board.

quote:
High on Mount Sinai, Moses was on psychedelic drugs when he heard God deliver the Ten Commandments, an Israeli researcher claimed in a study published this week.


I tend to think the Ten Commandments has a Hittite treaty structure that doesn't sound esoteric enough for a vision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...nts#Hittite_treaties

quote:
According to John Bright, however, there is an important distinction between the Decalogue and the "book of the covenant" (Exodus 21-23 and 34:10–24). The Decalogue, he argues, was modelled on the suzerainty treaties of the Hittites (and other Mesopotamian Empires), that is, represents the relationship between God and Israel as a relationship between king and vassal, and enacts that bond.[118]

"The prologue of the Hittite treaty reminds his vassals of his benevolent acts.. (compare with Exodus 20:2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery"). The Hittite treaty also stipulated the obligations imposed by the ruler on his vassals, which included a prohibition of relations with peoples outside the empire, or enmity between those within."[119] (Exodus 20:3: "You shall have no other gods before Me"). Viewed as a treaty rather than a law code, its purpose is not so much to regulate human affairs as to define the scope of the king's power.



Also the setting on a mountain is suspected of coming from Herodotus. Exodus actually has the whole mountain on fire and the Hebrew word for bush is close to the mountain name Sinai.

http://vridar.info/otorigins/mosesxerxes.htm


quote:
Dr Jan-Wim Wesselius, Senior Lecturer and Head of the Department of Semitic Studies in the Theological University of Kampen, Netherlands, in 2002, published The Origin of the History of Israel : Herodotus's Histories as Blueprint for the First Books of the Bible...

Moses sits and stands
brother Aaron and Hur support him;
written record
monument
Mt Sinai
thunderstorm

Xerxes sits and stands
brother Achaemenes and Demaratus give advice
written record
monument
Mt Parnassus
thunderstorm


I think Moses borrowed some of Abraham's Hittite/Egyptian history to go with the Xerxes blueprint. I do think there's a channeling Luwian ruler as a blueprint but this channeling could include a demiurge as the Gnostics think. Too much devious daevas out there. A second wife/scheming for birthrights stepmom blueprint is important too I think.
 
Posts: 1149 | Location: Tucson, AZ | Mbr Since: 04-23-2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Vicki:
Not really. It is very similar to the question God put to Adam and Eve, "Where are you?" God knew where Satan had been. Why else would He bring up Job, if He didn't know that Satan had seen on his travels?


Those who know the Bible can find other instances of where God did not know what was going on. How does the Bible say he learned about what was happening in Babel?

quote:
I might not be understanding your question correctly. Satan did not entice God against Job. Neither did God entice Satan against Job.


To deny that God himself said his Adversary had enticed (depending on translation: thou movedst me) him it to make a liar out of God.

https://www.britannica.com/top...d-the-origin-of-evil
In the Book of Job, Satan appears as the partner of God, who on behalf of God puts the righteous one to the test. Only in postbiblical Judaism does the Devil become the adversary of God, the prince of angels, who, created by God and placed at the head of the angelic hosts, entices some of the angels into revolt against God.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan
A figure known as "the satan" first appears in the Tanakh as a heavenly prosecutor, a member of the sons of God subordinate to Yahweh, who prosecutes the nation of Judah in the heavenly court and tests the loyalty of Yahweh's followers by forcing them to suffer. During the intertestamental period, possibly due to influence from the Zoroastrian figure of Angra Mainyu, the satan developed into a malevolent entity with abhorrent qualities in dualistic opposition to God.

I rather doubt ordinary Christians know how often the Hebrew for Adversary is used in the Tanakh, nor do they know the different applications.

quote:
I have read the opening verses of chapters 1 and 2 of Job and they are not identical.


Can you please identify the differences you see in the first three verses of those chapters. Seem identical to me, apart from "you incited Me against him, to destroy him without cause."

quote:

Are you referring to the Kirta Epic?


No comparison at all there. I'm referring to the well-known Ludlul-Bel-Nimeqi and the older Sumerian work, Man and His God.

https://www.ancient.eu/article...ely-a-babylonian-jo/

quote:
I think that the book of Job serves more than one purpose. Keeping in mind that Job is part of the wisdom literature section, it shows that there are exceptions to the general doctrine in proverbs and other parts of Scripture that says sin is punished and obedience is blessed. Job is a righteous man, yet God allows him to suffer from severe losses.


Far more likely, one would think, that the proto-rabbis rewrote this familiar story to excuse the simple fact that Marduk had defeated Adonai. Now they taught that, like Job, the exiled Jews had to worship Adonai because he IS, not because of what good or harm he did to them.

In [all] your days, did you command the morning? Did you tell the dawn its place? To grasp the corners of the earth so that the wicked shall be shaken from it?

Went through this thoroughly years ago with well-qualified posters and we were pretty much in agreement.

Problem most believers have is they pigeon-hole their Bible without ever taking into account the needs of the cultures which created the Bible. Nor do they know the politics of the time.

quote:

You are incorrect in thinking that God was challenged by Satan's implied charge that God was not worthy of worship and needed to buy it from people with blessings.


Can you provide any evidence to support your claim here?

In fact, what I said is common knowledge. As was his role, God's selected Adversary simply pointed out that, while God was boasting about what a dedicated follower of him Job was, his Adversary made the obvious observation that it was just as likely Job worshipped him only because of the good life he had.

A perfectly sensible and valid comment in context.

quote:
There is a big difference between the Scriptures, which are inspired at the direction of the Holy Spirit, thus the word of God and the Talmud, which are the thoughts and traditions of men. Those thoughts can be interesting commentary, fanciful speculation, insight into beliefs in the times they were written, etc. But they do not carry the authority that Scripture carries. (I realize, from discussions with Big Shmooz that he considered the Talmud to be necessary to understand the Scriptures.)


That sort of insulting dismissal of thousands of years of Jewish thinking is no doubt one reason for the schism you spoke of earlier.

quote:

No, the story of the birth of Abram is not identical to the story of the birth of Jesus. You are simply looking at human traditions and speculation about both figures. Genesis does not give any details of Abram's birth, other than he was from Ur. Jesus was wound in swaddling clothes and laid in a manger. The NT doesn't say anything about a cave, stable, or house.


https://www.chabad.org/library...2/jewish/Abraham.htm
The night before Abram was born, Nimrod’s astrologers were gathered at Terah’s house. Looking out into the night sky, they read in the constellation of the stars that the newly born child was to become the chief and the father of a mighty nation. This discovery was communicated to Nimrod, who became afraid that the new star might darken his own.
Nimrod asked Terah to bring the newly born baby to the palace to be killed. Terah tried to talk Nimrod out of it, but he couldn’t. He risked his life and the lives of his whole family, and exchanged his son with a servant’s child born the same day as Abram. Nimrod did not suspect the ruse, and he killed the baby with his own hands. Meanwhile, Abram was hidden in a cave.

Quite apart from the simple fact that no one knows where or when Abram was born, we don't even know who decided not to include the story around his birth, given that it was virtually identical to the mythology of the Star of Bethlehem portending the birth of Jesus.

Christians can't even agree on exactly where Abram was born

https://slate.com/news-and-pol...as-abraham-born.html
The leading assumption among Jewish and Christian scholars for the last century and a half has been that Ur of the Chaldeans refers to the ancient metropolis of Ur, capital of the mini-empire Sumer, which was, indeed, located in southeastern Iraq not far from Nasiryah. But this has problems. First, scholars now agree that the term Chaldeans is almost assuredly an anachronism, as it refers to a Semitic people who didn’t show up in Ur until the 7th century B.C Abraham, by contrast, would have lived 1,300 years earlier, closer to 2,000 B.C. Second, nomadic people did not have a habit of settling alongside major cities.
Muslim commentators (and increasingly some Jewish and Christians ones) propose a radically different alternative. The Genesis story says that after leaving Ur of the Chaldeans, Terah and his family settle alongside the town of Harran, where Terah lives for 60 more years. Harran almost surely corresponds to the ancient trading center that is located today in southeastern Turkey, on the border with Syria. Considering that they were headed for Canaan, which is due west of Sumerian Ur, it makes no geographic sense that Terah and his family would travel 550 miles out of their way to southern Turkey. It seems more likely—as Muslim tradition suggests—that biblical Ur is actually in Upper Mesopotamia, closer to Harran. The town of Urfa, Turkey (notice the shared root with Ur), is less than 20 miles from Harran and contains an ancient cave where Muslim tradition says Abraham was born.

Nor have I ever met any Christian who thinks to ask the meaning of the names of the people they consider Biblically important. Were they given names, or were they, in effect, descriptions? What do Abram and Abraham mean?

quote:
Not a problem at all when you are able to tell the difference between traditions and the Scriptures.


Something no ordinary Christian is taught. Can't find a source quickly, but examples abound of the clear distinction between what the ordinary Christian is told to believe and what the high-church experts actually know.

https://www.beliefnet.com/colu...-about-religion.html
Examples: Forty-five percent of Roman Catholics didn’t know church teaching that the bread and wine in Holy Communion is not just a symbol, but becomes the body and blood of Christ. And over 50% of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the person who inspired the Protestant Reformation. Of all groups participating in the survey, atheists and agnostics scored the highest number of correct answers.

quote:
I don't know that Herod's astrologers, if he had them, or anyone else would have been looking for signs in the stars that would tell them that the Messiah was born.


All those who study the culture of the times know how important astrology was. Herod naturally would have had his own astrologers. As did the Temple priests.

quote:
Who says they were Zarathustrian priests and that there were three of them?


https://www.ranker.com/list/co...e-bible/ashley-reign
Some scholars believe that the wise men were actually Babylonian Magi who may have been familiar with the prophecies of Daniel, of the lion's den fame. You see, not only did Daniel have a way with big kitties of the ferocious variety, he went on to become the chief seer and head of all the Babylonian Magi during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.
His prophecies in Daniel 9:24-27 laid out a timeline for the coming Messiah which the visitors of baby Jesus may have used to help determine when to expect Him. They may have additionally been familiar with the prophecy of Balaam in Numbers 24:17 which specifically mentions "a star coming out of Jacob."
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Vicki:
Actually there are many books of the Bible where there is internal evidence which help us date when they were written. Unfortunately, the original ancient manuscripts have not survived. Thankfully, we have copies.


Can you please provide evidence of accurate dating supported by scientific findings?

Have you ever considered the suggestion that the Bible version of David and Solomon is most probably based on the House of Omrid?

Given, too, that the earliest Tanakh writings we have date to well after the exile, how do we know whether in fact they are accurate copies of anything which existed before the exile?

quote:
As you said, the population of Egypt at that time (whichever time that was) is unknown. Keep in mind that our information of ancient Egyptian history is incomplete. We may yet find the evidence that supports the exodus out of Egypt. Also, evidence of a nomadic people group in the wilderness would also be hard to find. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.


It would be impossible for a population the size of Houston's not to leave traces. Instead, we do have evidence of small nomadic tribes going through Sinai. The effluent from 2.4 million people would have turned it into a fertile region.

quote:
At the time that Joshua led the people into Canaan, Egypt was not a factor.


Evidence, please.

quote:
The (flood) issue is dating of the archaeological evidence. I know that you have confidence in the current method, as do most scientists.


The issue is geology.

While it seems to have disappeared without trace, that amount of water would have left clear evidence. No such evidence exists anywhere.

https://www.csicop.org/si/show...flood_never_happened

Archaeological evidence such as all those cities, even the Giza pyramids, confirms the geology.

I even saw someone try to give the Grand Canyon as evidence. Shows just how far some are prepared to stretch the truth.

As I said earlier, we have at least three proven floods which might well be the base for the Bible version of what was said in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

quote:
The key is in understanding who the prince of Persia and the prince of Greece, and Michael one of the chief princes, are.


Who, exactly, provides this understanding? What established evidence do they provide?
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
Another duplicate.

Someone up there trying to tell me something?
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by bluelamp:
Channeling/visions with or without drugs is something to do very carefully aka you will never see me try out a Ouija board.


Back in the 60s and 70s I was one of the very few amateur members of the Queensland Hypnosis Society.

After the workout each Friday night, most of us stayed on until the wee small hours exploring hypnosis and NLP (brand new at the time).

One night someone suggested the ouija board.

I was OK with it, but the consensus was a definite no thanks.
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Allan:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Henry J:
Mushrooms can be such fun guys, huh.


Initiates in the Mystery Religions took offence at such ways of thinking.

On the other hand, a dish of escargot laced with ergot in an Amanita muscaria mushroom sauce could well be an entirely different story.

I guess, to follow your line of thinking, one Fun Gus joined by another become two Fun Guy?
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Here to stay...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Allan:
Have you ever considered the suggestion that the Bible version of David and Solomon is most probably based on the House of Omrid?

Yeah even though Omri himself is in the Bible, David picked up his attributes. David as Wikipedia mentions was a leader of outlaws. I do think like Abraham in the Amarna period, David in the Sea Peoples period picked up Luwian monotheism:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/...iblical-sea-peoples/

quote:
According to the press release, “After successful conquests on land, the united forces of western Asia Minor also formed a fleet and invaded a number of coastal cities (whose names are given) in the south and southeast of Asia Minor, as well as in Syria and Palestine… The Luwians from western Asia Minor advanced all the way to the borders of Egypt, and even built a fortress at Ashkelon in southern Palestine.”


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...hilistine_settlement

quote:
Ashkelon became one of the five Philistine cities that were constantly warring with the Israelites and the Kingdom of Judah.


quote:
It would be impossible for a population the size of Houston's not to leave traces. Instead, we do have evidence of small nomadic tribes going through Sinai. The effluent from 2.4 million people would have turned it into a fertile region.

If you want somebody comparable in size to Egypt battling Egypt you would need the Hittites/Luwians.

quote:
While it seems to have disappeared without trace, that amount of water would have left clear evidence... As I said earlier, we have at least three proven floods which might well be the base for the Bible version of what was said in the Epic of Gilgamesh.


Tsunamis don't actually need more water; they just move water around.

http://blogs.christianpost.com...of-genesis-711-8825/

quote:
This new retranslation of Genesis 7:11 tells that "the sources of the deep" (comets) that "lie in wait in heaven" (comets) in what we now call the Oort Cloud were "loosed" and "broken up" as they came in to strike the Earth. Subsequent verses provide clues consistent with a comet or comets that strike the ocean and cause a series of mega-tsunamis that would last for months and cause Noah's Flood.
A valid translation of a major catastrophic event should be supported by accounts from eyewitnesses, physical evidence, and linguistic validation. Not surprising, eyewitness support comes from the Sumerians and the Babylonians (regional neighbors to the Bible's Noah) who each have their own accounts of the Flood. Their texts say the flood covered the mountains on the first day. They attribute the flood to the "host of heaven" (Deuteronomy 4:19 and Jeremiah 19:13) which archeologists know were a group of cometary gods. These flood accounts describe events that were clearly cometary in nature. For example, they tell of the god Ninurta who was known to hurl fiery sling stones appearing on the horizon before the flood, a black cloud arising, and then the wide land being shattered like a pot, turning to darkness all that had been light and then the mountains being submerged; details that are consistent with cometary activity.


I tend to think Younger Dryas for Noah just like Atlantis because of the Tower of Babel technology but the source above uses the Burckle crater.
 
Posts: 1149 | Location: Tucson, AZ | Mbr Since: 04-23-2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Settling in...
posted Hide Post
Allan:
Those who know the Bible can find other instances of where God did not know what was going on. How does the Bible say he learned about what was happening in Babel?

Vicki:
I don't understand why you would think that God didn't know what was going on at Babel, just because Genesis 11:5 states God "came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building." He knew what was going on, if He decided to go there.

Allan:
To deny that God himself said his Adversary had enticed (depending on translation: thou movedst me) him it to make a liar out of God.

Vicki:
I'm using the NIV and HCSB. They use the word, incite, in Job 2:3. Incite is more along the lines of "movedst me", than entice. Satan urged God to take an action against Job. This was part of God's plan, which is why God drew Satan's attention to Job in the first place.


Allan:
Can you please identify the differences you see in the first three verses of those chapters. Seem identical to me, apart from "you incited Me against him, to destroy him without cause."

Vicki:
Job 1:1-3 There was a man in the country of Uz named Job He was a man of perfect integrity, who feared God and turned away from evil. He had seven sons and three daughters. His estate included 7,000 sheep, 3,000 camels, 500 yoke of oxen, 500 female donkeys, and a very large number of servants. Job was the greatest man among all the people of the east.
Job 2:1-3
One day the sons of God came again to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them to present himself before the LORD. The LORD asked Satan, "Where have you come from?"


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vicki
 
Posts: 455 | Location: Idaho | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Settling in...
posted Hide Post
Allan:
No comparison at all there. I'm referring to the well-known Ludlul-Bel-Nimeqi and the older Sumerian work, Man and His God.

Vicki:
I'm sure that we can agree that many cultures' wisdom literature asks the question why good people suffer. This doesn't mean that the book of Job is based on Ludlul-Bel-Nimeqi and Man and His God. People write about this same question, nowadays, without their writings being accused of being derivative.


quote:
I think that the book of Job serves more than one purpose. Keeping in mind that Job is part of the wisdom literature section, it shows that there are exceptions to the general doctrine in proverbs and other parts of Scripture that says sin is punished and obedience is blessed. Job is a righteous man, yet God allows him to suffer from severe losses.


Allan:
Far more likely, one would think, that the proto-rabbis rewrote this familiar story to excuse the simple fact that Marduk had defeated Adonai. Now they taught that, like Job, the exiled Jews had to worship Adonai because he IS, not because of what good or harm he did to them.

Vicki:
That would be a silly thing for the proto-rabbis to do, wouldn't it? After all, much of the various books of the prophets warned that the northern kingdom and Judah and Jerusalem would be conquered and exiled due to their sins of idolatry and injustice. These books make it very clear that God is the one who raises up nations and brings them down. The proto-rabbis didn't have to explain anything. All they had to do was point to the writings to the prophets.



quote:

You are incorrect in thinking that God was challenged by Satan's implied charge that God was not worthy of worship and needed to buy it from people with blessings.


Allan:
Can you provide any evidence to support your claim here?
In fact, what I said is common knowledge. As was his role, God's selected Adversary simply pointed out that, while God was boasting about what a dedicated follower of him Job was, his Adversary made the obvious observation that it was just as likely Job worshipped him only because of the good life he had. A perfectly sensible and valid comment in context.

Vicki:
Your claim that what you said is common knowledge, isn't as common as you think. The New American Commentary, volume 11, Job, by Robert L. Alden points out that "Satan assumed his classical pose of charging a good man with evil" and "His charge was not true. Job did not curse God when he lost everything".
Then, Satan couldn't leave well enough alone. He took things further and made another false accusation- that Job would curse God if Satan were to allow to afflict him physically.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vicki
 
Posts: 455 | Location: Idaho | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Settling in...
posted Hide Post
quote:
There is a big difference between the Scriptures, which are inspired at the direction of the Holy Spirit, thus the word of God and the Talmud, which are the thoughts and traditions of men. Those thoughts can be interesting commentary, fanciful speculation, insight into beliefs in the times they were written, etc. But they do not carry the authority that Scripture carries. (I realize, from discussions with Big Shmooz that he considered the Talmud to be necessary to understand the Scriptures.)


Allan:
That sort of insulting dismissal of thousands of years of Jewish thinking is no doubt one reason for the schism you spoke of earlier.

Vicki
My post was not meant to be insulting. There is a difference between Scriptures and Jewish commentaries. Are your posts meant to be insulting when you dismiss Christian thinking?

Allan:
Nor have I ever met any Christian who thinks to ask the meaning of the names of the people they consider Biblically important. Were they given names, or were they, in effect, descriptions? What do Abram and Abraham mean?

Vicki:
This mystifies me. In many of my Bibles, there are footnotes that give the meanings of the Hebrew names. I have friends who have named their children after people in the Bible, based on what those Hebrew names mean. Bible studies I've been a part of also address the meanings of the Hebrew names. It is very surprising to me that you haven't met any Christians who don't know the meanings of the Biblically important names.

quote:
Not a problem at all when you are able to tell the difference between traditions and the Scriptures.


Allan:
Something no ordinary Christian is taught. Can't find a source quickly, but examples abound of the clear distinction between what the ordinary Christian is told to believe and what the high-church experts actually know.

Vicki:
I think of myself as an ordinary Christian who attends a church full of ordinary Christians. Just the other day, we had a senior Christmas party where we played a game where we were tested on the difference between what is man's tradition and what the Bible says about the nativity. I think that you have a strange idea that people who go to church nowadays sit passively in the pew, accepting everything that is said. Nowadays, the passives have stopped attending, imo. The people in my church dig into what the Bible says. I have to be very diligent when I teach, because my class is full of women knowledgeable about God's Word.

Allan:
All those who study the culture of the times know how important astrology was. Herod naturally would have had his own astrologers. As did the Temple priests.

Vicki:
I think you are making an incorrect assumption, especially about the Temple priests.

quote:
Who says they were Zarathustrian priests and that there were three of them?


https://www.ranker.com/list/co...e-bible/ashley-reign
Some scholars believe that the wise men were actually Babylonian Magi who may have been familiar with the prophecies of Daniel, of the lion's den fame. You see, not only did Daniel have a way with big kitties of the ferocious variety, he went on to become the chief seer and head of all the Babylonian Magi during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar.
His prophecies in Daniel 9:24-27 laid out a timeline for the coming Messiah which the visitors of baby Jesus may have used to help determine when to expect Him. They may have additionally been familiar with the prophecy of Balaam in Numbers 24:17 which specifically mentions "a star coming out of Jacob."[/QUOTE]

Vicki:
It is possible that the magi were from Persia. It is also possible they were from Arabia. We don't really know. But there is nothing in the Bible to indicate that they were Zoroastrian priests.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vicki
 
Posts: 455 | Location: Idaho | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Settling in...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Allan:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vicki:
Actually there are many books of the Bible where there is internal evidence which help us date when they were written. Unfortunately, the original ancient manuscripts have not survived. Thankfully, we have copies.


Allan:
Can you please provide evidence of accurate dating supported by scientific findings?

Vicki:
No, I can't provide evidence of accurate scientific dating of originals that no longer exist.

Allan:
Have you ever considered the suggestion that the Bible version of David and Solomon is most probably based on the House of Omrid?

Vicki:
The suggestion does not make sense. I understand that there is more extra-biblical evidence for the house of Omri as there are a number of ancient documents in which Omri's name appears. The Bible gives a clear succession of rulers for Israel and then after the split, Judah and Israel (the northern kingdom). David and Solomon predate Omri by a number of decades.

Allan:
Given, too, that the earliest Tanakh writings we have date to well after the exile, how do we know whether in fact they are accurate copies of anything which existed before the exile?


Vicki:
What evidence do you have that they are not accurate copies?

quote:
As you said, the population of Egypt at that time (whichever time that was) is unknown. Keep in mind that our information of ancient Egyptian history is incomplete. We may yet find the evidence that supports the exodus out of Egypt. Also, evidence of a nomadic people group in the wilderness would also be hard to find. That doesn't mean it didn't happen.


Allan:
It would be impossible for a population the size of Houston's not to leave traces. Instead, we do have evidence of small nomadic tribes going through Sinai. The effluent from 2.4 million people would have turned it into a fertile region.


Vicki:
I'm sure it takes more than a lot of fertilizer to make the region fertile.

Allan:
While it seems to have disappeared without trace, that amount of water would have left clear evidence. No such evidence exists anywhere.

Vicki:
I'm sure that you are aware of the alternate interpretation of the evidence, offered by Creationists. I understand that you dismiss their interpretation, so I won't refer you to the Answers in Genesis site.

quote:
The key is in understanding who the prince of Persia and the prince of Greece, and Michael one of the chief princes, are.


Allan:
Who, exactly, provides this understanding? What established evidence do they provide?


Vicki:
Established evidence? Exactly what are you looking for, here?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vicki
 
Posts: 455 | Location: Idaho | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by bluelamp:
[QUOTE]According to the press release, “After successful conquests on land, the united forces of western Asia Minor also formed a fleet and invaded a number of coastal cities (whose names are given) in the south and southeast of Asia Minor, as well as in Syria and Palestine… The Luwians from western Asia Minor advanced all the way to the borders of Egypt, and even built a fortress at Ashkelon in southern Palestine.”
...I tend to think Younger Dryas for Noah just like Atlantis because of the Tower of Babel technology but the source above uses the Burckle crater.


You keep confirming our biases Smile-Big   :D

Understandably, the first, amateur, archaeologists were determined to confirm what the Bible said, so that's what they did.

As you know, I have long been saying we need far more research into the region around what is now called Turkey. One of the Luwian sites I read, after what you said, confirms this:

https://luwianstudies.org/who-are-the-luwians/
For a number of reasons discussed elsewhere, recognition of a Luwian civilization seems to have been delayed. The gap between linguistics and prehistory regarding the investigations of the Luwians has existed for almost a century, since Emil Forrer, the Hittitologist who first identified the Luwian language in the tablets from Hattuša, recognized the significance of the Luwians as early as 1920.
...However, Luwian hieroglyphic script occurs as early as 2000 BCE in western and southern Asia Minor as well. Therefore, the term Luwian is also applied to the indigenous people who lived in western and southern Anatolia – in addition to the Hattians – prior to the arrival of the Hittites and during the Hittite reign.

We can't even begin to understand the Bible unless and until we know about all the cultures which helped create it.

We do know how much the Bible owes to earlier Sumerian, Persian, Egyptian, and probably Indian mythology. How much more do they owe to their northern neighbours, the Hittites and the Hattites for just two?

It is obvious the Bible is wrong when it says the Hebrews began as one tribe, all descendants of Abraham. Instead, they began as the union of three separate Canaanite tribes, northern, central, and southern. The central group must have been the most powerful, as it convinced the others to accept their separate individual mythological founders as descendants of the central patriarch.

Clearly they formed this union because they were outgunned militarily and economically by the great powers which surrounded them.

Even then, they were incapable of remaining united, splitting instead into the more powerful Israel and the lesser Judea.

Have you any thoughts on just who, in both the Greek and Hebrew mythologies, were the ones who tried to deny knowledge (Zeus and the Titan Prometheus, Adonai and Babel)? As I said earlier the reason is obvious, but no one seems to want to own up.

Any progress on the Burckle meteor? Last I saw there was still considerable debate about it. When I first read it, this led me to at least two major meteor ocean strikes which affected northern Australia.

Your site certainly makes sense, and gives me more reason to accept comet impacts. Makes more sense, too, given this exercise in word games, something I have long felt is not accepted as vital.

We'll learn.
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
Vicki, it's just after 5pm on Christmas Eve, so may I wish you and all you hold dear a wonderful holy Christmas as you celebrate the birth of Jesus.

May it meet all your expectations.
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Settling in...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Allan:
Vicki, it's just after 5pm on Christmas Eve, so may I wish you and all you hold dear a wonderful holy Christmas as you celebrate the birth of Jesus.

May it meet all your expectations.


Thank-you, Allan.

I hope you have a wonderful and blessed visit with your family over the holidays and that you and yours are in good health.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vicki
 
Posts: 455 | Location: Idaho | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Aavid
Picture of Holy Bhagworm
posted Hide Post
It's absurd that Jesus' BD is celebrated Dec 25th. At least there is some kind of sense that Easter Sunday occurs when it does.

Merry Xmas to you people. I've been enjoying your discussions. Very heavy stuff. Channeling, mushrooms, satan, demiures, and discussions about Hebrew biblical history. Incredible dedicated minds to such weirdness. I would have to say you all agree that G-d had some human quirks that don't match up with my personal concept of a spiritual humanity/universe/Supreme Being. And no, I can't explain myself. I just don't/can't put energy into arguments that don't involve facts - "facts" which involve heresay hokus-pocus bs. But fun "facts" nonetheless!!

HB
 
Posts: 26544 | Location: 1 | Mbr Since: 08-11-2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of Reed N D Dark
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Bhagworm:
It's absurd that Jesus' BD is celebrated Dec 25th. At least there is some kind of sense that Easter Sunday occurs when it does.

Merry Xmas to you people. I've been enjoying your discussions. Very heavy stuff. Channeling, mushrooms, satan, demiures, and discussions about Hebrew biblical history. Incredible dedicated minds to such weirdness. I would have to say you all agree that G-d had some human quirks that don't match up with my personal concept of a spiritual humanity/universe/Supreme Being. And no, I can't explain myself. I just don't/can't put energy into arguments that don't involve facts - "facts" which involve heresay hokus-pocus bs. But fun "facts" nonetheless!!

HB


It is hard for most of us to describe the infinite in terms that aren’t humanoid. Of course, there may not be a good reason to try to define God at all, especially if one recognizes the concept of infinite in wher experiences of God. Nevertheless man will continue to claim that if we are made in the image of God, we then either know what God looks like or are gods ourselves!

May you experience those who also understand that God’s love extends beyond the realm of reason and definitions. Righteousness is more than a check list, it is a state of being that allows for human error and still provides a deeper peace that seems to come from both within and without.

Shalom.
 
Posts: 12863 | Location: Central PA | Mbr Since: 05-14-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Aavid
Picture of Holy Bhagworm
posted Hide Post
quote:
Nevertheless man will continue to claim that if we are made in the image of God, we then either know what God looks like or are gods ourselves!


That's a big assumption. Very ego-centric of mankind.

Well, there are still flat-earthers, earth-centrics, and Pat Robertson (and worse...the people who send him money).

HB
 
Posts: 26544 | Location: 1 | Mbr Since: 08-11-2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of Reed N D Dark
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Bhagworm:
quote:
Nevertheless man will continue to claim that if we are made in the image of God, we then either know what God looks like or are gods ourselves!


That's a big assumption. Very ego-centric of mankind.

Well, there are still flat-earthers, earth-centrics, and Pat Robertson (and worse...the people who send him money).

HB


Don’t forget that there are passages about the four corners of the world. LOL!   :lol:

As for ego-centric, of course!
 
Posts: 12863 | Location: Central PA | Mbr Since: 05-14-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
Picture of That JR Thang
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Bhagworm:
It's absurd that Jesus' BD is celebrated Dec 25th. At least there is some kind of sense that Easter Sunday occurs when it does.

Merry Xmas to you people. I've been enjoying your discussions. Very heavy stuff. Channeling, mushrooms, satan, demiures, and discussions about Hebrew biblical history. Incredible dedicated minds to such weirdness. I would have to say you all agree that G-d had some human quirks that don't match up with my personal concept of a spiritual humanity/universe/Supreme Being. And no, I can't explain myself. I just don't/can't put energy into arguments that don't involve facts - "facts" which involve heresay hokus-pocus bs. But fun "facts" nonetheless!!

HB

I think everyone has some concept of what they "believe" God to be. However, I don't think God is inclined to conform to our pitiful ideas.

The way I see God is that God is all-encompassing and permeating. God is all that there is and without God there is nothing. IOW, draw a circle and name it God. All matter, antimatter, spirit, whatever, of the universe(s) is within the circle that is God.

And as enormous as my concept is, I still believe it hardly scratches the surface of who and what God is. I really don't think the pitiful human mind can even come close to conceptualizing God. And I'm good with that.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fence straddlers get a crotch full of splinters -- Granny
 
Posts: 6590 | Location: Atlanta | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Don’t forget that there are passages about the four corners of the world

Ah well, corners wear out after some number of years.
 
Posts: 10050 | Location: Colorado | Mbr Since: 10-17-2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Devoted...
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by That JR Thang:
I think everyone has some concept of what they "believe" God to be. However, I don't think God is inclined to conform to our pitiful ideas.
The way I see God is that God is all-encompassing and permeating. God is all that there is and without God there is nothing. IOW, draw a circle and name it God. All matter, antimatter, spirit, whatever, of the universe(s) is within the circle that is God.
And as enormous as my concept is, I still believe it hardly scratches the surface of who and what God is. I really don't think the pitiful human mind can even come close to conceptualizing God. And I'm good with that.


Nothing at all wrong with the human mind so long as we understand we are all evolved social animals, born to learn how to behave in a way which benefits the tribe. Deities are easy; we create them in our own image.

The Singularity always was, always is, and always will be One; Matter and Energy always were, always are, and always will be.

As for the rest, leave it up to Shakespeare: What's in a name?

By the Middle Ages even the Kabbalists had accepted there was no point in having a Male Deity without completing its unity, so they gave him back his consort, now naming Her Shekhina instead of Astarte/Asherah/Ashtoreth/Anat, or, much more accurate, Isis. They even gave the Blessed pair a son and daughter.

And kept Lilith on the sideline to step in when the Shekhina went off in a huff when Her Chosen People reneged on the deal.

May you all celebrate appropriately your Winter Solstice as I swelter in our Summer Solstice.

Ra Rules OK
 
Posts: 5046 | Location: Queensland, Australia | Mbr Since: 05-05-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of Reed N D Dark
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Henry J:
quote:
Don’t forget that there are passages about the four corners of the world

Ah well, corners wear out after some number of years.


So you are arguing for a flat disk?
 
Posts: 12863 | Location: Central PA | Mbr Since: 05-14-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of Reed N D Dark
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by That JR Thang:
quote:
Originally posted by Holy Bhagworm:
It's absurd that Jesus' BD is celebrated Dec 25th. At least there is some kind of sense that Easter Sunday occurs when it does.

Merry Xmas to you people. I've been enjoying your discussions. Very heavy stuff. Channeling, mushrooms, satan, demiures, and discussions about Hebrew biblical history. Incredible dedicated minds to such weirdness. I would have to say you all agree that G-d had some human quirks that don't match up with my personal concept of a spiritual humanity/universe/Supreme Being. And no, I can't explain myself. I just don't/can't put energy into arguments that don't involve facts - "facts" which involve heresay hokus-pocus bs. But fun "facts" nonetheless!!

HB

I think everyone has some concept of what they "believe" God to be. However, I don't think God is inclined to conform to our pitiful ideas.

The way I see God is that God is all-encompassing and permeating. God is all that there is and without God there is nothing. IOW, draw a circle and name it God. All matter, antimatter, spirit, whatever, of the universe(s) is within the circle that is God.

And as enormous as my concept is, I still believe it hardly scratches the surface of who and what God is. I really don't think the pitiful human mind can even come close to conceptualizing God. And I'm good with that.


I believe that what we describe are our experiences of God, but even then not all of our own experiences are ever expressed in one description. That means that if we took all of our experiences we still wouldn't have the infinite defined!
 
Posts: 12863 | Location: Central PA | Mbr Since: 05-14-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Never goes away...
Picture of Reed N D Dark
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Allan:
quote:
Originally posted by That JR Thang:
I think everyone has some concept of what they "believe" God to be. However, I don't think God is inclined to conform to our pitiful ideas.
The way I see God is that God is all-encompassing and permeating. God is all that there is and without God there is nothing. IOW, draw a circle and name it God. All matter, antimatter, spirit, whatever, of the universe(s) is within the circle that is God.
And as enormous as my concept is, I still believe it hardly scratches the surface of who and what God is. I really don't think the pitiful human mind can even come close to conceptualizing God. And I'm good with that.


Nothing at all wrong with the human mind so long as we understand we are all evolved social animals, born to learn how to behave in a way which benefits the tribe. Deities are easy; we create them in our own image.

The Singularity always was, always is, and always will be One; Matter and Energy always were, always are, and always will be.

As for the rest, leave it up to Shakespeare: What's in a name?

By the Middle Ages even the Kabbalists had accepted there was no point in having a Male Deity without completing its unity, so they gave him back his consort, now naming Her Shekhina instead of Astarte/Asherah/Ashtoreth/Anat, or, much more accurate, Isis. They even gave the Blessed pair a son and daughter.

And kept Lilith on the sideline to step in when the Shekhina went off in a huff when Her Chosen People reneged on the deal.

May you all celebrate appropriately your Winter Solstice as I swelter in our Summer Solstice.

Ra Rules OK


Right now I think our temperature numbers are about the same. It's about 26-29 here!
 
Posts: 12863 | Location: Central PA | Mbr Since: 05-14-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Settling in...
posted Hide Post
It has been an interesting and challenging discussion. I wish that I was better able to express myself, though.

Although God is so much more than who we are, so far above us in holiness, compassion, power, knowledge, love, wisdom, righteousness, justice, mercy, and grace, etc., He reveals Himself to us on a level that we can understand and encourages us to relate to Him on a personal level.

Then there is His action, when the time was right, to come to us, being born as a human baby in a miraculous virgin birth, as promised hundreds of years before that birth. That baby grew as any normal human being, but Jesus lived a perfect life, without sin, according to the men who were the closest to him during his ministry. The light of the world, the son of God- given to us.

I don't care what day Jesus was actually born. It most likely wasn't December 25. Jewish people back then didn't even celebrate annual birthdays, so the date that Jesus was born wasn't important. What was important was that God kept His promise to send us Messiah, to save us from our sins.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Vicki
 
Posts: 455 | Location: Idaho | Mbr Since: 05-01-2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata       Page: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... 37 
 

    Aantares    Aantares BB  Hop To Forum Categories  Your Lifestyle & Culture  Hop To Forums  Religion & Spirituality    Biblical Scholar: Dont take Bible literally

© 2003-2020 Aantares Online LLC. All Rights Reserved.