KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2012, 10:53 AM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
He's biased because he loves you. We went over this in another thread.

"I think of myself as an intelligent, sensitive human being with the soul of a clown which always forces me to blow it at the most important moments." -Jim Morrison
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like lucradis's post
09-02-2012, 11:00 AM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 08:38 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(08-02-2012 10:59 PM)Erxomai Wrote:  Just because it was on Nova doesn't make it true, so my question is hypothetical. IF there were some way to show that this story, or one like it actually did happen, how would that affect your understanding of God. Consider: there never was an Abraham. There never was a Jacob who changed his name to Israel. There never was a Moses, Joshua, Saul. The history of the Israelites doesn't begin until King David and King Solomon consolidate these settlements of ex-Canaanites and announced that they are now the nation of Israel. If all that were some how absolute factual history, could you still believe in God? Or will you simply say he let those charlatans intentionally pass along a made up history and a made up rulebook to you in 2012 so you could know that he chose me to be tormented in the fires of hell forever?

Just wondering...

I guess I would have to be faced with that situation to know what I would do.

Fair enough. I don't like being forced to answer some of the hypothetical questions I see posed. Chas almost ruined my surprise party by saying it's not hypothetical. He's right. It's not a "what if?" question. Even though Nova relies upon the Documentary Hypothesis for authorship of the first 5 books, it's not as widely accepted today as it was 30 years ago. But newer theories that doubt the JEDP theory of authorship place the writing of the books of Moses in the 5th Century which would actually be AFTER the Babylonian Exile. What is still conjecture is "Who were the Israelites really?" But it is not a fringe theory that the Israelites were really displaced Canaanites, rather than the other way around. After 200 years of archaeology, not one shred of evidence has ever been found to show a massive group of 2 million people ever lived anywhere between Egypt and Israel. In fact, there is not one shred of physical evidence for any Biblical "history" until you get to David and Solomon. Not one piece of the first 9 Books of the Bible can be verified as ever happening. Archaeology catches up with the Israelites for the very first time with the House of David, in the 10 Century BCE. The implications of this can be a bit devastating to those who want to still believe in the Bible. You're ok with there never being a Noah, but are you ok with no Abraham? With the non-existence of Abraham, there was never a Covenant with the Hebrews. More importantly, a people called Hebrews never existed. So your theory of Adam and Eve being the first Hebrews is false. There never was a Moses, so there never was a giving of the law. No Ark of the Covenant. No Tabernacle. No Joshua. No Conquest. No 12 Tribes of Israel. Not 1 miracle in the Old Testament ever happened. It's all human created myth begun to be written in the 10th Century and further spun in the 5th Century to explain why they could only hold the land for 500 years. All you're reading is the attempt to give a new warlord, named David, credibility for his rule. We've seen the same thing in the Roman Caesars who called themselves divine in order to hold their authority. We've seen the same thing in European history when monarchs would say they had the Divine right to rule. So the ancient parts of the Old Testament were intended to explain why the House of David had the right to rule.
I know you won't be convinced of this until you do your own careful study, and I'm sure you will. If these implications make sense to you after your study, could you still hold to God's inspiration of the Bible? I guess if I were still a True Believer, I would say that what humans intended for a lie, God used to show his purposes. And we can't question God's purposes, but I do question why he waited until the 10th Century to make his presence known to humanity. Sounds a bit too much like Mohammed saying God finally appeared in the 4th or 5th Century BCE, or Joseph Smith saying, no, God finally appears in the 1800's in upstate New York.

Just stuff for you to research and consider.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Erxomai's post
09-02-2012, 11:11 AM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 10:50 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 10:46 AM)lucradis Wrote:  Hell man I might be completely wrong. He might be a total jesus douche. I don't know him at all. You could be right.

Ask germanyt.

He knows me IRL.

And he admits it? Sad

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2012, 11:23 AM
 
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 11:00 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  there was never a Covenant with the Hebrews. More importantly, a people called Hebrews never existed. So your theory of Adam and Eve being the first Hebrews is false. There never was a Moses, so there never was a giving of the law. No Ark of the Covenant. No Tabernacle. No Joshua. No Conquest. No 12 Tribes of Israel. Not 1 miracle in the Old Testament ever happened.

The lord works in mysterious ways! Now, please follow along with me in the hymn book, page 535 and sing with me as praise the lord...."Just as i am, without one plea......"

Sorry, i had to do it!

Man you really laid it on heavy Erxomai! You probably should have just trickled those facts out....like one a day. Heck, just one of those is a game changer. But you laid it all out there!

As an Ex Preacher, how long did it take for you to HEAR the words you typed above and BELIEVE it?
Many times when i go this far, i see Christians nod (but i know nothing is being received). Even as an atheist many years ago i did not really doubt some of this "Historical Bedrock Facts" of our human history as laid out in the bible, it simply never occurred to me. It was shocking to me to see that the OT is basically ...well....Inglorious Bastards! Quinton T. took the basic story, the basic locations and made up his OWN history, and it was a GREAT film!
Thats how i see the OT now. Indeed some great stories, just dont peel back the layers looking for REAL facts, cuz archeology cant prove ANY facts for you.
Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Denicio's post
09-02-2012, 11:34 AM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 11:23 AM)Denicio Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 11:00 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  there was never a Covenant with the Hebrews. More importantly, a people called Hebrews never existed. So your theory of Adam and Eve being the first Hebrews is false. There never was a Moses, so there never was a giving of the law. No Ark of the Covenant. No Tabernacle. No Joshua. No Conquest. No 12 Tribes of Israel. Not 1 miracle in the Old Testament ever happened.

The lord works in mysterious ways! Now, please follow along with me in the hymn book, page 535 and sing with me as praise the lord...."Just as i am, without one plea......"

Sorry, i had to do it!

Man you really laid it on heavy Erxomai! You probably should have just trickled those facts out....like one a day. Heck, just one of those is a game changer. But you laid it all out there!

As an Ex Preacher, how long did it take for you to HEAR the words you typed above and BELIEVE it?
Many times when i go this far, i see Christians nod (but i know nothing is being received). Even as an atheist many years ago i did not really doubt some of this "Historical Bedrock Facts" of our human history as laid out in the bible, it simply never occurred to me. It was shocking to me to see that the OT is basically ...well....Inglorious Bastards! Quinton T. took the basic story, the basic locations and made up his OWN history, and it was a GREAT film!
Thats how i see the OT now. Indeed some great stories, just dont peel back the layers looking for REAL facts, cuz archeology cant prove ANY facts for you.

I heard most of this stuff in my Seminary days. It took me about 15 years to get it past my excellent cognitive dissonance compartmentalization skills.

Damn, come to think of it, with my great ability to compartmentalize my brain, I should become an Assassin!


Oh, and I did hold back. I have a similar argument about the NT and Paul inventing a religion based upon another invented religion, but as you said, it might be better to trickle the info in a more digestible manner.

It was just a fucking apple man, we're sorry okay? Please stop the madness Laugh out load
~Izel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Erxomai's post
09-02-2012, 12:17 PM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 11:00 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  Fair enough. I don't like being forced to answer some of the hypothetical questions I see posed. Chas almost ruined my surprise party by saying it's not hypothetical. He's right. It's not a "what if?" question.

Geez, give a guy a head's up. I'd hate to trip you in the wings when you're about to make an entrance. Cool

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
09-02-2012, 12:28 PM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 08:38 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  God created humans to sin...

God damned our human nature...

WHY do you worship this god again?


All this talk about covenants and "spiritual death" make it so obvious that this is a cult. Don't drink the Kool-Aid until the appropriate time of ascension.

And do people usually rip on you this much? I don't really follow your threads but I assumed you were treated with some measure of respect, otherwise why the high rep and why haven't you left? But if I stumbled across this thread without knowing the author, I would assume it was Egor just by the angry responses.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Buddy Christ's post
09-02-2012, 12:40 PM (This post was last modified: 09-02-2012 12:46 PM by kingschosen.)
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
Erxomai, you make some good points, and you're right... I am going to look into it and do my own studying. Thanks for the info.

(09-02-2012 12:28 PM)Buddy Christ Wrote:  And do people usually rip on you this much? I don't really follow your threads but I assumed you were treated with some measure of respect, otherwise why the high rep and why haven't you left? But if I stumbled across this thread without knowing the author, I would assume it was Egor just by the angry responses.

TalledagaTom has always ripped on me. Chas... sort of... he did at first, now he's pretty chill. Same with Denicio... he vehemently disagrees with me, but I think he likes me as a poster.

TT just dislikes everything about me.

My beliefs invoke angry responses from some. It's not intentional; it's just how it is.

I haven't left because I like this place... besides, isn't that a bit shallow and narrow-minded... to leave because people don't agree with you? I'm not one to run back to people who share my belief and get circle-jerked. I want to learn. I want to grow.

And, I'm vastly different from Egor. I would suggest checking out some of the threads.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kingschosen's post
09-02-2012, 12:58 PM (This post was last modified: 09-02-2012 01:11 PM by kim.)
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
(09-02-2012 11:34 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 11:23 AM)Denicio Wrote:  
(09-02-2012 11:00 AM)Erxomai Wrote:  there was never a Covenant with the Hebrews. More importantly, a people called Hebrews never existed. So your theory of Adam and Eve being the first Hebrews is false. There never was a Moses, so there never was a giving of the law. No Ark of the Covenant. No Tabernacle. No Joshua. No Conquest. No 12 Tribes of Israel. Not 1 miracle in the Old Testament ever happened.

Man you really laid it on heavy Erxomai! You probably should have just trickled those facts out....like one a day. Heck, just one of those is a game changer. But you laid it all out there!

Damn, come to think of it, with my great ability to compartmentalize my brain, I should become an Assassin!

Oh, and I did hold back. I have a similar argument about the NT and Paul inventing a religion based upon another invented religion, but as you said, it might be better to trickle the info in a more digestible manner.

I was wondering when someone was going to pop. I'm not really equipped or authorized to put scripture in it's place -it's always been irrelevant for me. I do however, pick through actual history - most especially art history - and shit has never added up.

What does add up for me, is the timeline of proto-gnosticism and earlier belief systems through gnosticism, and why we are today saddled with subsequent Judeo-Christian belief systems that have screwed the entire planet ever since.

The symbolism of pre-gnosticism alone, is steeped in Egyptian and Persian mythology as well as Mithraic theology, which among others has been chronicled as a heavy rival of early Christianity.
... Blah blah blah ...

I just wanted to say Bravo Erxy! Smile


And uh, is there a link to that Nova, perchance?
Oops - got one... http://video.pbs.org/video/1051895565/ and they have it in parts on YouTube as well. I think I've seen this, but quite a long time ago.
Thanks for the reminder!! Smile

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes kim's post
09-02-2012, 01:17 PM
RE: KC's interpretation of the Creation Account
I wasn't saying anything about you or suggesting you leave. I was baffled because I thought people respected you (and maybe they do), yet every response has quite a bit of ad hominem. I'm concerned for our members if they can't even approach a civil theist without foaming at the mouth.

"Ain't got no last words to say, yellow streak right up my spine. The gun in my mouth was real and the taste blew my mind."

"We see you cry. We turn your head. Then we slap your face. We see you try. We see you fail. Some things never change."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Buddy Christ's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: