User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 3:22:32 PM EDT
[#1]
Camp fires and cheap wine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 3:28:54 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Abrahamic religions are attributed to the Hebrew Bible, Torah, etc. This is pretty much where the single god comes from. Pretty much all religion is based in one way or another on ancient Egyptian religion. ok wait.. What? I am not buying that, even if they are related they would be related to something earlier no? Both having come from some oral tradition before writing. Also, these are not monotheistic as is the Christian God and I believe that probably is related to Zoroaster and monotheism / dualism -eta- and I dont mean believe as in with faith.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 3:33:08 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ok wait.. What? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Abrahamic religions are attributed to the Hebrew Bible, Torah, etc. This is pretty much where the single god comes from. Pretty much all religion is based in one way or another on ancient Egyptian religion. ok wait.. What? ... 'tis nonsense... pretty much all religions come from man finding a universe without moral order intolerable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 3:33:59 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... 'tis nonsense... pretty much all religions come from man finding a universe without moral order intolerable. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Abrahamic religions are attributed to the Hebrew Bible, Torah, etc. This is pretty much where the single god comes from. Pretty much all religion is based in one way or another on ancient Egyptian religion. ok wait.. What? ... 'tis nonsense... pretty much all religions come from man finding a universe without moral order intolerable. ETA - also, this may be true, but it does not account for the genealogy or influence and development of religions or their concepts and constructs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 3:34:29 PM EDT
[#5]
Zoroastrianism
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 3:36:15 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
God himself of course Second post nailed it. Direct revelation up through Abraham, followed by oral tradition of those events up til Moses, then documented by Moses and the prophets till the end of the Tanakh (known to some as the Old Testament). |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:05:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: Quoted: God himself of course Second post nailed it. Direct revelation up through Abraham, followed by oral tradition of those events up til Moses, then documented by Moses and the prophets till the end of the Tanakh (known to some as the Old Testament). If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:09:58 PM EDT
[#8]
To connect the Zaruthustra, Zoroaster, Zoroastrianism answer with Judaism and therefore Christianity
Those who have not heard of it can begin their own skeptical research But here is some general stuff.. sure some of it is from wiki... This is not proof but support for theory or evidence for speculation, etc.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotheism In Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda appears as a supreme and transcendental deity. Depending on the date of Zoroaster (usually placed in the early Iron Age), this may be one of the earliest documented instances of the emergence of monism in an Indo-European religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroastrianism Zoroaster's ideas led to a formal religion bearing his name by about the 6th century BCE and have influenced other later religions including Judaism, Gnosticism, Christianity and Islam. Many suggest that during the First Temple period, the people of Israel believed that each nation had its own god, but that their god was superior to other gods. Some suggest that strict monotheism developed during the Babylonian Exile, perhaps in reaction to Zoroastrian dualism. In this view, it was only by the Hellenic period that most Jews came to believe that their god was the only god, and that the notion of a clearly bounded Jewish nation identical with the Jewish religion formed. Resemblances Between Zoroastrianism and Judaism. "The points of resemblance between Zoroastrianism and Judaism, and hence also between the former and Christianity, are many and striking. Ahuramazda, the supreme lord of Iran, omniscient, omnipresent, and eternal, endowed with creative power, which he exercises especially through the medium of his Spenta Mainyu ("Holy Spirit"), and governing the universe through the instrumentality of angels and archangels, presents the nearest parallel to Yhwh that is found in antiquity. But Ormuzd's power is hampered by his adversary, Ahriman, whose dominion, however, like Satan's, shall be destroyed at the end of the world. Zoroastrianism and Judaism present a number of resemblances to each other in their general systems of angelology and demonology, points of similarity which have been especially emphasized by the Jewish rabbinical scholars Schorr and Kohut and the Christian theologian Stave." "Both Zoroastrianism and Judaism are revealed religions: in the one Ahuramazda imparts his revelation and pronounces his commandments to Zarathustra on "the Mountain of the Two Holy Communing Ones"; in the other Yhwh holds a similar communion with Moses on Sinai." "The two religions agree in certain respects with regard to their cosmological ideas. The six days of Creation in Genesis find a parallel in the six periods of Creation described in the Zoroastrian scriptures. Mankind, according to each religion, is descended from a single couple, and Mashya (man) and Mashyana are the Iranian Adam (man) and Eve." "In the Bible a deluge destroys all people except a single righteous individual and his family; in the Avesta a winter depopulates the earth except in the Vara ("enclosure") of the blessed Yima. In each case the earth is peopled anew with the best two of every kind," http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/15283-zoroastrianism |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:15:12 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why did your god make himself/herself known to only a small group of people in a single small area of the world? The Chinese, the Inca, the American Indians, etc. never got the memo... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The Bible is the word of God; there are no "ideas" in it. Why did your god make himself/herself known to only a small group of people in a single small area of the world? The Chinese, the Inca, the American Indians, etc. never got the memo... He did tell his people to spread the word. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:19:05 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
God himself of course Second post nailed it. Direct revelation up through Abraham, followed by oral tradition of those events up til Moses, then documented by Moses and the prophets till the end of the Tanakh (known to some as the Old Testament). If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Get it right 
6,000 or 4.5 billion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:28:46 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Cloudy today with a 100% chance of shit storm! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:32:13 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:57:12 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: They knew Him as "God Almighty," which in Hebrew is "'El" Almighty. How 'bout that! The first reference to God in the passage, "And God spoke to Moses...", uses the Hebrew "'Elohiym", which is a plural derivative of "'El". Plural, as in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I guess the point is Quote HistoryQuoted: They knew Him as "God Almighty," which in Hebrew is "'El" Almighty. How 'bout that! The first reference to God in the passage, "And God spoke to Moses...", uses the Hebrew "'Elohiym", which is a plural derivative of "'El". Plural, as in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I guess the point is You may want to go ask your pastor, priest, choir leader or whomever led you down that road to re-examine this one. Haha I know of many rabbis who will disagree with your Hebrew interpretation here.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 4:59:57 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
God himself of course Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:03:38 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
God himself of course This is the correct answer. God is omnipotent and the creator of all things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:13:44 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The Bible is the word of God; there are no "ideas" in it. The Bible is a collection of fairy tales written down by human beings. "God" is a man-made idea - an attempt by our ancestors to interpret the world we live in and to make sense of that which was not understood (especially back then, when people didn't know jack shit about our universe - certainly nowhere near what we know now). The story of the Bible is a collection of "ideas" written down by living beings - there is absolutely nothing divine about it. The idea that the Bible is "the word of God" is the biggest BS story in the history of mankind that has somehow managed to survive for centuries... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:14:05 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You may want to go ask your pastor, priest, choir leader or whomever led you down that road to re-examine this one. Haha I know of many rabbis who will disagree with your Hebrew interpretation here. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
They knew Him as "God Almighty," which in Hebrew is "'El" Almighty. How 'bout that! The first reference to God in the passage, "And God spoke to Moses...", uses the Hebrew "'Elohiym", which is a plural derivative of "'El". Plural, as in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I guess the point is You may want to go ask your pastor, priest, choir leader or whomever led you down that road to re-examine this one. Haha I know of many rabbis who will disagree with your Hebrew interpretation here. That's kind of my own thing, though I have heard it taught elsewhere. As I'm no Hebrew scholar, I certainly wouldn't argue against anyone who would disagree. However, a rabbi is sort of forced to disagree as a matter of doctrine, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:31:08 PM EDT
[#18]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:33:39 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Bible is a collection of fairy tales written down by human beings. "God" is a man-made idea - an attempt by our ancestors to interpret the world we live in and to make sense of that which was not understood (especially back then, when people didn't know jack shit about our universe - certainly nowhere near what we know now). The story of the Bible is a collection of "ideas" written down by living beings - there is absolutely nothing divine about it. The idea that the Bible is "the word of God" is the biggest BS story in the history of mankind that has somehow managed to survive for centuries... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The Bible is the word of God; there are no "ideas" in it. The Bible is a collection of fairy tales written down by human beings. "God" is a man-made idea - an attempt by our ancestors to interpret the world we live in and to make sense of that which was not understood (especially back then, when people didn't know jack shit about our universe - certainly nowhere near what we know now). The story of the Bible is a collection of "ideas" written down by living beings - there is absolutely nothing divine about it. The idea that the Bible is "the word of God" is the biggest BS story in the history of mankind that has somehow managed to survive for centuries... While I would agree with you on most of your points. You would do well to learn the following: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothing |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:36:03 PM EDT
[#20]
From the religion thread?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:37:01 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: God himself of course |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 5:37:19 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Zoroastrianism. Wow. FPNI. I wasn't expecting that on this thread. I was coming in to close the deal with this answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:11:23 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wow. FPNI. I wasn't expecting that on this thread. I was coming in to close the deal with this answer. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Zoroastrianism. Wow. FPNI. I wasn't expecting that on this thread. I was coming in to close the deal with this answer. Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:17:17 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Zoroastrianism. Wow. FPNI. I wasn't expecting that on this thread. I was coming in to close the deal with this answer. Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? that most Jews came to believe that their god was the only god, and that the notion of a clearly bounded Jewish nation identical with the Jewish religion formed.~ part of my post above, search about Zoroastrianism and Judaism and you will see the relations, theories and time lines. Ideas existed before the formation of formal religions and religions or peoples and their culture/religion also evolve over time |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:21:03 PM EDT
[#25]
Originally Posted By Mastadon
Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? ^sounds reasonable, continue |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:33:58 PM EDT
[#26]
Isn't the first monotheistic faith on record Anhkenaten's worship of Aten, the sun deity?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:34:10 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. My point was if he'd waited for a couple hundred thousand years of humanity's existence, what was another few hundred until more people could read? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:41:36 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
snip~Some suggest that strict monotheism developed during the Babylonian Exile, perhaps in reaction to Zoroastrian dualism. In this view, it was only by the Hellenic period that most Jews came to believe that their god was the only god, and that the notion of a clearly bounded Jewish nation identical with the Jewish religion formed.~ part of my post above, search about Zoroastrianism and Judaism and you will see the relations, theories and time lines. Ideas existed before the formation of formal religions and religions or peoples and their culture/religion also evolve over time Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Zoroastrianism. Wow. FPNI. I wasn't expecting that on this thread. I was coming in to close the deal with this answer. Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? part of my post above, search about Zoroastrianism and Judaism and you will see the relations, theories and time lines. Ideas existed before the formation of formal religions and religions or peoples and their culture/religion also evolve over time A great deal of the Bible is dedicated to exhorting the Israelites to quit worshipping other gods, particularly the Baals. In fact, no sooner had Moses gotten down the mountain than he found that his own brother had overseen building an idol. The Israelites absolutely had a big problem remaining monotheistic. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:42:55 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
^sounds reasonable, continue Quote HistoryQuoted:
Originally Posted By Mastadon
Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? ^sounds reasonable, continue See my really long post above. It addresses what you're getting at. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:46:32 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The Bible is the word of God; there are no "ideas" in it. Why did your god make himself/herself known to only a small group of people in a single small area of the world? The Chinese, the Inca, the American Indians, etc. never got the memo... The middle east is the crossroads of the world. Want to move from Europe, Africa, or Asia to one of the other two, you will pass through the middle east. A hard concept to understand is that the Jewish people were essential to the spread of the Gospel. The Jews were at ground zero. They made the most powerful empire hate them. In the meantime, Christ was born and Christianity became established in the middle east. Being a part of the Roman Empire allowed Jews and Christians to spread to the known world via Roman infrastructure and sea travel. When the Diaspora came, it scattered Christians and Jews alike all over the place. God knew what was going to happen. Christ was begotten and not made. The triune god has always existed. Time as we understand it came later on. God wanted to have a one-on -one relationship with his creation. Couldn't do that with apes, so he created man.....who is created in god's image....and god is spirit. Man messed it up once man discovered free will. God cannot be in the presence of sin and vv. Jesus purpose from the very get go was to pay the price for all sin. But god had to first get back in touch with mankind yet again. He chose Abraham because Abraham had come to the conclusion that there was only one god and that god was omnipotent. God let Abraham know that he was indeed the god that Abraham had come to realize. Thus a monotheistic religion for the purpose of keeping in touch with a triune god was born. If it had been done anywhere else, it would not have spread as god wished it to. Your god seems more concerned with playing games. http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/368/trollphotou7.jpg Salt water is a good thing. Far vaster stretches of the ocean would be ice it it was not salt water. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:49:20 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
^sounds reasonable, continue Quote HistoryQuoted:
Originally Posted By Mastadon
Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? ^sounds reasonable, continue From "Cosmos, Chaos, and the World To Come". "that Zoroasterlived in a far earlier period, some time between 1500 and 1200 BC, when the Iranians were still settled pastoralists, rather than farmers. I have two books here on Zoroastrianism. Neither books says Zoroastrianism oriinated from Hinduism. Nor does Wikipedia. The book I cited does say Zoroastrianism did have an influence on Christianity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 6:53:05 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Zoroastrianism. Wow. FPNI. I wasn't expecting that on this thread. I was coming in to close the deal with this answer. Here's what I don't get: if Zoroastrianism didn't emerge as a distinct religion until about 600BC, how can we say that the God of Israel is rooted in Zoroastrianism? The nation of Israel dates back much farther than 600BC. For example, David ruled in around 1,000BC. If we're going to make the leap from similarity to commonality, shouldn't the root religion be the older one? Here toy go. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avestan_language |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:01:45 PM EDT
[#33]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_religion
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:10:02 PM EDT
[#34]
Hope and Change 1.0
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:37:31 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. Again, what of China? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2014 7:42:30 PM EDT
[#36]
"I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you'." |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 1:06:08 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Again, what of China? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. Again, what of China? What of it? Our oldest examples of Chinese writing are from around 1,200BC, or around 300 years after the Exodus. Folks in the neighborhood of Mesopotamia had already been writing things down for well over 1,000 2,000 years by that time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 1:18:00 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My point was if he'd waited for a couple hundred thousand years of humanity's existence, what was another few hundred until more people could read? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. My point was if he'd waited for a couple hundred thousand years of humanity's existence, what was another few hundred until more people could read? What would that matter? You and I have access to the Bible, right? As the most published and most widely distributed book of all time, I'd say that God did just fine in making sure that His writings were accessible to as many people as possible over the last few thousand years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 1:30:58 AM EDT
[#39]
From God
/thread |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 3:52:13 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What of it? Our oldest examples of Chinese writing are from around 1,200BC, or around 300 years after the Exodus. Folks in the neighborhood of Mesopotamia had already been writing things down for well over 1,000 2,000 years by that time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. Again, what of China? What of it? Our oldest examples of Chinese writing are from around 1,200BC, or around 300 years after the Exodus. Folks in the neighborhood of Mesopotamia had already been writing things down for well over 1,000 2,000 years by that time. The Longshan culture has some early examples of proto-writing, which led to the Shang Dynasty and writing. The Shang was 18th Century BC. Longshan started thousands of years before that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 4:16:59 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: it was only by the Hellenic period that most Jews came to believe that their god was the only god, The Jews were not originally monotheist, but monolatrists. They didn't deny that more gods existed, but only one was theirs, and he was the best one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 4:19:44 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Isn't the first monotheistic faith on record Anhkenaten's worship of Aten, the sun deity? That was probably more monolatry than monotheism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 4:28:20 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Aten That would be my guess. Atenism (sun cult, with sun god as supreme deity). Egypt geographically, don't forget Moses was raised among the Egyptian Royal Court. He got most of his ideas, long before the 'exodus'.........where a bunch of slaves left with TONS of assets. (according to the bible (torah whatever you want to call it)) I'd have to look and see if it predated Zoroastrianism. This actually can start you off on the largest subject in the world, because everything came from somewhere. Nothing new under the sun, and it all has deep cultural/political/sociological/psychological implications. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 4:48:30 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think we do agree just about 100%, and any disagreement comes from the way I worded things (if I'm reading things right). When I say "stole" I am using the language that non-believers used in that argument I've heard before, which is intended to demonstrate that Jehovah is fictional. The way I see it, Israel didn't "steal" anything--they simply continued to worship Jehovah, whom all of the other cultures had known by a different name that is also recorded in the Bible, and some had worshiped faithfully, since the beginning. For example: Genesis 14:18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If you look at Genesis, then it's plain to see that the concept of God was in play long before the creation of the Jewish faith. Many other cultures that are older than Judaism have a common thread of God. Some believe in multiple deities, others are mono-theistic. So it's safe to assume that some folks wandering around the deserts of what now is the Middle East were familiar with our concept of God for quite some time before the founding of the Hebrew nation. Genesis doesn't dive into this all that much because it's essentially a history of the Jewish people rather than a History of the World. There are plenty of historical and scientific facts that are not discussed in any way shape or form in Scripture. This, except Hebrews are an older people than the Israelites. Genesis refers to Abram as "Abram the Hebrew" long before he fathered Isaac. Essentially, the Israelites' cultural and ethnic history is rooted in Mesopotamia. Abram came from Ur of the Chaldeans, which makes Abram a Sumerian (or something--I might be wrong about that). Then, Abram wanders to southern Turkey and finally into the land of Canaan. He and the three following generations live there, procreating all the while. It wasn't until Abraham's great-grandchildren that we have Israelites, or children of Israel (Jacob). Therefore, the Israelites are effectively Canaanites. Hence, the God of the Bible is necessarily the same God that people knew throughout the Middle- and Near-East, including all the land of the Fertile Crescent. In essence, I believe that the argument that the nation of Israel "stole" God from other regional cultures agrees perfectly with what the Bible teaches. I just want to make sure I understand that argument. I think we do agree just about 100%, and any disagreement comes from the way I worded things (if I'm reading things right). When I say "stole" I am using the language that non-believers used in that argument I've heard before, which is intended to demonstrate that Jehovah is fictional. The way I see it, Israel didn't "steal" anything--they simply continued to worship Jehovah, whom all of the other cultures had known by a different name that is also recorded in the Bible, and some had worshiped faithfully, since the beginning. For example: Genesis 14:18 Then Melchizedek king of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was the priest of God Most High. Certainly, Melchizedek was a Canaanite and not related to Abraham. The name of the Canaanite father-god and creator was "El". Well, as it turns out, the Hebrew word for "God" in this verse is "'El". Certainly, Melchizedek worshiped the same God as both David and the author of Hebrews as is evident in those men's understanding that Melchizedek was a forerunner of the righteous priests of God: Psalm 110:4 The Lord has sworn And will not relent, You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek." Hebrews 6:20 where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. Now, listen to what God Himself told Moses centuries later in Exodus 6: Exodus 6:2, 3 And God spoke to Moses and said to him, "I am the Lord. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name Lord I was not known to them." Get this--in this passage, the word "Lord" is written in most Bibles in small-caps both times. That means that it represents the Hebrew name, Yehovah, which we Romanize as Jehovah. So, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob did not know God by the name Jehovah. By what name had they known Him? They knew Him as "God Almighty," which in Hebrew is "'El" Almighty. How 'bout that! The first reference to God in the passage, "And God spoke to Moses...", uses the Hebrew "'Elohiym", which is a plural derivative of "'El". Plural, as in Father, Son and Holy Spirit. I guess the point is this. According to the Bible narrative, all who currently live are descended from Adam through Noah. There was one language, one nation, for quite a long time. Men knew of, and some worshiped faithfully, Jehovah, though they did not know Him by that name. They knew Him as El. Then, God confused the speech of the various sons of Noah at Babel. They went from there and settled all over the place. Over the generations, many remembered the one God, El, but they corrupted His worship. They, as men are wont to do, added their own, additional deities while retaining God as the mightiest of them. They also worshiped Him according to ways that they devised themselves. After all, God had not yet given any instruction on how to worship Him. So, while you might say that they knew *of* God, they did not *know God*. That would be reserved for God's chosen nation, the Israelites. They would know God much later through the law and the prophets. But remember this: according to the Bible, God did not reveal himself to the nation of Israel until after they left Egypt. Yes, God had revealed Himself to Jacob (Israel) and his sons, but only in the context of keeping the promise to Abraham (you will receive land, etc.). There was no law until centuries later. Israel went into bondage in Egypt, and during those 400+ years, God was silent. It was not until God spoke to Moses that He revealed Himself, both to Israel and to Egypt, in the Exodus. It was then that God gave the law through Moses. The story goes on from there. The Israelites, after they conquered Canaan, did exactly what all of those other, pagan nations had done. They made idols of bulls and calfs, which were common Canaanite representations of El. They worshiped the Ba'als, whose names are derivatives of El. In other words, they forgot what God had taught them about Himself and, in do doing, corrupted their worship of God. Thus, God punished them in a series of captivities in Assyria, Babylon and Persia. Canaan would never again belong wholly to Israel. Then comes Christ and the completion of God's revelation to man. God has always been the same God, whether man has called Him El, Yahweh, Jehovah or God. As non-believers delight in telling the faithful, the archaeological record clearly shows that, before there was a nation of Israel, many ancient cultures worshiped a father-creator-god whose name was, or was based on, the same name by which Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew God. The archaeological record furthermore agrees that the worship of the one, true God--frequently named 'El in the Old Testament--was corrupted by all of the nations to include gods that man had invented as well as worship in ways that God never commanded or desired. In other words, the archaeological record entirely agrees with the Genesis account of how man knew God before the nation of Israel. God, the Great "I AM", has always been (hence, the name!). Man's knowledge of Him has always been limited to what He chose to reveal, and even in those revelations, man's knowledge of God has waxed and waned over the ages. It's not God who has changed, but man's perception and knowledge of God that has changed. That's what the Bible teaches, and that's what the archaeological record confirms. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 5:48:04 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Bible is a collection of fairy tales written down by human beings. "God" is a man-made idea - an attempt by our ancestors to interpret the world we live in and to make sense of that which was not understood (especially back then, when people didn't know jack shit about our universe - certainly nowhere near what we know now). The story of the Bible is a collection of "ideas" written down by living beings - there is absolutely nothing divine about it. The idea that the Bible is "the word of God" is the biggest BS story in the history of mankind that has somehow managed to survive for centuries... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The Bible is the word of God; there are no "ideas" in it. The Bible is a collection of fairy tales written down by human beings. "God" is a man-made idea - an attempt by our ancestors to interpret the world we live in and to make sense of that which was not understood (especially back then, when people didn't know jack shit about our universe - certainly nowhere near what we know now). The story of the Bible is a collection of "ideas" written down by living beings - there is absolutely nothing divine about it. The idea that the Bible is "the word of God" is the biggest BS story in the history of mankind that has somehow managed to survive for centuries... "somehow"? I don't believe so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 5:55:44 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Zoroastrianism. Try finding some actual hard info to support that assertion. You won't. There is as much hard info about Zoroastrainism as there is about Celtic Druidism, namely virtually none. A couple of inscriptions and references from a few Greek historians, that's it for both. And from these crumbs people constantly claim that Christianity is completely discredited. Not buying it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 6:07:26 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Longshan culture has some early examples of proto-writing, which led to the Shang Dynasty and writing. The Shang was 18th Century BC. Longshan started thousands of years before that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. Again, what of China? What of it? Our oldest examples of Chinese writing are from around 1,200BC, or around 300 years after the Exodus. Folks in the neighborhood of Mesopotamia had already been writing things down for well over 1,000 2,000 years by that time. The Longshan culture has some early examples of proto-writing, which led to the Shang Dynasty and writing. The Shang was 18th Century BC. Longshan started thousands of years before that. That's fine, too, and let's say I'm wrong about writing and Mesopotamia. Read again what I bolded in my previous post. China was not a "world player" during any of the time at which the Old Testament (or the New Testament, for that matter) happened. If you look at Jerusalem on a map of Europe, Asia and Africa, then superimpose the great empires over that map, you will see that Jerusalem is in all of them. Often in the earlier empires, it is close to the geographic center of these empires. Furthermore, the events of pretty much the whole Bible take place in the Fertile Crescent, which is pretty well accepted as the cradle of civilization. Consider Alexander's empire, for example, which he built after the Old Testament. His territory touched three continents: Europe, Africa and Asia. While Jerusalem is in the western portion of that empire, it is at the crossroads of the three continents--the perfect place to be to spread information. However, it may be interesting to note that, according to the Bible narrative, spreading information was not God's goal at the time of Alexander. The information that He gave through the law and the prophets was for the Israelites only. While you could worship God in a manner pleasing to Him if you were a Gentile, you could not be a part of His chosen nation unless you were descended from Abraham through Jacob. Furthermore, Alexander conquered Canaan during the 400 "silent" years between the Old and New Testaments, a period when God wasn't really telling us anything. Think about this, though: during Alexander's reign, Greek became the de-facto language of commerce and learning in Jerusalem. That led to the translation of the Old Testament writings into Greek, a work that we call the Septuagint. This common dialect of Greek would remain the academic standard of writing through the first century AD and the writing of the New Testament scriptures. Not too long after that (historically speaking), the language died and fell out of use. In other words, it stopped changing. The meanings and usages of the words in the texts stopped adapting to current cultural climes in the way that, say, English has (being gay in 1920 was very different from being gay today, for example). Fast forward to the first century AD. Now, the spread of information--the gospel of Jesus Christ--was a priority as God's plan was completed. That, as you know, happened while Jerusalem was under Roman rule. Thanks to Greek rule of the Levant, we had a dying language in which to record everything that needed to be recorded. Thanks to Roman engineering and efficiency, we now had the most advanced travel network the world had ever seen, connecting Spain to Mesopotamia and Britain to Africa. Now, it was far easier for apostles to travel the world and spread the gospel. Paul, for example, preached from Arabia to Italy and just about everything in between. It's said that Thomas went east and ended up preaching in India. From these far points, the message could spread even farther through an ever-growing network of evangelists centered on the heart of western civilization. Now, what were you saying about the Longshan people and their influence over the world? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 6:13:17 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is an excellent synopsis. I feel as if I should be paying tuition for this thread. Thanks for sharing. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
... That is an excellent synopsis. I feel as if I should be paying tuition for this thread. Thanks for sharing. 
Haha! Thanks, but there's never a charge--it's what I do.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 6:21:51 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: From God /thread  |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/22/2014 7:43:43 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What would that matter? You and I have access to the Bible, right? As the most published and most widely distributed book of all time, I'd say that God did just fine in making sure that His writings were accessible to as many people as possible over the last few thousand years. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: If that's the case, why'd He wait 200,000 odd years to do it and drop it in what amounts to a literacy wasteland? Would you dispute that the Fertile Crescent was pretty much the center of learning, certainly for the wider region between Europe and Central Asia, for a really long time--including the time at which the Old Testament events took place? Would you dispute that writing was born in Mesopotamia, that our oldest existing literary works are from that area, and that our modern alphabets and numbering systems come from what you characterize as a "literary wasteland"? From around 1500BC to around 400BC, which is when the events of the Old Testament from the Exodus to the end of the Old Testament happened, consider the various empires that flourished in that region: Sumer Babylon Egypt Hittites Assyria Persians etc. Even when Alexander took the place from Persia, that area was near the center of his empire and places like Tyre were hubs of commerce for the whole world from Spain to Africa to Central Asia. Even after Alexander, you had the Ptolemies in Egypt and centers of learning such as the Great Library, which were in the area. Even much later on as Europe fell into the Dark Ages, Mesopotamia was the center of learning. Baghdad was one city renowned for being a hub of scholarship, and Harat in Afghanistan was another. My point was if he'd waited for a couple hundred thousand years of humanity's existence, what was another few hundred until more people could read? What would that matter? You and I have access to the Bible, right? As the most published and most widely distributed book of all time, I'd say that God did just fine in making sure that His writings were accessible to as many people as possible over the last few thousand years. Don't you think dropping a few miracles during the internet age would have gone a long way towards solving the whole, "Which one is true?" dilemma? And I bet Moses would have loved a GPS. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
