1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52613
    23 May '14 11:13
    http://www.aldokkan.com/religion/creation.htm

    Jewish/Christian creation tale is actually just a plagiarized Egyptian myth shoehorned in MUCH later.

    This tale started out about 6,500 years ago......
  2. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    23 May '14 11:28
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.aldokkan.com/religion/creation.htm

    Jewish/Christian creation tale is actually just a plagiarized Egyptian myth shoehorned in MUCH later.

    This tale started out about 6,500 years ago......
    6,500 years ago? That means that the creationists are believing in a tale that was invented 500 years before anything was created?
    No, that couldn't be possible... Are you sure?
  3. Standard membersonship
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8559
    23 May '14 11:541 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    http://www.aldokkan.com/religion/creation.htm

    Jewish/Christian creation tale is actually just a plagiarized Egyptian myth shoehorned in MUCH later.

    This tale started out about 6,500 years ago......
    The in comparing Genesis with the Egyptian account says

    Unlike the Egyptian mythology, God existed before the creation, he was not born out as Ra


    In other words the God exists outside of time and space and the physical creation which He is about to bring into existence out of nothing. I think this is what makes Genesis unique among all cosmologies.

    Why people are quick to assume that the "borrowing" could have not gone the other way around is puzzling to me. Perhaps it is because they cannot see that just because Moses wrote something down after it had been an oral tradition.

    What Moses penned could have been somewhat familiar to other ancient cultures and gone through a variety of local embellishments to accomodate for local needs. Ie. the Egyptians had a version of what earlier cultures were familiar with.

    Bottom line for me is that the writing of Genesis is not proved uninspired by God because a somewhat embellished and similar cosmology showed up elsewhere in the ancient past.

    Thanks for the website though. It does not prove that the Egyptians were originators and the Hebrews were the copiers.

    [quote]
  4. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    23 May '14 11:59
    Originally posted by sonship
    Why people are quick to assume that the "borrowing" could have no gone the other way around is puzzling to me.
    Would you not feel the same way if you were a follower of Egyptian mythology and followers of Hebrew mythology were claiming elements of their folklore pre-dated yours?
  5. Standard membersonship
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8559
    23 May '14 12:291 edit
    Originally posted by FMF
    Would you not feel the same way if you were a follower of Egyptian mythology and followers of Hebrew mythology were claiming elements of their folklore pre-dated yours?
    I might agree that "elements" were seen in Egypt before they were written in the Pentateuch. I am not an expert in Egyptian mythology by any means. I don't know how I would feel.

    When a person comes to Christ it is not necessary that he immediately become well versed in every other Persian, Indian, Egyptian, Native American, Chinese, Roman sacred writings, before he trust in Christ.


    If an account was passed on from Adam down to his children and out into the world's cultures, it would not surprise me that "elements" of God's word seemed to show up elsewhere.

    If I were an atheist and wanting to assure myself that I had no accountability to the Bible's God, I would be eager to grasp at ancient cosmologies of all kinds.

    This is the prime directive of the Atheist, to assure himself that there is no cause for any sense of accountability to God. I may start a thread on this matter.
  6. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    23 May '14 12:34
    Originally posted by sonship
    I might agree that "elements" were seen in Egypt before they were written in the Pentateuch. I am not an expert in Egyptian mythology by any means. I don't know how I would feel.

    When a person comes to Christ it is not necessary that he immediately become well versed in every other Persian, Indian, Egyptian, Native American, Chinese, Roman sacred writin ...[text shortened]... there is no cause for any sense of accountability to God. I may start a thread on this matter.
    Mine was a question with a yes or no answer. I am not questioning your faith in Christ. My point is that "Why people are quick to assume that the 'borrowing' could have no gone the other way around is puzzling to me" is, in and of itself, simply a partisan declaration that could be used by anyone, with any ancient belief, and not a particularly valid debating point.
  7. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    23 May '14 12:37
    Originally posted by sonship
    If an account was passed on from Adam down to his children and out into the world's cultures, it would not surprise me that "elements" of God's word seemed to show up elsewhere.
    Yet in an earlier post you were eager to differentiate your favourite mythology from others and declare it unique. Why could Adam not have passed down those unique details to his children (making genesis not so unique)?
  8. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    23 May '14 12:41
    Originally posted by sonship
    If I were an atheist and wanting to assure myself that I had no accountability to the Bible's God, I would be eager to grasp at ancient cosmologies of all kinds.

    This is the prime directive of the Atheist, to assure himself that there is no cause for any sense of accountability to God. I may start a thread on this matter.
    Well I do not self-identify as an atheist. The difficulty I have with the stuff you profess here is that I just don't see any convincing evidence that God has revealed Himself to you. Nothing you say and nothing about your demeanour makes me think that He has. So, rather than attempting to dissect me and my supposed atheism in search of whatever motivations you might think I have to "grasp" at things, you should recognize ~ when you're typing stuff out addressed to me ~ that the problem I have with your beliefs is... your beliefs.
  9. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52613
    23 May '14 12:45
    Originally posted by FMF
    Mine was a question with a yes or no answer. I am not questioning your faith in Christ. My point is that "Why people are quick to assume that the 'borrowing' could have no gone the other way around is puzzling to me" is, in and of itself, simply a partisan declaration that could be used by anyone, with any ancient belief, and not a particularly valid debating point.
    You do know Egypt is older than Judaism, right? Their myth comes from the very beginnings of Egyptian society. They preferred to stay at one level and they did just that, espousing mediocrity and putting down individuality for thousands of years.
  10. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    23 May '14 12:46
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You do know Egypt is older than Judaism, right? Their myth comes from the very beginnings of Egyptian society. They preferred to stay at one level and they did just that, espousing mediocrity and putting down individuality for thousands of years.
    Why is this addressed to me?
  11. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52613
    23 May '14 12:59
    Originally posted by FMF
    Why is this addressed to me?
    You made the statement that the creation myth (presumably) could have been borrowed by Egypt.

    I was saying I thought Egypt was older than Judaism and would have been the ones origination this myth.
  12. Standard membersonship
    the corrected one.
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    8559
    23 May '14 13:011 edit
    "Is Genesis Merely a Rip-Off of Ancient Near Eastern Liturature?"

    An article from the Christian Thinktank -

    http://www.christianthinktank.com/gilgy07a.html

    A sample from the Introduction

    Historically, the early 'borrowing from Babylon' ('Pan-Babylonianism'😉 advocates developed most of their arguments for borrowing around the Sumerian/Akkadian textual corpus, with the consequence that Egyptian background for the Genesis stories was not generally supported (or certainly not emphasized). Scholars felt they could find most of biblical antecedents in the Babylonian literatures, and so there was no 'need' for Egyptian influences on the bible. At the same time, the corpus of Ugaritic/Canaanite literatures lay either undiscovered, unexplored, or under-studied.

    Three factors lead to the demise (or at least the 'humbling'...smile) of the Pan-Babylonianists: (1) successive generations of Assyriologists essentially 'de-bunked' all the important alleged parallels; (2) the more recently studied Canaanite materials began to show MORE important 'alleged' parallels for biblical studies; and (3) scholars learned that the influences between Babylonia and the Western Semite cultures was NOT as one-way as originally thought (e.g., there were several early cases of West Semitic influence on Sumerian/Akkadian--loan words, for example--which called into question the 'direction of borrowing'😉.
  13. SubscriberFMF
    Main Poster
    This Thread
    Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    29835
    23 May '14 13:06
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    You made the statement that the creation myth (presumably) could have been borrowed by Egypt.
    Well then you completely missed the point of what I said to sonship. I made no "statement" about the "creation myth".
  14. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52613
    23 May '14 13:52
    Originally posted by FMF
    Well then you completely missed the point of what I said to sonship. I made no "statement" about the "creation myth".
    Sorry, must have misread what you said. My bad.
  15. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52613
    23 May '14 13:56
    Originally posted by sonship
    I might agree that "elements" were seen in Egypt before they were written in the Pentateuch. I am not an expert in Egyptian mythology by any means. I don't know how I would feel.

    When a person comes to Christ it is not necessary that he immediately become well versed in every other Persian, Indian, Egyptian, Native American, Chinese, Roman sacred writin ...[text shortened]... there is no cause for any sense of accountability to God. I may start a thread on this matter.
    Ok, so it is clear from that bit that creationists have no problem with the Egyptian account, thinking them BOTH correct?
Back to Top