For the Atheist

Originally posted by dj2becker
I found this extract very interesting: http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?method=4&dsid=2222&dekey=Chaldean+mythology&gwp=8&curtab=2222_1&linktext=Chaldean%20mythology

"Many stories in Sumerian religion appear homologous to stories i ...[text shortened]... the Sumerians didn't steal their 'myth' from the God of Noah?

The question is why do you think the much later version of the myths are the word of God, do you think God was some kind of proofreader?

You won't find any post of mine saying I believed the myths , only that they existed for a couple of thousand years before Moses.

Originally posted by frogstomp
The question is why do you think the much later version of the myths are the word of God, do you think God was some kind of proofreader?

You won't find any post of mine saying I believed the myths , only that they existed for a couple of thousand years before Moses.

I suppose its just how you look at it. Sumerian mythology could alternatively support the fact that the Bible is historically accurate.

Originally posted by dj2becker
I suppose its just how you look at it. Sumerian mythology could alternatively support the fact that the Bible is historically accurate.

To a degree, yes. To establish precisely which degree, you'd have to undertake a study of comparative religion (Unisa does a very good one by the way).

Originally posted by frogstomp
Do you think God was some kind of proofreader?

As of 325 AD, yes.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
To a degree, yes. To establish precisely which degree, you'd have to undertake a study of comparative religion (Unisa does a very good one by the way).

Or maybe you could spare me a few years and list all the Bible's historical falacies?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Or maybe you could spare me a few years and list all the Bible's historical falacies?

Bosse you said the 's'-word to dj2: study.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Or maybe you could spare me a few years and list all the Bible's historical falacies?

Sure, if you pay my hourly rate.

Really, you'd be much better off taking a two-year correspondence course. Consider it a service to the Book you profess to love so much--that you're prepared to take the time to get to know its flaws as well as its beauty.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
Sure, if you pay my hourly rate.

Really, you'd be much better off taking a two-year correspondence course. Consider it a service to the Book you profess to love so much--that you're prepared to take the time to get to know its flaws as well as its beauty.

I know plenty of peaple that have been studying the Bible all their life. The more they study it the more they believe what it says.

At least I won't be as stupid as to go and study the Bible in an Atheistic University. 😲

Originally posted by dj2becker
I know plenty of peaple that have been studying the Bible all their life. The more they study it the more they believe what it says.

At least I won't be as stupid as to go and study the Bible in an Atheistic University. 😲

The more they study it, the closer their eyes grow together.

I'm sure you'll never be more stupid than you are now.

Originally posted by dj2becker
I suppose its just how you look at it. Sumerian mythology could alternatively support the fact that the Bible is historically accurate.

Abraham was born in Ur, why wouldn't he have the same historical stories as the rest of the people there?

It's clear that the israelites were struggling with their polytheistic roots all the way through Genesis and beyond.

As Boss de Nage says 325 was a year of proofreading. that was a year when people decided the book had to fit their view of the universe , and if was because of them than Christ spoke in parables. He expected the onslaught was coming just as it did 2000 years before and even earlier. He wanted the message to survive it this time and even that survival is touch and go at the present time. The ancients had no words to fit the message to maybe we do now, I'm not sure that even now that we know so much more that we wont be in the Error too, but I do know that the Error will eventually be disolved just as I know that it is still strong.

Originally posted by frogstomp
Abraham was born in Ur, why wouldn't he have the same historical stories as the rest of the people there?

It's clear that the israelites were struggling with their polytheistic roots all the way through Genesis and beyond.

As Boss de Nage says 325 is a year of proofreading. that was a year when people de ...[text shortened]... that the Error will eventually be disolved just as I know that it is still strong.

"The Ancients"? "The Error"? Sounds like you've got your own little mythology running there ...

Originally posted by lucifershammer
"The Ancients"? "The Error"? Sounds like you've got your own little mythology running there ...

No it sounds like the church didn't do a good enough job of suppression.

Originally posted by dj2becker
I know plenty of peaple that have been studying the Bible all their life. The more they study it the more they believe what it says.

At least I won't be as stupid as to go and study the Bible in an Atheistic University. 😲

. . . and I know of plenty of people who went to Bible school to study the Bible in earnest, and once they had a deep understanding of the history and languages, they realized their faith was built on a myth (just as they had always believed other religions were).

So it can go either way dj2. That you know some people who believe even after reading the Bible is pretty weak evidence of its veracity. In fact, one would hope those people who believe that the Bible is the true word of a god had actually read the whole thing. Moreover, such a weak standard bulsters the case for nearly any religious text, since for any given one, you will likely find people who believe it more after reading it.

At least I won't be as stupid as to go and study the Bible in an Atheistic University.

I didn't realize such an institution existed. Now certainly many 'atheistic' (lower-case 'a'😉 universities exist because most reputable universities do not explicitly state that a god exists or make it part of their mission as an institution of higher learning. A few do have elements of explicit theism in their charters because the references are a vestige of a much earlier time (I'm thinking of some of the Ivy League schools that began as colleges for ministers.). Note that an 'atheistic' university in no way explicitly denies that a god exists. It leaves the question open to inquiry, as it does with all questions.

Of course, that doesn't reinforce what your mommy and daddy taught you either, unlike these not so fine institutions:

www.patriotuniversity.com
www.ficu.edu
www.lipscomb.edu
www.ameschristian.org/

Then again that's not what college/university is all about. The institutions above are little more than cult vocational schools.
Non-fundamentalist universities do not take dogmatic stands on religion because that would be contradictory to the spirit of inquiry upon which every reputable college and university is founded.