Originally posted by Bosse de NageSeconded. Lilith...she was a hottie, wasn't she? An interesting Wiki article. Although, I'm sure there's no correlation between the Akkadian/Babylonian version, and that of the xtian bible. Mere happenstance.
I'd be very interested to hear more about these four traditions. Also, wasn't some mythological material cut from the tradition at some point? (I'm thinking about Lilith).
Originally posted by XanthosNZAnd somehow there are scientists who still believe in creation. They must be hopelessly ignorant as well. Always taking the arrogant high-ground I see. If people differ with you they are either ignorant and/or stupid. Uh-huh.
If your girlfriend believes that the earth is a few thousand years old then she is at best hopelessly ignorant of anything scientific.
Originally posted by HalitoseIf people differ with you they are either ignorant and/or stupid. Uh-huh.
And somehow there are scientists who still believe in creation. They must be hopelessly ignorant as well. Always taking the arrogant high-ground I see. If people differ with you they are either ignorant and/or stupid. Uh-huh.
But when Christians do it it's arrogance. Of course.
Originally posted by lucifershammerI'm not sure what you mean. To reiterate - I found it profoundly arrogant to immediately assume someone with a position different to yours ignorant.
[b]If people differ with you they are either ignorant and/or stupid. Uh-huh.
But when Christians do it it's arrogance. Of course.[/b]
Originally posted by David CStop playing high-school word games.
So, you agree that Hal was being hypocritical when he called Xanthos arrogant? How interesting.
I didn't say Hal was being hypocritical. If bf101 or RBHill had made the kind of comments that Hal made about Xanthos, then I would've agreed that it is hypocritical. But, in my experience, Hal has never taken the "secret decoder ring" defence.
Besides, the hypocrisy here refers to Xanthos - because he has called Christians arrogant for asserting precisely what he has (with positions reversed).
Grow up.
Originally posted by PawnCurryYou are not. That is one of the many inconsistancies that I have found.
So there must be SOME kind of explanation for the apparent inconsistency I've already found just two chapters into Genesis. (I can't be the FIRST person to have spotted this...)
Christian tradition is to acclamate its converts by incorporating their own beliefs in some way to reduce the risk of rebellion and conflict.
The date when Christmas is celebrated is another example of the Church (Christian) taking the tradition of another culture to aid in their acclamation - This one was taken from the Celtic Yuletide festival to aid in the conversion of the British Isles.
Originally posted by HalitoseA lot of people, not only Christians, believe in a creation and a Creator. There are even some agnostics that do not rule out the possibility.
And somehow there are scientists who still believe in creation. They must be hopelessly ignorant as well. Always taking the arrogant high-ground I see. If people differ with you they are either ignorant and/or stupid. Uh-huh.
Creationism, on the other hand, asserts that this creation occurred a mere six to ten thousnad years ago. These Creationists must ignore a greeat deal that contradicts their beliefs, and they are notorious for their distortions of science and the scientific method in defense of their beliefs.
There are many hermeneutical systems that seek to account for the internal inconsistencies in biblical texts. Several of the literalists on this site claim, however, that they just read the text with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, rather than interpret the text through a system of hermeneutics. They are wrong, of course. Just because they have failed to articulate their hermeneutics, and to consider the implications of how they read, does not mean that they read without a system of principles.
Some bright people have argued quite intelligently that all the apparent inconsistencies in the Bible can be harmonized. These folks are deeply engaged in study of textual criticism, biblical archaeology, and ancient history. Very few are young earth Creationists.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I'd be very interested to hear more about these four traditions. Also, wasn't some mythological material cut from the tradition at some point? (I'm thinking about Lilith).
When I googled the name of the idea (Graf-Wellhausen Hypothesis), the first hit was http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html. It presents the basic notion clearly and succinctly.
Originally posted by KnightWulfeNo, it isn't Christian tradition to acclamate its converts by
You are not. That is one of the many inconsistancies that I have found.
Christian tradition is to acclamate its converts by incorporating their own beliefs in some way to reduce the risk of rebellion and conflict.
The date when Christmas is celebrated is another example of the Church (Christian) taking the tradition of another culture to aid in the ...[text shortened]... s one was taken from the Celtic Yuletide festival to aid in the conversion of the British Isles.
incorporating their own beliefs in some way to reduce the
risk of rebellion and conflict. There may be a denomination
that did that, there may be people who did that that carried
the name Christian, there maybe cults that did that, but
Chistianity goes to the heart of people, you either walk with
God through Jesus Christ or you do not. If all someone is
trying to do is get a following, than it is a tactic of people to
acclamate their followers by...
Kelly
Originally posted by PawnCurryInterresting thought.
Hi... I've finally decided to try and read (and understand) the Bible, who knows I may become a convert, or it may not affect me. Problems I've had in the past are that there seem to be so many inconsistencies. It may well be a case of my (mis)interpreation, which is why I'm throwing this open to you lot. 🙂
[b]Genesis
1:21 And God created great w ...[text shortened]... k... don't have it immediately to hand)... the quotes are copied and pasted from an online KJV.
GENESIS Chapter 1 is the story of Creation Basics. Chapter 2 is the same as Chapter 1 but with more detail. As you will notice that GENESIS 2:4 says:
These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens. GENESIS 2:4
It also could have been that the animals were created and coverring the Earth. But during that time when GOD walked and talked with man on a one to one bases. GOD recreated the animals and placed them in the Garden of Eden, separrate from the ones that were populating the rest of the earth. It could have been that as GOD was recreating each animal Adam was right there watching HIM,
.
1 edit
Originally posted by WulebgrCreationism, on the other hand, asserts that this creation occurred a mere six to ten thousnad years ago.
A lot of people, not only Christians, believe in a creation and a Creator. There are even some agnostics that do not rule out the possibility.
Creationism, on the other hand, asserts that this creation occurred a mere six to ten thousnad years ago. These Creationists must ignore a greeat deal that contradicts their beliefs, and they are notorious for thei ...[text shortened]... /ccat.sas.upenn.edu/rs/2/Judaism/jepd.html. It presents the basic notion clearly and succinctly.
Not all; some take a more liberal interpretation of Genesis:
Genesis 1:1-2 indicates a beginning of space, time and matter as proposed by Einstein in his theory of general relativity. The initial state of planet earth would be empty and void.
Genesis 1:3 From the vantage point of the earth, dense gasses would become translucent - allowing a small amount of light to reach the earth. This early step is vital for photosynthesis - the crudest form of light energy retention.
Genesis 1:6 Water heated by the light energy sun would evaporate into clouds, setting up the hydrogen cycle.
Genesis 1:9-10 Heavy seismic and volcanic activity would cause continental drift resulting in a 30-70 proportion of land to water - ideal for life.
Genesis 1:11 Vegetation would be the next step as it forms the base of the food chain - light, water and large amounts of carbon dioxide would set the stage for plant life.
Genesis 1:14-18 With the production of oxygen and other factors, the atmosphere would become transparent so that the sun, moon and stars became visible from the surface of the earth.
Genesis 1:20-21 Appearance of Pre Cambrian angiosperm followed by the Cambrian explosion (545 million y.a) of many plants and sea animals.
Genesis 1:24 Amphibians, insects (350 million y.a) and reptiles (250 million y.a.) appear. Followed by dinosaurs (230 million y.a.), birds (150 million y.a.) and larger mammals (20 million y.a.).
Genesis 1:26 The last creature to appear is mankind... here we are (15,000 y.a.).
Genesis 2:2 The first law of thermodynamics is instituted where there can be no more creation.
With this timeframe, evolution may or may not be used as the mechanism for the introduction of new life.
Originally posted by KellyJayLook through history - You will find that with the spread of Christianity through the known world, more traditions were picked up as time passed. It started with the move of Christ's day in the 6th century from the End of Sept to Dec with the Yule festival of the celtic people of Briton. It was done after the fall of the Roman empire to prevent to the fractioning of the isles.
No, it isn't Christian tradition to acclamate its converts by
incorporating their own beliefs in some way to reduce the
risk of rebellion and conflict. There may be a denomination
that did that, there may be people who did that that carried
the name Christian, there maybe cults that did that, but
Chistianity goes to the heart of people, you either wal ...[text shortened]... do is get a following, than it is a tactic of people to
acclamate their followers by...
Kelly
If you like I will see if I can dig up the paper I wrote back in college on it for my Ancient and Medieval Civilizations class. Cant promise it, but I'd be happy to look.