|
|
Post by HAL on Feb 18, 2020 20:10:56 GMT
Bonehead,
.. People do not make up wild stories about their history. History is merely the story of a culture's experiences...
Really ?
You do know the difference between a Myth and a Legend ? And history is mostly written by the winners. So much of our history, even relatively modern, is being shown to be, at best, inaccurate, that very little can be taken for granted.
But as for myths and Legends (Please, don't claim 'History'), it seems that the Noah's ark story comes from the Epic of Gilgamesh; written four hundred years earlier.
HAL.
p.s. This is off topic, and is bound to irritate Gort and luvey, But it makes my point (and yours).
If you want to see a modern day illustration of the uselessness of investigation and the logic applied by humans, just go over the recent impeachment of POTUS.
That was so far from common sense as an investigation it must surely become a national joke.
And folks apply that king of logic to about everything.
As for there being a grand reveal of Aliens , just consider that it is the same people who would do the revealing.
Who are YOU going to believe ?
HAL
|
|
|
|
Post by mryelm on Feb 18, 2020 20:36:24 GMT
Hello All,
Sorry, I have not been following this thread closely. But I did find an article that seems to be cogent to your discussions.....
Mryelm said: "Is God of the Bible an alien? My personal opinion is there is no empirical evidence to support that statement."To this i say, "au contrare mon frère"! My experience has been that as time goes on, the "scientific proofs" for many religious and cultural traditions (forget the word "Myths" since that has become a negative, pejorative term) is being borne out by science. That is because I believe that these traditions were, at one time, what we call "history". People do not make up wild stories about their history. History is merely the story of a culture's experiences. That modern scientistic types find these stories "unbelievable" is irrelevant as far as I am concerned. I believe they are, in many cases, wrong about that.
Brother bonehead, thank you for your reply. First maybe I should clarify my quote, I reread it and noticed its a bit confusing! Ok so what I meant by empirical evidence was; a theory supported by empirical evidence. From the web ; "Empirical evidence is the foundation of science. A theory is an assumption. Empirical evidence are facts obtained by observation and analysis of data and needs corroboration to sustain itself."
(btw to everyone; sorry the quote tags are not in the right place, I got the code messed up and don't have time to fix it! )
About your comment concerning the Nephilim an entire text book could be written on that subject so I will try to present the short answer. The truth is there is no agreed upon answer! No one knows what the word Nephilim means. It's related to the Hebrew verb series to fall i.e. naphal. This is the reason some attribute this to fallen angels (which God created) or it may mean the angels 'offspring'. It could also mean a lot of support to a view that men were apostate or had fallen away from God. This is just beginning to describe the concept. To complicate the mono vs many argument gods according to some theologians there were three earth 'ages' . I have not decided if that is valid but even if it's not common popular theology is that God created the angels which included his fav Satan, and they were spiritual not flesh and blood etc. So Consider that (in genesis) the term 'we' and 'us' means God and his created beings. I will answer the other comments asap, I hope the info helps :{>
|
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Feb 19, 2020 0:42:57 GMT
Hello All,
Sorry, I have not been following this thread closely. But I did find an article that seems to be cogent to your discussions.....
Mryelm said: "Is God of the Bible an alien? My personal opinion is there is no empirical evidence to support that statement."To this i say, "au contrare mon frère"! My experience has been that as time goes on, the "scientific proofs" for many religious and cultural traditions (forget the word "Myths" since that has become a negative, pejorative term) is being borne out by science. That is because I believe that these traditions were, at one time, what we call "history". People do not make up wild stories about their history. History is merely the story of a culture's experiences. That modern scientistic types find these stories "unbelievable" is irrelevant as far as I am concerned. I believe they are, in many cases, wrong about that.
Brother bonehead, thank you for your reply. First maybe I should clarify my quote, I reread it and noticed its a bit confusing! Ok so what I meant by empirical evidence was; a theory supported by empirical evidence. From the web ; "Empirical evidence is the foundation of science. A theory is an assumption. Empirical evidence are facts obtained by observation and analysis of data and needs corroboration to sustain itself."
(btw to everyone; sorry the quote tags are not in the right place, I got the code messed up and don't have time to fix it! )
About your comment concerning the Nephilim an entire text book could be written on that subject so I will try to present the short answer. The truth is there is no agreed upon answer! No one knows what the word Nephilim means. It's related to the Hebrew verb series to fall i.e. naphal. This is the reason some attribute this to fallen angels (which God created) or it may mean the angels 'offspring'. It could also mean a lot of support to a view that men were apostate or had fallen away from God. This is just beginning to describe the concept. To complicate the mono vs many argument gods according to some theologians there were three earth 'ages' . I have not decided if that is valid but even if it's not common popular theology is that God created the angels which included his fav Satan, and they were spiritual not flesh and blood etc. So Consider that (in genesis) the term 'we' and 'us' means God and his created beings. I will answer the other comments asap, I hope the info helps :{>
Your previous statement was not confusing at all. And my answer goes directly to what was stated in your quote. The articles I quoted are not theories. In fact the articles only supply facts and do not really attempt to theorize about those discoveries at all. All theorizing is my own and is based on my knowledge of ancient mythologies. Admittedly, I am not an expert on mythologies but I am familiar enough with them to attempt to string these connective narratives together with the empirical evidence from those articles.
As for the "Nephilim" references in the bible, the only factor that is important to my posting is the fact that "Nephilim" is a plural noun. Clearly, as a plural it cannot refer to a singular "God" being or whatever term you wish to apply to it. So, they are not talking about "The" singular God. But the bible professes to be a book about that presumed singular God. So, the question becomes, who are these Nephilim?
Calling them "fallen" may imply that they come from above? In other words, not from here. But one thing that cannot be argued is that a plural term does not apply to a singular God. So, the Nephilim, whoever they may be are not the monotheistic God with a capital G. And the Bible seems pretty clear that these folks are not humans or normal men. This dovetails quite well with myths from cultures the world round that claim the "gods" at onetime walked the earth with humans. So maybe these are "gods" with a little g.
Such "god" folks are mentioned in the Bible, the Norse myths, Greek Mythology and Roman mythology to name but a few. You can also find them in lesser known mythologies such as the Mayans and many other indigenous mythologies. Although the myths themselves can vary widely in their narratives, a surprising number of them agree on this one point, there were "gods" upon the earth living among men. On this point, many differing narratives agree and corroborate each other.
And honestly, I think if you look at the two articles I linked, you will find that what i am saying makes sense. Certainly it makes more sense than the stories some of those theologians have used to explain these cognitive disconnects. That is my opinion, anyway.
I hope that helps!
Bonehead |
|
|
|
Post by moksha on Feb 19, 2020 1:05:56 GMT
*
|
|
|
|
Post by moksha on Feb 19, 2020 11:20:01 GMT
More links on the subject.
|
|
|
|
Post by mryelm on Feb 19, 2020 20:05:54 GMT
Thanks Mryelm, Your previous statement was not confusing at all. Thank you, I'll try harder next time! Lol, no just kidding, truly thanks! Ok, got it! I too do that, meaning 'problem solving' questionable claims that are scientific, religious etc. Like you I do not consider myself expert in most subjects that we discuss online in forums etc. Lastly, like you I use what I have learned in schooling and (a lot of) self study etc. I use all that in hopes that I can better understand a biblical or scientific theory* that I doubt is true. So to help me understand something you mentioned. Please clarify what you mean by defining the word; "theorizing". Here is a cut and paste; "All 'theorizing' is my own and is based on my knowledge of ancient mythologies." Are you saying your 'theorizing' is of a scientific type or maybe an intuitive or philosophical type? If your theories are of a scientific type please post how you vetted the theory. If you empirically validated** your theory please describe the processes. Thanks in advance! *....when trying to understand an scientific subject that contains a lot of advanced math etc I reach out to contact people, and a guy named Google! **… empirically validated... empirically validated means validated by scientific process/methodology. Actually the Christian bible is about the Trinity; The Father, the son and the Holy Spirit. Of course the NT is about Jesus Christ. As I posted the Nephilim appeared i.e. were created after lucifer was made by God (or ET). So that biblical fact invalidates your claim that God was not singular doesn't it? The Nephilim were relative late comers. So, what is Nephilim, or how do I define Nephilim ? I am not sure as of today. I am still learning and researching. In formal theology etc. the definition of Nephilim is different depending upon on which PhD you ask! It seems as of 2020 there is no agreement on a definition! I will say the most popular definition (biblically or popular secular tabloid claim) is Nephilim are a race of giants, demons (fallen angels that have rejected God) or Satanic monsters as seen on old Hollywood movies. So if they were the offspring of fallen angels they are created beings. Not human but similar to human. There is more written by those who study demonology. My personal opinion is Nephilim may be botched human genetic experiments created by Aliens or God. If God was involved it seems plausible that the fallen angles disobeyed God and mated with humans producing a true demonic bastard race that would please the good Dr. Moreau.[/quote] |
|
|
|
Post by bonehead on Feb 20, 2020 17:42:10 GMT
Thanks Mryelm, Your previous statement was not confusing at all. Thank you, I'll try harder next time! Lol, no just kidding, truly thanks! Ok, got it! I too do that, meaning 'problem solving' questionable claims that are scientific, religious etc. Like you I do not consider myself expert in most subjects that we discuss online in forums etc. Lastly, like you I use what I have learned in schooling and (a lot of) self study etc. I use all that in hopes that I can better understand a biblical or scientific theory* that I doubt is true. So to help me understand something you mentioned. Please clarify what you mean by defining the word; "theorizing". Here is a cut and paste; "All 'theorizing' is my own and is based on my knowledge of ancient mythologies." Are you saying your 'theorizing' is of a scientific type or maybe an intuitive or philosophical type? If your theories are of a scientific type please post how you vetted the theory. If you empirically validated** your theory please describe the processes. Thanks in advance! *....when trying to understand an scientific subject that contains a lot of advanced math etc I reach out to contact people, and a guy named Google! **… empirically validated... empirically validated means validated by scientific process/methodology.
You said:"As I posted the Nephilim appeared i.e. were created after lucifer was made by God (or ET). So that biblical fact invalidates your claim that God was not singular doesn't it?"I never said that "God" wasn't singular. I said that the Nephilim are not the singular "God" (with a capital G) of the bible. They are something separate and different. "The Nephilim were relative late comers. So, what is Nephilim, or how do I define Nephilim ? I am not sure as of today. I am still learning and researching. In formal theology etc. the definition of Nephilim is different depending upon on which PhD you ask! It seems as of 2020 there is no agreement on a definition! I will say the most popular definition (biblically or popular secular tabloid claim) is Nephilim are a race of giants, demons (fallen angels that have rejected God) or Satanic monsters as seen on old Hollywood movies. So if they were the offspring of fallen angels they are created beings. Not human but similar to human. There is more written by those who study demonology. My personal opinion is Nephilim may be botched human genetic experiments created by Aliens or God. If God was involved it seems plausible that the fallen angles disobeyed God and mated with humans producing a true demonic bastard race that would please the good Dr. Moreau."Even Bible scholars cannot agree on who the Nephilim are. A popular definition does not qualify as anything but another of those intuitive choices that are made at the inception of a theory or idea. Popular definitions are intuitive. And, since they are made by bible scholars, they are inevitably tainted with the bias of a bible scholar. Things like satanic monsters, satan and fallen angels are simply ideas that come from (the bible) and bible scholars. They do not establish facts or truth. They only establish the beliefs of bible scholars about the bible. And since the bible is established, crystalized and immutable, none of that can be considered scientific. It is static and does not have the mutability of science. But then science, as frequently practiced, is but another intuitive religious idea about the nature of reality. So for some, science is little more than another religious institution. It is, for many, a crystalized belief system in the same manner as religion.
Philosophy is another thing altogether. This discussion, on my part, is a philosophical discussion about the nature of knowledge: religious and secular. Philosophy, in the way I practice it here, is a study about the nature of knowledge. I would add that no depth of understanding can be gained without first vetting what knowledge is and where it comes from. That is what I hoped to do with this posting. I hope this helps to clarify my thinking about where such knowledge, ultimately, comes from.
And from there, we can assess its reliability. Or not.
Cheers!!
Bonehead |
|
|
|
Post by mryelm on Feb 20, 2020 23:03:43 GMT
Theorizing is never a "scientific" thing. Theorizing, done by scientists or not, is ALWAYS an intuitive operation. Facts are collected (such as the articles I linked above). Those were facts uncovered by academic types studying archaeology. They simply look at and analyze the evidence they uncover. The facts are their collected empirical evidence. WHAT they are evidence of is purely conjectural. So a theory, scientific or not, is always a subjective/intuitive thing. Well, and I must be a bit of a devils advocate here, your description is your personal opinion and certainly not the opinion of the contemporary scientific establishment. That is perfectly ok! I was just trying to understand how you define words so we could understand each other's positions etc. The answer to my question is your ideas are more of a hypothesis not supported by the scientific method. Again that's ok fine. The truth is as I mentioned above I place little value on empirical evidence in some instances. That said I DISAGREE that theory is intuitively supported in most cases. That depends entirely on what type of evidence you are referencing! Mathematical evidence of say orbital mechanics is unwaveringly accurate for intended applications. Again, that depends on the type of evidence you are referencing Yes some are, but I would say that is true plate tectonics come to mind. I also have a problem with what I call the entrenched scientific establishment. They are for sure, biased. The S. Establishment admits theory have a time stamp or a shelf life and can at any time be changed to agree with emerging evidence. I have wrote several articles about how that position somewhat (fully?) detracts from the credibility of science in general. Science would make a A1 con man because it can change its story at anytime.
I agree with that as well. I learned that while science changes, my religion doesn't. Emerging evidence and time usually undermines all science but much archeology confirms biblical stories once known as myth and biblical predictions (prophesy) made 1000 or more years ago are being fulfilled, such as Israel becoming a nation state in one day etc. So we are in agreement!
I' ll reply to the rest of your reply asap, these days I have about an hour on the PC for fun! Not much!
; {> |
|
|
|
Post by mryelm on Feb 21, 2020 3:39:44 GMT
You do know the difference between a Myth and a Legend ? And history is mostly written by the winners. So much of our history, even relatively modern, is being shown to be, at best, inaccurate, that very little can be taken for granted.
>>>>>>BODY OF REPLY CONTAINS PARTIAL QUOTES<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BODY OF REPLY CONTAINS PARTIAL QUOTES <<<<<<<
Hall I hope you don't mind me commenting on some replies you made to bonehead.
History is usually written by the winners! Of course that means if the winners were not truthful those untruthful past events are reality for future readers. That is a reason I am angry about some of our text books being influenced by Islamic writers writing a revisionist history, but that is another subject and going off topic even if it applies to things like NASAs untruthful history of its reason for existing and its total fabrication details in UFO reports.
Yours is a common claim of bible skeptics. Actually there are over 200 flood legends in different cultures all over the world. Example; the Aztecs tell of a worldwide flood in which only two people survived. In China, the legend is told of God sending a messenger to Earth to warn three sons that a flood was coming. These are just two of the numerous flood legends from around the world. I believe the many flood accounts help verify a flood of immense destructive power nearly wiped out humanity. I think some of the details of the Noah story were more symbolic than actual but much of the bible is symbolic than historical. I agree on that one! Like Trump or not what we witnessed was a real attempted hostile of a takeover of the United States Government. If Trump had been impeached I think a civil war or at least armed skirmishes would happened. Right now its still a dangerous time for liberty, and our Constitutional Federal Republic (a federation of states with a Representative Democracy). And an international joke! But it was and is a tragic and really frightening abuse of power by the Democrats. Really the coup...er impeachment was an attempt to overthrow constitutional protocol and seize power by dyed in the wool Marxist Socialists, needless too say I am not laughing. |
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Feb 21, 2020 18:50:24 GMT
..Hall I hope you don't mind me commenting on some replies you made to bonehead. ..
No problem at all. That is why we are here.
To me the Biblical flood story is yet another of the Bible stories that is so far beyond ridiculous it isn't even funny.
Just one simple question kills it dead.
How did Noah get his penguins ?
This usually elicits the response, 'well, you're not supposed to take it as actual historical fact'.
This implies that it is just one story from a book of fables.
Problems start when hard-line believers say 'of course it's true. It's in the Bible, it has to be true. And you had better believe it; or else'.
A modern day equivalent is when Trump (or any other politician) comes out with some ridiculous statement in public and then his staff have to scuttle around walking it back with statements like 'oh, he was joking, you're not to take everything he say literally'. again, people do; and it has consequences. Plus, as the most powerful (and hence also the most dangerous) man on the planet, we are supposed to take him seriously.
HAL.
|
|
|
|
Post by moksha on Feb 22, 2020 12:52:57 GMT
How did Noah get his penguins ? This usually elicits the response, 'well, you're not supposed to take it as actual historical fact'. This implies that it is just one story from a book of fables. HAL. O HAL, did the penguins need saving? Can't they swim? Here is another flood story you might not heard of.
Then there is this interview.
.
|
|
|
|
Post by HAL on Feb 22, 2020 22:42:28 GMT
But the good book says he had two of every thing.
And, after the flood, when all the other animals and people had drowned, and all the land was totally saturated and destroyed by forty days of immersion in water, where did Noah get the food to feed his animals ?
|
|
|
|
Post by moksha on Feb 23, 2020 12:16:39 GMT
But the good book says he had two of every thing. And, after the flood, when all the other animals and people had drowned, and all the land was totally saturated and destroyed by forty days of immersion in water, where did Noah get the food to feed his animals ? Yes HAL, I understand your feelings, been there myself. The good book, (Old Testament) is related to 39 non-Biblical documents, so, yes, your are right about Gilgamesh. but wrong about all things being drowned (link below). There is no time line, "unknown" until 2500 BC, the "unknown" includes, Creation, Fall, Flood, Babel. From my perspective, it is up to the reader to decide, what was real or imagined.
Link about Flood
Link of Archaeology of Ancient Law Ebla
.
|
|
|
|
Post by mryelm on Feb 25, 2020 14:48:59 GMT
..Hall I hope you don't mind me commenting on some replies you made to bonehead. ..No problem at all. That is why we are here. To me the Biblical flood story is yet another of the Bible stories that is so far beyond ridiculous it isn't even funny.Just one simple question kills it dead.
I don't find it insulting that many people don't believe the bible is a viable, accurate or historical document. I don't believe the validity of some biblical accounts and information myself. That's why as a unbeliever I began studying the original languages of the bible and why I studied (long term) related fields that could help prove or disprove biblical claims and such. Unlike many that study secular and non-secular subjects that relate to ancient documents with emphasis on the bible I became a believer! So I have handled both ends of the tiger! So its not that I dislike or don't respect nonbelievers and their claims. What I do find insulting is someone making a statement that is in truth simply an instrument to carry a purposeful intent to harm. How a comment or a question is phrased belies its intent regardless of the subject. For example I could say something like this; 'To me the UFO's, especially abduction stories are yet another spin off of UFO stories that is so far beyond ridiculous it isn't even funny.' Or I could be respectful and state the same concerns like this; 'Personally I think UFO's are secret government programs not spacecraft from another planet, and abduction stories are probably instances of PTSD' from a traumatic event. So, do you see the difference? Of course I DO think some UFO and some abductions stories have Extraterrestrial causes. And if you, I, or anyone believes UFOs are real its not much of a step to conclude biblical examples may be sightings and contact with a race so advanced they WOULD be god by any kind of means test. So that is one way even secular people are actually believers in God! Man, what a visual, means testing God! (notice the lower case spelling of god to represent God other than the Creator. Its simply a personal expression of respect for my savior).
Well, respectfully from a laypersons view that is true, I get that response from many unbelievers that haven't studied the bible formally (as in advanced schooling)or even in a cursory manner as a ancient series of documents. My personal account of the flood was that it was a flood of the known world, not the entire globe. That view is subject to change depending on the evidence Actually, if you ask a secular or non-secular expert in ancient documents they would tell you the bible uses many literary devices and consists of many styles such as; Pastiche, Rhetorical structures, Nonfiction, Parable, Historical novel, Didactic literature, Allegory Biography (A narrative work that reports true events)Poetry, and others. You see the bible was written by, I believe 72 authors in separate dialects of Hebrew, the book of Daniel or some of it was written in Aramaic which is a Semitic language of Syrian dialect. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek. So that, and the time periods written is the reason for the various styles etc. Study of the bible as a document is very interesting even for non-beleivers, because its been proven to be as or more accurate than other examples of literature written in the same time periods. I agree that ignorant pastors and believers have done more for the father of all lies (Lucifer) than he could do himself on his best day! The fire and brimstone preachers that say unbelievers etc are going to hell and burn for ever and ever are ignorant of what the bible actually says. They should study more and speak less! Trump is not a polished politician, and that's a good, no a wonderful thing. Sure he makes mistakes that many common people not versed in life long politics would make, but look at the stock market! Look at the unemployment rate! I am a Veteran, after Trump won (Ha ha nah na nah) (lol)...***cof*** ahhh (a trump moment) After trump won I notices an almost immediate change at the VA hospital in the way the treat me, and other veterans. Many vets had no choice and were drafted, even from them trump is a darling. If it weren't for the MSNBC propaganda type 'news' reporting along with other Marxist loving leftist Media concerns history will remember Trump as a great president. Others like Obama, and even that dumb NAFTA loving Bush II (yes I know he is a rep) should be remembered for their FAILED policies, and not the lies fed to us by their propaganda i.e. News outlets. Anyway, Open the pod door HAL.... |
|
|
|
Post by mryelm on Feb 25, 2020 16:24:06 GMT
But the good book says he had two of every thing. And, after the flood, when all the other animals and people had drowned, and all the land was totally saturated and destroyed by forty days of immersion in water, where did Noah get the food to feed his animals ? Yes HAL, I understand your feelings, been there myself. The good book, (Old Testament) is related to 39 non-Biblical documents, so, yes, your are right about Gilgamesh. but wrong about all things being drowned (link below). There is no time line, "unknown" until 2500 BC, the "unknown" includes, Creation, Fall, Flood, Babel. From my perspective, it is up to the reader to decide, what was real or imagined.
Link about Flood
Link of Archaeology of Ancient Law Ebla
.
 Yes what disturbs me about the secular scientific establishment is how some of their proponents attack the faith. All this has a history, and that history came to the forefront back in the early 1900's. No, it's not the scopes monkey trial, even thorough the Christians won that one, it was the concept the Vienna Circle embraced like a religion. From the web; "The Vienna Circle was a group of eminent early twentieth-century philosophers who sought to reconceptualize empiricism by means of their interpretation of then recent advances in the physical and formal sciences. Their radically anti-metaphysical stance was supported by an empiricist criterion of meaning and a broadly logicist conception of mathematics.
Notice this part of the web cut and paste; "Their radically anti-metaphysical stance was supported by an empiricist criterion of meaning and a broadly logicist conception of mathematics." Anti-metaphysical means anti-Religion, among other things. The sentence is a blade that divided secular and non-secular science, giving rise to the 'God is dead" sentiment that was popular on college campuses beginning in earnest in the 1960's. As the century progressed the west (and later the worlds) scientific establishments became sometimes RABIDLY anti-meta-physicist meaning anti-religion. Most of the 'vetted' scientific establishment vigorously rejected anything that did not have results verified by inflexible rules and experiment/mathematics. However I do not share the enthusiasm for empirical verification, rather I embrace, love, hug up to watering down the reliance on empirical methods and relying equally upon metaphysical evidences and methods! Why? Because the circle was establishing reality and it is an atheist reality they are creating. Kurt Godel had similar concerns and he was the lone Physicist that didn't agree with the Vienna Circles dependence on empirical methods! He was also a theist of sorts and included metaphysics in his genius brains 'truth file' (my term). Godel proved wrong a dearly held mathematical truth' when he devised his incompleteness theorem. Let's not to use an over used phrase 'throw out the baby with the bathwater! Which means as science progresses and is failing to answer serious problems lets not ignore a tool that may prove beneficial for discovery and answers. |
|
