On the subject of Hell and Salvation

[MilesAbbott81]

You really need to get out of your head that you can simply assert things, all evidence points to the Yahweh myth being a minor god and a subordinate to El.

I didn't assert anything, I'm actually pointing out that your assertions are unfounded because there is no definitive proof that one came before the other. How do they know the Canaanite "El" isn't the copycat? Who cares about their supposed "evidence," your own citation says the following: "All of these stipulations and details were applied to the god later, however; it is unclear exactly when Yahweh was first worshipped, by whom, or how."

So, I'd have to say that you really need to get out of your head that you can simply assert things.

[Drich]

Meh, since I'm on the subject, not only is this idea of a personal relationship with the divine common to classical paganism, it;s common to contemporary paganism...and in all three examples of contemporary christianity, classical paganism, and contemporary paganism...some deficiency in this personal relationship with the divine is suggested to be the root of much of our misery (if not all).  Each goes so far as to posit that the decreasing interest in the proper relationships with their prospective invocations of divinity are at least partially if not largely at fault for the apparent decline of their respective civilizations.    

To the classical greeks, divine abandonment was predicated on the wickedness of man and portended disaster.   To contemporary christians, the dimished role of christ in our lives and society is indicative of moral decay, and to contemporary pagans our disconnection with the numinous natural is very literally destroying the thing regarded as the source of divinity.

---

It's also interesting to point out that while each of the three groups has (and two still) carries a priestly class, there's a heavily refined form of shamanism presenting itself as mystery tradition in all three.  

Those truly called to the numinous both expect and report a deeply personal relationship with the divine.  This is, bluntly, what informs them of the very existence of the divine.  The conceit of a priestly caste has always been that some have better ears than others - and this fails to make sense as a conjecture in the absence of the assumption that the divine engages in personal relationships with human beings.  This single statement is the difference between deism and theism.  All theists have this thing you thought was unique in common. It's what defines you as theists.  The notion that we can and have had a personal relationship with gods.

citation please..

Never came across that one. in fact in every known religion I have studied needed a prophet, emissary, high priest or some conduite between the realm of the gods and the world of man. No common people could ever approach God. Except with Christianity where Christ Himself says with the coming Spirit we will not even need teachers. Show me another religion where the common man devoid of any special gobetween can directly access God on any level.

I'm calling BS on this one sport.

[MilesAbbott81]

I'm saying that any text that appears older isn't necessarily older. The oldest manuscripts of the Torah could easily have been copied from older manuscripts extant at the time or passed down by oral tradition, which I already mentioned earlier in the thread. You can't break that argument.

  And..... the stones that would seem to be older.... and layed down before those of the culture that created the Abrahamic diety..... Like, oh lets say, the people that inhabited the Nile river system for some EDIT: six or so thousand years?

Just curious to know your point of veiw.  

6,000 years is the limit, and that dates back to Adam and Eve. Anything beyond the 6,000 number is junk science based on assumptions and unreliable dating methods.

[Drich]

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

  And..... the stones that would seem to be older.... and layed down before those of the culture that created the Abrahamic diety..... Like, oh lets say, the people that inhabited the Nile river system for some EDIT: six or so thousand years?

Just curious to know your point of veiw.  

6,000 years is the limit, and that dates back to Adam and Eve. Anything beyond the 6,000 number is junk science based on assumptions and unreliable dating methods.

:lol:

'Junk science' ?

Yeah, I really bet all those highly paid geologists who quite successfully find the myriad mineral deposits which drive the fundamentals of our economic society with their "Millions or years old planet" are really fust faking it and pulling out the Dowsing rods when no kne is looking.

:lol:

You're a funny guy.

Or maybe Gal. Who knows what lurks behind the screen?

[possibletarian]

Yes, actually, it's quite different. The Bible is not at all about God appearing in human form and having superficial relationships with people. It's about Him having the most intimate of relationships with everyone, where He willfully lays down His life for us all to save us. That is nothing like any other religion (again, to my knowledge, others are free to prove me wrong).

And can you prove that the mythical relationship exists outside of your own head ?

And how did he lay his life down exactly, did god cease to live at any point ?

---

  And..... the stones that would seem to be older.... and layed down before those of the culture that created the Abrahamic diety..... Like, oh lets say, the people that inhabited the Nile river system for some EDIT: six or so thousand years?

Just curious to know your point of veiw.  

6,000 years is the limit, and that dates back to Adam and Eve. Anything beyond the 6,000 number is junk science based on assumptions and unreliable dating methods.

Again simple assertion.

---

You really need to get out of your head that you can simply assert things, all evidence points to the Yahweh myth being a minor god and a subordinate to El.

I didn't assert anything, I'm actually pointing out that your assertions are unfounded because there is no definitive proof that one came before the other. How do they know the Canaanite "El" isn't the copycat? Who cares about their supposed "evidence," your own citation says the following: "All of these stipulations and details were applied to the god later, however; it is unclear exactly when Yahweh was first worshipped, by whom, or how."

So, I'd have to say that you really need to get out of your head that you can simply assert things.

Well did you even read the article? you are the one making the claim that that no god pre-dates yaweh, where is your evidence ? I'm saying your claim is unsafe and you foolishly quote a passage saying no one can be sure back at me, which is exactly the point I'm making.

The passage quoted was actually from the bible, I'm glad to see that you don't consider it evidence, we may actually be getting somewhere.

---

'Junk science' ?

Yeah, I really bet all those highly paid geologists who quite successfully find the myriad mineral deposits which drive the fundamentals of our economic society with their "Millions or years old planet" are really fust faking it and pulling out the Dowsing rods when no kne is looking.

:lol:

You're a funny guy.

Or maybe Gal. Who knows what lurks behind the screen?

Of course they are faking it you unbeliever

[Deesse23]

6,000 years is the limit, and that dates back to Adam and Eve. Anything beyond the 6,000 number is junk science based on assumptions and unreliable dating methods.

What do you think of C14 dating and Dendrochonology?

[possibletarian]

Taking all the 'dating' science to one side for a moment, the fact that we have clearly had ELE impacts the aftermath of we can still see today in the layers of deposits, and the extinction of dinosaurs should give reason to re think to the 6,000 year old claim.

Only blind faith can lead people to be so stupid.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

Taking all the 'dating' science to one side for a moment, the fact that we have clearly had ELE impacts the aftermath of we can still see today in the layers of deposits, and the extinction of dinosaurs should give reason to re think to the 6,000 year old claim.

Only blind faith can lead people to be so stupid.

Yes, well..... we only have geology, astronomy, archeology, certain aspects of biology (I can't remeber the specific field I genetics which does the 'Gene clock thing atm), nuclear physics.......

Just to name a few of the sciences (I'm sure others can add to the list) that all, rather independently, have the conclusion that our reality is rather mature in its years.

[Drich]

  And..... the stones that would seem to be older.... and layed down before those of the culture that created the Abrahamic diety..... Like, oh lets say, the people that inhabited the Nile river system for some EDIT: six or so thousand years?

Just curious to know your point of veiw.  

6,000 years is the limit, and that dates back to Adam and Eve. Anything beyond the 6,000 number is junk science based on assumptions and unreliable dating methods.

have you hear my theory on this yet?

in essence we need to re look at the time lines and book chapter and verse denotations. as these are not apart of the orginal scripture. for example chapter 1 should as a narritive start 1 one and end on day 7 in fact chapter 2:1-3 completes day seven which would mean chapter 2:4  should be chapter 2:1

We also note that God the Father Is the one incharge of creation of Chapter 1 (7 day creation) then on chapter two starts with yhwh or "the Word" (As in John 1:1 the word of God who was there and created the world) is resposible for all of chapter 2 which is a garden narritive whichis seperate and apart from the 7 day creation, we know this because what would be verse one says... this starts when the father was making the earth and sky (day 3 but before the rain day 4) so everything in chapter 2 happened before the end of day 4. including the creation of adam and eve which was again seperate than man created outside the garden by the father on day 6.

Still with me? this then means right after the garden was complete chapter 3 could not have happen as it was still day5 of the creation of the world. this also mean we do not have any time line between the end of chapter two and the beginning of chapter three. although we do know chapter three started 6000 years ago as this is when the geneologies all trace back to. meaning the fall happened 6000 ago... while creation could have been 10 billion years ago. and adam and eve could have been safly tucked away in the garden all that time..

We know they were immortal as per the tree of life they had free access to.
We know they did indeed die the day they ate the fruit ending their immortal existence with God and was cast out into the world. meaning that life died and they started a new one. (kinda how we work in reverse, we are created here die goto heaven/they where in heaven/presence of God died and came here.) 
this also explains all of the other paradoxes atheist bring up about the orgins.. who did the children of adam marry, where did the city of nod come from why is man created on day 6 and again on day 4 why was the garden world decribed as a cirle of earth and a dome sky?