Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Another ancient of Creation myth Psalm 74:12-14

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
    As someone else said, in our worldview, memories of such a flood would be shared through the centuries. So what's your point?

    First it was not a Noah and the Ark flood, and by the evidence there was no such flood. it was a catastrophic flood in the Tigris Euphrates valley about 2900 to 2800 BCE first recorded by the Sumerians.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      But where did the Canaanites "borrow" from?
      Babylonian and Sumerian cuneiform texts. The Sumerians were the first to record the catastrophic flood that occured ~2900-2800 BCE.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        Babylonian and Sumerian cuneiform texts. The Sumerians were the first to record the catastrophic flood that occured ~2900-2800 BCE.
        And where did they "borrow" from?

        You see where we're going? What is the origin of these stories?
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          And where did they "borrow" from?

          You see where we're going? What is the origin of these stories?
          The origin of the stories are is the first written record in cuneiform texts of the Sumerians, basically the first written language. These were based on the oral traditions of the Sumerians before writing. There are no written records in the Middle East at this time nor before that would support any other origin.

          This is the basic pattern observed in all cultures of the world. Oral traditions were later written down when writing was developed. For example in China the written records of China fairly accurately record events and time they occurred such as the catastrophic flooding event of the river valleys hundreds of years after the event confirmed by geologic records. The geologic record of the catastrophic river flood of the Tigris Euphrates rivers confirm the description of this flood in the Sumerian cuneiform. The oral traditions and the depiction of Tsunamis in the totums of the Northwest Native Americans as the 'great wave' is confirmed by geologic records.
          Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-10-2019, 07:55 AM.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #20
            Shuny...

            Can you not at least see the possibility that people wrote of what they knew either from stories passed down through generations or from eyewitness testimony? Or is there only ONE possible explanation- that somebody said, "that's a cool story - let's make it our own." !!??!!
            Watch your links! http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/fa...corumetiquette

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              The origin of the stories are is the first written record in cuneiform texts of the Sumerians, basically the first written language. These were based on the oral traditions of the Sumerians before writing. There are no written records in the Middle East at this time nor before that would support any other origin.

              This is the basic pattern observed in all cultures of the world. Oral traditions were later written down when writing was developed. For example in China the written records of China fairly accurately record events and time they occurred such as the catastrophic flooding event of the river valleys hundreds of years after the event confirmed by geologic records. The geologic record of the catastrophic river flood of the Tigris Euphrates rivers confirm the description of this flood in the Sumerian cuneiform. The oral traditions and the depiction of Tsunamis in the totums of the Northwest Native Americans as the 'great wave' is confirmed by geologic records.
              You are contradicting yourself. On one hand you are saying that the oral traditions proceeded the written form. On the other, you are saying that the only source for people to develop written forms is by copying it from the Sumerians. It hardly matters if there was a written form when there were parallel oral forms being shared. The first written form doesn't particularly claim dibs as being the original form ... unless you have proof that these cuneiforms were on the Times best-seller list.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by DesertBerean View Post
                Shuny...

                Can you not at least see the possibility that people wrote of what they knew either from stories passed down through generations or from eyewitness testimony?
                Possibilities?!?!?

                I already acknowledged and explained where oral traditions were handed down, and include eyewitness testimony that was later confirmed by geologic evidence.

                Or is there only ONE possible explanation- that somebody said, "that's a cool story - let's make it our own." !!??!!
                This is off the scale, and does not reflect anything I posted. The oral traditions are simply the stories of the cultures that were believed as factual, but of course may be true or false, and written down when they developed writing. Some are supported by archaeological, paleontological, and geologic evidence, others like dragons and world floods have no basis in the objective verifiable evidence. In fact they defy any known possible evidence outside the myth itself.
                Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-10-2019, 10:14 PM.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post
                  You are contradicting yourself. On one hand you are saying that the oral traditions proceeded the written form. On the other, you are saying that the only source for people to develop written forms is by copying it from the Sumerians. It hardly matters if there was a written form when there were parallel oral forms being shared. The first written form doesn't particularly claim dibs as being the original form ... unless you have proof that these cuneiforms were on the Times best-seller list.
                  Proof in this case is fool's quest. The matter of fact evidence is what we have to deal with instead of wishful thinking and speculation of what one hopes may exist.

                  No contradiction whatsoever. You are arguing from ignorance basing this line of reasoning on the claim of possible evidence that simply does not exist. There is simply no Hebrew writing nor written language that offers any hope of the possibility of a 'parallel text' from a parallel oral tradition.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    The origin of the stories are is the first written record in cuneiform texts of the Sumerians, basically the first written language. These were based on the oral traditions of the Sumerians before writing. There are no written records in the Middle East at this time nor before that would support any other origin.
                    And what was the source of the oral tradition?
                    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                    Than a fool in the eyes of God


                    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      The Bible records Abraham as being from Ur, so it is possible that the Biblical accounts of times predating Abraham will originate in with his background. Of course, we would have to preclude any information about those times being imparted to Abraham during his encounters with God.
                      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                      .
                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                      Scripture before Tradition:
                      but that won't prevent others from
                      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                      of the right to call yourself Christian.

                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                        The Bible records Abraham as being from Ur, so it is possible that the Biblical accounts of times predating Abraham will originate in with his background. Of course, we would have to preclude any information about those times being imparted to Abraham during his encounters with God.
                        ?
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          Hardly.

                          10 O God, how long shall the adversary reproach? shall the enemy blaspheme thy name for ever?
                          11 Why withdrawest thou thy hand, even thy right hand? pluck [it] out of thy bosom.

                          12 For God [is] my King of old, working salvation in the midst of the earth.
                          13 Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest the heads of the dragons in the waters.
                          It doesn't take a lot of thinking to work out who the dragon and leviathan symbolises. nor which sea got divided. nor to work out that the author considers the action against dragons, and leviathan, is something the author expects to be repeated.
                          14 Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, [and] gavest him [to be] meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness.
                          15 Thou didst cleave the fountain and the flood: thou driedst up mighty rivers.

                          16 The day [is] thine, the night also [is] thine: thou hast prepared the light and the sun.
                          17 Thou hast set all the borders of the earth: thou hast made summer and winter.

                          18 Remember this, [that] the enemy hath reproached, O LORD, and [that] the foolish people have blasphemed thy name.
                          19 O deliver not the soul of thy turtledove unto the multitude [of the wicked]: forget not the congregation of thy poor for ever.

                          Which part of the psalm is intended to be a creation story? Which part of drying up fountains, floods, and rivers recounts creation stories?
                          There is a discussion of this and other “sea-monster”-passages in the OT in Alexander Heidel’s (ageing but still useful) translation of the Enuma Eliš. The dragon is mentioned here: http://www.geocities.ws/SoHo/Lofts/2938/baalmot.html - scroll down to: Shalyat of the seven heads
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            Atheists love the "borrowing" argument, but they never seem to realize that the borrowing could have gone the other way
                            However, as a theist, you realize that the borrowing could have gone the both ways?
                            "Yes. President Trump is a huge embarrassment. And it’s an embarrassment to evangelical Christianity that there appear to be so many who will celebrate precisely the aspects that I see Biblically as most lamentable and embarrassing." Southern Baptist leader Albert Mohler Jr.

                            Comment

                            Related Threads

                            Collapse

                            Topics Statistics Last Post
                            Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                            14 responses
                            50 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                            21 responses
                            129 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                            Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                            78 responses
                            414 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post tabibito  
                            Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                            45 responses
                            303 views
                            1 like
                            Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                            Working...
                            X