|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 3:10:28 GMT 10
Abraham, Issac, and Jacob pre-existed Moses. And God revealed the name YHWH to Moses..
So....uh....DUH! That's a total no-brainer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 3:31:49 GMT 10
We know El as a Canaanite god ...Do we, now? |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 3:51:27 GMT 10
We know El as a Canaanite god, married to Asherah, and YHWH was also married to Asherah until after the Babylonian Exile, when the Jews learned monotheism from the Zoroastrians so they organised a divorce for their Canaanite god and copied the Zoroastrian god. That's not entirely incorrect. Archaeologists have discovered artistic representations of Yahweh and Asherah and inscriptions indicating that Asherah was considered some sort of consort of Yahweh. *But remember* The Bible does say that many people of Israel fell into pagan practices before the Babylonian Exile, so evidence of this paganism might agree with, rather than contradict, the Bible. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 3:59:34 GMT 10
In Exodus 6:3 it clearly states that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob only knew El (Ale) and did not know YHWH (He causes to become) Actually, it (YHWH) means "He makes it happen" It's a 3rd person form of hayah `( So, literally, " he was, he became, it happened")' |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 22:00:02 GMT 10
There is no doubt the Canaanites named their god El.
So did many other civilizations.
1. In Hebrew, the word that most often refers to “The Divinity” (God) is Elohim, and is translated into English as “god” or “God.” [glow=red,2,300]However, “Elohim” does not mean “God” nor is it a name. Elohim actually has two meanings.[/glow] a. When it’s used to refer to the Divinity (God), Elohim means (the) “Almighty” (singular) or “Mighty One.”
b. It also refers to heavenly beings and means “mighty ones”; that is, angels, offspring of angels or humans spiritually reborn. (Psalms 82:6; John 10:34)
c. In Hebrew, the ‘im’ suffix is plural so Elohim is plural (meaning more than one; i.e. “mighty ones”), but in the context of the Almighty Yahweh, Elohim as plural emphasizes his might in opposition to the plurality (the many) of “all the gods.” (see Exodus 12:12)
d. Elohim is also used occasionally in its singular forms, el and eloha = “mighty one.”
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 22:12:37 GMT 10
That's not entirely incorrect. Archaeologists have discovered artistic representations of Yahweh and Asherah and inscriptions indicating that Asherah was considered some sort of consort of Yahweh. *But remember* The Bible does say that many people of Israel fell into pagan practices before the Babylonian Exile, so evidence of this paganism might agree with, rather than contradict, the Bible. Yes the Bible does say that, but it was written in the Persian Period under the influence of Zoroastrians where they were changing over from polytheism to monotheism. They have found figurines of Asherah in almost every domestic building right up to the 2nd Century BCE - so the whole time the Old Testament is set, the people were polytheistic - up to the Maccabees. It was not just before the Exile, but for centuries afterwards. For hundreds of years. The Exile happened in 586 BCE almost 400 years later the Jews made the switch to just one god. The Bible is a pack of lies and the sad thing is you cannot see it. The rest of us can. We do not possess any evidence of Cyrus himself being Zoroastrian. The first concrete proofs of the existence of Mazdaism outside Avesta itself are in the inscriptions of Darius, who does mention the deity "Ahura Mazda" - but does NOT mention the name of prophet Zoroaster. Neither does he make any detailed theological statements (like concerning the essential Zoroastrian idea of "Amesha Spentas") besides the simplistic idea of fighting for truth and opposing lie. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 23:26:54 GMT 10
You would defend your lie, because there is a lot more at stake for you than me.
If I could prove you wrong BEYOND a shadow of a doubt, you still wouldn't admit you were wrong because that would mean you'd have to apologize for that piece of fire kindling you published.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 23:37:00 GMT 10
quote Veritas (Greek for Truth sic) We do not possess any evidence of Cyrus himself being Zoroastrian. Cyrus was a polytheist, in the Cyrus Cylinder, which was found in the rubble of Babylon, Cyrus says that his rule "Bel and Nebo love, whom they want as king to please their hearts". Cyrus did not know or acknowledge the God of Isreal, as recorded in Isaiah 45:4. Josephus in "Antiquities" writes that Cyrus came to know his destiny with respect to the Jewish people "by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of his prophesies; for this prophet said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision: "My will is, that Cyrus, whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations, send back my people to their own land, and build my temple". Your book is nothing more than a conspiracy theory written by a bigotted nutter. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 23:50:18 GMT 10
Scholarship?
Are you a historian, Buzz?
Where are your credentials?
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 23:54:21 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 23:57:24 GMT 10
Pointless to argue with you on this, you'd never admit you are wrong. Even if it were blatantly so.
You embarrass yourself by being forced to apologize for your sloppy research
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 29, 2012 23:58:12 GMT 10
Scholarship? Are you a historian, Buzz? Where are your credentials? My book was well researched and cited and you will read in the Bibliography my sources. So not what I asked. Are you a historian, yes or no? |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 30, 2012 0:01:41 GMT 10
i know what the cylinder says - but the interpretation is the main thing. as you have no knowledge of Zoroastrianism you wouldn't understand. Dare I say, neither do you. Is there another way to interpet when Cyrus mentions "Marduk, Entil of the gods (plural)" If there is, I'd love to hear it. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 30, 2012 0:13:04 GMT 10
Yes well let me try to explain - this will not be easy dealing with a delusional. You'd know that better than anyone. (I'm surprised you can get dressed in the morning.) Other gods. So then you concede that Cyrus was a polytheist. Belief in other gods is contrary to monotheism. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 30, 2012 1:57:31 GMT 10
Have you read the Old Testament? YHWH sits at the head of the council of the gods who is like you among the gods? Yes. False gods. God also appointed the god of this world who blinds men in 2 Corinthians 4:4. When John 17:3 says there is one true God we then know that the god of 2 Corinthians 4:4 is a false god, as are any others. So we don't need every instance of the term "god" to explicitly include the term "false" to know that other gods are false gods. |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 30, 2012 8:20:24 GMT 10
All gods are "false".
There are no "real" ones otherwise knucklehead would have shown us some proof.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 30, 2012 14:26:55 GMT 10
Do you believe everything you know requires proof, slarti?
Do you know that for certain? Do you have any proof for that belief?
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 30, 2012 16:46:35 GMT 10
I know what I believe and why I believe what I believe.
I don't believe that there is someone higher up there watching us.
That sort of stuff is just fairytales.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 1, 2012 2:27:23 GMT 10
...But do you have proof for all of those beliefs?
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 6, 2012 8:22:38 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 6, 2012 13:08:34 GMT 10
Your bullshit paperback novel, verses over 2000 years of accredited historical scholarship and archeology...
Nuff' said.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 6, 2012 13:20:07 GMT 10
Oh that's right - overwhelming evidence to the contrary of your false beliefs doesn't work on you. It does with normal people but not you. You mean, it only works on people trying to improve their book sales.. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 6, 2012 13:40:02 GMT 10
Sorry Buzzy, but that particular sentence has been uttered since Bastille 1789.
We're still waiting for the fulfillment of that particular prophecy.
Things haven't been looking so well for you, since the fall of that infamous Berlin Wall.
|
|
Your armchair scholarship wins the day again.
