EPTGod HAD a wife - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
refmac_cys.cys
United States177 Posts
| ||
|
gongryong
Korea (South)1430 Posts
Claims are always made here and there, but the initial reaction on our part should be examination, and not outright rejection. Ratzinger is right all along, Deus Caritas Est! DTK-m2, your entire... supposition... is practically irrelevant here. You narrate only the basic and mechanical aspect of the story, while the issue here is politics. | ||
|
101toss
3232 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:08 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Yeah... hopefully. I doubt it though  I think someone needs to make a thread on how to avoid flame wars on religious threads, before we can ever have a successful religious thread. A good way to start is to not have some people saying religion is wrong and others saying religion is right, i.e. arguing over the validity of religion. In the last thread people called religion "a scourge", etc. Maybe we can just focus on the topic for once | ||
|
Roeder
Denmark735 Posts
And Gandalf was the local newspaper boy. User was warned for this post | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45174 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:07 101toss wrote: This specific topic [hopefully] won't spur flame between believers and nonbelievers. I'm seriously holding back from saying about thirty different things that would cause trouble, just because I want to see success for once. I wonder if mainstream Christians will take this new "find" of God's wife to heart. I don't think it'll be taken seriously by most of them. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On March 23 2011 11:58 Jerubaal wrote: To quote Ratzinger, why is this age obsessed with finding religion through history? To quote myself, why is this age obsessed with refuting others' religious beliefs? Why is everyone so religiously secular these days? =) On a side note, I'm Mormon, and we have always believed God has a wife. Why would he set up some arbitrary sociality for his children if it's not what he himself has attained in his state of perfection and happiness? His goal is for us to become like him, just like any parent(s). Most couples who live their religious beliefs would say that is the pinnacle of fulfillment for them and adds a new level of depth, closeness, and love to their relationship with each other and with God. Also, we believe that anyone who lives the Gospel can eventually become an exhalted person (through the Atonement) like God is, so this idea is not strange to us. Any parent wants their kid to grow up and share in their wisdom and happiness. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:00 Redmark wrote: What is the bible if not history? This is not a rhetorical question. I hope the answer isn't god transcends time or something like that. Though I agree that trying to (dis)prove (parts of) religion through archaeology is a bit silly. I usually regret my one-liners, but I'll go off on a tangent for one post so you don't go away empty handed. Really, it's the obsession with reducing everything to history. Theology is history. Economics is history (Marx). History is now conferring meaning to theology instead of theology conferring meaning to history. Apart from (I hope) the obvious ridiculousness of this, history is a pretty poor techne on which to base your knowledge. To steal another quote, to be an expert in history is to know less than the poorest cook in Rome; to know Latin is to have the same knowledge as Cicero's maid. On topic, this sort of thing crops up from time to time(e.g. The Gospel of Judas), but i assure you that some snippet of information that suddenly makes everything clear has not been overlooked for thousands of years and is usually well known by experts in the field. Another regrettable sin of this modern age is the belief that you've discovered something new. | ||
|
mowglie
United States74 Posts
I quote one person's comment from that link. "The article is misleading. The ancient isarelites did indeed frequently pray to foreign Gods and godesses, and in every place in the Bible where they have done so, it has been called an abomination, that Asherah was an adopted Canaanite goddess, and that kings and rulers who worshipped such did evil in the sight of the Lord. The prophets of Asherah were central to the story of the face-off between Elijah and the Canaanites told in 1 Kings 18. The fact that archeologists find inscriptions to Asherah does not indicate that she was "erased" from the Theology, or that she was once main-stream Judaism. Anyone who has actually studied the old testament, particularly Samuel/Chronicles/Kings knows that this is indicative of the very falling-away and heresies that are documented in these texts." | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45174 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:00 Redmark wrote: What is the bible if not history? This is not a rhetorical question. Once the other non-Christians come to this thread, they're going to have a field day with that question. Good luck. I hope this stays on the topic of history and the evolution of religion and mythology. | ||
|
rel
Guam3521 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
andy186
Australia1058 Posts
Countless hours upon hours are spent trying to prove/disprove the bible as truth. If only we could just leave it well enough alone. If you believe it good on you, if you dont, good on you too its your life, but do we really have to have these atheists who attack religion with such zeal. The hypocrisy is hilarious. "This seems to be in part driven by a modern desire, clearly inspired by the Biblical narratives, to hide Asherah behind a veil once again." So ofcourse it couldnt actually mean Sacred Tree is has to be an obvious attempt to hide the name. I would really like to know what this authors sources are because he is basically just saying stuff and we are expected to believe it as fact which is somewhat ironic. Yes i get that there are apparantly 'ancient artifacts' but cmon. | ||
|
Keitzer
United States2509 Posts
what about the people that believe theres an alien god or some shit? what about the europeans (fuck... romans?) that believed in titans, and other gods and shit User was warned for this post | ||
|
mowglie
United States74 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:17 Keitzer wrote: religion = belief. that's it... what about the people that believe theres an alien god or some shit? what about the europeans (fuck... romans?) that believed in titans, and other gods and shit I would go further and say that not all beliefs are equal, that some are pretty damn outrageous while other beliefs are reasonable. | ||
|
Gatsbi
United States1134 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:20 mowglie wrote: I would go further and say that not all beliefs are equal, that some are pretty damn outrageous while other beliefs are reasonable. What? That's absolutely ridiculous. Believeing in the Christian God is just as ridiculous as believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, why is one more outrageous than the other? Are you sure you're not biased? User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
101toss
3232 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:24 Gatsbi wrote: What? That's absolutely ridiculous. Believeing in the Christian God is just as ridiculous as believing in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, why is one more outrageous than the other? Are you sure you're not biased? This is why religious threads get closed. | ||
|
frequency
Australia1901 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
ProfessorCold
United States41 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:00 DTK-m2 wrote: Consider this: assume that you are a true believer (or, if you actually are a true believer, just keep on reading) that the Holy Bible came down from God himself, and had no human influence whatsoever in it's original copy. Great, now we have a single book from the big man, with all the stuff we should listen to. But we need to spread this book! Spread the word! How do we do that? By making more books. Unfortunately, no guy named Gutenberg has come along and invented a printing press doo-dah yet. Alas, how do we make more books? Only one way: copy them over by hand. Yay, I just copied over a thousand pages entirely perfectly. I definitely didn't make a SINGLE mistake, because, you know, I'm perfect and all. Here you go, fellow dude! You can copy it to spread the word, too, if you want. I'm sure that you ALSO are completely perfect and will not make any mistakes when transferring the content of this book into another book. This is a pretty ignorant view of the history of copying the Bible. Evidence is overwhelmingly on the side of this not occurring. With the Hebrew text (or the Old Testament half of the Bible), the copyists were as anal as anal could be about it. They usually copied down the text one letter at a time, and when they got done with the book, they counted forward and backward to find the word 1/2 way through, 1/4, 1/8, and et cetera. Their excellence in copying it evidenced by our finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which came about 1000 years before our next-earlier copies (done by the Masoretes), yet are extraordinarily close to the ones we already had. The Greek text copiers (or the Bible's New Testament), on the other hand, were not quite so anal about their copying. Most of the copies were probably just done by slaves for the first few centuries. However, this is made up for by the sheer number of manuscripts that we have of what they did. About the OP though, the Bible's pretty clear about Asherah, she was a god that nearby nations worshiped. The Israelites worshiped other Gods all the time, that's why God constantly sent bad things their way - so that they would realize the error of their ways and repent. Just because they worshiped Asherah doesn't mean they were all polytheists, or that this was common tradition in their culture. Edit: Sorry guys, didn't read any of the posts about not wanting to flare up big arguments (my post took too long). I don't want to flare up big arguments either, especially since I don't check TL enough to take part in them. | ||
|
adeezy
United States1428 Posts
But I personally don't know much about it, but just because they find evidence that is contrary to normal cathecism, doesn't mean it was part of the original. There was a lot of secular religions prior to Christianity and even Judaism. Before Paul and peter started the ministry there was just basically a bunch of Christians getting persecuted everywhere with structure barely in place. | ||
|
Jumbled
1543 Posts
On March 23 2011 12:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: We JUST opened, and JUST closed a religious thread. I guess this means that God can't be given any female pronouns? I know some religious speakers wanted to make it sound fair (gender-wise) by not only using He, but by also using She, when referring to God. Well, it does suggest a good reason for referring to Yahweh exculsively as he. It's a very interesting article, but unfortunately I suspect most of us lack the depth of historical knowledge required to analyse it in more detail. | ||
|
Gatsbi
United States1134 Posts
Huh? http://www.venganza.org/ | ||
| ||
