Confession of a former christian

quote:

---

Chinese writings date back to the 5th MILLENNIUM when Hebrew hadn't even been invented yet either as a language or a script.

---

Chinese writings is not old at all. If your refering to a controversial debate over fossil bones with markings said to resemble writings, you have to slot this in the trivia box for the time being. It is disputed by all reliable sources, and shows no transit imprints in the 3000 years upto the 2nd M BCE it claims. This is like the stories writings appeared in Europe 10,000 years ago! I believe you are referring to this one:

quote:

---

Archaeologists Rewrite History

​

The debate centers on the origin of writing.

​

The earliest writing on earth is commonly believed to have evolved in what is today's southern Iraq about 5,200 years ago. There, settlers invented the cuneiform, a way of arranging impressions stamped on clay by a wedge.

​

It is commonly recognized that writing didn't emerge in China until 2nd millennia BC, about 2,000 years after it appeared in Iraq.

​

In China, early writing known as jiaguwen consisted of pictographic inscriptions on bone and tortoise shells.

​

However, the Chinese and American researchers claim their findings may overturn long-held convictions about where the evolution of Chinese writing began. After studying the artifacts from a site called Jiahu, in central China's Henan Province, they have proposed that the pictograms inscribed onto animal bones and shells unearthed there predate the jiaguwen used in the Shang Dynasty (c. 16 century-11 century BC).

---

Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Except for those that Jesus and Paul came up with.

---

The message is, DON'T MESS WITH THE OT LAWS. We can see clearly, from the attempted negation of circumsizion - the NT failed, and on its heels, from the same neck of the words as Jesus, came Islam - and the attempted negation ['by fullfilling'] was itself negated: a billion muslims uphold the OT law, as well as the science and medical community. This signifies the NT is a non-middle-east treatise, representing the wish list of Europe - than that of a jew named Jesus [a European name].Europe has used the name of Jesus to foster blatant errors:

quote:

---

In Kenya, male circumcision gains ground as weapon against AIDS
Saturday, May 24, 2008 11:52:01 AM

​

Common virus blamed for 5 infant deaths, CDC says
Sitting underneath the bright murals at a clinic, 22-year-old Elijah Ochanda gestures at his shorts and explains: "When they remove this thing, it makes you safer."

​

He is talking about the circumcision he is about to undergo at the urging of his older brother. He has watched several friends die of AIDS, and has come to believe the science that says circumcision can prevent men from being infected.

​

Dr. Robert Bailey, an epidemiology professor from the University of Illinois, is helping to roll out Kenya's first free circumcision project, which offers operations at public health facilities. Such projects are already running in Swaziland, Rwanda and Zambia, other countries where a large percentage of the population traditionally do not circumcise.

​

Bailey's study in Kisumu, western Kenya found infection rates were cut by 60 percent among men who were circumcised. The study, funded by the U.S. Institutes of Health and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, was one of several that led the World Health Organization to include circumcision in its prevention policies a year ago.

​

It prompted the Kenyan government to form a task force to promote voluntary, medically safe operations.http://www.theconservativevoice.com/ap/article.html?mi=D90S4GRO0&apc=9020

---

Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

No. As you point out yourself in your next sentence, fallen people understand what evil is (whereas 'what you just said' suggested that they don't understand what evil is).Re-defining evil so that evil acts can be viewed other than being evil is the manner in which the impediments to sin are removed. Like, if conscience halts your achieving your desires then suppressing conscience is a good a way as any around the problem.- Forgive me if I'm beginning to view your liberally sprinkled accusations of contradiction as boy who cried wolf-ism.I've said fallen people redefine evil. I'm not sure how a knowledge of what evil is means you aren't able to redefine it to suit your book. Bill Clinton was certainly able to redefine what sexual relations with a woman meant. Are you suggesting he didn't know he was having sexual relations with that woman at the time he was having them?- That school of definition makes talk of God doing evil meaningless s'all.Is God responsible for placing his son in a situation which would result in his death? Seeing as he planned it so I would say that he is responsible - even if he utilised mans evil in pulling the trigger.- I'm not sure what you reckon yourself to have established.We are agreed, I think, that this God-who-can-do-anything cannot create a creature who could determine his own final destination without giving that creature a choice of destinations and the ability to determine which of the options he would like to have.But a willed creature choosing a final destination without God is choosing the option that God doesn't desire for them (even though God desires to supply a choice regarding the nature of the persons eternal destination). The person is doing evil not in exercising choice (which God has given them), but in the option they pick.As ever, it cannot be said that a person who wills to supply a choice desires all that can be chosen. You'll have noted the definition supplied being a theological one?- One can deliberately make a consequential choice without any reference to right and wrong. Deliberate requires deliberation only. I can deliberate on the consequences of painting my room red prior to painting it so. You do agree I can deliberately choose to paint my room red don't you?- There is nothing accidental about deliberating upon the consequences and subsequently painting, a wall red. I might find that the consequences of actually doing so are not to my liking. No matter, deliberation doesn't require that I have full knowledge of the actual consequences prior to choosing.Otherwise I'd be like God - See Red Wall above- ..of good and evil. We could shorten things down by agreeing to leave out references to moral choices. We are agreed they couldn't make such a one. The definition of sin requires disobeying the "known" will of God. There is no reference to them knowingly disobeying God prior to them eating the fruit. Nor a reference to Gods will in the matter of nakedness prior to them eating the fruit - for that matter.Your case supporting your assertion is..?- A knowledge of good and evil brought it to their attention? I did make that suggestion and you seemed to have missed it altogether.- Christians would disagree (and I'm a Christian). The Jews have the right God but the wrong end of the stick. Not surprisingly, "on the day you eat you shall surely die.." is viewed through different lens than a Jew would read through.- I wish I hadn't painted that wall red - moral sluggard that I am. Perhaps the devil made me do it.

IamJoseph responds to me in multiple posts:

quote:

---

So the D.S. Scrolls [dated upto 3C BCE] is not a script?

---

Huh? The Dead Sea Scrolls date to the 2nd century BCE, not the 3rd.

quote:

---

While factors like the Illiad are deficient of any historial factors and dated to 6C BCE, it is contrasted with a 3,200 year reference of Israel, by name, in an Egyptian monument.

---

You're referring to the Merneptah Stele, yes? It would be quite helpful if you would be forthcoming in your references so I don't have to guess.It was written in Egyptian hieroglyphs. I thought you didn't consider hieroglyphs to be a real writing system."Deficient of any historical factors"? If you truly believed, as you said, that "95% of all archeological dating is via names," then one has to wonder if you have ever read the Iliad or the Odyssey as they are filled with names. You've heard of Agamemnon, right? He was the king from whom Helen was stolen by Paris and abducted to Troy, thus instigating the Trojan war where Agamemnon, leader of the Achaeans, sacked the city of Troy and burned it to the ground.The Hittite's mention him as "Akagamunas," ruler of "Ahhiyawa," the land of the Achaeans. The references date to the 14th century BCE.The Mask of Agamemnon:You really don't know anything about Greek history, do you?

quote:

---

There is not a single confirmable alphabetical book put out in Greek

---

What is the obsession with books? Why is writing only legitimate if it is written in a book? Your Merneptah Stele isn't a book and it is written in hieroglyphics.By the way, the oldest "book" that currently exists was written in Greek: The Derveni papyrus. It only dates from the 4th century BCE.Why is this fetish of yours regarding books? Why are stone carvings illegitimate?

quote:

---

There is not a single confirmable alphabetical book put out in Greek, linear B or any other even 700 years near this date, yet to equate the greek as older?

---

That's because there aren't any books in any language that old. Paper and similar things simply don't last that long. Stone, however, does. That's why your Merneptah Stele is still around. If you're going to rely upon works written upon stone for one example, then you necessarily must accept everything else written on stone for every other language.

quote:

---

I put it to you, if Greek alphabeticals are even the same age, as opposed older than hebrew, we should have at least 10% of such books as we see in the Hebrew

---

Huh? Hebrew script as it is currently used didn't appear until the 2nd century BCE. Greek script as it is currently used appeared nearly 1000 years before that.Books, on the other hand, are extremely fragile and we don't have any from the area older than the 4th century BCE, and it's written in Greek.And there are many more books written in Greek contemporary to the appearance of the Hebrew script of the 2nd century BCE. There's a reason all the ancient philosophers are Greek ones: They're the ones whose writings we have been able to find.

quote:

---

Why alphabeticals you ask? Because this leads to advanced nations

---

So Egypt, which built the pyramids, wasn't an "advanced" nation because their writing was phonetic, not alphabetic? China, which built the Great Wall, isn't "advanced" because their writing is glyphic, not alphabetic? The Maya, who developed the most accurate calendar the world has ever seen outside of modern astronomy, weren't an "advanced" nation because their writing was glyphic, not alphabetic?

quote:

---

the issue of democrasy's first descriptions

---

There's nothing in the Old Testament that relates to democracy. We've been through this before.

quote:

---

state & religion seperation

---

Separation of church and state is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament. In fact, it is a direct violation of the first commandment. The very law is a religious law.

quote:

---

the lack of any Hebrew writings in the gospels

---

(*chuckle*)What do you think the dominant language of the time was? Why, then, do you think the gospels should have been writtin in Hebrew?

quote:

---

the forbidence of human sacrifice and Capital punishments

---

...is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament. In fact, the exact opposite is true: Human sacrifice is required and capital punishment is part of the law.

quote:

---

Your rejection of capital punishment being annuled first in israel is of course quite mindless

---

So Leviticus doesn't exist?

quote:

---

it is a fact there was no capital punishment here since 850 BCE

---

So Leviticus doesn't exist?

quote:

---

do not include the exit clauses allowed therein

---

There are no exit clauses. Not one jot, not one tittle of the law shall be changed till all be fulfilled.Are you saying all was fulfilled back in 850 BCE? Nearly a thousand years before the person you claim was supposed to be the one to fulfill it?

quote:

---

Chinese writings is not old at all.

---

Then why do we have writings that date from the 5th millennium BCE? Note, I'm not talking about modern Chinese. I'm talking about writing that was used to transcribe the Chinese language, which is what all writing is: Transcriptions of verbal language.Greek was written in more than one script. So was Hebrew. So was Arabic. Chinese went through a number of scripts before coming to the current version we have today.

quote:

---

The message is, DON'T MESS WITH THE OT LAWS.

---

Except Paul completely violated them. The law is that you are to be circumcised...except Paul said you don't have to be.Who are you going to believe? The Old Testament law, straight from god? Or Paul?

quote:

---

a billion muslims uphold the OT law, as well as the science and medical community.

---

Incorrect. The science and medical community pretty much reject the OT proscriptions as superstition from a scientific and medical point of view.Circumcision as a way to prevent HIV transmission is short-sighted and ineffective. The way to prevent it is to use a condom.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

quote:

---

Huh? The Dead Sea Scrolls date to the 2nd century BCE, not the 3rd.

---

Its over 200 years BCE, which means 3rd C BCE. The point is, you stated hebrew script was 2C BCE, and that the scrolls was not a script. I asked if you believed all of the scrolls package was written in that same century, even as it alligns with a 'history' [not a myth] dating back over a 1000 years - with specifics of historical names, dates and places? FYI, the names Mount Sinai, Medianites, Goshen, Pithom, Ramasey, Philistines, the King's Highway, Abraham, Israel, Jerusalem, Gaza, Hebron, Mount Nebo, a giant red tree, and 100s of such factors - are first recorded in the Hebrew documents.Re:

quote:

---

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
While factors like the Illiad are deficient of any historial factors and dated to 6C BCE, it is contrasted with a 3,200 year reference of Israel, by name, in an Egyptian monument.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

​

You're referring to the Merneptah Stele, yes? It would be quite helpful if you would be forthcoming in your references so I don't have to guess.

​

It was written in Egyptian hieroglyphs. I thought you didn't consider hieroglyphs to be a real writing system.

​

"Deficient of any historical factors"? If you truly believed, as you said, that "95% of all archeological dating is via names," then one has to wonder if you have ever read the Iliad or the Odyssey as they are filled with names. You've heard of Agamemnon, right? He was the king from whom Helen was stolen by Paris and abducted to Troy, thus instigating the Trojan war where Agamemnon, leader of the Achaeans, sacked the city of Troy and burned it to the ground.

---

There is only one such stella dated over 3,200 years old, which mentions Israel by name, and describes a war with Egypt: that is called, 'independent historical vindication'. The issue of hieroglyphs in this instant is not a factor, but that Israel was already a recognised nation at this early time, and its written history is scientifically verifiable in stone etchings. Its hardly a fictional issue, as you are making it appear - in fact, no writings or nation can equate such vindication for this ancient period.Re The Illiad, you cannot select what you want. The facts ['historicity'] say different from what you are positing:

quote:

---

Historicity of the Iliad
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
” Find out more about navigating Wikipedia and finding information ”Jump to: navigation, search

​

Map of the Troad (Troas)
Map of Bronze Age Greece as described in Homer's IliadThe extent of the historical basis of the Iliad has been debated for some time. Educated Greeks of the fifth century continued to accept the truth of human events depicted in the Iliad, even as philosophical scepticism was undermining faith in divine intervention in human affairs. In the time of Strabo topological disquisitions discussed the identity of sites mentioned by Homer. The historic nature of Troy and the events of the Trojan War, long accepted at face value by Christians,[1] were doubted by Blaise Pascal,[2] even before the rational age of the Enlightenment, and after the Enlightenment were devalued as fables by George Grote.

​

The discoveries made by Heinrich Schliemann at Hisarlik reopened the question in modern terms, and recent discoveries have fueled more discussion across several disciplines.[3] The events described in Homer's Iliad, even if based on historical events that preceded its composition by some 450 years, will never be completely identifiable with historical or archaeological facts, even if there was a Bronze Age city on the site now called Troy, and even if that city was destroyed by fire or war at about the same time as the time postulated for the Trojan War.

​

No text or artifact has been found on site itself which clearly identifies the Bronze Age site by name.

---

There is no confusion from an archeological determination - you need to come up with something similar to the tel dan or the moabite stone, concerning Greece. This requires identifiable historical names and dates, wars, nations, etc. This one is written in alphabetical aramaic, which is always alligned with Hebrew, and vindicates independent Hebrew documents. Of course I have read copiosly of greek history, and looked but found no evidence of what is accepted. A vase with letters dated 8C BCE, hardly compares with 100s of alphabetical hebrew books. This also vindicates King David's psalms, by default, and which are alphabetical, historical, 3000 years old, and in Hebrew, mentioning the name Moses numerously, and alligning with the OT naratives and the book of kings, without any contradictions. Where is a greek document, or another nation's documents, vindicating greek's history as does this, by an independent nation:

quote:

---

The Tel Dan Stele is a black basalt stele erected by an Aramaean king in northernmost Israel, containing an Aramaic inscription to commemorate his victory over the ancient Hebrews.
The inscription has been dated to the 9th or 8th centuries BCE. The 8th-century limit is determined by a destruction layer caused by a well-documented Assyrian conquest in 733/732 BCE. Because that destruction layer was above the layer in which the stele fragments were found, it is clear that it took place after the stele had been erected, then broken into pieces which were later used in a construction project at Tel Dan, presumably by Hebrew builders. It is difficult to discern how long before that Assyrian conquest these earlier events took place.

​

The period of Aramean Supremacy and military conquest as depicted in the Tel Dan Stele against the Kingdoms of Judah and Israel was dated to ca. 841 - 798 BCE in correspondence the beginning of the reign of Jehu, King of Israel (841-814 BCE), until the end of the reign of Jehoahaz, King of Israel (814/813-798 BCE). This also corresponds to the end of the reigns of both Achazyahu (Ahaziah), King of Judah of the House of David (843 - 842 BCE) and the reign of Yoram (Joram), King of Israel (851 - 842 BCE).

---

Pointing out, the earliest DDS is the great Isaiah scroll, which has been carbon dated from between 335bc to 107 BC, so it could be anywhere from the 4th century bc to the second century bc. The others date from between 150 BC to 100 AD (probably 70 ad would be more accurate)

Although the scrolls parcel goes upto 330 BCE, IMHO, it is its content, more than the C14 process, which establishes its veracity. C14 is not reliable for small margin datings, but one cannot argue with specifics of historicity which are vindicated by other writings and events. IOW, the scrolls is not mythical but historical stuff.If I saw something similar in veracity in the greek or any other document, with such vindicated historical criteria, there would be no need to question it. I see nothing similar in greek writings to accept it is older than the hebrew. I have witnessed scholars debating and there was unanimous agreement Hebrew is a far older script than the greek.The truth is, after a certain point in history, everything becomes fuzzy with regard which alphabetical writings was first; this allows anyone to make any assumption they prefer to, without being negated. Now obviously, the Hebrew people came late in the scene, well after babylon and canaan, and those early nations did have writings, as is seen on the pyramids and other monuments, and these would have later graduated to a shorter, more advanced alphabetical script, with the obvious, ever advancement processes of humanity.The anomoly is, why or how did the Hebrew writings become so copious, with the introduction of such an advanced grammatical writing, prior to a host of nations older and more mightier? Where are the phenecian/sumerian/canaanite/babylonion alphabetical books? - these nations prevailed for more than a 1000 years after the Hebrew emerged, eg. Babylon was a super-power, and conquered Israel in 586 BCE, but had not near equivalent alphabetical books as did the Hebrew at that point in time.This also applies to Greece, because Alexander allowed Israel to remain autonomous although it was a conqeured state of Greece, because he esteemeed their historical writings, which predated Greece, and his quest was it becomes translated into Greek; he esteemed Israel to such an extent, and vice versa, that his name became a Jewish one, the preists nameing all their first borns with his name, and the Hebrews were given the most prominent positions in the Greek society and parlaiment. Alexander's greatest conquest may be his decision to translate the OT, rather than all his military conquests: two religions emerged because of that decision, and history changed to what it is today.When happened here was, as in ancient Egypt, the Hellenist preists lost their prominence after the OT was translated and understood by the greeks - it was seen as far superior to greek theology and greek laws. This led to a hatred inculcated against the OT and the Hebrews, and Alexander was probably assassinated for this reason; exactly the same thing happened in Egypt, and its preists instigated the genocide of first born Hebrew males, to destroy the infusion of the Hebrews from Egypt. The pharoah inclined with the Hebrew theology via Joseph who was made its viceroy [second in command of egypt], but this also created internal havoc with many careers and traditions on the line, and the egyptian preistly power eventually prevailed, the pharoah was assassinated, and resulted here:

quote:

---

Ex 1/ 8 Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph [rejected Joseph]. 9 And he said unto his people: 'Behold, the people of the children of Israel are too many and too mighty for us; 10 come, let us deal wisely with them, lest they multiply, and it come to pass, that, when there befalleth us any war, they also join themselves unto our enemies, and fight against us, and get them up out of the land.' 11 Therefore they did set over them taskmasters to afflict them with their burdens'

---

Geneocide was the plan now. This is also what appears occured with christianity in medevial Europe - the greeks instigated many false reports and theologies into the Gospels, and christianity became seperated from its mother religion when it was merely one of its Jewish groups. The Jesus story has no historical veracity and prevails only on belief, its doctrines being a provable pre-dating hellenist tradition and religion. But this cannot be entertained today, because this hatred has been attached to belief in God, no less, and here the prefered lie transcends any disdained truth. Try telling a Muslim, for example, that neither Moses nor Jesus were Muslim by history or belief?Prior to christianity, the greeks proposed an amalgamation with Judaism, but this failed because they insisted on including in this new joint religion, all their pagan beliefs [Zeus, incest, gay, etc] - the greeks never forgave the Jews for declining, with numerous wars occuring before Rome entered the scene, and this hatred continued with christianity via the greek input into Rome, and then emulated with Islam. But both the gospels and quran cannot be right - they are in dire contradiction of each other - in history and theology. The truth is, the Jews did nothing untowards these belief systems other than continueing their own beliefs - and this was unacceotable to those claiming the OT as their own, with no fear of anyone disputing it.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Oh really< it's content does? It is just the scroll of Isaiah.. I would like to see you make a case for that using paleographies, which are even worse at dating precisely than carbon dating.And, the scrolls themselves are very historical. However, their content might or might not be mythical. Let's see you provide external evidence that , oh , lets say , genesis is not mythical.

Yes this the in the "Free For All", but even there topic drift control is in effect. Besides, it seems that many of the things being discussed belong in forums other that the "FFA".If anyone wishes to make a case for this topic being reopened, go to the Thread Reopen Requests topic.Adminnemooseus