Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   evolution of judaism
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 61 of 82 (148888)
10-10-2004 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by arachnophilia
10-10-2004 6:48 AM


It looks like this is pretty pointless.
Can we try to get back towards the topic. If Jason wants to debate Genesis 1 & 2 let him wander over to that thread. In the meantime, perhaps we can get on with discussing the evolution of Judaism.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by arachnophilia, posted 10-10-2004 6:48 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by arachnophilia, posted 10-10-2004 5:29 PM jar has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 62 of 82 (148903)
10-10-2004 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by JasonChin
10-10-2004 4:47 AM


Nope, if you read it carefully, you'll see that it simply details the creation of man in Genisis 2 after treating it more broadly in Genisis 1.
How can that be when they have the same amount of detail?
Why is it that you must insert this extra-Biblical interpretation to wave away the contradiction? Whatever happened to just reading the text that was there?
What would it take, I wonder, to substantiate to you that there was a contradiction in the Bible? Or, is every time I show two passages that contradict each other, you're response is going to be "it's just making the first part clearer.
If I said "drinking is ok in moderation", and then I said "drinking is never ok", wouldn't you think I had contradicted myself? Why would you say that my second statement "clarifies" the first?
We're getting off-topic here, so if you would, please reply in this thread.
This message has been edited by crashfrog, 10-10-2004 12:16 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by JasonChin, posted 10-10-2004 4:47 AM JasonChin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 2:51 AM crashfrog has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 63 of 82 (148904)
10-10-2004 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by JasonChin
10-10-2004 2:44 AM


Re: brennakimi
quote:
jar said:
One key thing is that Genesis was not written by one person whether it was Moses or anyone else. Instead, it is an anthology of many independent and sometimes mutually exclusive stories. For example, Genesis 1 & 2 tell two completely different stories.
to which jasonChin responded:
That's not true.
Jason, it might have been better if you had said "I don't believe that is true. I believe that all of Genesis was written by one man."
That would be a better statement of your position.
However, almost every major Christian religion believes that Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 were written by two different authors from two different traditions from two different eras. Gensis 2 is and older tale while Genesis 1 is from a much later period.
Here is what Bishop Sims of the Episcopal Church Atlanta Diocese said related to the accounts in Genesis 1&2:
But even here the distinction between religion and science is clear. In Genesis there is not one creation statement but two. They agree as to why and who, but are quite different as to how and when. The statements are set forth in tandem, chapter one of Genesis using one description of method and chapter two another. According to the first, humanity was created, male and female, after the creation of plants and animals. According to the second, man was created first, then the trees, the animals and finally the woman and not from the earth as in the first account, but from the rib of the man. Textual research shows that these two accounts are from two distinct eras, the first later in history, the second earlier. emphasis added
So the issue of who wrote Genesis is certainly open to discussion. The majority of the evidence today is that there were multiple sources from multiple periods with very different theologies.
But to move back towards the topic, Judaism, like Christianity, is a composite, adoptive religion. It adopted and modified tales and stories from the religions that preceeded it, taking their tales and beliefs and incorporating them with a Judaic slant.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by JasonChin, posted 10-10-2004 2:44 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
AdminAsgara
Administrator (Idle past 2303 days)
Posts: 2073
From: The Universe
Joined: 10-11-2003


Message 64 of 82 (148921)
10-10-2004 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by JasonChin
10-10-2004 7:54 AM


Re: brennakimi
First off, Jason this isn't just to you but to the thread in general...there is already a topic on Gen 1 vs Gen 2
Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2
Let's please keep the topics seperate.
Now, to Jason. Please read some formating hints here, Assistance w/ Forum Formatting
This will tell you how to use the quote features on the boards.

AdminAsgara
Queen of the Universe


http://asgarasworld.bravepages.com
http://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by JasonChin, posted 10-10-2004 7:54 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 65 of 82 (148946)
10-10-2004 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by jar
10-10-2004 12:50 PM


yeah, really. this is pretty frustrating.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by jar, posted 10-10-2004 12:50 PM jar has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 66 of 82 (148950)
10-10-2004 5:49 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by JasonChin
10-10-2004 7:54 AM


Re: brennakimi
No knowledgable religious person claims that the Bible was written by one individual. I have no idea where you got this idea from.
actually, i know several people on this board that might make that claim.
Generally speaking, traditional attribution of authorship is taken to be true.........which is the same for ALL ancient literature. Only (and unfairly) is it questioned when it comes to the Bible.
no, the two running examples we've used, homer and shakespeare, are questioned ALL the time. and shakespeare's hardly ancient.
But no one's claiming that all romantic comedies are based on the same story..........flood myths are clearly all based on the same story. Why would this story ring true to all cultures unless it WAS true?
no, flood myths are NOT clearly all based on the same story. some are very different. but yes. all in involve a flood. wow. every culture has a creation myth too, where a god or gods creates almost everything. is that true?
they don't share specifics. for instance, not all of the flood stories involve a boat, and not all involve everything dying.
Ok, but if you assume the story is allegorical then that still doesn't diminish the inerrancy of the Bible.
i didn't say it was allegorical. i said it was making fun of a real babylonian ziggurat. it didn't really happen that way, and it wasn't all the people of the world, it was JUST the babylonians. construction was eventually completed, at a whopping 295 feet high. for reference, the great pyramid of giza dates to 2500 bc or so, and 480 some feet high. there were certainly things taller in the ancient world for god to have struck down.
ie: the bible is factually incorrect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by JasonChin, posted 10-10-2004 7:54 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 67 of 82 (148991)
10-11-2004 2:46 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by arachnophilia
10-10-2004 6:48 AM


Arachnophilia
Chapter 2 starts with "Thus the heavens and the Earth and all the host them, were finished." This makes it clear that chapter 2 is CLEARLY intended as a continuation of chapter 1.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by arachnophilia, posted 10-10-2004 6:48 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by arachnophilia, posted 10-11-2004 3:06 AM JasonChin has replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 82 (148992)
10-11-2004 2:51 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by crashfrog
10-10-2004 1:15 PM


We're getting off-topic here, so if you would, please reply in this thread.>>
Will do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by crashfrog, posted 10-10-2004 1:15 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 69 of 82 (148995)
10-11-2004 3:06 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by JasonChin
10-11-2004 2:46 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
Chapter 2 starts with "Thus the heavens and the Earth and all the host them, were finished." This makes it clear that chapter 2 is CLEARLY intended as a continuation of chapter 1.
actually, if the chapter starts "the end" it's sort of suspicious that someone got the divisions wrong. almost every story in genesis has a beginning and an end. the end is usually "such is the story of..." or "and that is why..." etc. it's a good cue that the story is now over. the stories usually start "when god..." or "when so-and-so...".
go read genesis 1 and two again, but this time, instead of breaking the stories by chapters, break it in the middle of 2:4, and end it at the second last verse of 2. does the structure make more sense now?
the verse numbering system was a christian invention from around 300 ad. the book was not written that way. in reality, the breaks in genesis are implied story breaks (such as i described above) and actually sections. (such as between 6:8,9; at the start of 12,and 18, etc.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 2:46 AM JasonChin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:20 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 70 of 82 (149001)
10-11-2004 3:20 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by arachnophilia
10-11-2004 3:06 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
the verse numbering system was a christian invention from around 300 ad. the book was not written that way. in reality, the breaks in genesis are implied story breaks (such as i described above) and actually sections. (such as between 6:8,9; at the start of 12,and 18, etc.>>
And if they were intended to be two seperate stories, wouldn't they be two different sections then?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by arachnophilia, posted 10-11-2004 3:06 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:23 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 72 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2004 3:25 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 75 by arachnophilia, posted 10-11-2004 3:33 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 71 of 82 (149002)
10-11-2004 3:23 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by JasonChin
10-11-2004 3:20 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
You can make an argument that they're two seperate stories roughly tied together, but they, in there present form, are CLEARLY intended to be read as one story. Why would an editor place a second version of the same story in? He'd either revise the first version, or remove it entirely.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:20 AM JasonChin has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2004 3:26 AM JasonChin has replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 72 of 82 (149003)
10-11-2004 3:25 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by JasonChin
10-11-2004 3:20 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
you will say anything to grasp on to your ideas that dumb down an incredible book won't you?
and would you please take this to some other thread. will no one discuss my question? jeeze. i should make a qualifier next time... no fundies allowed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:20 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3928 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 73 of 82 (149004)
10-11-2004 3:26 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by JasonChin
10-11-2004 3:23 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
not if both versions were thought to be sacred. who is this editor that you think he'd think himself worthy to change or delete sacred texts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:23 AM JasonChin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:29 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
JasonChin 
Inactive Member


Message 74 of 82 (149006)
10-11-2004 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by macaroniandcheese
10-11-2004 3:26 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
Maybe if your topic was more interesting, people would want to discuss it......

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-11-2004 3:26 AM macaroniandcheese has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by AdminAsgara, posted 10-11-2004 3:35 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 77 by arachnophilia, posted 10-11-2004 3:37 AM JasonChin has not replied
 Message 78 by Amlodhi, posted 10-11-2004 11:06 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 75 of 82 (149008)
10-11-2004 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 70 by JasonChin
10-11-2004 3:20 AM


Re: Arachnophilia
And if they were intended to be two seperate stories, wouldn't they be two different sections then?
no. not at all.
the sections are collections of similar stories based on periods of the religion, not separations between the stories. this is also an arbitrary system, possibly devised by the redactor of genesis much like the christian numbering system.
the first section is adam to noah. the second is noah, and the third, fourth, fifth abraham. the sixth is isaac, and the sevent jacob. etc. it's sort of like sticking tabs into important points in a textbook.
the two creation stories are not separated because they are two traditional stories about creation, and thusly, both go in the "creation" section.
but you have to read the text for the break down of the individual stories. my text is written in prose, with spaces between the individual stories. the chapter numbers are off to the side, and don't always coincide with the spaces. chapter three for instance actually starts the verse before.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by JasonChin, posted 10-11-2004 3:20 AM JasonChin has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024