|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 2794 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Abel and His Flock | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
doctrbill writes:
quote: And you find evidence of this in the Bible where, precisely? Chapter and verse, please.
quote: Only in the most naive sense. Instead, Genesis 4 talks about the lord. Are you seriously trying to say that god and the lord aren't the same entity? Are you seriously saying that "elohim" and "adonai" aren't references to the same entity?
quote: Why? Shouldn't Cain and Abel, adults in their own right, be atoning for their own sins? There is no indication that either Cain or Abel were still living at home. So what makes Adam "head of the family"?
quote: And this has relevance how? There was something wrong with Cain's sacrifice to the extent that god didn't like it. Perhaps, as the John Huston movie hinted, Cain kept something back. Perhaps, as some theologians think, the importance of blood sacrifice was an understood concept and since Cain's offering was not of blood, it was insufficient. The truth is, we don't know and the Bible doesn't say.
quote: And the Bible says this where, precisely? Chapter and verse, please. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Abshalom writes:
quote: Hmmm...someone who accepts his punishment and through his hard work and effort manages to bring forth something beautiful, nourishing, and sustaining from the most base of starting materials. Yeah...why would anybody ever think that's a good thing? I mean, you take a lump of coal and spend a great deal of energy heating it and compressing it until it turns into a diamond...what a disgusting and horrible thing! Are you saying god doesn't appreciate those who take seriously the adage, "When life hands you lemons, make lemonade"?
quote: It says the lamb brought was a firstling, which generally means the best of its kind, and makes a point to say that it was the fattest. The Hebrew word is "umechelvehen" which primarily means "fat" but has overtones of "best part."
quote: Indeed. And that's all we know: Abel's sacrifice was accepted while Cain's was not.
quote: Actually, it does. What was the point of raising sheep if not to eat them? What do you think they did with the sacrifice when they were done? There's a reason you eat of the lamb shank during Pesach.
quote: And just throwing the rest away? What waste! ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
doctrbill responds to me:
quote:quote: Then you're making stuff up. Why should we take the stuff you made up out of thin air over the direct statements of the Bible?
quote:quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? By the way...as Amlodhi said, it uses the tetragrammaton. Are you seriously saying that the true name of god is not a reference to god?
quote: But your impressions are your impressions and not the Bible's. Why should we take your word over the Bible's?
quote: I'm not the one making the claim. You are. Therefore, it is your responsibility to justify it. "My impression" isn't justification...it's wishful thinking.
quote: Because when the issue is, "What does it say," there isn't much room for opinion. There's a little more room in, "What does it mean," but even there, not all opinions are valid.
quote: I thought I did just that. That's why I contradicted you and quoted from the Bible, after all. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
ConsequentAtheist responds to me:
quote:quote: There's a difference between recognizing the evolution of the Hebrew concept of god, its absorption of other cultures and their mythologies, etc. and the final product. So yes, Genesis 1 was written by P and Genesis 4 was written by J, but the claim being made is that the being that Cain and Abel offer their sacrifices wasn't god...simply because two different titles for god were used. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
Abshalom responds to me:
quote: Irrelevant. You asked why god would consider Cain's sacrifice a good thing. I gave you a justification. And you haven't shown how becoming a successful horticulturist contradicts holding god above all other gods, treating others with the respect you expect for yourself, or obedience to the Law. After all, "And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food," so it would seem that god does have some sort of connection to plants. In fact, man was created to till the ground, "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground." So wouldn't becoming a farmer be right up there with god's plan for humanity?
quote: No, no, and yes. The first two do not lead to the final one. There is no justification to the claim that Cain's sacrifice was refused because it was of "cursed origins." Oh, we know that god didn't like Cain's sacrifice, but we have no idea why.
quote: Yes, it is. The specific word used is rooted in "cheleb" which has overtones of the choicest, best parts. It's used 92 times in the Bible. Take this one: Psalms 81:16: He should have fed them also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee. The word translated as "finest" is "mekhelev," from "cheleb," meaning "fat" or "best part."
quote: You're being naive. The word used is directly translated to be firstborn, right of the firstborn, etc., but what do you think that means? What implications are set by it? Why do you think Jacob stole Esau's birthright?
quote: But it doesn't say the lamb was without defect. It says it was the firstling. That makes it better. It has the right of the firstborn. It's what Jacob steals from Esau.
quote: Perfectly. I'm certain god knows why Cain's sacrifice was rejected, but god doesn't deign to let us know what the reason was. Are you god? Were you there? Is there some verse in the Bible that says what the reason was? How does god's knowledge of why Cain's sacrifice was rejected mean that we know what that reason was?
quote: Not at all! Cain's countenance has fallen because his sacrifice got rejected, but we don't know why. Cain might know why, but the narrative doesn't tell us. And Cain's reaction is understandable...he did his best and got shot down. That's a bit depressing. God tries to buck him up, but he does exactly what god warns against: Wallows in self-pity and leads himself down the path of sin.
quote: Then we agree on the claim that humans didn't start eating meat until after the flood is not justified. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
doctrbill writes:
quote: You mean it couldn't be that the text was cobbled together from multiple sources and the one that claimed god had never mentioned his name as Yahweh was from a different tradition from the one that seemed to think god had revealed that name? Indeed, there has been some editing of the text, but what evidence is there that the problem lies in the editor and not the source? ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rrhain Member Posts: 6351 From: San Diego, CA, USA Joined: |
doctrbill responds to me:
quote:quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? The question is whether or not Cain was dealing with god. Your argument seems to be that Cain wasn't really since the words used in Genesis 4 to refer to the being that Cain was dealing with don't match up to the words used in other parts of the Bible...that somehow "elohim" and "adonai" and "YHWH" don't refer to the same entity. And you seriously think that the reason for those differences has no effect upon the question of whether or not Cain was dealing with god?
quote: (*blink!*) You did not just say that, did you? While I certainly agree that someone who makes a statement that is actually a lie and someone who misquotes someone and makes a statement that is actually a lie doesn't affect the result that the statement made is a lie. But the process by which we came about that lie is of tremendous importance. If the problem is that the quoter is simply making stuff up, then we have the option to cast about for evidence of what was actually say. But if the original source is lying, then we don't have any other recourse.
quote: Then one would need to be extremely careful basing anything upon it. ------------------Rrhain WWJD? JWRTFM!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024