|
Replies: 27
| visibility 456
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [98332]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65235
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Our creek behind the house is almost past its banks.
2
Dec 17, 2023, 1:09 PM
|
|
If it goes like 30 feet above the bank, then it will hit our foundation. At 40+ feet it touches the subflooring. Way I figure it, a really big ### has to fail for that to ever happen. I know 13 inches and a ### failure still doesn't even get the water to our backyard fence. So there's that. Still had 15-20 feet before it touched the house, and another 10 feet before subflooring and real flood damage happens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94420]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95606
Joined: 12/25/09
|
#1 reason:
2
Dec 17, 2023, 2:06 PM
|
|
God said it would nearly 400 yrs before He did it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1190]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 1651
Joined: 11/15/23
|
Re: #1 reason:
2
Dec 17, 2023, 2:57 PM
|
|
lol, so all the physical evidence and no evidence of a worldwide flood, but ancient man wrote it down so you believe it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Men in ancient times apparently said that God said it.
1
Dec 17, 2023, 3:06 PM
[ in reply to #1 reason: ] |
|
It is your opinion that they are correct, no matter the evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30137]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8928
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: The top 5 reasons Noah's flood probably happened ...
1
Dec 17, 2023, 3:03 PM
|
|
A helpful graphic of the Jewish understanding of the earth, and where the water came from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Could such incorrect, limited understandings influenced their beliefs
1
Dec 17, 2023, 3:10 PM
|
|
about God, the creation and history of the earth, and natural disasters that occurred?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30137]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8928
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Could such incorrect, limited understandings influenced their beliefs
1
Dec 17, 2023, 3:27 PM
|
|
I would say so. If one reads Genesis 1, that image is what is described.
And this is their understanding of the greater universe, including the 3rd of 7 Heavens that Paul describes in 2 Cor 12:2.
"I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago was caught up to the third heaven. Whether it was in the body or out of the body I do not know—God knows."
They were clearly writing about the earth and universe as they understood it in their time, just as we would write about how we understand the earth and universe in our time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Of course. The books in the Bible were written by flawed men full of
3
Dec 17, 2023, 4:01 PM
|
|
biases and beliefs based on ancient, limited, and flat out wrong understandings of the world in which they lived. Their writings reflected all of that. Then those writings were copied countless times, resulting in errors and changes, many of which were accidents, while many were intentional, but both often changed the original meanings and intentions of the flawed men who originally wrote them. Still, I believe that much of the Bible was written by truly devout, inspired men, and contains many profound, universal truths. To that extent I believe it is worthy of study and respect, and is of great value to a people who are starved for spritual guidance and inspiration when understood in the proper context.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2244]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 2641
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Of course. The books in the Bible were written by flawed men full of
4
Dec 17, 2023, 4:12 PM
|
|
I agree with this 100% and I have never given up the idea that there is a higher power and that he spoke through Jesus and other biblical figures especially where they taught love and peace.
However it’s hard to get along with the Bible thumpers like the pastor this morning that said “either you believe the Bible is gods word or not”.
It’s not that simple and it’s borderline dishonest to make statements like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14060
Joined: 7/3/01
|
A person will not likely describe something in terms beyond what he has
1
Dec 17, 2023, 3:54 PM
[ in reply to Could such incorrect, limited understandings influenced their beliefs ] |
|
seen or experienced. A BC era architect, describing the production of a building plan, would not refer to some knowns now taken for granted, but would be no less correct in what he is describing.
If a person looks at Genesis as though a modern scientist wrote it, and demands that terminology, one would say the writer is missing the boat somewhere. If one assumes it is written by someone not familiar with astrological mechanics, and describes what happened before anyone could observe it, with the purpose of describing how the relationship between God/man came to be as it is now, it is a pretty accurate accounting of what we think happened from the Big Bang onward. I'm not one who says that is proof of devine origin, but it is a process one wouldn't know to make up.
The choice is therefore which demands on Genesis one wants to impose. That is an ideological, often emotionally based, choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14060
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
1
Dec 17, 2023, 4:23 PM
|
|
I saw it.
Of course people believed things that are not true. They still do today, if we haven't noticed. Nothing has changed there, only what is specifically known or not known. I was responding to your comment that not knowing things would influence how someone views God. Maybe, maybe not. One can show an atheist that life beginning here is a near impossibility, and he will nevertheless insist on some naturalistic mechanism, simply because he believes there must be one. Conversely, a person who knew nothing of science can write a reasonably accurate account of how all this came to be.
To respond beyond that, I would have to know what you meant by what a person knows influencing how a person views God. Sure. So?
If your linked video was the thing, it was one guy, responding to one other guy's comments. Entertaining. Won't rewrite Christianity, but entertaining.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
2
Dec 17, 2023, 6:26 PM
|
|
You: Of course people believed things that are not true. They still do today, if we haven't noticed. Nothing has changed there, only what is specifically known or not known.
Yes, I noticed. That's why I said this: I am sure we are still getting things wrong for the same reason.
You: Conversely, a person who knew nothing of science can write a reasonably accurate account of how all this came to be.
Sure, I can't totally rule it out as a possibility, but we aren't shooting for absolute certainty, because it's beyond our grasp. I believe it's extremely unlikely, however, that primitive people who had so many incorrect beliefs about the realities of the world they lived in, would have any idea how the earth was created, and think it much more likely that they built up stories based on the combination of knowledge, lack of knowledge, and incorrect beliefs, to explain things. I think our vast increase in knowledge today gives us a much better idea of, if not what happened, at least what didn't. I have no reason to believe the copies and revisions we have now of such ancient writings are more reliable than science or reason.
The link I provided was just a conversation starter, and in no way was supposed to be the final word on the matter, or indisputable fact. I do have a great deal of respect for Dan McClellan, however, and enjoy watching his clips.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14060
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
1
Dec 17, 2023, 7:49 PM
|
|
Absolutely. Very fun conversation. Great way to start it. You tend to like doing so, which is what makes a board fun.
If a person wants to come to a message board simply to say, "I believe X", or "I don't believe X", fine. But having done so, that statement has been made. It gets tiresome when that is repeated over and over in various forms, doesn't it? Trolling, that is. Not you, but it is common.
If instead one wants to promote his view in a way that moves understanding forward, we have to be willing to admit that certain points, pro or con, are true, then discuss what that means. As an example, the statistical impossibility of life beginning in this universe, given science as we know it, has yet to be acknowledged by a board atheist, though it was atheist Koonin who pointed it out. But those same people say the Genesis writers were wrong about science. Okay.
Between you and me, that is why I started the thread on the source of human rights. I wanted to see if anyone would agree to a clear thing, even if doing so was uncomfortable. We all want our human rights to be inviolable. Fine, but on what basis would that be so? One of two things about human rights must be true: (1) we create the idea of human rights or (2) they exist separate from us, and we perceive what they are. If we create them, we can undo them, and they are not inviolable. If we do not create them, they come from somewhere, which means maybe God exists. Doesn't prove it, but it brings Him into the conversation. Oops, cant be having that. Not one person would agree to the premise of the Declaration of Independence; "We hold these truths ...'. One person at least insisted on saying they were inviolable simple because they were. Just because. I respect him for at least saying that. But that is how far we have come.
We will not agree to the premise that formed the US, because it says God exists, but we insist on claiming the resulting values exist, because we do want the benefits of those values. Gimme what I want, but don't make me agree to the implications.
Does that not seem to you to be a failure of rationality? It reflects almost every conversation on this board. How does that relate to your clip? The clip is two people having a debate, while only one can talk. That is not a compelling support for a point of view. It does say, "There are different ways of looking at things". Sure. Granted. Having made that point, now what?
BTW, how do you get italics to show in the text? Can't figure it out. Fordt had to show me the ![]() trick for photos. And it's been so long since I've use it, I've probably forgotten it.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
2
Dec 17, 2023, 8:05 PM
|
|
See attached for italics. Just above the "Message" box, you will see 3 small "boxes". One contains a "B", one an "I", and one an underlined "U". Click the "I" and the italics brackets will appear in the message box. Just type what you want in italics between the brackets.
I will respond to the rest later - thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14060
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
2
Dec 17, 2023, 8:08 PM
|
|
Got it. Is used as one types, not as an edit. Kept trying to use it as an edit. Thanks.
I shortened my post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [58921]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 46570
Joined: 4/23/00
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
2
Dec 17, 2023, 8:47 PM
[ in reply to Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions. ] |
|
All very fair and fun.
While I know you are not saying I am (thank you), I promise I am not trolling. I really enjoy these topics. I'm looking for that insight from one of yall, that makes me go "ahhhhh! I never thought of it that way!".
To be clear, I am not an atheist, and I don't argue from that perspective, nor do I hand wave or dismiss any reasonable argument. And I do believe our rights are endowed by our creator, as part of our natural existence. For me, the important thing is that we all understand and agree that regardless of where one believes they come from, those rights are the very foundation of our country, our society, and everything we are as Americans, and as such, they are not negotiable or revocable. That's the important part, and even though all sorts of arguments can be made, that is what must be accepted and vauled by all. I do not believe that is dependent upon belief in God. They will never BE inviolable (I feel smarter using that word!) no matter what we believe. If we say they come from God, then people who don't believe in God won't feel bound by them or consider them inviolable anyway. If enough people want to ignore or disregard them, they just will.
We will not agree to the premise that formed the US, because it says God exists, but we insist on claiming the resulting values exist, because we do want the benefits of those values. Gimme what I want, but don't make me agree to the implications.
Does that not seem to you to be a failure of rationality?
No, it doesn't, not to me. We do not in any way, shape, or form, have to believe in the premise that God exists, in order to believe that we have certain rights, and that those rights are the very foundation of our country, and respecting, upholding and defending them is essential to our existence as a country. Embracing that, regardless of what one believes about God is absolutely possible, and what matters.
The clip I shared is food for thought. Again, it's not supposed to be comprhensive or a fully balanced
piece showing all sides and opinions equally. It's just one guy who is very knowledgeable sharing hIS opinions. Nothing more.
Again, thanks for disagreeing in a civil, yet challenging and thought provoking way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14060
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Re: Their limited knowledge resulted in factually incorrect beliefs and assumptions.
1
Dec 17, 2023, 9:46 PM
|
|
Sure. 80% of my post was discussion with you, not about you, about what seems to happen on the board.
I agree that the guy being argued against in the clip doesn't do Christianity any favors. All his points are rebuttable, which the poster did. Had the guy been there, he might have had rebuttals to the rebuttal, but presented as "this solves that question", his points are not winsome. The post itself doesn't say whether the flood happened or not, or in what possible fashion, only that the other guy's points, as presented, do not prove it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2244]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 2641
Joined: 6/4/22
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 14060
Joined: 7/3/01
|
Whooosh.***
2
Dec 17, 2023, 5:49 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94420]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95606
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I don't believe the ancient Hebrews believed that.
2
Dec 17, 2023, 5:54 PM
[ in reply to Re: The top 5 reasons Noah's flood probably happened ... ] |
|
I believe modern Hebrews believe their ancestors believed that.
The logic that Hebrews of today knew how their ancestors lived and what they believed is confounded by the fact that they couldn't keep track of the most important part of their ancestry.
Modern Hebrews do not know which tribe they belong to. My reasoning is fairly sound since knowledge of their ancestry seems to have dwindled through the Diaspora and is even more vague today. I think some folks claim to be of a particular tribe.
Keep in mind that only the sons of Aaron could conduct sacrifices and attend the temple. Only the sons of David could sit on the throne. I mean, if there's two tribes you're going to find a way to keep up with it's those two. Nope, the entire concept of them actually knowing much about their ancestors is simply not logical to me.
Even today, even in America and among the most sophisticated minds here use the terms for east winds, N wind...4 corners of the world...and other terms relative to our position(s) might be the same proof for us believing the world is flat as we do the Ancient Hebrews believing it.
Sun's coming up (LOL, right) Sun's going down, sunrise, sunset... If they'd have said the sun is making another rotation we'd think they were nuts. How do you scientifically say sunrise? Even the freaking weather bureau uses that term.
Message was edited by: ClemsonTiger1988®
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30137]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8928
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: I don't believe the ancient Hebrews believed that.
Dec 20, 2023, 3:25 AM
|
|
88, Just talking to you makes me smarter.  ">">">
ClemsonTiger1988®
>Modern Hebrews do not know which tribe they belong to.
That is something I've never considered, and why I like this board so much. We know the 10 tribes are long gone. Killed or assimilated into the Assyrian Empire of nations back in 722ish BCE.
That only left the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin around Jerusalem, who were hauled off by Babylon in 586 BCE. They, or some inter-married version got to go back home 50 years later, thanks to Cyrus the Persian.
So I assume at that point the returning exiles, and the stragglers the Babylonians didn't want who were left behind in Judah, still considered themselves from the tribe of Judah. But I don't know.
And when the Romans wiped those folks out, far more inter-marrying had to go on in the intervening 2000 years.
So do the Jews still consider themselves from the tribe of Judah? Do Jews living in Iraq, or Iran, or wherever the Assyrians sent them still consider themselves ancestors of the 10 tribes?
I have no idea, but now I have to find out ">">">
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94420]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95606
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Woah now.
1
Dec 20, 2023, 8:55 AM
|
|
If I had a deep thought it would give me a headache. I never get headaches so do the math.
My view of Israel is from, guess what, the Bible. This topic deserves a thread starter, Fordtunate Son
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30137]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8928
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: I don't believe the ancient Hebrews believed that.
Dec 20, 2023, 3:39 AM
[ in reply to I don't believe the ancient Hebrews believed that. ] |
|
>I believe modern Hebrews believe their ancestors believed that.
That is an important distinction. I haven't really touched on creation stories or cosmology a whole lot, but after the holidays I might drop some posts on how various ancient civilizations viewed how we got here, and where we fit in the bigger picture of the universe. Some are pretty good.
Early man figured out pretty quickly, and from simple observation, that to the earth we return, and since we go back there we must have come from there too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30137]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8928
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: The top 5 reasons Noah's flood probably happened ...
2
Dec 17, 2023, 3:18 PM
|
|
I find it interesting that several flood stories come from Mesopotamia, which literally means "between the rivers, the Tigris and Euphrates. That area is still prone to rapid and catastrophic flooding to this day.
But no flood stories come from Egypt and the Nile, which is famously stable with very predictable overflow cycles that lends itself to farming, irrigation, and civilization.
And no flood stories have been found in the Canaanite tradition, which would include the Judean desert and modern Israel itself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5007]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5291
Joined: 6/2/03
|
Re: The top 5 reasons Noah's flood probably happened ...
1
Dec 17, 2023, 9:27 PM
|
|
The Canaanites didn't leave any written records of their history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30137]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8928
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: The top 5 reasons Noah's flood probably happened ...
1
Dec 20, 2023, 3:10 AM
|
|
Thanks for joining the conversation, OCG.
orangecoloredglasses®
Canaanite is a term worth defining, because the definition does affect how the archaeological evidence that has been found in the region is viewed. The Ras Shamra Texts are usually considered to be, if not Canaanite themselves, precursors to the Canaanite Religion. Most of the tablets come from about 1200 BCE, which is significant because that means they were probably written within a few hundred years of Moses and the Exodus, and possibly before even Joshua arrived in the area.
The Bible tends to focus on the Promised Land as the land of the Canaanites, but both those boundaries are variable. The Promised Land extends all the way to the Euphrates in Iraq in Exodus 23:31
“I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the desert to the Euphrates River.
Now, that didn't happen, and Joshua only conquered the area more or less around Jerusalem, but God's promise was a lot bigger. Similarly, the land of Canaan had a much bigger historical area, as this map from 1815 shows.
I mention all that because quite a few texts have been found of "Canaanite" origin, again, depending on where and who one considers Canaan to be. Just southwest of Antioch are the ruins of Ras Shamra, where about 1500 tablets were discovered, many describing the religion of the Canaanites to the south.
Ras Shamra is where Laodicea is on this map.
So yes, Ras Shamra (Ugarit) is perhaps right beyond the border perhaps, depending on how one marks Canaan, but there is a good deal of information regarding Canaan, including the Baal Cycle, which includes a detailed description of their pantheon. And we don't even have to go to Europe to look at the tablets. They're housed right up in Los Angeles at the Claremont School of Religion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugaritic_texts
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 27
| visibility 456
|
|
|
50
