U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-09-2011, 10:15 PM
 
Location: 30-40N 90-100W
13,856 posts, read 22,232,709 times
Reputation: 6657

Advertisements

This is interesting stuff, but it's a long video and about 4 minutes in it was kind of make more leaps that I really care for.

For one Israel is mentioned by about 1200 BC in an Egyptian monument. The Apiru are mentioned possibly earlier than that and I think there's some reason to think they might be the ancestors of the Hebrews.

I read one source that says "Yw son of El" is mentioned in Ugaritic, but other sources don't seem to know of that or make no mention of it as significant. "El" is a generalized term for "God" or "The High God" and as they speak related languages it's not surprising the words would be similar or the same.

The story of El and the Seventy sons is intriguing though. Of all the things atheists have come up with I think it's been the most disturbing for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2011, 10:34 PM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,708,938 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas R. View Post
This is interesting stuff, but it's a long video and about 4 minutes in it was kind of make more leaps that I really care for.

For one Israel is mentioned by about 1200 BC in an Egyptian monument. The Apiru are mentioned possibly earlier than that and I think there's some reason to think they might be the ancestors of the Hebrews.

I read one source that says "Yw son of El" is mentioned in Ugaritic, but other sources don't seem to know of that or make no mention of it as significant. "El" is a generalized term for "God" or "The High God" and as they speak related languages it's not surprising the words would be similar or the same.

The story of El and the Seventy sons is intriguing though. Of all the things atheists have come up with I think it's been the most disturbing for me.
It really is intriguing for real. I know Eusebius and a few others may think I may throw this out to derail people's faith and that is NOT my primary desire. I really do love religious history and I love to go back and play detective in order to reconstruct what may have happened to bring religion down to us the way it is today. Putting the puzzle together is just fascinating to me because I have ALWAYS been curious person and always (since childhood) find joy in understanding why things are the way they are.

In the Spong video, the author of that video took a different route from me in his transition. Mine actually led me to toward the information in this thread. It always annoyed me that so many elements of older pagan religions could be found in old Judaism and Christianity. I realized the answer Origen came up with (Satan created counterfeit "saviors" in advance of Jesus) was very lacking. As a result, I began to reason in my mind that before mankind started to invent their religions, there was one god with one truth but ancient man screwed it up and went their own way. God had to call the Jews to reintroduce the truth, BUT it was when I began to go back BEFORE the Hebrews/Israelites (in other words, step outside the 66 book of the Bible and its narrow view) is when I started to run into this information. Like you said, it was disturbing to confront, but liberating at the same time. It helped to basically put it ALL in perspective for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2011, 11:50 PM
 
1,194 posts, read 734,916 times
Reputation: 122
Default The Truth

Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane View Post
Not a Jew.
Shalom...actually "gentile" was a reference to anyone who was not a Roman citizen...whereas "goyim" is a reference to anyone who is not a citizen of the commonwealth of Israel and "goyim" are nations. The Blessings of The Eternal One bring you joy...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 04:46 AM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,708,938 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by littlewitness View Post
Shalom...actually "gentile" was a reference to anyone who was not a Roman citizen...whereas "goyim" is a reference to anyone who is not a citizen of the commonwealth of Israel and "goyim" are nations. The Blessings of The Eternal One bring you joy...
Thank you!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 05:26 AM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,708,938 times
Reputation: 1351
There is a yet another telling piece of information. The Dead Sea Scrolls claims that the nations were divided according to the "sons of god." For the ancient Israelite, this was not startling in the least. Deuteronomy 32:7-9 makes sense when the "sons of god" interpretation is used. Simply put, a supreme god divides up the earth into 70 nations and gives his sons one nation each to govern. Jacob is given to Yahweh.

While sensible to the most ancient of Israelites, this proved problematic to later Jews who had gone on to monotheism and I believe this is reflected in the Septuagint and the post-polytheistic world of the Jew. The Septuagint prefers to use "angels of god" as opposed to sons of god and thus remove the polytheistic implications and keep or establish a monotheistic view. Instead of god supposedly having sons and *gasp* a wife, with the stroke of a pen, he now has NO sons, but rather, some beings he created to be his agents called angels.

1,100 years later (around 900 C.E), with the Jews now firmly believing in a monotheistic world view, the Jewish Massorites who created a Jewish Bible came up with yet another interpretation which was later used by the King James Version translators. The Massoretic Text (MSS) uses "children of Israel" as the standard for the division of the nations. This creates a problem in that, Israel was NOT a nation when the nations were divided according to the book of Genesis.

To further compound the problem, pre-conceived notions, by modern Christians are applied. They believe that ever time they come the titles, "lord," "LORD," "god" or "Most High," they apply to the same god - THEIR god. This is what happens in Deuteronomy 32:8-9. They see "Most High" in verse 8 and then see "the LORD" in verse 9 and think they are one in the same. This creates a problem where god inherits or receives Jacob (Israel) from himself. Some say that the passage is actually saying that god simply reserved Israel for himself which implies the other gods were given responsibility for the other nations, but Israel was special and the supreme god reserved them for himself. This idea, of course, breeds arrogance and ethnocentrism. It appears; however, that the CORRECT interpretation is the first one. The Most High GOD divided the nations according to his 70 sons and Yahweh, one of his sons, received Israel as HIS portion to govern thus his story with Israel begins at the Exodus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 06:18 AM
 
17,853 posts, read 11,749,501 times
Reputation: 4113
Quote:
Originally Posted by trettep View Post
Most Ancient

So much for the accuracy of the video.
Look again...

Reflections on the Qeiyafa Ostracon - Epigraphy - - Rollston Epigraphy

Debunking Christianity: SURPRISE!! Khirbet Qeiyafa Inscription Already Being Used to Support the Historicity of David
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 06:55 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,425,536 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane View Post
I know this will be blasphemous to you to even consider, but what if Jesus was simply echoing a later monotheistic interpretation held by the Jews regarding Psalm 82? You see, Psalm 82 is consistent with the theology of the day - that is - El has sons and divides the nations amongst them and they are thus part of his divine court (council) . Now, when the Jews became a monotheistic people, the idea that Yahweh was standing in the council of the elohim (gods) would be considered preposterous and had to be re-interpreted. Claiming that these "gods" (elohim) were mere mortal men would make a better fit.
God has "sons" in that they are created beings. The angels are called sons of God in that they were created (not in the sense they are equal to God).
Adam is called a "son of God" (Luke 3:38). Do you think Adam should be worshipped? Do you think Adam had powers like God? Do you think Adam should be added to a pantheon? Well, you probably do but I don't. Gheesh!

The Jews were called sons of God

Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
And Jesus reiterated Psalm 82:6 when speaking to the Jews who accused Him of making Himself God in John 10:34

Was Jesus espousing polytheism by stating the above?

Jesus, in speaking of believers who later are resurrected, called them "sons of God":

Luke 20:34-37 CLV And, answering, Jesus said to them, "The sons of this
eon are marrying and are taking out in marriage." (35) Yet those deemed
worthy to happen upon that eon and the resurrection from among the
dead are neither marrying nor taking out in marriage. (36) For neither
can they still be dying, for they are equal to messengers, and are the
sons of God, being sons of the resurrection." (37) Now that the dead are
rousing, even Moses divulges at the thorn bush, as he is terming the Lord
the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob."

Also, believers are sons of God:

Mat 5:9 "Happy are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

So was Jesus spreading polytheism? Hardy har hardly.


Quote:
On a little side note, we find elements of this old theology even in the later book of Daniel when we read about the Prince of Persia, the spiritual power who was charged with ownership of that nation. In the same book, we read of Michael (a prototype of Jesus) being the one selected to guard over Israel. By this time, the "sons of god" had become the "angels of god" and this is reflected in the Greek Septuagint. This helped to take away the polytheistic implication.
The prince of persia was an angelic being just like Satan is a spirit being. Satan is over all the spiritual forces of wickedness. There are sovereignties, authorities and powers among the celestials just as there are on earth.



Quote:
Still another additional note. In the book of Judges we find the early Israelites acknowledging the validity of other gods when the delegates (under Jephthah) from Israel went to Ammon. They admitted that the Ammonite god Molech gave the Ammonites their lands while their god, Yahweh, gave them their borders. This admission would sound odd to later Jews and Christians today, but for THAT time, the admission was consistent with the theological ideas of the day.
Please provide book, chapter and verse when stating something that so and so said such and such.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 07:07 AM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,708,938 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
God has "sons" in that they are created beings. The angels are called sons of God in that they were created (not in the sense they are equal to God).
Adam is called a "son of God" (Luke 3:38). Do you think Adam should be worshipped? Do you think Adam had powers like God? Do you think Adam should be added to a pantheon? Well, you probably do but I don't. Gheesh!

The Jews were called sons of God

Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
And Jesus reiterated Psalm 82:6 when speaking to the Jews who accused Him of making Himself God in John 10:34

Was Jesus espousing polytheism by stating the above?

Jesus, in speaking of believers who later are resurrected, called them "sons of God":

Luke 20:34-37 CLV And, answering, Jesus said to them, "The sons of this
eon are marrying and are taking out in marriage." (35) Yet those deemed
worthy to happen upon that eon and the resurrection from among the
dead are neither marrying nor taking out in marriage. (36) For neither
can they still be dying, for they are equal to messengers, and are the
sons of God, being sons of the resurrection." (37) Now that the dead are
rousing, even Moses divulges at the thorn bush, as he is terming the Lord
the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob."

Also, believers are sons of God:

Mat 5:9 "Happy are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

So was Jesus spreading polytheism? Hardy har hardly.




The prince of persia was an angelic being just like Satan is a spirit being. Satan is over all the spiritual forces of wickedness. There are sovereignties, authorities and powers among the celestials just as there are on earth.





Please provide book, chapter and verse when stating something that so and so said such and such.
I'm running to work, but let me just mention a few things.

1. "sons" in the bible has DIFFERENT meanings and I think you know that.

2. The NT idea of "sons" means "by adoption." That is strictly a NT concept.

3. Jesus was a product of his time and thus repeated the concept of the time, that being, earthly humans were the sons of god

4. Look up Judges 11:14-25 (pay careful attention to verse 24)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 08:17 AM
 
17,968 posts, read 12,425,536 times
Reputation: 989
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneInDaMembrane View Post
I'm running to work, but let me just mention a few things.
Why not drive?

Quote:
1. "sons" in the bible has DIFFERENT meanings and I think you know that.
There are sons by creation such as the angels and Adam and by becoming subjectors.


Quote:
2. The NT idea of "sons" means "by adoption." That is strictly a NT concept.
Jesus wasn't a Son of God by adoption.
The Jews to whom the word went to that they were all sons of God were not so by adoption but due to being to-subjectors.

Quote:
3. Jesus was a product of his time and thus repeated the concept of the time, that being, earthly humans were the sons of god


That's laughable.


Quote:
4. Look up Judges 11:14-25 (pay careful attention to verse 24)

So the Ammonites had a false god they made up called Chemosh. Obviously a god of wood and stone or metal is no match for the true God of Israel for Jephtah destroyed those Ammonites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2011, 08:22 AM
 
Location: New York City
5,556 posts, read 6,708,938 times
Reputation: 1351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius View Post
God has "sons" in that they are created beings. The angels are called sons of God in that they were created (not in the sense they are equal to God).
See my comment AGAIN on WHY it was necessary to turn "sons of god" into "angels of god" in Jewish theology.

Quote:
Adam is called a "son of God"
Quote:
(Luke 3:38). Do you think Adam should be worshipped? Do you think Adam had powers like God? Do you think Adam should be added to a pantheon? Well, you probably do but I don't. Gheesh!
Adam is referred to as a son in relation to the fact he was CREATED. That is just ONE biblical definition of "son."

Quote:
The Jews were called sons of God
Quote:

Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.


The passsage was NOT talking about the Jews. Yawheh was standing in the council of the gods in the heavenly divine court. I don't think you would believe he was hanging out with a bunch of earthly judges and having a conversation with them about their behavior. Again, the gods sitting together in council is CONSISTENT with the mythology of the ancient world.

Quote:
And Jesus reiterated Psalm 82:6 when speaking to the Jews who accused Him of making Himself God in John 10:34
Jesus was just piping the theology of the day. The Jews had long since past the time when they believed god had sons that were born to him via a wife. At that time, such a notion would be considered blasphemous in much the same way they STILL believe today that god does not and CANNOT have a son despite what Christians say. You ignore the pagan myths about a god and their son but believe YOUR god has a son. Go figure.

Was Jesus espousing polytheism by stating the above?

Quote:
Jesus, in speaking of believers who later are resurrected, called them "sons of God":
Quote:

Luke 20:34-37 CLV And, answering, Jesus said to them, "The sons of this
eon are marrying and are taking out in marriage." (35) Yet those deemed
worthy to happen upon that eon and the resurrection from among the
dead are neither marrying nor taking out in marriage. (36) For neither
can they still be dying, for they are equal to messengers, and are the
sons of God, being sons of the resurrection." (37) Now that the dead are
rousing, even Moses divulges at the thorn bush, as he is terming the Lord
the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob."

Also, believers are sons of God:

Mat 5:9 "Happy are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.

So was Jesus spreading polytheism? Hardy har hardly.
Again these are NT concepts. The new birth provided by Jesus brought men into a father-son relationship with god.


Quote:
The prince of persia was an angelic being just like Satan is a spirit being. Satan is over all the spiritual forces of wickedness. There are sovereignties, authorities and powers among the celestials just as there are on earth.
And you think this was ALWAYS the belief? The very idea of angels and demons who rule over various nations has its start in the ancient idea of gods who were in charge of the nations. The gods of the other nations just happened to become scandalized in Jewish theology, even rejected and discarded and non-existent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top