Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

The causation of Christianity born from Ancient Near Eastern religious ideologies.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

    Yes, in those terms. Which is not the same as what we were discussing - you basing a conclusion on your own speculation and pronouncing it as if it were fact about Christianity as a whole.
    That is what I was getting at "in those terms". To some degree Christians as a whole will agree on something Biblical. Extra Biblical writings do show engagement between the Israelite's deity Yahweh and the Ugaritic deity Yahweh.




    Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
    This has been gone over 'ad nauseum' (a little throw back to one of your own comments ) yet here it sits, all alone, not connected to anything before or after it.....
    See above, but to caveat the Israelite don't actually exist, they are from Mesopotamia (Canaan specifically) this is why the "Israelite's" are largely polytheistic and eventually adopt monotheism, once they are out of Babylonian captivity.



    Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
    It’s your statement based on your understanding from your research and from your belief system – your conclusion is understandable from that perspective.

    Originally posted by Bonlee View PostBeing a polytheist, who worships the gods of Sumer, and with the sources you have chosen and with your limited Holy Spirit led understanding of the Bible, what other conclusion would you expect to arrive at?
    Why would you even conclude "its your statement based on your understanding from research"? It is only subsequent that I am a polytheist who worships the Gods from Sumer. The research part of it comes from scholarly critiques of the three Abrahamic faiths, as well other faiths. As I have stated before I am polytheistic and specifically adhere to the faith of Sumer. It isn't really even a secret that Sumer predates even Biblical writings. I have had this discussion before with another Christian who totally agree'd but he happened to see Yahweh as most favorable. Of course he decidedly disagreeing that Baal was Yahweh, but instead agrees the two had a lot in common respective of their cultural adaptations. However, the cult of Yahweh was widespread.

    I wouldn't say I have a limited knowledge of the Bible, I surely do critiqute the Bible, but that doesn't indicate limited knowledge. In fact it would be the opposite as research surrounding Mid Eastern belief systems usually end up in archaeological discoveries, such as in the Canaanite Vulcan that Yahweh originated among semi-nomadic copper smelters between the Bronze and Iron Age.









    QUOTE=Bonlee;n5831731]
    I was following you quite fine - up until this last part below - do you think you could 'reword' it - I simply don't see what it is you're attempting to say. Thanks.

    Aaron engages in purity rites, as earlier do the Mesopotamian's, Aaron is commanded by God to engage in purity rites, the Mesopotamian's are commanded by their city-state God to do the same thing. There isn't much change from earlier Mesopotamia to later Aaron's purity rites, which did involve the removal of sin from sacrificing children (this includes pregnant women) to Moloch or explicit activities in the synagogue.





    [/QUOTE]

    Here I will us an analogy, Sally wants to buy a car and the year is 2013 so Sally goes to the Ford dealer and buys a Ford. John wants to buy a car and the year is 2014 so John goes to the Toyota dealer and buys a Toyota. The only differences in the scenario is when the two went and purchased cars is the year. Either way both went through the same processes however identical. The operation is the same, they are greeted, shown cars, test drive cars (if they wish), sign paperwork, pay money and eventually get a car.

    There really isn't a difference and the same thing happens with Mesopotamia as well with Aaron, the same rites occur. The only difference is that Yahweh (a translation for the name God) apparently commanded Aaron and this is fine, in Sumer it would have been Enki (a translation for the name God). The problem with both is that "God" is a nominal term, and can be applied to any "God".

    Also, per my earlier posting, Yahweh is seen as Baal.



    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Shamash View Post
      Why would you even conclude "its your statement based on your understanding from research"?
      So you haven’t done any research? You just suddenly,out of nowhere decided that “Yahweh becomes popularized in Israelite mythology.” as you stated in Post #13.
      Shamash: It's just Yahweh becomes popularized in Israelite mythology.


      It is only subsequent that I am a polytheist who worships the Gods from Sumer. The research part of it comes from scholarly critiques of the three Abrahamic faiths, as well other faiths.
      So you have done research from scholarly critiques.

      As I have stated before I am polytheistic and specifically adhere to the faith of Sumer.
      Yes….I covered that in my response.

      It isn't really even a secret that Sumer predates even Biblical writings
      Uh-huh…….then why mention it out of nowhere.....no point....irrelevant....

      I have had this discussion before with another Christian who totally agree'd but he happened to see Yahweh as most favorable. Of course he decidedly disagreeing that Baal was Yahweh, but instead agrees the two had a lot in common respective of their cultural adaptations. However, the cult of Yahweh was widespread.
      Uh-huh….and that was his perspective, which of course was different than yours on the key point that Yahweh not being Baal.

      I wouldn't say I have a limited knowledge of the Bible, I surely do critiqute the Bible, but that doesn't indicate limited knowledge.
      I said you have limited Holy Spirit understanding of the Bible, in actual fact, I worded that incorrectly, as a Polytheist, you are limited by having NO Holy Spirit understanding of the Bible, so your 'critiquing' is kind of also irrelevant.

      In fact it would be the opposite as research surrounding Mid Eastern belief systems usually end up in archaeological discoveries, such as in the Canaanite Vulcan that Yahweh originated among semi-nomadic copper smelters between the Bronze and Iron Age.
      Doesn't apply to the Bible knowledge you were referring too or to my correction of your misunderstanding.








      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

        So you haven’t done any research? You just suddenly,out of nowhere decided that “Yahweh becomes popularized in Israelite mythology.” as you stated in Post #13.
        Shamash: It's just Yahweh becomes popularized in Israelite mythology.




        So you have done research from scholarly critiques.


        Yes….I covered that in my response.


        Uh-huh…….then why mention it out of nowhere.....no point....irrelevant....



        Uh-huh….and that was his perspective, which of course was different than yours on the key point that Yahweh not being Baal.



        I said you have limited Holy Spirit understanding of the Bible, in actual fact, I worded that incorrectly, as a Polytheist, you are limited by having NO Holy Spirit understanding of the Bible, so your 'critiquing' is kind of also irrelevant.



        Doesn't apply to the Bible knowledge you were referring too or to my correction of your misunderstanding.








        I conclude that my understanding based on research is what I understand based on research, separately I am a polytheist.

        I didn't decide that Yahweh become popular, the Bible is a popular book, unless it's not. Yahweh goes along with Biblical mythologies, so why would Yahweh not be popularized?

        It is relevant that Sumer predates Biblical writings, otherwise we can assume all etymologies begin with the Israelite's. Ignoring Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian to fit a model of the Bible, essentially erases history. Etymology is important, because the Sumerian's spoke a pre Semitic, non Semitic aggulagnative tongue.

        His perspective was that he agreed that Yahweh comes out of Canaan, with exception that Yahweh proved himself with the Israelite's. The guy is a doctor from North Africa, and Christian. He did propose Ur-Monotheismus, that Monotheism actually began in Sumer, while it is a stimulating concept it holds little weight. The Sumerian's who lived in Mesopotamia all had city-states and for each city-state they worshiped a God. The idea is that because each city-state worships a singular God they must have been seeking out monotheism. This fails on the notion that in each household a shrine would have been dedicated to a different God than the city-state God. Oddly enough he attributed Yahweh to El and yes in some inscriptions Yahweh was seen as El, in other's Yahweh comes out the Canaanite Vulcan. Hard to really say where Yahweh actually originates from, especially with the inference of El. I'm not opposed to Christianity, but historically Yahweh and Baal in both cultures were essentially the same. Now whether Christians want to see those two differently is up to the Christian, but the reason for this is due to help from Yahwehist who penned the Pentateuch.

        I would kindly disagree with you on the "holy spirit" understanding, I mean events are events, they do not change based on what we "feel spiritually". A flood is a flood, but the earlier writing is Ziusudra who is saved from the flood by Enki, while the Biblical Noah is saved from the flood by the Hebrew God. I call both epics as part of their cultural and religious important to both belief systems. The only difference is that the Biblical epics adopted into their writings the events from Sumer. But, someone who is of the Babylonian faith would also get irritated by this, because the Babylonian's with Utnapishtim believe that their epic is the original version, when it is not. How we can tell the writing from Sumer first happens is that it's on Cuneiform (clay tablet) and not on paper, papel, or parchment which is a much later writing technique. Biblical writings are all on some kind of parchment, and tablet writing predates that.




        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Shamash View Post

          Here I will us an analogy, Sally wants to buy a car and the year is 2013 so Sally goes to the Ford dealer and buys a Ford. John wants to buy a car and the year is 2014 so John goes to the Toyota dealer and buys a Toyota. The only differences in the scenario is when the two went and purchased cars is the year. Either way both went through the same processes however identical. The operation is the same, they are greeted, shown cars, test drive cars (if they wish), sign paperwork, pay money and eventually get a car.
          Sally’s car has faulty airbags, a slow leak in the radiator and the batter is almost dead. Sally bought a lemon.
          John’s car is solid as a rock. John bought the real thing.

          There really isn't a difference and the same thing happens with Mesopotamia as well with Aaron, the same rites occur.
          Are you serious….where’s your research…..their 'rites' were very different.

          Lev.20:

          1The Lord said to Moses, 2“Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him.3I myself will set my face against him and will cut him off from his people; for by sacrificing his children to Molek, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. 4If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death, 5I myself will set my face against him and his family and will cut them off from their people together with all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molek.



          The only difference is that Yahweh (a translation for the name God) apparently commanded Aaron and this is fine, in Sumer it would have been Enki (a translation for the name God). The problem with both is that "God" is a nominal term, and can be applied to any "God".
          The problem for you is that you consider the word “God” as being a ‘nominal term’ and that is wherein your difficulty lies, which is understandable considering you have a lot of ‘gods’ that you have to spread it around on. It’s not a problem for me, as I have the One true God and I just use a capital “G” to distinguish Him with honour from all the other ‘gods’, with a small ‘g’. Just as Aaron could distinguish between his God (YHVH)and all the other ‘gods’.(Enki,Sleepy,Doc,Sneezy,Dopey...whatever).


          Also, per my earlier posting, Yahweh is seen as Baal.

          As per my earlier posting, that is not true.

          Hosea 2

          NASB
          10 “And then I will uncover her lewdness
          In the sight of her lovers,
          And no one will rescue her out of My hand.
          11 “I will also put an end to all her gaiety,
          Her feasts, her new moons, her sabbaths
          And all her festal assemblies.
          12 “I will destroy her vines and fig trees,
          Of which she said, ‘These are my wages
          Which my lovers have given me.’
          And I will make them a forest,
          And the beasts of the field will devour them.
          13 “I will punish her for the days of the Baals
          When she used to offer sacrifices to them
          And adorn herself with her earrings and jewelry,
          And follow her lovers, so that she forgot Me,” declares the Lord.
          14 “Therefore, behold, I will allure her,
          Bring her into the wilderness
          And speak kindly to her.
          15 “Then I will give her her vineyards from there,
          And the valley of Achor as a door of hope.
          And she will sing there as in the days of her youth,
          As in the day when she came up from the land of Egypt.
          16 “It will come about in that day,” declares the Lord,
          “That you will call Me [Ishi
          And will no longer call Me Baali.
          17 “For I will remove the names of the Baals from her mouth,
          So that they will be mentioned by their names no more.











          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Shamash View Post


            I conclude that my understanding based on research is what I understand based on research, separately I am a polytheist.
            I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood you - I took the 'secular' out of the equation and replaced it with 'spiritual' from your response below, as you seemed to go into detail about your chosen spirituality.

            Post #7
            Originally posted by Bonlee
            View Post

            As an academic and from your secular perspective, I understand how you would arrive at this conclusion. That is why I suggested another way of studying it, a way that would open your horizons and clear up all those “ifs” and uncertainties that you attempt to fill in with your own limited, secular understanding.


            Shamash: I approach it as an Academic, correct. I guess by secular you mean in a non spiritual way, incorrect.

            I am a polytheist and I worship the Gods of Sumer who were adopted into Biblical myths, Canaanite myths, Babylonian myths, and so on.



            It is relevant that Sumer predates Biblical writings, otherwise we can assume all etymologies begin with the Israelite's. Ignoring Sumerian, Akkadian, Babylonian to fit a model of the Bible, essentially erases history. Etymology is important, because the Sumerian's spoke a pre Semitic, non Semitic aggulagnative tongue.
            What on earth are you babbling on about...the study of 'words' is totally irrelevant to what we are discussing.

            I'm not opposed to Christianity, but historically Yahweh and Baal in both cultures were essentially the same.
            Nothing new here - it's already been discussed.


            I would kindly disagree with you on the "holy spirit" understanding, I mean events are events, they do not change based on what we "feel spiritually".
            Unless you’ve renounced your Polytheist ways and have acknowledged Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour then you can “kindly disagree” all you want with what I posted, but until then it stands true. And for the record, His working, is not based on "what we feel spiritually".

            Shamash: I wouldn't say I have a limited knowledge of the Bible, I surely do critiqute the Bible, but that doesn't indicate limited knowledge.

            Bonlee: I said you have limited Holy Spirit understanding of the Bible, in actual fact, I worded that incorrectly, as a Polytheist, you are limited by having NO Holy Spirit understanding of the Bible, so your 'critiquing' is kind of also irrelevant.


            You have already displayed ignorance about the Bible and not being able to understand it - Hosea verses - and not realizing that the sacrificial rituals that Aaron performed were not the same as what the Mesopotamian rituals were, either that or your 'researching' skills are used to only serve your own agenda.


            A flood is a flood, but the earlier writing is Ziusudra who is saved from the flood by Enki, while the Biblical Noah is saved from the flood by the Hebrew God. I call both epics as part of their cultural and religious important to both belief systems. The only difference is that the Biblical epics adopted into their writings the events from Sumer. But, someone who is of the Babylonian faith would also get irritated by this, because the Babylonian's with Utnapishtim believe that their epic is the original version, when it is not. How we can tell the writing from Sumer first happens is that it's on Cuneiform (clay tablet) and not on paper, papel, or parchment which is a much later writing technique. Biblical writings are all on some kind of parchment, and tablet writing predates that.




            You are quite right, a flood is a flood, and that was THE flood of all times, so much so that civilizations from all over the world have stories about it.

            From what you've posted, all it proves is that a Sumerian story about a great flood, (their version being fitted to their own culture and religious ideas) was written down on clay tablets before it was recorded on paper or parchment or fig leaves, whatever - by the Hebrews. Your theory, does not account for the fact of the favoured use of oral traditions that the Hebrews would have passed on generation after generation after generation, prior to them actually writing it down. That God could preserve His truth about Noah and have it recorded when He chose to have it done and by His chosen people when they were ready and had acknowledged Him as the One true God, only shows that the Sumerian stories and all the other flood stories from all over the world are simply that – re-told stories, but with their own various gods and embellishments added, to satisfy their belief systems.




            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

              I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood you - I took the 'secular' out of the equation and replaced it with 'spiritual' from your response below, as you seemed to go into detail about your chosen spirituality.
              I don't actually care about your misunderstanding, this is just sideline garbage.


              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
              What on earth are you babbling on about...the study of 'words' is totally irrelevant to what we are discussing.
              Actually etymologies are another way of dating languages, which help date civilizations. It's a great tool and is very relevant.

              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
              Nothing new here - it's already been discussed.
              Allow me to rephrase, Yahweh is Baal, that is what the Christian's worship.

              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
              Unless you’ve renounced your Polytheist ways and have acknowledged Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour then you can “kindly disagree” all you want with what I posted, but until then it stands true.
              The first humans on earth began as Polytheistic, accepting Jesus is getting away from that concept.

              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
              And for the record, His working, is not based on "what we feel spiritually".
              This is not relevant because I was discussing events that happened in the Bible and events happening surrounding the Bible that had influence on the Bible do not change.


              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
              You have already displayed ignorance about the Bible and not being able to understand it - Hosea verses - and not realizing that the sacrificial rituals that Aaron performed were not the same as what the Mesopotamian rituals were, either that or your 'researching' skills are used to only serve your own agenda.
              Hosea 2:16 is clear, Yahweh says to no longer call him Baal, but now Husband. Aaron smeared blood on the altar, just like in Mesopotamia. A goat was sent to the wilderness, just like in Mesopotamia. An evil spirit received the goat in the wilderness, just like in Mesopotamia. The people would cleanse with expiation rites evils such as sacrifice of children, just like in Mesopotamia. It's all the same, the only difference is the claim is that Yahweh commanded Aaron to do the rites. Yahweh is associated with Baal, no thank you, those are evil Gods.

              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
              You are quite right, a flood is a flood, and that was THE flood of all times, so much so that civilizations from all over the world have stories about it.

              From what you've posted, all it proves is that a Sumerian story about a great flood, (their version being fitted to their own culture and religious ideas) was written down on clay tablets before it was recorded on paper or parchment or fig leaves, whatever - by the Hebrews. Your theory, does not account for the fact of the favored use of oral traditions that the Hebrews would have passed on generation after generation after generation, prior to them actually writing it down. That God could preserve His truth about Noah and have it recorded when He chose to have it done and by His chosen people when they were ready and had acknowledged Him as the One true God, only shows that the Sumerian stories and all the other flood stories from all over the world are simply that – re-told stories, but with their own various gods and embellishments added, to satisfy their belief systems.
              Who said I was ignoring oral tradition? This is why timelines and etymologies exist. The Canaanite's would have the flood story and in oral tradition would have told the Israelite's, and later Yahwehist put that epic in the Bible.

              Also, the very fact that the Bible for example describes the Ark as Tevah, when the word Tevah doesn't mean Ark at all. Why would such a perfect book fail at naming something properly?


              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Shamash View Post
                I don't actually care about your misunderstanding, this is just sideline garbage.
                Now, now....what “sideline garbage” is to some, is ‘keeping the record straight’ to others.
                Besides, the majority of the actual content of your posts could be considered to be “sideline garbage” by some, but you don’t see me getting all huffy about it do you?

                Allow me to rephrase, Yahweh is Baal, that is what the Christian's worship.
                Again, already addressed in regards to your lack of 'Bible' knowledge abilities and your 'Broad brush stroking' penchant.

                The first humans on earth began as Polytheistic, accepting Jesus is getting away from that concept.
                More evidence of your Biblical knowledge skills being put to use.


                Hosea 2:16 is clear, Yahweh says to no longer call him Baal, but now Husband. Aaron smeared blood on the altar, just like in Mesopotamia. A goat was sent to the wilderness, just like in Mesopotamia. An evil spirit received the goat in the wilderness, just like in Mesopotamia. The people would cleanse with expiation rites evils such as sacrifice of children, just like in Mesopotamia. It's all the same, the only difference is the claim is that Yahweh commanded Aaron to do the rites.
                Already addressed, many times, but I’ll expand on your own analogy from a previous post of yoursto see if that helps:

                Sally wants to buy a car and the year is 2013 so Sally goes to the Ford dealer and buys a Ford. John wants to buy a car and the year is 2014 so John goes to the Toyota dealer and buys a Toyota. The only differences in the scenario is when the two went and purchased cars is the year. Either way both went through the same processes however identical. The operation is the same, they are greeted, shown cars, test drive cars (if they wish), sign paperwork, pay money and eventually get a car.

                Sally’s car (a god) has faulty airbags, a slow leak in the radiator and a battery that is about to die. Sally got a lemon. (a Mesopotamian god lemon)

                John’s car is rock solid. He got the real car.(the YHWH/I Am/Yahweh /El Shaddai/God)


                Shamash: There really isn't a difference and the same thing happens with Mesopotamia as well with Aaron, the same rites occur. The only difference is that Yahweh (a translation for the name God) apparently commanded Aaron and this is fine, in Sumer it would have been Enki (a translation for the name God). The problem with both is that "God" is a nominal term, and can be applied to any "God".

                Me: It’s only a problem for you as you are unable to distinguish the real from the lemons. Lots of people are able to make the distinction (nominally) between the real God and the other gods, see, I just did it and it is done throughout the Bible that way also.

                Who said I was ignoring oral tradition? This is why timelines and etymologies exist. The Canaanite's would have the flood story and in oral tradition would have told the Israelite's, and later Yahwehist put that epic in the Bible.
                Well I am so glad that you’ve finally seen reason from my post on the authenticity of the Bibles story about Noah’s flood and how it was passed on orally by his descendants, with its truth preserved by God until they wrote it down.

                Also, the very fact that the Bible for example describes the Ark as Tevah, when the word Tevah doesn't mean Ark at all. Why would such a perfect book fail at naming something properly?
                I thought you studied etymology!?
                I don’t, obviously, and had to do a quick check on the internet, as my Bible uses 'ark' and I've never heard the word 'Tevah'. I suggest you try it, as it showed that the Orthodox Jewish Bible uses Ark and side references ‘Tevah’ in brackets, and Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon for the different Christian Bible translations references 'Tevah' also for 'ark'.





                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

                  Now, now....what “sideline garbage” is to some, is ‘keeping the record straight’ to others.
                  Besides, the majority of the actual content of your posts could be considered to be “sideline garbage” by some, but you don’t see me getting all huffy about it do you?

                  I don't know what you mean by "huffy about it", but your issue is not my issue, so what you misunderstood is not my problem and therefore sideline garbage.

                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

                  Again, already addressed in regards to your lack of 'Bible' knowledge abilities and your 'Broad brush stroking' penchant.
                  I'm pretty sure that my postings concerning Baal and Yahweh are pretty clear.


                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                  More evidence of your Biblical knowledge skills being put to use.
                  Evidences of a first civilization in Mesopotamia are in Biblical literature, even the character Abraham comes from Ur. Seems you go against the grain of your own Bible.



                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                  Already addressed, many times, but I’ll expand on your own analogy from a previous post of yoursto see if that helps:

                  Sally wants to buy a car and the year is 2013 so Sally goes to the Ford dealer and buys a Ford. John wants to buy a car and the year is 2014 so John goes to the Toyota dealer and buys a Toyota. The only differences in the scenario is when the two went and purchased cars is the year. Either way both went through the same processes however identical. The operation is the same, they are greeted, shown cars, test drive cars (if they wish), sign paperwork, pay money and eventually get a car.

                  Sally’s car (a god) has faulty airbags, a slow leak in the radiator and a battery that is about to die. Sally got a lemon. (a Mesopotamian god lemon)

                  John’s car is rock solid. He got the real car.(the YHWH/I Am/Yahweh /El Shaddai/God)
                  While I appreciate you and your caveat to my analogy, there are issues with your analogy. When you buy a car from any dealer it can fail, have mechanical issues, even if you get a warranty, and both dealers would most likely offer a warranty. I was only stating that the procedures are the same, I don't know why you would confuse that?
                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                  Shamash: There really isn't a difference and the same thing happens with Mesopotamia as well with Aaron, the same rites occur. The only difference is that Yahweh (a translation for the name God) apparently commanded Aaron and this is fine, in Sumer it would have been Enki (a translation for the name God). The problem with both is that "God" is a nominal term, and can be applied to any "God".

                  Me: It’s only a problem for you as you are unable to distinguish the real from the lemons. Lots of people are able to make the distinction (nominally) between the real God and the other gods, see, I just did it and it is done throughout the Bible that way also.
                  I don't have a problem with distinction, obviously the Israelite's worshiped Yahweh the way they saw fit, and the Canaanite's also worshiped Yahweh the way they saw fit. The key is that when Abraham leaves Canaan he leaves with Yahweh, when Abraham leaves Ur he doesn't go with Yahweh.


                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                  Well I am so glad that you’ve finally seen reason from my post on the authenticity of the Bibles story about Noah’s flood and how it was passed on orally by his descendants, with its truth preserved by God until they wrote it down.

                  I never had an issue with oral tradition, that is how the Israelite's got the epic of Ziusudra, but with translation from Sumer to Akkad to Babylon to Israel (from Sumerian to Semitic language) there are translatability issues, but Enki already divided the languages from Sumer and on. Sumer is a Holy language, while Semitic is subsequent to it. Hence, why the name 'Noah' derived from the name Nuach, Nuach lived 250 years. The name Ziusudra means "man of long life", or "life of long days", Ziusudra lives a very long time, as later we see so does the Biblical character Noah or Nuach, depending on which transliteration you use.
                  Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                  I thought you studied etymology!?
                  I don’t, obviously, and had to do a quick check on the internet, as my Bible uses 'ark' and I've never heard the word 'Tevah'. I suggest you try it, as it showed that the Orthodox Jewish Bible uses Ark and side references ‘Tevah’ in brackets, and Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon for the different Christian Bible translations references 'Tevah' also for 'ark'.
                  Of course your Bible uses "Ark" it's translated.

                  We should follow the Ark trail where it naturally leads, which is to the Hebrew Bible and beyond.

                  Genesis 6:14–16
                  Make yourself an ark (tēvāh) of gopher wood [came the instruction]; make rooms (qinnīm) in the ark, and cover it (kāpar) inside and out with pitch (kopher). This is how you are to make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. Make a roof for the ark, and finish it to a cubit above; and put the door of the ark in its side; make it with lower, second, and third decks.

                  Such was the order to Noah, facing in his turn the awful task of saving the world more or less single-handedly with the help of a custom-order boat. This is the breakdown of the specs:

                  Ark: tēvāh (unknown word for boat)
                  Material: gopher-wood (unknown species)
                  Rooms: qinnīm (cells; the basic word means ‘bird’s nest’)
                  Waterproofing: pitch or bitumen (kopher), smeared on (kāphar), inside and out
                  Length: 300 cubits (ammah) = 450 ft = 137.2 m
                  Width: 50 cubits = 75 ft = 22.8 m
                  Height: 30 cubits = 45 ft = 13.7 m
                  Roof: 1 cubit high(?)
                  Door: 1
                  Decks: 3

                  Compare the sparser data for Moses’ ‘arklet’ in Exodus 2:2–6:

                  Ark: tēvāh (unknown word for rectangular boat)
                  Material: gomeh, bulrushes; rush/reed/papyrus; wicker
                  Waterproofing: hamār, slime; bitumen/asphalt; bitumen; zefeth, pitch

                  The biblical word tēvāh, which is used for the arks of Noah and Moses, occurs nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible. The flood and baby episodes are thus deliberately associated and linked in Hebrew just as the Atrahasis and Sargon Arks are linked associatively in Babylonia.

                  Now for something extraordinary: no one knows what language tēvāh is or what it means. The word for the wood, gopher, is likewise used nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible and no one knows what language or what kind of wood it is. This is a peculiar state of affairs for one of the most famous and influential paragraphs in all of the world’s writing.

                  The associated words kopher, ‘bitumen’, and kāphar, ‘to smear on’, are also to be found nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible, but, significantly, they came from Babylonia with the narrative itself, deriving from Akkadian kupru, ‘bitumen’, and kapāru, ‘to smear on’. In view of this it is logical to expect that tēvāh and gopher are similarly loan words from Babylonian Akkadian into Hebrew, but there has been no convincing candidate for either word. Suggestions have been made for gopher-wood, but the identification, or the non-Hebrew word that lies behind it, remains open. Ideas have also been put forward over the centuries concerning the word tēvāh, some linking it – because Moses was in Egypt – with the ancient Egyptian word thebet, meaning ‘box’ or ‘coffin’, but these have ended nowhere. The explanation is that tēvāh, like other ark words, reflects a Babylonian word.







                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Shamash View Post
                    I'm pretty sure that my postings concerning Baal and Yahweh are pretty clear.
                    Oh definitely, as I stated, already addressed to your many, many, many recurring posts concerning Baal and Yahweh.

                    .................................... ............................... ...................................

                    Shamash:The first humans on earth began as Polytheistic, accepting Jesus is getting away from that concept.

                    Me: More evidence of your Biblical knowledge skills being put to use.

                    Shamash: Evidences of a first civilization in Mesopotamia are in Biblical literature, even the character Abraham comes from Ur. Seems you go against the grain of your own Bible.
                    Seems from your academic researching abilities when using the Bible, you don't know about Jesus and Who He is, from your blue post above, which is what that red response was directly in relation too- affirming how your Biblical knowledge skills were being put to use once again. This simply is true, as you yourself admit that you are a Polytheist and therefore you obviously do not know Who He is.

                    You respond by using my response red to your statement from the previous post and then use it by making a new post with a claim that would imply, that not only am I unaware of what is in the Bible, but that I 'go against the grain' of it, which is not true and none of my posts throughout this thread indicates any such a thing.

                    Smacks of intellectual dishonesty.


                    While I appreciate you and your caveat to my analogy, there are issues with your analogy. When you buy a car from any dealer it can fail, have mechanical issues, even if you get a warranty, and both dealers would most likely offer a warranty. I was only stating that the procedures are the same, I don't know why you would confuse that?
                    There's no issue with my caveat to your analogy, it's spot on. The issue is with your analogy and your negligence of not putting the warranty procedure in your otherwise, very specific list.You managed to do it with "Test drive cars (if they wish)", could've put "Get a warranty (if they wish), but you didn't.

                    I don't have a problem with distinction, obviously the Israelite's worshiped Yahweh the way they saw fit, and the Canaanite's also worshiped Yahweh the way they saw fit.
                    You said:

                    Shamash: The problem with both is that "God" is a nominal term, and can be applied to any "God".

                    Me: It’s only a problem for you as you are unable to distinguish the real from the lemons. Lots of people are able to make the distinction (nominally) between the real God and the other gods, see, I just did it and it is done throughout the Bible that way also.

                    I never had an issue with oral tradition, that is how the Israelite's got the epic of Ziusudra, but with translation from Sumer to Akkad to Babylon to Israel (from Sumerian to Semitic language) there are translatability issues, but Enki already divided the languages from Sumer and on. Sumer is a Holy language, while Semitic is subsequent to it. Hence, why the name 'Noah' derived from the name Nuach, Nuach lived 250 years. The name Ziusudra means "man of long life", or "life of long days", Ziusudra lives a very long time, as later we see so does the Biblical character Noah or Nuach, depending on which transliteration you use.
                    Obviously, this is something that we’ll have to agree to disagree on.

                    Of course your Bible uses "Ark" it's translated.
                    Gee really.
                    Before you go any further, I should have asked this earlier, with regards to your initial post, it could have saved you a lot time, sorry.

                    Shamash: Also, the very fact that the Bible for example describes the Ark as Tevah, when the word Tevah doesn't mean Ark at all. Why would such a perfect book fail at naming something properly?

                    Who says it is not named properly?
                    Last edited by Bonlee; 02-20-19, 11:51 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

                      Shamash:The first humans on earth began as Polytheistic, accepting Jesus is getting away from that concept.

                      Me: More evidence of your Biblical knowledge skills being put to use.

                      Seems from your academic researching abilities when using the Bible, you don't know about Jesus and Who He is, from your blue post above, which is what that red response was directly in relation too- affirming how your Biblical knowledge skills were being put to use once again. This simply is true, as you yourself admit that you are a Polytheist and therefore you obviously do not know Who He is.

                      You respond by using my response red to your statement from the previous post and then use it by making a new post with a claim that would imply, that not only am I unaware of what is in the Bible, but that I 'go against the grain' of it, which is not true and none of my posts throughout this thread indicates any such a thing.
                      Jesus the Biblical myth hero who dies and rises again, is the same epic as Dumuzid who was killed and arose again.

                      I'm not going to comment concerning your reading or understanding of a collection of writing later on known as the Hebrew Bible (and I emphasize Hebrew), that is pointless. Either you know something or you don't, if you think I should read the Bible with Jesus in mind, that is your way of controlling which is a tactic the church uses.
                      Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                      There's no issue with my caveat to your analogy, it's spot on. The issue is with your analogy and your negligence of not putting the warranty procedure in your otherwise, very specific list.You managed to do it with "Test drive cars (if they wish)", could've put "Get a warranty (if they wish), but you didn't.
                      Warranty isn't the issue, the process and similarity is what I am talking about. You can go to the grocery store and buy soda for 1.99 or you can go to another store and buysoda for 1.99, either way you are going to the store to buy soda. The process is the same, and with Baal and Yahweh it is the same.

                      Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

                      You said:

                      Shamash: The problem with both is that "God" is a nominal term, and can be applied to any "God".

                      Me: It’s only a problem for you as you are unable to distinguish the real from the lemons. Lots of people are able to make the distinction (nominally) between the real God and the other gods, see, I just did it and it is done throughout the Bible that way also.
                      God is a nominal term and comes from the Germanic, whether you use a G or g is only preference for the reader.


                      Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                      Obviously, this is something that we’ll have to agree to disagree on.
                      Uh ok? I mean I do like the Noah myth, it's a fun bed time story.

                      Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                      Gee really.
                      Before you go any further, I should have asked this earlier, with regards to your initial post, it could have saved you a lot time, sorry.

                      Shamash: Also, the very fact that the Bible for example describes the Ark as Tevah, when the word Tevah doesn't mean Ark at all. Why would such a perfect book fail at naming something properly?

                      Who says it is not named properly?
                      Tevah means to be startled or alarmed.



                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Shamash View Post
                        I'm not going to comment concerning your reading or understanding of a collection of writing later on known as the Hebrew Bible (and I emphasize Hebrew), that is pointless. Either you know something or you don't, if you think I should read the Bible with Jesus in mind, that is your way of controlling which is a tactic the church uses.
                        What I actually had in mind, was your 'academic researching' skills, which would surely include being able to read something in context with surrounding data in order to be able to get a better understanding of what you are actually reading, and that holds true whether you're reading a history book, a novel, or the Bible. You certainly seem to be able to do so with the reading and research you've done on the Sumerian/Babylonian/Mesopotamian myths, but for some reason you are either not able or willing to do so when reading and researching the Bible. You proved this once by clipping out one verse from Hosea in the O.T. and coming to a conclusion based on it alone for no other reason than it suit your purpose at that time. When I posted more of the verses surrounding that one verse and showed that you were incorrect in your conclusion and suggested you read the whole chapter so that you could get a better understanding in context of what was really being said, you ignored it apparently, because not long after, you quoted that one verse again in order to support the same claim.

                        You don't have to read the Bible with Jesus in mind at all, but to be intellectually honest academically speaking, you should at least make an effort to read it in context and present it in the same way.

                        Warranty isn't the issue, the process and similarity is what I am talking about. You can go to the grocery store and buy soda for 1.99 or you can go to another store and buy soda for 1.99, either way you are going to the store to buy soda. The process is the same, and with Baal and Yahweh it is the same.
                        And I expanded on your analogy to show the process and the similarity and ultimately the dissimilarity, which is applicable to your Baal/Yahweh claim.

                        Hosea 2:16 is clear, Yahweh says to no longer call him Baal, but now Husband. Aaron smeared blood on the altar, just like in Mesopotamia. A goat was sent to the wilderness, just like in Mesopotamia. An evil spirit received the goat in the wilderness, just like in Mesopotamia. The people would cleanse with expiation rites evils such as sacrifice of children, just like in Mesopotamia. It's all the same, the only difference is the claim is that Yahweh commanded Aaron to do the rites.


                        Already addressed, many times, but I’ll expand on your own analogy from a previous post of yours to see if that helps:

                        Sally wants to buy a car and the year is 2013 so Sally goes to the Ford dealer and buys a Ford. John wants to buy a car and the year is 2014 so John goes to the Toyota dealer and buys a Toyota. The only differences in the scenario is when the two went and purchased cars is the year. Either way both went through the same processes however identical. The operation is the same, they are greeted, shown cars, test drive cars (if they wish), sign paperwork, pay money and eventually get a car.

                        Sally’s car (a god) has faulty airbags, a slow leak in the radiator and a battery that is about to die. Sally got a lemon. (a Mesopotamian god lemon)

                        John’s car is rock solid. He got the real car.(the YHWH/I Am/Yahweh /El Shaddai/God)

                        God is a nominal term and comes from the Germanic, whether you use a G or g is only preference for the reader.
                        Or the writer when wanting to ensure the reader that there is a difference.


                        Shamash: Also, the very fact that the Bible for example describes the Ark as Tevah, when the word Tevah doesn't mean Ark at all. Why would such a perfect book fail at naming something properly?

                        Me: Who says it is not named properly?

                        Shamash: Tevah means to be startled or alarmed.
                        That's not an answer to my question.


                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I have to say Shamash, that this has been an interesting experience for me. I’ve had to delve deeper into the scriptures, which is always a pleasure for me, and also research some of the cultures and belief systems pertaining to the other ‘gods’ that you brought to my attention.

                          It has strengthened my faith in Him and my awe in His patience and love for mankind, and my admiration for the tenacity and endurance of His chosen people. That they were “Polytheists/monotheists/polytheists/monotheists – ad nauseum” is true as you stated, nevertheless they’ve endured, and since "I’'ve read the end of the book" as they say, and "don'’t have to wait for the movie to come out" –- they will have their rightful place in His Kingdom.

                          As a Christian, I have the benefit of hindsight obviously that they didn't have, in being able to read through the O.T. and through the N.T. with the aid of the Holy Spirit, to be able to understand and witness the resulting evidence of the truth of that love and patience that He has towards them and to all mankind.

                          Shamash, you intimate that you are content with your Sumer ‘gods’, however your actions indicate otherwise. For some reason, the Bible and the “I AM” seem to bother you. You use the Bible and consider it to be true enough in certain places to use it against God, but not true enough to believe what it actually says about God. Reminds me of those who adamantly claim –“There is no God!” – but as soon as a catastrophe hits, they are the first to BLAME God!

                          From a purely academic perspective – the Bible gives a pretty, brutally clear coverage of the Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish history – it’s not as if it is attempting to hide anything – and goes on to show the connection to the Gentiles and to the fulfillment of the O.T. prophesies in the N.T.

                          And rest assured the love and patience that He has towards all mankind, of course extends to you.

                          All I suggest, is that you when you read it for research, at least try to read it in context.

                          Ciao!




                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

                            What I actually had in mind, was your 'academic researching' skills, which would surely include being able to read something in context with surrounding data in order to be able to get a better understanding of what you are actually reading, and that holds true whether you're reading a history book, a novel, or the Bible. You certainly seem to be able to do so with the reading and research you've done on the Sumerian/Babylonian/Mesopotamian myths, but for some reason you are either not able or willing to do so when reading and researching the Bible. You proved this once by clipping out one verse from Hosea in the O.T. and coming to a conclusion based on it alone for no other reason than it suit your purpose at that time. When I posted more of the verses surrounding that one verse and showed that you were incorrect in your conclusion and suggested you read the whole chapter so that you could get a better understanding in context of what was really being said, you ignored it apparently, because not long after, you quoted that one verse again in order to support the same claim.

                            You don't have to read the Bible with Jesus in mind at all, but to be intellectually honest academically speaking, you should at least make an effort to read it in context and present it in the same way.
                            What data? The bible is a collection of writings, I'm not sure what you mean by data? I guess you are talking about the rest of Hosea 2? All that happens is that the name "Baali" is stricken from the Israelite's and the prophet tricks the Israelite's into worship Yahweh who was already known as Baal, there isn't much more to it than that.


                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            And I expanded on your analogy to show the process and the similarity and ultimately the dissimilarity, which is applicable to your Baal/Yahweh claim.
                            I don't know how saying something to the effect of warranty issues makes any difference? Or John's car is better than Sally's car? I was simply talking about the process. But, if it helps you think that you have some commonality I guess whatever floats your boat. Yahweh was originally a Canaanite God, when the Israelite's adopt Yahweh into their polytheistic pantheon he becomes an Israelite God. All Yahweh did was go from one culture to the next.



                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            Or the writer when wanting to ensure the reader that there is a difference.
                            Modernly this is done a noun is capitalized, as is a person, place or thing. In ancient Mesopotamia this may not have been the case, because symbolism was used more than anything, even in oral tradition.

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            That's not an answer to my question.
                            It's not the answer you want. Go look at Strong's Concordance.

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            I have to say Shamash, that this has been an interesting experience for me. I’ve had to delve deeper into the scriptures, which is always a pleasure for me, and also research some of the cultures and belief systems pertaining to the other ‘gods’ that you brought to my attention.
                            Not saying you did, but Google isn't the best of places to start with research.

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            It has strengthened my faith in Him and my awe in His patience and love for mankind, and my admiration for the tenacity and endurance of His chosen people.
                            hahaha I thought the Jews were "his chosen people", all joking aside, this is kind of unnecessary to emphasize or flaunt your faith in such a crass way.

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            That they were “Polytheists/monotheists/polytheists/monotheists – ad nauseum” is true as you stated, nevertheless they’ve endured, and since "I’'ve read the end of the book" as they say, and "don'’t have to wait for the movie to come out" –- they will have their rightful place in His Kingdom.
                            So then you have read from Genesis to Revelations, cool. Then why earlier did you say you had to delve deeper into the "scripture"? Yes, the Israelite's are sub structed as Polytheists, and go back and forth. Those nitwit Babylonian's are the ones who influence the Israelite's into Monotheism. I say nitwit to the Babylonian's because they couldn't figure out which God to worship (between Tiamat and Marduk), and they also foolishly adopt Baal or Bel. The Israelite's were also foolish because after the Babylonian Exile (6th century bce), and especially from the 3rd century bce on, Jews ceased to use the name Yahweh for two reasons. As Judaism became a universal rather than merely local religion, the more common noun Elohim, meaning “God,” tended to replace Yahweh to demonstrate the universal sovereignty of Israel’s God over all others, bearing in mind that El was very much so a Canaanite deity. At the same time, the divine name was increasingly regarded as too sacred to be uttered; it was thus replaced vocally in the synagogue ritual by the Hebrew word Adonai (“My Lord”), which was translated as Kyrios (“Lord”) in the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures. So all they did was use the Gods from Canaan and for some reason it became "divine", utter foolishness.

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            As a Christian, I have the benefit of hindsight obviously that they didn't have, in being able to read through the O.T. and through the N.T. with the aid of the Holy Spirit, to be able to understand and witness the resulting evidence of the truth of that love and patience that He has towards them and to all mankind.
                            I'm very proud of your reading comprehension.

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            Shamash, you intimate that you are content with your Sumer ‘gods’, however your actions indicate otherwise.
                            Ok?
                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            intimate
                            did you mean "indicate", because intimate is used improperly? Oh and cool, thanks for the observation, obviously J

                            Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                            For some reason, the Bible and the “I AM” seem to bother you. You use the Bible and consider it to be true enough in certain places to use it against God, but not true enough to believe what it actually says about God. Reminds me of those who adamantly claim –“There is no God!” – but as soon as a catastrophe hits, they are the first to BLAME God!
                            From a purely academic perspective – the Bible gives a pretty, brutally clear coverage of the Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish history – it’s not as if it is attempting to hide anything – and goes on to show the connection to the Gentiles and to the fulfillment of the O.T. prophesies in the N.T.
                            And rest assured the love and patience that He has towards all mankind, of course extends to you.
                            All I suggest, is that you when you read it for research, at least try to read it in context.
                            Ciao!
                            Bible doesn't bother me, in fact I absolutely love both the Tankh and the KJV, good books to read. Tankh and Bible are closest books to Cuneiform that I can get my hands on.

                            No, the Bible does not actually give a good history on Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish history, for example, the city of Erech in the Bible is Uruk but the CH in Erech is actually an Sh/I. Meaning that Erech is actually not Uruk, most likely it is Abu Salabikh and is in Al-Qādisiyyah Governorate, Iraq while Uruk is actually in Al-Warka, Muthanna Governorate, Iraq. The Bible gets geographic locations incorrect by all the subsequent translations.

                            Also, the Bible won't tell you that the Hittite's were Indo-Euro and not Semitic, though at one point they are found in Canaan. If they are Indo-Euro they didn't come from Canaan, but settled in Canaan, meaning they are not descendants of Heth, the second son of Canaan, youngest son of Ham.

                            The Bible won't tell you that in Revelations a Hippodrome was on the Island of Patmos and that John's vision of the 4 horsemen included hippomancy. Also, when John got to Patmos the governor of pardoned him, due to an incident with a storm on the way to Patmos.

                            The Bible or Tankh won't tell you that a Cuneiform explains Enki dividing the languages and was passed into the tower of Babel epic. The Bible or Tankh won't tell you that the Babylonian's built Ziggurats and not Towers.

                            Technically I am a fan of all the Abrahamic faiths from Judaism, to its little brother Christianity to Christianities little sister Islam. You all have done a wonderful job of translating, re-translating and translating ad nauseum until infinity and beyond, don't worry some day collectively you'll get it right.




                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Shamash View Post
                              What data? The bible is a collection of writings, I'm not sure what you mean by data? I guess you are talking about the rest of Hosea 2? All that happens is that the name "Baali" is stricken from the Israelite's and the prophet tricks the Israelite's into worship Yahweh who was already known as Baal, there isn't much more to it than that.
                              Comprehension usually comes with context, except obviously, when it doesn’t serve your purpose.
                              As for what I meant by ‘data’ – (dictionary meaning later in post).

                              I don't know how saying something to the effect of warranty issues makes any difference? Or John's car is better than Sally's car? I was simply talking about the process.
                              As was I, see what I posted again.

                              Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                              And I expanded on your analogy to show the process and the similarity and ultimately the dissimilarity, which is applicable to your Baal/Yahweh claim.


                              But, if it helps you think that you have some commonality I guess whatever floats your boat.
                              Were you not attempting ‘commonality’ with the use of your analogy in the first place?

                              Shamash: Yahweh was originally a Canaanite God, when the Israelite's adopt Yahweh into their polytheistic pantheon he becomes an Israelite God. All Yahweh did was go from one culture to the next.

                              The above is your understanding based on the ‘data’ you have chosen to ‘comprehend’.

                              Shamash: It's not the answer you want. Go look at Strong's Concordance.

                              Shamash:Tevah means to be startled or alarmed
                              I don’t want to startle or alarm you Shamash, but the two references that I gave to you and that you ignored, disagree with you.


                              Bonlee: I thought you studied etymology!?
                              I don’t, obviously, and had to do a quick check on the internet, as my Bible uses 'ark' and I've never heard the word 'Tevah'. I suggest you try it, as it showed that the Orthodox Jewish Bible uses Ark and side references Tevah in brackets, and Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon for the different Christian Bible translations references 'Tevah' also for 'ark'.


                              Not saying you did, but Google isn't the best of places to start with research.
                              Google is a great place to research all sorts of things, like the meaning of words, such as ‘data’, ‘intimate’, ‘tevah’….you should try it, you can learn a lot.

                              Data
                              Dictionary result for data/derte
                              Noun
                              1. facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.
                              "there is very little data available"
                              synonyms: facts, figures, statistics, details, particulars, specifics, features;
                              information, evidence, intelligence, material, background, input;
                              proof, fuel, ammunition;
                              statement, report, return, dossier, file, documentation, archive(s);
                              informalinfo, dope, low-down, deets;
                              informalgen
                              "there is a lack of data on the drug's effect on humans"
                              Intimate:
                              VERB
                              • 1State or make known.
                              ‘Mr Hutchison has intimated his decision to retire’
                              More example sentences
                              Synonyms
                              1. 1.1with clause Imply or hint.
                              ‘he had already intimated that he might not be able to continue’

                              Tevah:
                              https://www.sermoncentral.com/bible/...f=BibleDetails Bereshis 7

                              1And Hashem said unto Noach, Come thou and all thy bais into the tevah (ark); for thee have I found tzaddik before Me in dor hazeh.


                              hahaha I thought the Jews were "his chosen people", all joking aside, this is kind of unnecessary to emphasize or flaunt your faith in such a crass way.
                              I simply made a statement - YOU chose for some reason to emphasise it with your crass response.

                              So then you have read from Genesis to Revelations, cool. Then why earlier did you say you had to delve deeper into the "scripture"?
                              As I stated in that post, it is always a pleasure for me to delve deeper into scripture and to learn more from it. Do you read through your books and put them down and never pick them up again to see if you can learn more from them, tossing them aside, assured that you’ve gained everything possible from them after one reading and never refer to them again?

                              Yes, the Israelite's are sub structed as Polytheists, and go back and forth. Those nitwit Babylonian's are the ones who influence the Israelite's into Monotheism. I say nitwit to the Babylonian's because they couldn't figure out which God to worship (between Tiamat and Marduk), and they also foolishly adopt Baal or Bel. The Israelite's were also foolish because after the Babylonian Exile (6th century bce), and especially from the 3rd century bce on, Jews ceased to use the name Yahweh for two reasons. As Judaism became a universal rather than merely local religion, the more common noun Elohim, meaning “God,” tended to replace Yahweh to demonstrate the universal sovereignty of Israel’s God over all others, bearing in mind that El was very much so a Canaanite deity. At the same time, the divine name was increasingly regarded as too sacred to be uttered; it was thus replaced vocally in the synagogue ritual by the Hebrew word Adonai (“My Lord”), which was translated as Kyrios (“Lord”) in the Septuagint, the Greek version of the Hebrew Scriptures. So all they did was use the Gods from Canaan and for some reason it became "divine", utter foolishness.
                              It never ceases to amaze me how foolish and blind some people are when relying on their own reasoning and comprehension skills and coming to the conclusions they do; your own posts, including this one above is a good example.

                              did you mean "indicate", because intimate is used improperly?
                              I meant 'intimate' and it wasn't used improperly - see dictionary meaning and the way it was used.

                              Bible doesn't bother me, in fact I absolutely love both the Tankh and the KJV, good books to read. Tankh and Bible are closest books to Cuneiform that I can get my hands on.
                              Love KJV!

                              No, the Bible does not actually give a good history on Hebrew/Israelite/Jewish history, for example, the city of Erech in the Bible is Uruk but the CH in Erech is actually an Sh/I. Meaning that Erech is actually not Uruk, most likely it is Abu Salabikh and is in Al-Qādisiyyah Governorate, Iraq while Uruk is actually in Al-Warka, Muthanna Governorate, Iraq. The Bible gets geographic locations incorrect by all the subsequent translations.
                              Any comment with "most likely" inserted in the middle, does not warrant the use of a definite "No" at the beginning and a definite conclusive statement at its end, as if it were stated on fact.

                              Also, the Bible won't tell you that the Hittite's were Indo-Euro and not Semitic, though at one point they are found in Canaan. If they are Indo-Euro they didn't come from Canaan, but settled in Canaan, meaning they are not descendants of Heth, the second son of Canaan, youngest son of Ham.
                              Same with "If" - see above.

                              The Bible won't tell you that in Revelations a Hippodrome was on the Island of Patmos and that John's vision of the 4 horsemen included hippomancy.(unsubstantiated claim) Also, when John got to Patmos the governor of pardoned him, due to an incident with a storm on the way to Patmos.(irrelevant - He was still in exile and on Patmos at the time)

                              The Bible or Tankh won't tell you that a Cuneiform explains Enki dividing the languages and was passed into the tower of Babel epic. ( see Noah's Ark posts - oral tradition, etc,etc,) The Bible or Tankh won't tell you that the Babylonian's built Ziggurats and not Towers.(Ziggurats/Towers - it still came tumbling down)

                              Technically I am a fan of all the Abrahamic faiths from Judaism, to its little brother Christianity to Christianities little sister Islam. You all have done a wonderful job of translating, re-translating and translating ad nauseum until infinity and beyond, don't worry some day collectively you'll get it right.
                              There are already many from Islam and Judaism that have got it right and have collectively recognized Christ for Who He was (is) and now love and know Him as Christians. Unfortunately, not everyone will get it right, however God is patient (longsuffering KJV) and wants all to come to Him and as the saying goes, ‘the game isn’t over until the fat lady sings!’






                              Last edited by Bonlee; 03-03-19, 11:37 PM.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                Comprehension usually comes with context, except obviously, when it doesn’t serve your purpose.
                                As for what I meant by ‘data’ – (dictionary meaning later in post).
                                ok?

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                As was I, see what I posted again.
                                You didn't expand on anything by expanding on my analogy. All you did was take that the two who purchased the cars either got a warranty or not, that doesn't say much at all, it's still part of the process.

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                And I expanded on your analogy to show the process and the similarity and ultimately the dissimilarity, which is applicable to your Baal/Yahweh claim.




                                Were you not attempting ‘commonality’ with the use of your analogy in the first place?

                                Shamash: Yahweh was originally a Canaanite God, when the Israelite's adopt Yahweh into their polytheistic pantheon he becomes an Israelite God. All Yahweh did was go from one culture to the next.

                                The above is your understanding based on the ‘data’ you have chosen to ‘comprehend’.
                                Commonality concerning this discussion, as far as Baal being Yahweh that's just cross pollination between the Ancient Israelite's and the Canaanite's


                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                I don’t want to startle or alarm you Shamash, but the two references that I gave to you and that you ignored, disagree with you.


                                Bonlee: I thought you studied etymology!?
                                I don’t, obviously, and had to do a quick check on the internet, as my Bible uses 'ark' and I've never heard the word 'Tevah'. I suggest you try it, as it showed that the Orthodox Jewish Bible uses Ark and side references Tevah in brackets, and Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon for the different Christian Bible translations references 'Tevah' also for 'ark'.
                                Tevah would have been the Babylonian word placed in the Biblical Ark epic.


                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                Google is a great place to research all sorts of things, like the meaning of words, such as ‘data’, ‘intimate’, ‘tevah’….you should try it, you can learn a lot.

                                Data
                                Dictionary result for data/derte
                                Noun
                                1. facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.
                                "there is very little data available"
                                synonyms: facts, figures, statistics, details, particulars, specifics, features;
                                information, evidence, intelligence, material, background, input;
                                proof, fuel, ammunition;
                                statement, report, return, dossier, file, documentation, archive(s);
                                informalinfo, dope, low-down, deets;
                                informalgen
                                "there is a lack of data on the drug's effect on humans"
                                Intimate:
                                VERB
                                • 1State or make known.
                                ‘Mr Hutchison has intimated his decision to retire’
                                More example sentences
                                Synonyms
                                1. 1.1with clause Imply or hint.
                                ‘he had already intimated that he might not be able to continue’

                                Tevah:
                                https://www.sermoncentral.com/bible/...f=BibleDetails Bereshis 7

                                1And Hashem said unto Noach, Come thou and all thy bais into the tevah (ark); for thee have I found tzaddik before Me in dor hazeh.
                                And Hashem said unto Noach, Come thou and all thy bais into the tevah (ark); for thee have I found tzaddik before Me in dor hazeh

                                https://bibliaparalela.com/hebrew/8429.htm

                                "Come thou and all thy bais into the tevah (ark)" in Strong's Concordance which is the biblical reference for Hebrew terminology the term Tevah mean to be startled or alarmed

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                As I stated in that post, it is always a pleasure for me to delve deeper into scripture and to learn more from it. Do you read through your books and put them down and never pick them up again to see if you can learn more from them, tossing them aside, assured that you’ve gained everything possible from them after one reading and never refer to them again?
                                Was just asking, you should read on Yahweh's connection to Tophet.

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                It never ceases to amaze me how foolish and blind some people are when relying on their own reasoning and comprehension skills and coming to the conclusions they do; your own posts, including this one above is a good example.
                                Yeah you don't have a response, just some weird insult.

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                Any comment with "most likely" inserted in the middle, does not warrant the use of a definite "No" at the beginning and a definite conclusive statement at its end, as if it were stated on fact.
                                Most likely is not use congruently with the word "no", these are nominal terms, the locations don't change though. In fact I say no concerning the Israelite history, the example only gives geographic information, the most likely is only used for geographical purposes. And no it's not the same with "if" the Egyptian's and the Hittite's have a peace treaty in 1200 BC, and the document written in Indo-Euro by the Hittite's remains to this day.


                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                The Bible won't tell you that in Revelations a Hippodrome was on the Island of Patmos and that John's vision of the 4 horsemen included hippomancy.(unsubstantiated claim) Also, when John got to Patmos the governor of pardoned him, due to an incident with a storm on the way to Patmos.(irrelevant - He was still in exile and on Patmos at the time)
                                Not unsubstantiated there was 3 pagan temples and a hippodrome on Patmos, that isn't some secret you can look that up yourself. He is pardoned, it's disservice to say he wasn't pardoned, otherwise he might have been killed in Patmos.

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post

                                The Bible or Tankh won't tell you that a Cuneiform explains Enki dividing the languages and was passed into the tower of Babel epic. ( see Noah's Ark posts - oral tradition, etc,etc,) The Bible or Tankh won't tell you that the Babylonian's built Ziggurats and not Towers.(Ziggurats/Towers - it still came tumbling down)
                                Ziggaurats were not built high, they were built down. Noah's ark is a copy from the Sumerian flood epic.

                                Originally posted by Bonlee View Post
                                There are already many from Islam and Judaism that have got it right and have collectively recognized Christ for Who He was (is) and now love and know Him as Christians. Unfortunately, not everyone will get it right, however God is patient (longsuffering KJV) and wants all to come to Him and as the saying goes, ‘the game isn’t over until the fat lady sings!’

                                I don't know who these people are, personal experience of one has nothing to do with someone else, go sell your conversion garbage somewhere else.





                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X