02-24-2017, 03:13 PM
(01-12-2017, 06:55 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Of course we know who Saint Peter's ... Boss is. Note the capitalization.
Bruce Springsteen?
Well of course
(01-12-2017, 06:55 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Of course we know who Saint Peter's ... Boss is. Note the capitalization.
Bruce Springsteen?
(01-10-2017, 05:59 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]A warning to him: Genesis 1:27 suggests that God is BLACK. If He made Man in His Image, then because the first human beings were black, God must be black.
Quote:Genesis 1:27, KJV
So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.
(02-24-2017, 03:34 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing that I missed saying something. If God made Man in His Image, then because the first humans were black, so must be God.
(02-24-2017, 03:20 PM)Mikebert Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:34 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing that I missed saying something. If God made Man in His Image, then because the first humans were black, so must be God.
No. The first humans were black if you assume that humans appeared first in Africa and that the world is more than 6000 years old. But if you are a bibilical literalist, then humans first appearred in the region around the Persian Gulf about 6000 years ago and were white. Thus, God is White just like Santa Claus.
(02-24-2017, 03:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:20 PM)Mikebert Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:34 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing that I missed saying something. If God made Man in His Image, then because the first humans were black, so must be God.
No. The first humans were black if you assume that humans appeared first in Africa and that the world is more than 6000 years old. But if you are a bibilical literalist, then humans first appearred in the region around the Persian Gulf about 6000 years ago and were white. Thus, God is White just like Santa Claus.
But this conclusion depends on the "literalist" interpretation of the Bible, which itself is a modern notion and which scholars show was not the interpretation among those who wrote the Bible. It also depends on a literalist interpretation of "God" as given to us by atheists, which we don't have to accept either. It can also be thought that God worked through evolution, and that evolution is a creative and not a mechanical process.
(02-24-2017, 03:27 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:20 PM)Mikebert Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:34 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]I'm guessing that I missed saying something. If God made Man in His Image, then because the first humans were black, so must be God.
No. The first humans were black if you assume that humans appeared first in Africa and that the world is more than 6000 years old. But if you are a bibilical literalist, then humans first appearred in the region around the Persian Gulf about 6000 years ago and were white. Thus, God is White just like Santa Claus.
But this conclusion depends on the "literalist" interpretation of the Bible, which itself is a modern notion and which scholars show was not the interpretation among those who wrote the Bible. It also depends on a literalist interpretation of "God" as given to us by atheists, which we don't have to accept either. It can also be thought that God worked through evolution, and that evolution is a creative and not a mechanical process.
Which is why he gave the first option as well.
Quote:Some Biblical literalists are Young Earth Creationists (who say the Earth is 6000 years old, as Bishop Ussher calculated), but other literalists are not YECs.
(02-24-2017, 03:37 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Some Biblical literalists are Young Earth Creationists (who say the Earth is 6000 years old, as Bishop Ussher calculated), but other literalists are not YECs.
I question their "literalism", then. Next you're gonna tell me that they believe the Earth is "round" and does not have pillars.
(02-24-2017, 04:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:37 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Some Biblical literalists are Young Earth Creationists (who say the Earth is 6000 years old, as Bishop Ussher calculated), but other literalists are not YECs.
I question their "literalism", then. Next you're gonna tell me that they believe the Earth is "round" and does not have pillars.
Every kind of literalism is anything but. There is no 6000-year timeline stated in the Bible. It speaks of 7 days, the first few of which cannot even be days, since there was no Sun and Moon yet. There are in fact Young Earth Creationists and non-Young Earth Creationists, who both consider themselves "literalists" or at least "fundamentalists." That's why the term YEC exists.
But it's true that the Garden of Eden is assumed to be southern Mesopotamia.
"Eden" is another name for "Earth," and the term originated as a description of that region, which is where the basic Bible stories came from. So, to realize that Adam is black, you have to go beyond the Biblical tradition to that extent.
Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
(02-24-2017, 04:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:37 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Some Biblical literalists are Young Earth Creationists (who say the Earth is 6000 years old, as Bishop Ussher calculated), but other literalists are not YECs.
I question their "literalism", then. Next you're gonna tell me that they believe the Earth is "round" and does not have pillars.
Every kind of literalism is anything but. There is no 6000-year timeline stated in the Bible. It speaks of 7 days, the first few of which cannot even be days, since there was no Sun and Moon yet. There are in fact Young Earth Creationists and non-Young Earth Creationists, who both consider themselves "literalists" or at least "fundamentalists." That's why the term YEC exists.
But it's true that the Garden of Eden is assumed to be southern Mesopotamia.
"Eden" is another name for "Earth," and the term originated as a description of that region, which is where the basic Bible stories came from. So, to realize that Adam is black, you have to go beyond the Biblical tradition to that extent.
Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
I'd heard someone propose that there was a lunar calendar in use when the "X begat Y" chapter was written. If you read the word 'years' literally, everybody lived much longer than most would believe possible. If you divide by twelve, things become a lot more believable. For example, Genesis 11:32, "And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran." What do you think? Would you go with 205 years, or 17 for a life span that far back in time?
Quote:Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
(02-24-2017, 04:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:37 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]Quote:Some Biblical literalists are Young Earth Creationists (who say the Earth is 6000 years old, as Bishop Ussher calculated), but other literalists are not YECs.
I question their "literalism", then. Next you're gonna tell me that they believe the Earth is "round" and does not have pillars.
Every kind of literalism is anything but. There is no 6000-year timeline stated in the Bible. It speaks of 7 days, the first few of which cannot even be days, since there was no Sun and Moon yet. There are in fact Young Earth Creationists and non-Young Earth Creationists, who both consider themselves "literalists" or at least "fundamentalists." That's why the term YEC exists.
But it's true that the Garden of Eden is assumed to be southern Mesopotamia.
"Eden" is another name for "Earth," and the term originated as a description of that region, which is where the basic Bible stories came from. So, to realize that Adam is black, you have to go beyond the Biblical tradition to that extent.
Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
I'd heard someone propose that there was a lunar calendar in use when the "X begat Y" chapter was written. If you read the word 'years' literally, everybody lived much longer than most would believe possible. If you divide by twelve, things become a lot more believable. For example, Genesis 11:32, "And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran." What do you think? Would you go with 205 years, or 17 for a life span that far back in time?
(02-25-2017, 03:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:37 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]I question their "literalism", then. Next you're gonna tell me that they believe the Earth is "round" and does not have pillars.
Every kind of literalism is anything but. There is no 6000-year timeline stated in the Bible. It speaks of 7 days, the first few of which cannot even be days, since there was no Sun and Moon yet. There are in fact Young Earth Creationists and non-Young Earth Creationists, who both consider themselves "literalists" or at least "fundamentalists." That's why the term YEC exists.
But it's true that the Garden of Eden is assumed to be southern Mesopotamia.
"Eden" is another name for "Earth," and the term originated as a description of that region, which is where the basic Bible stories came from. So, to realize that Adam is black, you have to go beyond the Biblical tradition to that extent.
Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
I'd heard someone propose that there was a lunar calendar in use when the "X begat Y" chapter was written. If you read the word 'years' literally, everybody lived much longer than most would believe possible. If you divide by twelve, things become a lot more believable. For example, Genesis 11:32, "And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran." What do you think? Would you go with 205 years, or 17 for a life span that far back in time?
No, that's stupid. Average life spans in premodern times were dragged down by largely by infant/child mortality rates and deaths in childbirth. People didn't literally grow old and die in 16, 20, or 35 years.
Lunar calendars are in use today, they don't restart every month. They are also generally properly lunisolar calendars, measuring the number of lunar cycles in one solar year, with some degree of padding to line them up. Even purely lunar ones like the Islamic calendar still have 12 months in a year.
(02-26-2017, 06:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-25-2017, 03:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Every kind of literalism is anything but. There is no 6000-year timeline stated in the Bible. It speaks of 7 days, the first few of which cannot even be days, since there was no Sun and Moon yet. There are in fact Young Earth Creationists and non-Young Earth Creationists, who both consider themselves "literalists" or at least "fundamentalists." That's why the term YEC exists.
But it's true that the Garden of Eden is assumed to be southern Mesopotamia.
"Eden" is another name for "Earth," and the term originated as a description of that region, which is where the basic Bible stories came from. So, to realize that Adam is black, you have to go beyond the Biblical tradition to that extent.
Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
I'd heard someone propose that there was a lunar calendar in use when the "X begat Y" chapter was written. If you read the word 'years' literally, everybody lived much longer than most would believe possible. If you divide by twelve, things become a lot more believable. For example, Genesis 11:32, "And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran." What do you think? Would you go with 205 years, or 17 for a life span that far back in time?
No, that's stupid. Average life spans in premodern times were dragged down by largely by infant/child mortality rates and deaths in childbirth. People didn't literally grow old and die in 16, 20, or 35 years.
Lunar calendars are in use today, they don't restart every month. They are also generally properly lunisolar calendars, measuring the number of lunar cycles in one solar year, with some degree of padding to line them up. Even purely lunar ones like the Islamic calendar still have 12 months in a year.
Even today, more people die at 17 than at 205.
(02-26-2017, 06:10 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-25-2017, 03:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:39 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 04:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ](02-24-2017, 03:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Every kind of literalism is anything but. There is no 6000-year timeline stated in the Bible. It speaks of 7 days, the first few of which cannot even be days, since there was no Sun and Moon yet. There are in fact Young Earth Creationists and non-Young Earth Creationists, who both consider themselves "literalists" or at least "fundamentalists." That's why the term YEC exists.
But it's true that the Garden of Eden is assumed to be southern Mesopotamia.
"Eden" is another name for "Earth," and the term originated as a description of that region, which is where the basic Bible stories came from. So, to realize that Adam is black, you have to go beyond the Biblical tradition to that extent.
Each day was billions of years. People thousands of years ago had no concept of those types of time frames. Therefore, as Zoroastrian and subsequent Abrahamic holy books got written, they used the "day" as an arbitrary demarcation of time.
I'd heard someone propose that there was a lunar calendar in use when the "X begat Y" chapter was written. If you read the word 'years' literally, everybody lived much longer than most would believe possible. If you divide by twelve, things become a lot more believable. For example, Genesis 11:32, "And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years; and Terah died in Haran." What do you think? Would you go with 205 years, or 17 for a life span that far back in time?
No, that's stupid. Average life spans in premodern times were dragged down by largely by infant/child mortality rates and deaths in childbirth. People didn't literally grow old and die in 16, 20, or 35 years.
Lunar calendars are in use today, they don't restart every month. They are also generally properly lunisolar calendars, measuring the number of lunar cycles in one solar year, with some degree of padding to line them up. Even purely lunar ones like the Islamic calendar still have 12 months in a year.
Even today, more people die at 17 than at 205.
(02-26-2017, 03:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]I mean, are you really doubling down on this pretentious idiocy?
(02-27-2017, 06:14 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: [ -> ](02-26-2017, 03:16 PM)SomeGuy Wrote: [ -> ]I mean, are you really doubling down on this pretentious idiocy?
Nah... I'm likely the last person to argue that the Bible makes sense in it's nitpick details.