- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 5/29/26 at 10:29 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:They also deny miracles and the resurrection of Jesus. I guess I should just go with their naturalistic conjectures and abandon Christianity
Moses is a non-historical, fictional character. That’s the consensus of historians, and it’s what is taught at Harvard and Yale divinity schools - they teach that Moses was a composite character and they teach the documentary hypothesis.
I don't think I'll take your word for the historicity of anyone, seeing that you deny the "scholarly consensus" that Jesus was a historical person. It's just more cherry-picking from you.
quote:That must leave you out of the discussion. You are neither serious nor educated on these topics. It's clear that you are referencing a few books or websites that are devoted to this material and repeat it enough to sound like you know something about it, when in reality, you keep getting contradicted by facts over and over again, all while claiming you have the facts on your side. That's what illogical conclusions get you. Your worldview is messed up, which is why you can't come to true conclusions.
You should keep praying to the evil storm deity of the Shasu who is the head of the heavenly army of the Canaanite pantheon and leave serious historical and religious topics to those who are serious and educated.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 10:43 am to Squirrelmeister
You’re such a heathen…you have no idea how stupid you sound.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 10:46 am to Squirrelmeister
quote:I'm glad you can use laughter to cope with the painquote:
It must be painful to consistently be defeated on these topics
quote:I responded to you about the topic. I was referring to the fact that no one in the Christian or Jewish communities--that we are aware of from the historical evidence--denied belief that the Torah was Scripture. The Essenes had it, the Sadducees had it, the Pharisees had it, and the Christians had it (even the heretics that you love to pretend were representative of true Christianity).
More than accusing. I noticed you didn’t attempt to refute the evidence. John Calvin, Moses, and Jesus would agree with me on this topic as what I posted to be objective facts.
I'll cede one thing to you: I said "The Old Testament was considered Scripture universally, by Jews and Christians, and across all geographies.", and I should have said "Torah" instead of "Old Testament". That's where you are getting hung up, but that doesn't matter to my point. I'm happy to correct to "Torah", because that's really at issue when it comes to which came first, and who believed what.
That wasn't a lie, though. My point stands true with this minor correction.
You aren't willing to cede anything, other than the vague notion that you could be wrong about some things (not admitting to be wrong about anything in particular), so I won't hold my breath waiting for you to respond to the many refutations I provided to your false statements.
quote:I wouldn't claim such a thing. You're the one who consistently makes statements as facts without checking them.
The Sadducees were only the temple authorities and center of the culture of Jerusalem in the province of Judea.
What’s next Foo? Are you going to claim Sadducees weren’t Jews?
The Sadducees were influential over the wealthy, as they were also politicians. They weren't very influential with the people, and the Pharisees were moreso, as they were focused on the day-to-day teachings in the Synagogues. It's why when the Temple was destroyed, the Sadducees basically went extinct immediately, because their existence was closely tied to the Temple, while the Pharisees weren't.
This misses the point, though. You were talking about the influence of 1 Enoch and how it is older than the Old Testament. I showed how the Torah came first, before 1 Enoch, and you ignored it entirely so that you could focus on an irrelevant "gotcha".
Try again.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 10:52 am to FooManChoo
quote:
This misses the point, though. You were talking about the influence of 1 Enoch and how it is older than the Old Testament. I showed how the Torah came first, before 1 Enoch, and you ignored it entirely so that you could focus on an irrelevant "gotcha".
Regardless of which text came first, I have shown that Enoch (and a lot of the OT early stories) were ripped directly from Sumerian source stories. The distinction you guys are arguing over is irrelevant as the stories themselves are not original and were based on stories already inscribed in clay over 1,000 years before any of it was penned by the Hebrews.
What's interesting to note though is that the biblical authors a lot of times took directly from Sumerian source stories and then twisted it around. For instance, the story of the watchers that the Enochian authors copied from, paints the watchers as the heroes in the Sumerian literature. In the original version the watchers are angelic type beings who roam the surface and the underworld looking for those who violate the Annunaki law and they take them off to prison when they find them. Fast forward to Enoch and you have the same beings but they're suddenly the villains.
The original "tower of babylon" story is different too. In the original version there was no tower. It's a story about the invention of writing. Two kings were having a battle of wits and using a messenger to deliver messages back and forth across 7 mountains to one another over a land dispute. Eventually one of the kings tells the messenger something that he could not remember when he went to relay the message. So the king wrote in clay for the very first time. And what's interesting is that according to the text the other king had no trouble understanding what the very first text ever penned was. It also kinda echoes what we actually see when it comes to Sumerian language. It sprung up out of nowhere fully developed. The idea that the gods "confused the tongues" of the people also appears to have been inverted from its original meaning. In the original story it reads more like a promise that, sometime in the future, Enki will actually unify the tongues of the people.
This post was edited on 5/29/26 at 11:21 am
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:20 am to AlterEd
quote:I think you have overstated your case.
Regardless of which text came first, I have shown that Enoch (and a lot of the OT early stories) were ripped directly from Sumerian source stories. The distinction you guys are arguing over is irrelevant as the stories themselves are not original and were based on stories already inscribed in clay over 1,000 years before any of it was penned by the Hebrews.
First, the Biblical stories you are likely referring to were not "ripped directly", as there are major key differences between the creation stories and flood stories (as examples) that show great differences in belief beyond the stories, themselves. The differences are just as important as the similarities.
Second, common themes do not demonstrate a dependency connection from one to the other. It's merely assumed that more ancient traditions were borrowed by less ancient traditions.
Lastly, common themes not only don't show dependency, but they could actually point to a shared oral tradition. In Christian (and Jewish) theology, God reveals truth to mankind and man perverts it and worships false gods. God then selects a people to be special knowledge-preservers of the truth. God then re-reveals the ancient truth that was perverted and it was then preserved in the traditions and writings of that chosen people. If that is true (I believe it is), then it would explain why even older traditions and writings have similarities but major differences from the writings of the Bible. Not showing dependency becomes crucial.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:22 am to FooManChoo
quote:
In Christian (and Jewish) theology, God reveals truth to mankind and man perverts it and worships false gods
Yes. And it was actually the Hebrews that twisted these stories, as I explained in my previous post.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:27 am to AlterEd
quote:And I disagree. Jesus agreed that those stories were true as written by Moses as testimonies to real history, not fables borrowed by other cultures that created them out of nothing.
Yes. And it was actually the Hebrews that twisted these stories, as I explained in my previous post.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:29 am to FooManChoo
quote:
And I disagree.
Disagree all you want. You're clearly wrong. You have stories that were copied from older (1,000 years) source stories and inverted in their meaning. But not always. Some of the stories are just retellings of the same story damn near verbatim.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:35 am to AlterEd
Someone just needs to set up a teams meeting with Jesus and the talking snake so we can all get on the same page here.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:38 am to JCdawg
quote:
Someone just needs to set up a teams meeting with Jesus and the talking snake so we can all get on the same page here.
I think what's going on a lot of times is that it's just an example of the same story being told from two different perspectives. Whether an entity is good or bad depends on which side of the law you find yourself on. But that's not always the case - such as the tower of babylon story. I'm not sure what's going on there. The biblical story is radically different from the original story.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:46 am to AlterEd
quote:
I think what's going on a lot of times is that it's just an example of the same story being told from two different perspectives. Whether an entity is good or bad depends on which side of the law you find yourself on. But that's not always the case - such as the tower of babylon story. I'm not sure what's going on there. The biblical story is radically different from the original story
This is a valid point and it is fascinating people believe things as a fact of certainty because of books that were written by people who didn’t know the earth was round and have been translated numerous times to fit a narrative of control.
It really boggles the mind.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 11:53 am to JCdawg
quote:
as a fact of certainty because of books that were written by people who didn’t know the earth was round and have been translated numerous times to fit a narrative of control.
This is exactly why the Sumerians should be given more credit. Because they knew the Earth was round and also knew its place in relation to the rest of the planets in our solar system. They also knew of planets that cannot be seen without a telescope. The Sumerians were building grand cities while the Hebrews were wandering around tending goats out of tents. They're also the original source for these stories and should be given more credit for this fact alone.
They also describe how they built the megalithic wonders. By singing to the stones. They describe a method where priests trained for many years to be able to sing a certain note and hold it (110 hertz apparently). They would arrange in groups of 7 or more (always doubling in number from there) and sing at the stones holding that certain note at a certain pitch until the stones would glow, and then hum, and then "walk" into place.
So while the rest of the people in the ancient world say that the megalithic structures came before them and never describe the construction methods, the Sumerians give explicit instructions for how it was done.
This post was edited on 5/29/26 at 11:59 am
Posted on 5/29/26 at 12:29 pm to AlterEd
quote:
This is exactly why the Sumerians should be given more credit. Because they knew the Earth was round and also knew its place in relation to the rest of the planets in our solar system. They also knew of planets that cannot be seen without a telescope. The Sumerians were building grand cities while the Hebrews were wandering around tending goats out of tents. They're also the original source for these stories and should be given more credit for this fact alone.
They also describe how they built the megalithic wonders. By singing to the stones. They describe a method where priests trained for many years to be able to sing a certain note and hold it (110 hertz apparently). They would arrange in groups of 7 or more (always doubling in number from there) and sing at the stones holding that certain note at a certain pitch until the stones would glow, and then hum, and then "walk" into place.
So while the rest of the people in the ancient world say that the megalithic structures came before them and never describe the construction methods, the Sumerians give explicit instructions for how it was done.
You seem to be eager to believe any ridiculous thing that anyone floats except the actual likely truth.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 12:30 pm to JCdawg
quote:
This is a valid point and it is fascinating people believe things as a fact of certainty because of books that were written by people who didn’t know the earth was round and have been translated numerous times to fit a narrative of control.
That's not what people believe or why they believe it.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 12:44 pm to wackatimesthree
quote:
You seem to be eager to believe any ridiculous thing that anyone floats except the actual likely truth.
Still boring.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 7:17 pm to AlterEd
Here is another interesting video on the Sumerian tablets. In this video they're taking a look at an Annunaki council meeting where the "gods" discuss among themselves how conditions on Earth were changing and were no longer hospitable to them. This is when the Gods decide to leave Earth and leave mankind to its fate. A theme recorded throughout religious mythos after religious mythos. But this is the original telling and it isn't told as if it is myth. This is recorded out in official format of a council meeting with recorded minutes.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 7:31 pm to AlterEd
quote:I will, thank you.
Disagree all you want.
quote:No, the Bible is right, as it is divinely inspired. Jesus, as the God-man, knew what was true.
You're clearly wrong.
quote:Again, no.
You have stories that were copied from older (1,000 years) source stories and inverted in their meaning. But not always. Some of the stories are just retellings of the same story damn near verbatim.
You assume that the Bible was copied from an older myth rather than both coming from a similar source with one being perverted and the Bible providing clarification from God.
You are looking at this from a strictly naturalistic perspective, which is why you are coming to a false conclusion.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 7:35 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
You assume that the Bible was copied from an older myth rather than both coming from a similar source with one being perverted and the Bible providing clarification from God.
I do not assume it, it very obviously was.
quote:
You are looking at this from a strictly naturalistic perspective, which is why you are coming to a false conclusion.
This is gooblegook nonsense. The equivalent of a child putting their thumbs in their ears, saying "na-na-na-na-na-na, I'm rubber you're glue whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you."
The Sumerians were building civilization while your Hebrew heroes were wiping their asses with their hands and living in tents. They wrote the same stories a full 1,000 years before the Hebrews. The same frickin stories.
Posted on 5/29/26 at 7:44 pm to AlterEd
The CIA propagandists underestimated how much the modern social media culture cares about aliens. The modern person could give two shits.
Page 48 of 73
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News