Old Earth vs Young Earth Debate

[exchemist]

-----------------
Obviously you dont believe in ancient myths since you read these as a kind of entertainment without any connections to facts.

Back in 3.200 BC the Egyptians worshipped the Milky Way with their Mother Goddess of creation, Hathor, who resembled the very contours of the Milky Way on the southern hemisphere. This goddess was closely connected to the Egyptian story of creation, the Ogdoad, where the first central entity was Amun-Ra with a close "family" connection to the Milky Way Mother Goddess, Hathor, and together Amun-Ra and Hathor created everything visible in the Milky Way galaxy.

Read these links:
The Infinite Ogdoad: The Creation Pantheon of Ancient Egypt and Predecessor Gods of the Old Kingdom
and
Hathor - Wikipedia

So, contrary to your refusals, ancient people had very specific knowledge of the Milky Way and its formation processes. iI is just that you can´t see the connections because you dont work with needed "mythical dots" in order to get the overall picture.

I´m afraid you also misses my scientific points and explanations because you are biased against the mythical stories - which you have som much fun from

Note: I am NOT a creationist.

Neither of your links shows any knowledge of the actual process by which either the solar system or our Milky Way galaxy were formed, so far as I can see. All I can see is a load of stuff about lotus flowers and the Milky Way being a river or waterway. If you really think they do indicate "specific knowledge" of the formation process of our galaxy, please quote the actual passages that you think show this.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

After having conversations with Jewish believers over the years, I find that their adherence to scripture is very much like Christendom's.

But the difference here has zero to do with Jewish theology or Jewish tradition. At issue is solely the characteristics of Biblical Hebrew, and the people referenced are held in high regard, not as Jewish sages, but as experts in Biblical Hebrew. You dismiss scholarship because of the religion of the scholar; there's a word for that.

 

[Native]

Neither of your links shows any knowledge of the actual process by which either the solar system or our Milky Way galaxy were formed, so far as I can see. All I can see is a load of stuff about lotus flowers and the Milky Way being a river or waterway. If you really think they do indicate "specific knowledge" of the formation process of our galaxy, please quote the actual passages that you think show this.

1) I am referring and linking to an Egyptian Mother Goddess who is resembling the Milky Way on the southern hemisphere.
2) I am also linking to the Egyptian story of creation, where the god Amun-Ra is the first central fiery entity to be created from the "primordial celestial rivers" of dust and gas and "he" is closely connected to the Milky Way goddess. See the atlas picture of the Milky Way contours here - Skymaps.com: Astronomy Posters - where the southern Milky Way contour resembles the Mother Goddess, where the galactic center is positioned in the star constellation of Sagittarius, right on the area of the female like figure´s womb, hence the titel of the Mother Goddess who gives form and birth to everything in our galaxy.

You have to combine the contents from these two informations in order to get the picture.

Anyone who is unfamiliar with the ancient mythical language and its astronomical and cosmological connections has of course huge difficulties to grasp that ancient people really did understand much more than we give them credit for.

Of course I can´t provide links or articles to something which confirms my perceptions since scholars haven´t discovered/forgotten the extent of the ancient myths - and I also cannot provide links to modern cosmology about the formation process in the Milky Way since they all refers to a Solar System creation which is disconnected to the overall formation process in the Milky Way center. They just claim the Solar System to have been formed from a local cloud of dust and gas which suddenly for no dynamic reasons decided to collapse by its own gravitational weight.

So: Anyone who are truly interested in my explanations really have to use time to ponder over my claims and logics as I myself have done for some 35 years.

 

[Native]

Neither of your links shows any knowledge of the actual process by which either the solar system or our Milky Way galaxy were formed, so far as I can see. All I can see is a load of stuff about lotus flowers and the Milky Way being a river or waterway. If you really think they do indicate "specific knowledge" of the formation process of our galaxy, please quote the actual passages that you think show this.

BTW: Ancient cultures knew of the barred galaxies and they used the so called Swastika symbol to illustrate their knowledge as shown here - Swastika - Wikipedia.

Of course scholars without any mythical and cosmological insight interpret this symbol as describing the Earth celestial pole and the rotation of the stars and Milky Way around this celestial point, forgetting that the Swastika symbol have two opposite turning appearances and turning directions.

 

[gnostic]

I am a Christian and I have Jesus' word for the fact that the Pharisees of his day could not be trusted as custodians of the word of God. Just read Matthew 23 and see why. Do I have reason to believe those ones today who teach virtually the same thing?

Sorry, but the Pharisees in Jesus’ very short 3-year ministry is hardly representatives of the entire Judaism.

And you are forgetting that Jesus didn’t write a single word. He wasn’t the author or narrator of any gospel.

Plus, the names were attributed to the gospels in the 2nd century BCE, so the authors were unknown. Each gospels were written anonymously, 1 & 2 (if not 3) generations after Jesus’ crucifixion and alleged resurrection, so it is pretty doubtful that any of the gospel authors were eyewitnesses.

Lastly, you stated that Jewish sources were biased, but given the gospels and letters were pro-Christian, then wouldn’t Christian sources be naturally biased against Jews.

I would hardly think bias would exist one way. In fact, you are showing bias right now.

 

[gnostic]

if you dont understand the "mud and water" sentence in the Sumerian-Akkadian creation stories, would you then also refuse that humans are made of particles and gaseous liquids?
Why are you reading the ancient myths of creation if you dont take them as ancient knowledge?

Do you know what the general molecules in soil and clay, Native?

Silicates with other minerals, like iron or aluminium. Clay and soil come from weathering of these types of compounds.

While silicate (molecule) contained silicon and oxygen atoms, and both of these exist in the human body, there are NO SILICATE MOLECULES IN OUR BODIES!

And the silicon is so tiny, you cannot even make mud from it.

Do a little research, google or wiki search on clay minerals. You will see that such soil compounds don’t exist in this form in any human or even animal body.

People are not made of silt or clay. Only a person who failed in both chemistry and biology, don’t understand the differences between element and compound/molecule.

 

[gnostic]

1) I am referring and linking to an Egyptian Mother Goddess who is resembling the Milky Way on the southern hemisphere.
2) I am also linking to the Egyptian story of creation, where the god Amun-Ra is the first central fiery entity to be created from the "primordial celestial rivers" of dust and gas and "he" is closely connected to the Milky Way goddess. See the atlas picture of the Milky Way contours here - Skymaps.com: Astronomy Posters - where the southern Milky Way contour resembles the Mother Goddess, where the galactic center is positioned in the star constellation of Sagittarius, right on the area of the female like figure´s womb, hence the titel of the Mother Goddess who gives form and birth to everything in our galaxy.

You have to combine the contents from these two informations in order to get the picture.

Anyone who is unfamiliar with the ancient mythical language and its astronomical and cosmological connections has of course huge difficulties to grasp that ancient people really did understand much more than we give them credit for.

Of course I can´t provide links or articles to something which confirms my perceptions since scholars haven´t discovered/forgotten the extent of the ancient myths - and I also cannot provide links to modern cosmology about the formation process in the Milky Way since they all refers to a Solar System creation which is disconnected to the overall formation process in the Milky Way center. They just claim the Solar System to have been formed from a local cloud of dust and gas which suddenly for no dynamic reasons decided to collapse by its own gravitational weight.

So: Anyone who are truly interested in my explanations really have to use time to ponder over my claims and logics as I myself have done for some 35 years.

I know about Egyptian myths, and none of it contained any remotely knowledgeable about astronomy.

You have mention Hathor.

But there is another who often shared the characteristics as Hathor - Nut.

Nut, like that of Hathor was a sky goddess, who often appeared iconography as a cow, hence the “celestial cow”.

The most common image of is her as a naked woman standing over her reclining brother Geb (Earth) on her fingertips and toes. Her body and limbs covered in stars. Also underneath her was her father, Shu, holding her up, while standing on his son, to keep them apart.

But other images of Nut, in the form of a cow, with stars painted on her belly.

Neither images of Nut (in form of woman or a cow) can be called “astronomy”.

 

[exchemist]

1) I am referring and linking to an Egyptian Mother Goddess who is resembling the Milky Way on the southern hemisphere.
2) I am also linking to the Egyptian story of creation, where the god Amun-Ra is the first central fiery entity to be created from the "primordial celestial rivers" of dust and gas and "he" is closely connected to the Milky Way goddess. See the atlas picture of the Milky Way contours here - Skymaps.com: Astronomy Posters - where the southern Milky Way contour resembles the Mother Goddess, where the galactic center is positioned in the star constellation of Sagittarius, right on the area of the female like figure´s womb, hence the titel of the Mother Goddess who gives form and birth to everything in our galaxy.

You have to combine the contents from these two informations in order to get the picture.

Anyone who is unfamiliar with the ancient mythical language and its astronomical and cosmological connections has of course huge difficulties to grasp that ancient people really did understand much more than we give them credit for.

Of course I can´t provide links or articles to something which confirms my perceptions since scholars haven´t discovered/forgotten the extent of the ancient myths - and I also cannot provide links to modern cosmology about the formation process in the Milky Way since they all refers to a Solar System creation which is disconnected to the overall formation process in the Milky Way center. They just claim the Solar System to have been formed from a local cloud of dust and gas which suddenly for no dynamic reasons decided to collapse by its own gravitational weight.

So: Anyone who are truly interested in my explanations really have to use time to ponder over my claims and logics as I myself have done for some 35 years.

Yes but all this shows - at most - is that these people looked at the night sky. Your claim, however, was that their writings show knowledge of the processes of formation of galaxies and the solar system. From the way you write, it seems you can't see the difference.

 

[Deeje]

But the difference here has zero to do with Jewish theology or Jewish tradition.

Does Judaism today adhere to a different theology or tradition to what existed in Jesus' day? Is the Jewish interpretation of Genesis a literal 7 day scenario, or does "yohm" carry other meanings as Strongs suggests?

God doesn't change, but apparently human ideas about him do. (Malachi 3:6) Human ideas about what scripture says too, vary enormously.....but there can only be one truth.....so how do we find it?

At issue is solely the characteristics of Biblical Hebrew, and the people referenced are held in high regard, not as Jewish sages, but as experts in Biblical Hebrew.

Biblical Hebrew is not really the issue as I see it. It is how men have interpreted that ancient language 'today' that is the problem.

The Pharisees are a good example, because they were the custodians of the Hebrew Scriptures and the teachers of the Law back in Bible times. They must have understood it well.

If Matthew 23 is not a good representation of what the Pharisees taught back then, please tell me what is in error.

Jesus begins by saying...in verse 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the seat of Moses. 3 Therefore, all the things they tell you, do and observe, but do not do according to their deeds, for they say but they do not practice what they say."

Then he goes on to elaborate on why their conduct was so hypocritical because they failed to practice what they preached. How was he wrong?

When I speak to Jewish believers I am often amazed that they will admit to all that error and yet somehow God will forgive them just because they are Jews...."sons of Abraham".

John the Baptist was considered a prophet in the first century and yet he denounced them too. He told the Scribes and Pharisees......

"Do not presume to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children for Abraham from these stones. (Matthew 3:7-9)

Doesn't that indicate that being "Jewish" in the fleshly sense means nothing, if they do not repent AND accept their Messiah and his sin atoning sacrifice.

After all these thousands of years waiting for a Messiah who never comes, how are Jews today gaining God's forgiveness without the prescribed sacrifices? Why was the Temple (a vital part of Jewish worship) never rebuilt after Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in the first century CE? Can you provide a scriptural reason for me Jay? Are Jews not still under the Law?

You dismiss scholarship because of the religion of the scholar; there's a word for that.

Are Jews any less guilty in that regard?

I do not dismiss the scholarship....I simply have suspicions about bias for the same reasons that Jesus and John the Baptist exposed the Pharisees' interpretation of scripture and showed how they manipulated it using the Talmud. Tradition became the measuring stick, rather than scripture. In that regard Christendom mirrored Judaism IMO. Human nature does not change. Men will always be corrupted by power over others. So who you trust to tell the truth is important, don't you think?

I know this is a Jewish/Christian divide.....but interpreting scripture continues to divide Jews and Christians to this day, which to me is a great pity since we purport to worship the same God whose will it is that all be saved.....but we have to choose our position and our truth...God will not force it on anyone.

How people interpret Genesis in the creation account determines whether it becomes a fairy tale or scientifically supported event.

So, what does "yohm" mean in all it's nuances? What does the scholarship suggest?

 

[gnostic]

I do not dismiss the scholarship....I simply have suspicions about bias for the same reasons that Jesus and John the Baptist exposed the Pharisees' interpretation of scripture and showed how they manipulated it using the Talmud. Tradition became the measuring stick, rather than scripture.

Ah, Deeje?

The part I’ve highlighted...the part with exposing manipulation by using the Talmud.

Well, you are using anachronism, Deeje.

There was no “Talmud” in Jesus’ time.

Jews were concern with their scriptures and other works being lost, after the destruction of the temple in 70 CE. So works on the Hebrew Scriptures and that of Talmud began after 70 CE, and the work spanned for centuries, before they were completed.

So your saying that Jesus spoke out against the use of Talmud, is utterly false, since there were no Talmud to speak of.

 

[Native]

Do you know what the general molecules in soil and clay, Native?

Silicates with other minerals, like iron or aluminium. Clay and soil come from weathering of these types of compounds.

While silicate (molecule) contained silicon and oxygen atoms, and both of these exist in the human body, there are NO SILICATE MOLECULES IN OUR BODIES!

And the silicon is so tiny, you cannot even make mud from it.

Do a little research, google or wiki search on clay minerals. You will see that such soil compounds don’t exist in this form in any human or even animal body.

People are not made of silt or clay. Only a person who failed in both chemistry and biology, don’t understand the differences between element and compound/molecule.

------
Gnostic, you don´t get it because you have problems with understanding the symbolism in ancient mythology. The ancient mythical sentence of mud/soil stems from the creation stories where "dust and gas" in the "primordial waters" are (electromagnetically) assembled and formed into firm matter and this process even takes place in the human body.

The ancient stories of creation just deals with the cosmological formation process in the creation and not specifically with the contents in human bones.

 

[Subduction Zone]

------
Gnostic, you don´t get it because you have problems with understanding the symbolism in ancient mythology. The ancient mythical sentence of mud/soil stems from the creation stories where "dust and gas" in the "primordial waters" are (electromagnetically) assembled and formed into firm matter and this process even takes place in the human body.

The ancient stories of creation just deals with the cosmological formation process in the creation and not specifically with the contents in human bones.

You appear to be reinterpreting myths in light of today's knowledge. I doubt if there are any well respected historians that would agree with your interpretation of myths.

 

[Deeje]

Ah, Deeje?

The part I’ve highlighted...the part with exposing manipulation by using the Talmud.

Well, you are using anachronism, Deeje.

There was no “Talmud” in Jesus’ time.

Oh silly me......

[*sigh*]
"The Talmud (Hebrew for “study”) is one of the central works of the Jewish people. It is the record of rabbinic teachings that spans a period of about six hundred years, beginning in the first century C.E. and continuing through the sixth and seventh centuries C.E. The rabbinic teachings of the Talmud explain in great detail how the commandments of the Torah are to be carried out.

The Talmud is made up of two separate works: the Mishnah, primarily a compilation of Jewish laws, written in Hebrew and edited sometimes around 200 C.E. in Israel; and the Gemara, the rabbinic commentaries and discussions on the Mishnah, written in Hebrew and Aramaic, which emanated from Israel and Babylonia over the next three hundred years. There are two Talmuds: the Y’rushalmi or Jerusalem Talmud (from Israel) and the Bavli or Babylonian Talmud. The Babylonian Talmud, which was edited after the Jerusalem Talmud and is much more widely known, is generally considered more authoritative than the Jerusalem Talmud."

The Talmud

Whose ideas do we imagine these works were based on?

I think it helps to understand that the last prophet sent to Israel before Jesus was Malachi. Israel had been without a prophet for over 400 years when Jesus presented himself for baptism. What do you imagine happened during all that time without a prophet to correct them?
What had happened previously in Israel when the priests were left to their own devices? Read the first chapter of Malachi to find out.

Now imagine why Jesus was sent to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" and NOT to their incorrigible shepherds? Can you not put two and two together? Reads Jesus words at Matthew 23:37-39 and understand......

Jews were concern with their scriptures and other works being lost, after the destruction of the temple in 70 CE. So works on the Hebrew Scriptures and that of Talmud began after 70 CE, and the work spanned for centuries, before they were completed.

And the Talmud was written based on the teachings and additions of Israel's Religious Leaders....not on the Torah. These teachings were nothing new when Jesus walked the earth. Any wonder Jesus denounced them so confidently. He was there through all of Israel's history for all but the brief period when he walked this earth. He knew them well.

So your saying that Jesus spoke out against the use of Talmud, is utterly false, since there were no Talmud to speak of.

Would you like to try highlighting the next sentence.....

"Tradition became the measuring stick, rather than scripture."

 

[Native]

I know about Egyptian myths, and none of it contained any remotely knowledgeable about astronomy.

You have mention Hathor.

But there is another who often shared the characteristics as Hathor - Nut.

Nut, like that of Hathor was a sky goddess, who often appeared iconography as a cow, hence the “celestial cow”.

The most common image of is her as a naked woman standing over her reclining brother Geb (Earth) on her fingertips and toes. Her body and limbs covered in stars. Also underneath her was her father, Shu, holding her up, while standing on his son, to keep them apart.

But other images of Nut, in the form of a cow, with stars painted on her belly.

Neither images of Nut (in form of woman or a cow) can be called “astronomy”.

---------------
The Egyptian goddess Nut and Hathor is the same but from different cultural layers and you are correct with the Sky-Cow symbolism which IMO is an earlier description.

Quote from - Hathor - Wikipedia

"Hathor, along with the goddess Nut, was associated with the Milky Way during the third millennium B.C. when, during the fall and spring equinoxes, the Milky Way aligned over and touched the earth where the sun rose and fell".

The Milky Way is a visible part of the celestial realms and of course also a part of astronomy since the Milky Way is made of stars.

 

[Native]

Yes but all this shows - at most - is that these people looked at the night sky. Your claim, however, was that their writings show knowledge of the processes of formation of galaxies and the solar system. From the way you write, it seems you can't see the difference.

----------
From the way you understand my explanations, it seem that you are unable to connect the mythical and cosmological dots
And ancient people didn´t just look physically at the Sky, they also had spiritual visions/informations of the cosmos and how it works.

 

[Native]

You appear to be reinterpreting myths in light of today's knowledge. I doubt if there are any well respected historians that would agree with your interpretation of myths.

------------
You are correct. I compare and interpret ancient myths of creation and furthermore compare these with modern astronomical and cosmological science - much to the benefit of the ancient myths which are more precise regarding understanding the formation in cosmos.

I guess that you also are correct regarding "well respected historians" which agree with me, which dont bother me a bit. I´ve read too many books and studied too many encyclopedia to have respect for historical people who just repeat each others lack of knowledge regarding ancient myths and the cosmological meaning of the myths.

I would though recommend this author who have all my respect:

“The Night of the Gods”, by John O'Neill, Part 1-2.

Part 1 can be read online or downloaded as PDF files here: The Night of the Gods

Part 2 can be bought here:
http://www.amazon.com/Night-Gods-Part-John-ONeill/dp/076615159X

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

------------
You are correct. I compare and interpret ancient myths of creation and furthermore compare these with modern astronomical and cosmological science - much to the benefit of the ancient myths which are more precise regarding understanding the formation in cosmos.

In what ways are Genesis 1 "more precise regarding understanding the formation in cosmos?"

 

[Subduction Zone]

------------
You are correct. I compare and interpret ancient myths of creation and furthermore compare these with modern astronomical and cosmological science - much to the benefit of the ancient myths which are more precise regarding understanding the formation in cosmos.

I guess that you also are correct regarding "well respected historians" which agree with me, which dont bother me a bit. I´ve read too many books and studied too many encyclopedia to have respect for historical people who just repeat each others lack of knowledge regarding ancient myths and the cosmological meaning of the myths.

I would though recommend this author who have all my respect:

“The Night of the Gods”, by John O'Neill, Part 1-2.

Part 1 can be read online or downloaded as PDF files here: The Night of the Gods

Part 2 can be bought here:
http://www.amazon.com/Night-Gods-Part-John-ONeill/dp/076615159X

I hope that you do realize that those that make such reinterpretationa are almost always wrong . You need a lot more than woo based books for anyone to take you seriously .

 

[Native]

In what ways are Genesis 1 "more precise regarding understanding the formation in cosmos?"

-----------
I did refer in general to the numerous cultural stories of creation and not just Genesis and these stories deals with a formation/creation which is directly connected to the Milky Way formation, whereas standard cosmology just speaks of a formation of the Solar System from a "local cosmic cloud of dust and gas which suddenly decided to collapse under its own weight".

 

[Native]

I hope that you do realize that those that make such reinterpretationa are almost always wrong . You need a lot more than woo based books for anyone to take you seriously .

-------
I am stunned that you already have read the two books and concluded that both this author and I am wrong