Picture of Mars vs. the earth. So how did Moses know?

[MyM]

True. Other people have different views. 'To you your religion, to me mine". Quran does not speak to me.

You actually just quoted a little of the Quran. Surat al Kafirun

 

[Aupmanyav]

That was for brevity, otherwise I have studied Quran to some extent.

 

[YoursTrue]

God didn't endorse the Bible. Man did .

Our beliefs are different.

 

[YoursTrue]

Makes sense? Than you haven't bothered to fact check to see if it's probably a legend.

Moses and the Patriarchs are comprised of Egyptian myths. Thomas Thompson demonstrated none of these characters were actual people. His work was peer-reviewed and this has become the standard position.
I just pointed out some clear indications that the creation story is re-writing both Mesopotamian creation myths as well as using the Epic of Gilamesh (often verbatim) to craft their flood story.

Then, none of the science or cosmology makes sense, a primal cosmic sea is found in older creation myths like the Hindu version as well. So the material is copied and has nothing to do with the actual science of the creation of the universe?

and you say it makes sense to you?

"Generally, Moses is seen as a legendary figure, whilst retaining the possibility that Moses or a Moses-like figure existed in the 13th century BCE
Van Seters concluded, 'The quest for the historical Moses is a futile exercise. He now belongs only to legend.' ... "None of this means that there is not a historical Moses and that the tales do not include historical information. But in the Pentateuch, history has become memorial. Memorial revises history, reifies memory, and makes myth out of history."

Actually, I've given much thought to what the Bible says. I realize there are things written either hard to understand (such as miracles) or events which are contested by some. I have no quibble about these things. I have thought about "natural" and supernatural events and have come to the conclusion that (1) life is a gift from God, enabled by Him, (2) not all is equal, (3) miracles of the extraordinary kind have happened, such as some of the dead having been resurrected.

 

[YoursTrue]

God didn't endorse the Bible. Man did .

Some people take vaccines and "endorse" them, others do not.

 

[MyM]

Some people take vaccines and "endorse" them, others do not.

truly you are not comparing God to a vaccine

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

A human is changing and doing it. God created the apes, God created the humans...if apes are evolving, then why can't they think, why can't they hold a job?

They are. We call them humans.

If you are actually asking why chimps aren't acting like humans, the answer is "because they aren't humans". :-S

Dogs and wolves are both canines, but wolves don't act like dogs either.

This isn't Planet of the Apes Movie lol Give me one ape that transformed since man has come into being? There isn't one! It's all conjecture.

The other apes you see today are on a different evolutionary path then humans.
To think they should also be evolving into humans if evolution is true, is evidence - if not proof - that you don't understand the first thing about evolution.
In fact, if chimps would give rise to homo sapiens, evolution as currently understood would be falsified.

This is how disturbingly little you actually know about this subject....
The observation you demand as evidence for the theory, would actually falsify the theory.

I mean pigs are close to human DNA as well 84% so you gonna say we evolved from pigs as well?

We share an ancestor with pigs, just like we share one with all mammals. And beyond. Eventually with all life.

We didn't evolve from currently existing species. We share ancestors with them. And these ancestors are long gone.

You really need to stop commenting on things you have clearly no understanding of until you at least read up on the basics.

 

[MyM]

They are. We call them humans.

If you are actually asking why chimps aren't acting like humans, the answer is "because they aren't humans". :-S

Dogs and wolves are both canines, but wolves don't act like dogs either.





The other apes you see today are on a different evolutionary path then humans.
To think they should also be evolving into humans if evolution is true, is evidence - if not proof - that you don't understand the first thing about evolution.
In fact, if chimps would give rise to homo sapiens, evolution as currently understood would be falsified.

This is how disturbingly little you actually know about this subject....
The observation you demand as evidence for the theory, would actually falsify the theory.



We share an ancestor with pigs, just like we share one with all mammals. And beyond. Eventually with all life.

We didn't evolve from currently existing species. We share ancestors with them. And these ancestors are long gone.

You really need to stop commenting on things you have clearly no understanding of until you at least read up on the basics.

You can keep on calling me illiterate when it comes to evolution, but I know where I came from. It's not apes.

you go your way, I go mine.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Does an open mind mean that we do not make up our mind about anything?

An open mind means that one is open to new evidence which might potentially falsify currently held beliefs.

When one simply states in advance that "there is nothing you can say or show to convince me", then that is pretty much being closed minded by definition.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

You can keep on calling me illiterate when it comes to evolution, but I know where I came from. It's not apes.

you go your way, I go mine.

Honest question here.

Does it not bother you at all that just about every "objection" to the scientific theory of evolution you throw out there, is simply based on a disturbingly huge misunderstanding of what it actually says?

I get that you are, or feel that you are, religiously required to reject it.
But why do you seem to insist on being wrong about it?

Why do you try to make points about a theory you clearly have no understanding of?

Just be intellectually honest here and say that you don't know what the theory says and that you don't care either because you are dogmatically invested in a religious narrative.

Obviously I would think you are being irrational and wrong. But at least I'ld respect you for your honesty.

 

[joelr]

I'd like to say something here. It's kind of similar to Einstein's theories. Based on "evidence." Of light and motion and distance. So there is much proven about the Bible's relevance and truthfulness.,

As fiction the Bible contains some metaphors that have wisdom. That is proven. The myths themselves are all re-workings of older cultures myths. The supernatural happenings are not proven. Not one single iota of proof. Archaeology shows that the historical narrative is wrong. Israelites did not come from Egypt but from Canaan. There was no armed conflict. Exodus is a national foundation myth written around the time the Hebrew kings were returning to Judea when the Persian kings decided to let them return. King Solomons kingdom was much more modest than written. Judea was a small hill town. This goes on and on. The Gods and beings in the story are as fiction as the Gods in Greek myths.
Why you would mention Einstein leading up to a mention of the Bible is bizarre? The secret is out? It isn't history.

But who are you talking to? Yourself? A guardian angel? You did not answer any points? I demonstrated Genesis is a re-working of Mesopotamian myths, Noah is taken from Gilamesh and modern historians have the benefit of seeing all this literature now so we can see that this is religious syncretism in action.
Your response is to compare a physicist (who relies on proofs) and make some vague statement? Yes so much is proven. It's proven that the legends in the OT are re-used myths?

"The legend of Moses, rather than being that of a historical Hebrew character, is found from the Mediterranean to India, with the character having different names and races, depending on the locale: "Manou" is the Indian legislator. "Nemo the lawgiver," who brought down the tablets from the Mountain of God, hails from Babylon. "Mises" is found in Syria, where he was pulled out of a basket floating in a river. Mises also had tablets of stone upon which laws were written and a rod with which he did miracles, including parting waters and leading his army across the sea. In addition, "Manes the lawgiver" took the stage in Egypt, and "Minos" was the Cretan reformer.
Jacolliot traces the original Moses to the Indian Manou: "This name of Manou, or Manes . . . is not a substantive, applying to an individual man; its Sanscrit signification is the man, par excellence, the legislator. It is a title aspired to by all the leaders of men in antiquity."
Like Moses, Krishna was placed by his mother in a reed boat and set adrift in a river to be discovered by another woman. The Akkadian Sargon also was placed in a reed basket and set adrift to save his life. In fact, "The name Moses is Egyptian and comes from mo, the Egyptian word for water, and uses, meaning saved from water, in this case, primordial." Thus, this title Moses could be applied to any of these various heroes saved from the water.

Walker elaborates on the Moses myth:

"The Moses tale was originally that of an Egyptian hero, Ra-Harakhti, the reborn sun god of Canopus, whose life story was copied by biblical scholars. The same story was told of the sun hero fathered by Apollo on the virgin Creusa; of Sargon, king of Akkad in 2242 B.C.; and of the mythological twin founders of Rome, among many other baby heroes set adrift in rush baskets. It was a common theme."

Furthermore, Moses's rod is a magical, astrology stick used by a number of other mythical characters. Of Moses's miraculous exploits, Walker also relates:

"Moses's flowering rod, river of blood, and tablets of the law were all symbols of the ancient Goddess. His miracle of drawing water from a rock was first performed by Mother Rhea after she gave birth to Zeus, and by Atalanta with the help of Artemis. His miracle of drying up the waters to travel dry-shod was earlier performed by Isis, or Hathor, on her way to Byblos."

And Higgins states:

"In Bacchus we evidently have Moses. Herodotus says [Bacchus] was an Egyptian . . . The Orphic verses relate that he was preserved from the waters, in a little box or chest, that he was called Misem in commemoration of the event; that he was instructed in all the secrets of the Gods; and that he had a rod, which he changed into a serpent at his pleasure; that he passed through the Red Sea dry-shod, as Hercules subsequently did . . . and that when he went to India, he and his army enjoyed the light of the Sun during the night: moreover, it is said, that he touched with his magic rod the waters of the great rivers Orontes and Hydaspes; upon which those waters flowed back and left him a free passage. It is even said that he arrested the course of the sun and moon. He wrote his laws on two tablets of stone. He was anciently represented with horns or rays on his head."
In addition, the miraculous "parting of the Red Sea" has forever mystified the naive and credulous masses and scholars alike, who have put forth all sorts of tortured speculation to explain it. The parting and destruction of the hosts of Pharaoh at the Red Sea is not recorded by any known historian, which is understandable, since it is, of course, not historical and is found in other cultures, including in Ceylon, out of which the conquering shepherd kings (Pharaohs) were driven across "Adam's Bridge" and drowned. This motif is also found in the Hawaiian and Hottentot versions of the Moses myth, prior to contact with outside cultures. The crossing of the Red Sea is astronomical, expressly stated by Josephus to have occurred at the autumnal equinox, indicating its origin within the mythos.

Moreover, the famed Ten Commandments are simply a repetition of the Babylonian Code of Hammurabi and the Hindu Vedas, among others. As Churchward says:

"The 'Law of Moses' were the old Egyptian Laws . . . ; this the stele or 'Code of Hammurabi' conclusively proves. Moses lived 1,000 years after this stone was engraved."

Walker relates that the "stone tablets of law supposedly given to Moses were copied from the Canaanite god Baal-Berith, 'God of the Covenant.' Their Ten Commandments were similar to the commandments of the Buddhist Decalogue. In the ancient world, laws generally came from a deity on a mountaintop. Zoroaster received the tablets of law from Ahura Mazda on a mountaintop."

Doane sums it up when he says, "Almost all the acts of Moses correspond to those of the Sun-gods." However, the Moses story is also reflective of the stellar cult, once again demonstrating the dual natured "twin" Horus-Set myth and the battle for supremacy between the day and night skies, as well as among the solar, stellar and lunar cults. . . . [end excerpt]

As has been demonstrated, the Moses fable is an ancient mythological motif found in numerous cultures. It therefore has nothing to do with any particular ethnic group, and the character Moses is not the founder of the Jewish ideology. Like so many others, this story as presented represents racist rubbish and cultural bigotry.

I might also mention that not all who profess to represent the Bible have represented God in a truthful manner,

They actually did represent the Bible in a manner that was truthful to their interpretation. There is no standard truth of scripture. Interpretations can fit whatever any theologian leader decides to make it.
Pick an issue, hell, salvation, trinity, then look at. the Wiki page. Endless versions of interpretations, hundreds of denominations.

 

[joelr]

There are many things that happened in time (history) that either have been obliterated by men or circumstances or not recorded. Thus the idea that there is no record particularly other than the detailed account in the Bible of the incident in Egypt of Pharaoh and Moses is not convincing to me that it did not happen as recorded. God has preserved the writings of the prophets throughout the ages for the benefit of mankind and those taking advantage of learning about it and believing in Him. Take care.

Sure, there are core groups of fundamentalists in Christainity, Judaism, Islam who have no interest in what is true and insist on somehow making obvious myths real events. But academia is clear and the rest of the world will move on and these will become just like the Greek gods. Allah preserved the writings, Yahweh preserved the writings.....not real. Most prophecies did not even happen.

"Though scholars generally do not recognize the biblical portrayal of the Exodus as an actual historical event,[1] various historical pharaohs have been proposed as the corresponding ruler:"

“All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.”—2 Tim. 3:16, 17

Oh wow the Quran says that also? I guess if it says it then it must be true?

And this Qur’an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah), and the Injeel (Gospel)], and a full explanation of the book (i.e. laws, decreed for mankind) – wherein there is no doubt – from the Lord of the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinn, and all that exists).

 

[joelr]

Actually, I've given much thought to what the Bible says. I realize there are things written either hard to understand (such as miracles) or events which are contested by some..

Miracles are not hard to understand. They occur (the same mundane miracles) in all holy books in all religions. They are fictional stories and can be found in every ancient culture.
They are not contested any more than Greek stories about a Trojan Horse being snuck into a fort. It's known fiction.
You again failed to respond to anything in the post and are just rambling.

I have no quibble about these things. I have thought about "natural" and supernatural events and have come to the conclusion that.

Then you don't care about what is true. Ok. No one has to care.

(1) life is a gift from God, enabled by Him, (2) not all is equal, (3) miracles of the extraordinary kind have happened, such as some of the dead having been resurrected.

There is no evidence for any God outside of myths written by people. There is even less evidence of people being raised from the dead. There is however evidence that during the Hellenistic period, most religions who had a national God who lived in heaven (like Yahweh), was upgraded to supreme God and resurrecting savior demigods were appearing in all these religions, coming to life in 3 days and getting followers into this new afterlife (prior to this the afterlife was not in religions, it started primarily with Hellenenism). Notice in Judaism Heaven was only for God and only one human escaped death by being brought to heaven. Souls that go to heaven were a Greek idea (the Greeks occupied Israel for a few centuries before Christianity). Your beliefs come from them.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I was reading about the speed of sound and light. You may believe that is natural (just came about). I do not.

Wait, so you think the speed of sound and light are supernatural?
Why?

 

[SkepticThinker]

You seem to think that without any original documents that God has not preserved His Word. That does not make sense.

Of course it makes sense. The "original" is the document in question. If it's not preserved (and we don't know that it is and have never found originals), then how can you claim that it's preserved?

 

[SkepticThinker]

It is obvious to me if not to you. It is a subjective thing.

Then it's not "evidence" that is useful to anyone else.

I presume you are saying that you don't see good evidence for design.

No, I don't. And I explained why. You didn't respond to that.

If it's so obvious, it should be really easy to give evidence for it. The fact that you haven't, and just keep claiming that it's so obvious, doesn't bode well for your argument.

To me spiders that can build webs and bees that have a dance to tell the other bees the direction and distance of food and the billions of atoms in our DNA that control our growth and development etc and atoms that are the building blocks for all things dead matter which has become alive and conscious etc are all good evidence for design and a designer.

We can observe spiders building webs. We can observe bees interacting with other bees. We can measure DNA. Demonstrations of such things doesn't rely on personal/subject experiences that can't be verified by anyone else. Quite the opposite.
Show me anything close to that for the claims you're making.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Science is fine up to a point and then it starts conflicting with the evidence that it, as science, ignores.

What evidence?
Simply stating something is "obvious" isn't evidence.

Science cannot accept the words in an old book as evidence and when science with the naturalistic methodology steps in to analyse the Bible,

Why should science accept the words in old books, without verification? That's not science at all. Should science just accept every supernatural claim made by anybody then?
Should we all just accept that everything in the Quran is true too, because Muslims might say so? See the problem here?

the presumption of no supernatural influence only tends to bring science to the conclusion that the old book must be wrong.

Demonstrate that the supernatural is testable or measurable in some way, and it will be considered. There's no reason to consider it without evidence.
Do you believe in Thor? Why not? There are descriptions written of him in old books?

Circular reasoning of course but people don't walk away from for example anthropological books on the Bible with the message of "circular reasoning", they walk away with a scientific view that the Bible is not true as shown by science.

That is not circular reasoning. I called you out on the before and now you're just going to repeat it?
How is it circular reasoning to not accept things that are not in evidence?

My way is my way and I cannot show it is better, especially if people don't even want to see circular reasoning in the science of the Bible.
How many sceptics are going to be willing to think that the writer of Genesis did not plagiarise information from earlier religions? How many are going to say, "Well it could be that the earlier religions and Genesis both knew the same original stories of the flood and creation"?

We can analyze earlier religions and verify that information has been copied and plagiarized from them. That's how we figure that out.

 

[SkepticThinker]

That does not mean that life is just chemicals.

My response was regarding this comment that you had made:

"It's nice to know something about evolution but that says nothing about the origins of man unless you presume that life comes from chemicals and chemicals just happened etc."

To which I pointed out that life is composed of chemicals. Our bodies are made up of chemicals and chemical reactions drive our body's actions. That's not to say that "life is just chemicals," whatever you mean by that.

You say you are just following the evidence with science but really you are following the naturalistic methodology and believing it as fact that there was no supernatural involvement.
Science cannot say one way or the other concerning God so why do people want to use science as if it can say one way or the other?

Why do sceptics ignore the caveat on science when it suites and forget that the reason science might say things like "Evidence shows that life and consciousness are chemically based" is because of the naturalistic methodology and not because all the evidence points there. It is that the evidence science can use points there.

Where is the evidence for the supernatural?
Maybe the fact that I have to keep asking for it and never receive it has something to do with my not accepting it as factually existing. Hmmm
On the other hand, when scientists make claims about stuff, they can back it up with evidence that can be verified by people other than just themselves.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You can keep on calling me illiterate when it comes to evolution, but I know where I came from. It's not apes.

you go your way, I go mine.

You are illiterate when it comes to evolution. That's okay, I'm illiterate when it comes to automotive repair.
It's fixable though. I provided you with a great link to start with a few pages back, remember?

 

[MyM]

You are illiterate when it comes to evolution. That's okay, I'm illiterate when it comes to automotive repair.
It's fixable though. I provided you with a great link to start with a few pages back, remember?

not really, I don't wanna get into this sorry. I am suffering with Covid now and not in the mood to seriously think about something that I know from my Creator, to be false maybe you can find another Muslim to enlighten or Christian about the theory of Darwinism. It's too much of a headache. sorry

“He cannot be questioned as to what He does, while they will be questioned” al-Anbiya’ 21:23