The creator did it.

[Subduction Zone]

Time to post this OOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD video again:

It is not long and dismantles the claim that scientists doubt evolution.

 

[sooda]

Yes, separately.

Ur had sat on the coast, with its own port, and it was situated at the mouth of Euphrates, and since the rivers don't intersect until further downstream AFTER Ur, then it would stand to reason that Tigris feed to the gulf separately.



Enoch?

I have not thought of Enoch being Erech/Uruk.

It is a bit of stretch.

In Genesis 10, it say Erech or Uruk being one of the cities founded by Nimrod, after the Flood.

Erech was never the name used in ancient Mesopotamia. Uruk was an Akkadian name for the city, but in the original Sumerian, the transliteration of cuneiform name would have been Unug. But whether it is Unug or Uruk, the cuneiform "spelling" were exactly the same, that's because the Akkadians didn't create their own cuneiform. So any historian who could read Babylonian or Assyrian, which were descendant languages of Akkadian, then they could read Sumerian, though most likely pronunciation would be different.

It sort of Chinese writings (traditional Chinese characters or Han characters) were adopted and being used in ancient Korea and Japan, when they became literate kingdoms. They didn't create their own writings until centuries later.

Anyway, I don't know if we can equate Enoch with Erech, especially since there very little in detail about Enoch son of Cain, nor do Genesis 4 provide any location to Enoch or to Nod. All it does say is that Cain went to the land of the Nod, which was east of Eden. Many places are east of Tigris and Euphrates, the two rivers that supposedly mark the boundaries of Eden.

This is why I think Genesis has a lot of craps, because it is very light on details.


Italian?

What do you mean?

The second website is in Italian.

After the birth of Enoch, the Hebrew text of Genesis 4:17 is unclear. Either Cain built a city and named it after Enoch, or else Enoch built a city.

Cain, when exiled from Eden, went "east" to the land of Nod and built a city? We are also told that he named his city after his firstborn son, Enoch. Ancient linguistics have shown that the city of Uruk, in Iraq, is the same word as Enoch.

Or, Uruk is Erech, a Genesis 10:10 city. Uruk (Erech) existed in the days of Nimrod.

 

[gnostic]

After the birth of Enoch, the Hebrew text of Genesis 4:17 is unclear. Either Cain built a city and named it after Enoch, or else Enoch built a city.

Cain, when exiled from Eden, went "east" to the land of Nod and built a city? We are also told that he named his city after his firstborn son, Enoch. Ancient linguistics have shown that the city of Uruk, in Iraq, is the same word as Enoch.

Or, Uruk is Erech, a Genesis 10:10 city. Uruk (Erech) existed in the days of Nimrod.

I am no expert in linguistic or in etymology.

Does the Sumerian Unug sounds like Enoch to you?

I can't tell, because my hearing are not good.

 

[sooda]

I am no expert in linguistic or in etymology.

Does the Sumerian Unug sounds like Enoch to you?

I can't tell, because my hearing are not good.

Maybe..

The biblical notion that the world's first city is founded by Cain, is recalling Gilgamesh who lives at Sumerian Unug (Babylonian Uruk), Unug being recast as Enoch.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am no expert in linguistic or in etymology.

Does the Sumerian Unug sounds like Enoch to you?

I can't tell, because my hearing are not good.

The sound of words can change enormously over time. Take the former island and now peninsula of Tyre. It's original name was Zur or Sur when transliterated to English.

The amazing name Tyre: meaning and etymology

That is why my brain reads it more as "Tir" than "Tire".

 

[sooda]

The sound of words can change enormously over time. Take the former island and now peninsula of Tyre. It's original name was Zur or Sur when transliterated to English.

The amazing name Tyre: meaning and etymology

That is why my brain reads it more as "Tir" than "Tire".

Hmmm. Well Enoch and Enug mixes Genesis with the Sumerian Gilgamesh.

 

[gnostic]

Maybe..

The biblical notion that the world's first city is founded by Cain, is recalling Gilgamesh who lives at Sumerian Unug (Babylonian Uruk), Unug being recast as Enoch.

I know of only one Uruk (Akkadian and Babylonian name for Unug) in Mesopotamia, and it has been around since 5000 BCE, or at least the oldest layer (Uruk XVIII) of the settlement has been dated to this time. It became the most important city in the region throughout the 4th millennium BCE.

It continued to be important until Sargon of Akkad established the 1st true empire, conquering much of the city-states of Sumer.

Gilgamesh was said to be the king, during the 1st dynasty of Uruk, which is dated to around 2900 to 2650 BCE.

But Uruk predated the Bronze Age Sumerian civilisation (3rd millennium BCE).

Those cities mentioned in Genesis 10, supposed built by single man, Nimrod. Well, they were built in different times, a couple of them predated the 3rd millennium Bronze Age.

Genesis 10 also say that Egypt didn't exist until Ham's son Mizraim/Egypt, but Egyptian cultures have also predated the start of the Bronze Age, before the 1st dynasty.

 

[sooda]

I know of only one Uruk (Akkadian and Babylonian name for Unug) in Mesopotamia, and it has been around since 5000 BCE, or at least the oldest layer (Uruk XVIII) of the settlement has been dated to this time.

It became the most important city in the region throughout the 4th millennium BCE.

It continued to be important until Sargon of Akkad established the 1st true empire, conquering much of the city-states of Sumer.

Gilgamesh was said to be the king, during the 1st dynasty of Uruk, which is dated to around 2900 to 2650 BCE.

But Uruk predated the Bronze Age Sumerian civilisation (3rd millennium BCE).

Those cities mentioned in Genesis 10, supposed built by single man, Nimrod. Well, they were built in different times, a couple of them predated the 3rd millennium Bronze Age.

Genesis 10 also say that Egypt didn't exist until Ham's son Mizraim/Egypt, but Egyptian cultures have also predated the start of the Bronze Age, before the 1st dynasty.

Wonder why they made such extravagant efforts to change history?

Genesis 10:9
He was a mighty hunter before the LORD; so it is said, "Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the LORD."

And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.

 

[gnostic]

Hmmm. Well Enoch and Enug mixes Genesis with the Sumerian Gilgamesh.

In one of the scrolls (Dead Sea Scrolls), I don't remember which one exactly, Gilgamesh was mentioned, as one of the giants or Nephilm.

I don't think Iron Age Israel/Judah was unaware of the Babylonian myths of Gilgamesh and the Flood (Ziusudra/Atrahasis/Utnapishtim), because Gilgamesh was a very popular epic throughout the Middle East.

And there are number of fragments of the Epic found outside of Babylonia, during the 2nd millennium BCE, like Megiddo for example. Other fragments were found in Hattusa (Hittite capital in Anatolian Turkey), in Ugarit in northwest Syria, and in Amarna the religious capital of heretic king of Egypt, Akhetaten, all dated to around the 1500 BCE, which is the Middle Babylonian period in Babylonia.

 

[sooda]

In one of the scrolls (Dead Sea Scrolls), I don't remember which one exactly, Gilgamesh was mentioned, as one of the giants or Nephilm.

I don't think Iron Age Israel/Judah was unaware of the Babylonian myths of Gilgamesh and the Flood (Ziusudra/Atrahasis/Utnapishtim), because Gilgamesh was a very popular epic throughout the Middle East.

And there are number of fragments of the Epic found outside of Babylonia, during the 2nd millennium BCE, like Megiddo for example. Other fragments were found in Hattusa (Hittite capital in Anatolian Turkey), in Ugarit in northwest Syria, and in Amarna the religious capital of heretic king of Egypt, Akhetaten, all dated to around the 1500 BCE, which is the Middle Babylonian period in Babylonia.

I have read that too so of course they knew,

Do you think it was about promoting their power and prestige ?

 

[Rapture Era]

Well boys and girls, it's been interesting jousting with you about the truth of either Supernatural creation by a transcendent being, namely God, or something from nothing to everything evolution. But this is the bottom line. They both cant be true at the same time.
If abiogenesis and evolution is true, at the end of our life, we are nothing and cease to exist. No hope at all.
However, if the Word of God is true, Heaven and Hell exist. If that's true, then there will be eternal consequences to our decisions while we are here on earth. Now think about this for a moment. How stupid would it be for anyone to choose to spend an eternity in Hell? Remember, God has made a way of escape from this dreadful place called Hell through his Son Jesus who paid YOUR price for sin through his death on the cross. How many of you would admit that an eternal decision to spend eternity in Hell is the height of stupidity? Verses, spending eternity in heaven where there will be no more tears, no more suffering, no more disease, no more physical handicaps, but life with friends and family in a euphoric state for ever and ever! Heaven or Hell, you are the one to make that choice. And God will honor your choice. He doesn't want anyone to parish in hell, but, if that's your choice, he will grant it for you.

 

[Polymath257]

And now we have Pascal's Wager!

Can you say 'those aren't the only alternatives'?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well boys and girls, it's been interesting jousting with you about the truth of either Supernatural creation by a transcendent being, namely God, or something from nothing to everything evolution. But this is the bottom line. They both cant be true at the same time.
If abiogenesis and evolution is true, at the end of our life, we are nothing and cease to exist. No hope at all.
However, if the Word of God is true, Heaven and Hell exist. If that's true, then there will be eternal consequences to our decisions while we are here on earth. Now think about this for a moment. How stupid would it be for anyone to choose to spend an eternity in Hell? Remember, God has made a way of escape from this dreadful place called Hell through his Son Jesus who paid YOUR price for sin through his death on the cross. How many of you would admit that an eternal decision to spend eternity in Hell is the height of stupidity? Verses, spending eternity in heaven where there will be no more tears, no more suffering, no more disease, no more physical handicaps, but life with friends and family in a euphoric state for ever and ever! Heaven or Hell, you are the one to make that choice. And God will honor your choice. He doesn't want anyone to parish in hell, but, if that's your choice, he will grant it for you.

Empty threats are no way to win a debate. And there is more than one false dichotomy in your post. We know that life as we know it is a product of evolution. Even you indirectly confirmed that when you dodged the question on whether or not your God lied. Also even though the original lifeforms arose through abiogenesis that does not mean that death is necessarily the end. That was your first clear false dichotomy.

Your second was assuming that it was your immoral version of God of nothing. There could be countless versions of god. Your barbaric tribal God that relies on magic and genocide almost certainly does not exist. And you should be grateful for that.

 

[joelr]

Well boys and girls, it's been interesting jousting with you about the truth of either Supernatural creation by a transcendent being, namely God, or something from nothing to everything evolution. But this is the bottom line. They both cant be true at the same time.
If abiogenesis and evolution is true, at the end of our life, we are nothing and cease to exist. No hope at all.
However, if the Word of God is true, Heaven and Hell exist. If that's true, then there will be eternal consequences to our decisions while we are here on earth. Now think about this for a moment. How stupid would it be for anyone to choose to spend an eternity in Hell? Remember, God has made a way of escape from this dreadful place called Hell through his Son Jesus who paid YOUR price for sin through his death on the cross. How many of you would admit that an eternal decision to spend eternity in Hell is the height of stupidity? Verses, spending eternity in heaven where there will be no more tears, no more suffering, no more disease, no more physical handicaps, but life with friends and family in a euphoric state for ever and ever! Heaven or Hell, you are the one to make that choice. And God will honor your choice. He doesn't want anyone to parish in hell, but, if that's your choice, he will grant it for you.

That's exactly what myths are for, to allow you to fear death less.
A universal god who created the universe still doesn't get you to Jesus or Hercules or Thor.
Invoking Pascals Wager is just embarrassing for you.

 

[joelr]

Sounds like a lot of obfuscated foreign word salad to me. That is, where everything can be correct, and everything can be false. Whether it was the Devil, Satan, a talking snake, or just a weird dream by Eve, their innocence alone did not warrant death or expulsion, or the creation of the Jesus narrative. Especially by an all-knowing, all-powerful God. But I am now more informed that another myth was added later to an earlier myth.

No they don't make much sense in a literal way. The metaphorical readings are the only way to make sense of them.

 

[gnostic]

Maybe..

The biblical notion that the world's first city is founded by Cain, is recalling Gilgamesh who lives at Sumerian Unug (Babylonian Uruk), Unug being recast as Enoch.

But Uruk isn't the oldest city in the world. It is ancient, but by no mean the earliest.

Damascus and Jericho are older still, by several thousand of years.

Like Uruk, Jericho was successively built on top of older layers of settlements.

The oldest layer of Jericho is about 12,000 years old (hence around 10,000 BCE), which was among the earliest Neolithic village.

What is really amazing about Jericho is that there were no pottery this early in the Neolithic period, and yet they were advanced enough to construct homes make from sun-dried clay and straw bricks, about a thousand years later, construct the stone walls around the town, and even a tower with stairway!

Jericho is oddity, because when Jericho was abandoned almost 1000 years later, you would expect the newer town would be more advanced and city would be larger than the old. Instead the immediate newer town was smaller in size with no fortified walls. Technology, they were less advanced, probably due to the residents being invaders.

Jericho would not become a walled city until the Bronze Age (around 25-2400 BCE).

Like Jericho and Uruk, Damascus was a city of long history, but its earliest city was no where as advanced as Jericho in the 9th millennium BCE. Damascus wan't prominent until the late Chalolithic period (when people were using copper tools as well as stone, the Chalolithic period started around 4000 BCE, and its more like transitional period between Neolithic and Bronze Age).

Another city, a Phoenician city, I can't remember if it was Byblos or Sidon (goodness, my memory seemed to be slipping), is about roughly the same age as Uruk, but whichever one it is, the city didn't become a seafaring city-state until the Bronze Age.

No, sooda, Uruk isn't the first or oldest city. Uruk wasn't important until 4200 BCE, and reaching its zenith around 3600 to 2900 BCE. Gilgamesh, belonging to the 1st dynasty of Uruk, was said flourished around 27th or 26th century BCE, but we know from legend and myth than the historical Gilgamesh.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

Well boys and girls, it's been interesting jousting with you about the truth of either Supernatural creation by a transcendent being, namely God, or something from nothing to everything evolution. But this is the bottom line. They both cant be true at the same time.
If abiogenesis and evolution is true, at the end of our life, we are nothing and cease to exist. No hope at all.
However, if the Word of God is true, Heaven and Hell exist. If that's true, then there will be eternal consequences to our decisions while we are here on earth. Now think about this for a moment. How stupid would it be for anyone to choose to spend an eternity in Hell? Remember, God has made a way of escape from this dreadful place called Hell through his Son Jesus who paid YOUR price for sin through his death on the cross. How many of you would admit that an eternal decision to spend eternity in Hell is the height of stupidity? Verses, spending eternity in heaven where there will be no more tears, no more suffering, no more disease, no more physical handicaps, but life with friends and family in a euphoric state for ever and ever! Heaven or Hell, you are the one to make that choice. And God will honor your choice. He doesn't want anyone to parish in hell, but, if that's your choice, he will grant it for you.

If an all knowing, all-loving, all-benevolent, and all powerful personal God, wanted everyone to go to Heaven, then everyone would. Why would any rational human on the planet, willfully choose to spend an eternity of everlasting suffering? Do you think that a God would not interfere in matters of eternal salvation. This is truly a God of Indifference, Inaction, and Apathy. If we really did have free-choice/will, it would only be a part of our human condition, not any gift from a God.

Death itself clearly demonstrates no pain, no suffering, no disease, and no physical handicaps(other than being dead). Without the "snake-oil" sales pitch of "follow and obey, and death will NOT be the end", no one would have ever considered the possibility of a life after death(except in myths/stories). It is just another con job, like Laetrile, Thalidomide, Crystals, and other pseudoscientific claims? Ask yourself what would the residual image of yourself be in the afterlife? Old, young, or the walking dead? What form of energy would support such an existence, and where?

The self-conscious awareness of death is "..reflective and conceptual, and animals are spared it.". Without exploiting this self-awareness, the church would have no leverage that could support the rest of its messages. First, you must get the attention of people by promising them an impossible reward. Second, you must create in people a sense of inadequacy, or some personal sense of guilt. Thirdly, you must provide a means for people to acquire this impossible reward. Finally, you must create a repetitive system of positive and negative feedback loops, that suppress individuality and any critical thinking. Churches are just another institution(like political) trying to control the populace, by controlling how they think. By controlling how they think, you also control how they behave.

If you are correct, then good luck in the next life. I am just happy to be able to reflect on almost 70 years of history. I am happy to have had the opportunity to experience all the nuance of life itself. Including, the birth of my children, the memories of my first love, and the miracle of finding someone willing to share a journey through life together. I am also happy to be able to enjoy all the fruits of my academic and practical experiences. This is certainly worth dying for afterwards. What seems stupid and selfish to me, is spending your entire life preparing for your own death. We don't have any control over how we came into this world, and we won't have any control over what happens after we leave this world. Fortunately after death, neither of us could be bitterly disappointed or pleasantly surprised anyway.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

No they don't make much sense in a literal way. The metaphorical readings are the only way to make sense of them.

What are some of the metaphorical interpretations explicit(not implied, or a simile) in the story of the "Fall"? The Bible is a Book of allegories, and should never be taken literally. How much in-depth metaphorical reading, do we need to make any sense of God and mass murder, slavery, genocide, infanticide, hating ugly people((Leviticus 21:17-24), everything He did to Job, and cannibalism? Since there will always be verses to contradict any metaphorical interpretation, I will stick to literal interpretations only.

 

[sooda]

But Uruk isn't the oldest city in the world. It is ancient, but by no mean the earliest.

Damascus and Jericho are older still, by several thousand of years.

Like Uruk, Jericho was successively built on top of older layers of settlements.

The oldest layer of Jericho is about 12,000 years old (hence around 10,000 BCE), which was among the earliest Neolithic village.

What is really amazing about Jericho is that there were no pottery this early in the Neolithic period, and yet they were advanced enough to construct homes make from sun-dried clay and straw bricks, about a thousand years later, construct the stone walls around the town, and even a tower with stairway!

Jericho is oddity, because when Jericho was abandoned almost 1000 years later, you would expect the newer town would be more advanced and city would be larger than the old. Instead the immediate newer town was smaller in size with no fortified walls. Technology, they were less advanced, probably due to the residents being invaders.

Jericho would not become a walled city until the Bronze Age (around 25-2400 BCE).

Like Jericho and Uruk, Damascus was a city of long history, but its earliest city was no where as advanced as Jericho in the 9th millennium BCE. Damascus wan't prominent until the late Chalolithic period (when people were using copper tools as well as stone, the Chalolithic period started around 4000 BCE, and its more like transitional period between Neolithic and Bronze Age).

Another city, a Phoenician city, I can't remember if it was Byblos or Sidon (goodness, my memory seemed to be slipping), is about roughly the same age as Uruk, but whichever one it is, the city didn't become a seafaring city-state until the Bronze Age.

No, sooda, Uruk isn't the first or oldest city. Uruk wasn't important until 4200 BCE, and reaching its zenith around 3600 to 2900 BCE. Gilgamesh, belonging to the 1st dynasty of Uruk, was said flourished around 27th or 26th century BCE, but we know from legend and myth than the historical Gilgamesh.

Baalbek??

Great post. So we know that several cities (like Jericho) were old before Cain and Enoch built Uruk.

 

[Looncall]

Well boys and girls, it's been interesting jousting with you about the truth of either Supernatural creation by a transcendent being, namely God, or something from nothing to everything evolution. But this is the bottom line. They both cant be true at the same time.
If abiogenesis and evolution is true, at the end of our life, we are nothing and cease to exist. No hope at all.
However, if the Word of God is true, Heaven and Hell exist. If that's true, then there will be eternal consequences to our decisions while we are here on earth. Now think about this for a moment. How stupid would it be for anyone to choose to spend an eternity in Hell? Remember, God has made a way of escape from this dreadful place called Hell through his Son Jesus who paid YOUR price for sin through his death on the cross. How many of you would admit that an eternal decision to spend eternity in Hell is the height of stupidity? Verses, spending eternity in heaven where there will be no more tears, no more suffering, no more disease, no more physical handicaps, but life with friends and family in a euphoric state for ever and ever! Heaven or Hell, you are the one to make that choice. And God will honor your choice. He doesn't want anyone to parish in hell, but, if that's your choice, he will grant it for you.

On another hand, maybe all your heaven and hell guff is just a scam for fleecing the gullible. Seems more likely to me.