Oly....

"The teacher asked, 'What if Jonah went to hell?'
The little girl replied, 'Then you ask him'!"

I luv that :)

David F..

The issue of 'talking snakes' is one of 'plausability structure'... from ours..it seems ludicrous, granted.
Perhaps it was in a dream ? :)
But the idea that 'snakes can't talk' is a true to me as "broken bones cannot be healed in seconds" :) which as you know was my own experience. In short.. if the Almighty can create the universe and world and mankind.. it would be but a small thing for a snake to verbalize something if God so enabled it.

I honestly don't know the degree of 'anthropomorphism' in some of the early Genesis stories.... I do however accept them as truth.
But "scientific truth" in a stiched up, stacked away, tidy, no-hypothesy-related-loose-ends? of course it is not that kind of document.
Perhaps part of modern scientific mans problem with understanding the Bible is his desire to impose such a view on it?

Back to Oly

Dead Sea Scrolls Fake? No of course not..why would I? They are crucial in understanding many Old Testament documents. In particular the Isaiah Scroll.
I just don't inject into them the kind of Christology preferred by pagan scholars :) (Such as Thering?)

Hi Poly,

I have read translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls. What is interesting those documents provide insights into the religiosity of the period and the behaviour of religious groups, especially the Essenes. For example, the Sabbath would seem to have been Saturday with a slowing down on Friday pm.

I have read some Theiring, mainly on calendars and the Apocalypse. I have not read her extensively. Some things she does say overlap with other scholars, say regading the general transition from Christian Judaism to Christianity. Some matters, built on Pesher interpretation would to be less mainstream, say, Jesus II and Jesus III, as (two) generational offspring of Jesus I. On the Otyher hand,I think secular scholars would "generally" hold that the Apocalyse referred to the circa the fist century, that for a period Christianity was a banch of Judaism and that the case of the history and selection of the gospels is not as clear cut (Nicaea), as the theistic scholars posit.

In the time of Constantine that era was farther away from Jesus that we are from Captain Cook when a new religion from as it was would have helped consolidate failing Roman Empire after several nut-case emperors. What is curious, though, is today, we would understand the languages and have docucments hided from the Romans. Herein, the academic scholar often has a strong posit.

Polycarp wrote:

"But the idea that 'snakes can't talk' is a true to me as "broken bones cannot be healed in seconds" :) which as you know was my own experience.

Dear Polycarp,

I also think that "broken bones cannot be healed in seconds"

You believe you had such an experience. Do you have any clinical evidence such as x-rays of a healed fracture to support your belief? You probably are certain that it happened, but I don't think it did. I am willing to examine evidence that would support your belief.

The ability to speak requires not only vocal cords and associatedphysical equipment but also a cerebral capacity which a snake does not have.

I think you are unwilling to recognise a tribal legend or fiction when you see it.

William of Ockham (c. 1300-1349), a medieval philosopher, had a profound influence on later philosophers and scientific thought. Scientifically, his claim to fame rests on his enunciation of 'Ockham's razor', according to which entities ought not to be multiplied except of necessity. Translated into modern terminology this dictum asserts that when a phenomenon can be interpreted in several ways the preferred explanation is that involving the fewest assumptions.

To assume the infallibility of any book is an unnecessary assumption. We can look at the Bible and see that it is a patchwork of stories, eg. the two accounts of the creation of man and woman in Genesis.

The first account has God creating man and woman together.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Later woman is a separate creation.

2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

The simplest explanation for two separate stories is that two separate stories were put together. Contradictory tribal legends were merged.

Dear david f,

There are philosphical objections to humans being made in the image of Man or gods becoming human. God has to be God in all ways/manners of self and effect, and, humanity is imperfect. A God can even approximate the imperfect.

Hi Poly,

If there is only "One" God, does that mean that at God is governed by the Law of the Integer? Can God not be One God, if said God chooses? If, yes, does God now have the "potential" to be gods, should It choose? Thus, polythesistic divine entities subsist, within your existant monotheist divine entity?

david f

Oops.

A God canNOT even approximate the imperfect. That is, cannot be human and God.

Oly.

Dear Oliver,

Since God is a human invention the only limits on what God can do are the limits of the human imagination.