8 of 23
8
Definition of Atheist
Posted: 13 June 2013 08:20 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 106 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

“In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God and the word was God.”

Scott Mayers,
My thinking is Jesus was Gnostic in his teachings.
Do you think that “In the beginning was the Word” is Gnostic?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 09:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 107 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2757
Joined  2011-11-04

I know little about Gnosticism, but, in retrospect, the verse cited seems ironically revealing, in that I think that human’s development of complex language was a prerequisite for humans creating the concept of God.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 09:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 108 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

For the concept of God, yes. For the thought of a supreme power, I got to give that to mother nature as the driving force.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 10:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 109 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2757
Joined  2011-11-04

I’m not sure I understand what you are saying.  But we exist in a natural world, so, of course, nature provides context for so much of what we do, including having thoughts and forming concepts.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 12:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 110 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
Mike Yohe - 13 June 2013 08:20 AM

“In the beginning was the Word, and the word was with God and the word was God.”

Scott Mayers,
My thinking is Jesus was Gnostic in his teachings.
Do you think that “In the beginning was the Word” is Gnostic?

The Gnostic concepts were mostly taken out of European Western ideals because it’s obscurity with mystery made it less of something people could grasp on to. Because of this, people had too many varying personal interpretations and thus didn’t have a uniform agreement as to what is true about those writings. This mystic interpretation spread to the Eastern Asian forms of religions like Hinduism. Such claims that “God is one” or “God is in you to discover” was a somewhat democratic acceptance of various personal beliefs for the multicultural societies that lived in relatively peaceful and secure environments like India during that time.

It didn’t hold well in areas like Europe because the survival of beliefs required unifying the concepts to something common which requires clarity and definition. So when Constantine legitimized Christianity, they had to abandon most (not all) of the Gnostic interpretations and scripts that were too personally interpreted. What was left was the content that was more declarative and specific. It also assured people collectively that the people, events, and God, himself, were literally real as opposed to presuming the Bible as a collection of possible myth or metaphor.

I think the original religious content was mixed in meaning and that the Gnostic views were becoming more recognized for its actual mistaken view that originated from the awe of earlier people to the invention of writing and its seemingly ‘magical’ ability to transport one’s thoughts precisely to others without speaking directly to each other. A good example I saw recently was in the 1991 movie, Black Robe, where in this scene, these natives observed a French missionary to the early French colonies of North America reading the Bible and inquired what the hell he was doing. It didn’t make any sense to them for someone to be so seemingly obsessed with staring at an object that had what appeared to be confusing arbitrary markings. In order to demonstrate its significance, the missionary took a blank page and asked the Indian to tell him something that no one but he himself knew. He wrote it down. Then he lead them to his assistant who was in the distance and clearly did not hear what the Indian said. The missionary gave the piece of paper to his assistant and asked him to read out loud what it said. The natives were in such awe that they thought that it was the work of a demon.

Gnosticism evolved from this. Gematria, Numerology, and astrology were all part of this construct as well and is still evidenced in the bible in lots of places. Matching symbols that represented both numbers and phonetic alphabets made people think that there was some magical connection between how one’s name ‘added’ up. If their numbers matched other names’ or word numbers, they associated the two as significantly connected. Notice how God renames people in the Bible. Although some of it’s original connections are lost to why this was done, one of them most likely was to re-associate a prior meaning that the names added up to to numbers that matched other understood names and concepts of the time.

This began before the New Testament and so Gnosticism is not Christian in origin. Egypt was the world’s capital of permanent writings from their original hieroglyphs in stone and the birth of transferable writing (paper). I believe that secularism always coexisted with religion. As writing became less mysterious, the secular understandings eventually proceeded the Gnostic views and so they began to be less accepting.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 12:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 111 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
TimB - 13 June 2013 09:15 AM

I know little about Gnosticism, but, in retrospect, the verse cited seems ironically revealing, in that I think that human’s development of complex language was a prerequisite for humans creating the concept of God.

I agree as you can read above. I think that evolution of any intelligence from living creatures that must adapt through the neural logic of association must actually incidentally require stages of thinking that always initiate religious conceptualizing until sufficient experience proves otherwise. In other words, what is found in the origins of religion is identical to the origins of knowledge and wisdom itself. It’s the logic of any possible natural consequence of neurological evolution, not specific genes, for example, that determine how we learn. So within religious manuscripts is hidden the evolution of reasoning itself and the shows marks of its various stages during the first attempts at making sense of the real world.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 01:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 112 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

That makes a lot of sense to me. I was trying to come up with a name for the loss of Harappan knowledge after the Great Flood. The Great Dark Age seemed to fit well except it was a natural disaster and religion should have been able to move forward, not backwards.
So if the Vedic knowledge base was destroyed in the Great Flood then you say one should expect the religious wisdom to decline?

The same with Gnostic, the lost of the teachers would cause a decline.
Is my understanding correct?

The vedic was verbal, the Gnostic was not, therefore the books were ordered destroyed. 


By the way, great work in your post.

[ Edited: 13 June 2013 01:24 PM by MikeYohe ]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 June 2013 07:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 113 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
Mike Yohe - 13 June 2013 01:19 PM

That makes a lot of sense to me. I was trying to come up with a name for the loss of Harappan knowledge after the Great Flood. The Great Dark Age seemed to fit well except it was a natural disaster and religion should have been able to move forward, not backwards.
So if the Vedic knowledge base was destroyed in the Great Flood then you say one should expect the religious wisdom to decline?

The same with Gnostic, the lost of the teachers would cause a decline.
Is my understanding correct?

The vedic was verbal, the Gnostic was not, therefore the books were ordered destroyed. 


By the way, great work in your post.

If you’re responding to me, I’m confused about you’re knowledge base. I’m getting some impression that you believe that there existed an event you refer to as “the Great Flood”. The Deluge or Flood stories are seemingly derived from likely observations of fossils of fish in higher elevations like mountains. But there are many versions. Which are you assuming and why?

If you are wondering why the Indian subcontinent kept a more esoteric belief in religion as opposed to the Middle East and Europe, I presume that they had a longer history of the gnostic (or vedic, in Indian) ideology and that they lacked a need to change or adapt to the European concept because the those times and places were relatively stable as their land was producing well and they were isolated geographically. India/Pakistan was not a highway between conflicting civilizations and thus didn’t have the high capacity exchange between traders like the Middle East being a trade route between many differing groups.

Their religious works were likely not known or understood through the pass of the Afghanistan other than the fact that they likely also shared influence in regions like Mesopotamia at times. You’re probably right to presume that the Vedic’s mostly verbal reliance on passing scripture would mean that they their traveling traders of the time had a less likely opportunity to get to the West but even if the development of Western religions destroyed works, they didn’t go out of their way to go to some distant land (India/Pakistan) to destroy whatever possible traces of gnostic-style beliefs. Why would they? By the time of Constantine, however, the Vedics were all recorded in various writings within India/Pakistan. They had relatively no actual informative content to Gnostic Christianity though because Gnosticism is not itself a particular belief, it is a descriptive term to describe how they believed. “Gnostic X” is an X (religion or belief system) that believes in the magical nature of various degrees or forms of symbols and the languages they create, spoken or written. The literal symbols and structures of language itself was worshiped as the source of their Gods.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 June 2013 07:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 114 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

I got to go to strictly theory here.

1.  Take the DNA timeline of grains out of India.
2.  Take the apple, orange and other fruit, nuts and vegetables.
3.  Look at the animals, like the chicken.
4.  Take what we know about the Cowry Shell, where it was use and traded.
5.  The language being Asia/African.
6.  How bad were the plagues?
7.  Take the theory of the Burckle Crater.
8.  Make a timeline graft of BC dates of the new discoveries and white paper theories in India over the last ten years.

Then without any information of the Yellow River Valley history which should be factored in.
Look at the direction theories are going. Plus what is not theory, the many beginning dates of a range of items that have been moved backwards in time in just the last couple of years.
I think the next twenty years are going to be very interesting in finds and theories. Instead of waiting years for good discoveries, they are happening monthly and weekly.

One item worth mentioning out of a book about the finding of the Ark and the tribe in the middle of Africa that claimed they were Jewish. The DNA showed Yemen and the Africa tribe was connected by DNA. The black Africa tribe was 50% from the tribe of Abraham, 40% African and 10% other.

If the Burckle impact did occur or one similar, many questions could be answered.


Sorry for being out of the norm on communication skills, self-taught.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 June 2013 10:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 115 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21

I’m still confused, Mike. Are you claiming there was a “Great Flood”?

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 June 2013 10:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 116 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2757
Joined  2011-11-04

There were likely a number of megafloods in human pre-history that could have essentially wiped out some rudimentary human societies.

 Signature 

“Our lives are not our own. From womb to tomb… We are bound to others, past and present… And by each crime and every kindness… We birth our future.”  Sonmi, 2144.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 June 2013 12:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 117 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

Scott,
Yes, it is being more accepted that there were two floods. The last one around 2807BC time period. Myself I have no way of knowing. Only going on the theories by researchers.
As far as the pieces of the puzzles I have, yes there was a great flood.
Nola, I don’t think lived to be 900 or whatever years old. The records were lost. And it took some time to get back in order.
The good part is, if it was a flood, then the proof in buried.
Notice that Egypt went from mud to stone after 2807BC.
They say Ur was by the ocean, it is now, what, I think seventy miles away.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 June 2013 01:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 118 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  514
Joined  2010-11-21
Mike Yohe - 15 June 2013 12:31 AM

Scott,
Yes, it is being more accepted that there were two floods. The last one around 2807BC time period. Myself I have no way of knowing. Only going on the theories by researchers.
As far as the pieces of the puzzles I have, yes there was a great flood.
Nola, I don’t think lived to be 900 or whatever years old. The records were lost. And it took some time to get back in order.
The good part is, if it was a flood, then the proof in buried.
Notice that Egypt went from mud to stone after 2807BC.
They say Ur was by the ocean, it is now, what, I think seventy miles away.

First of all, by ‘Great Flood’, you seem to be implying a world flood as far as I and most are concerned who use the term. Certainly there were likely great big floods here and there for various reasons. But these aren’t the same thing. Also, even if temporary local flooding due to tsunamis were a possible supporting candidate for flood myths, these stories are everywhere at all times and places supporting different religious stories. Either way, any flooding has much more natural explanations than mystical ones of any particular religious claim.

Ages of people in ancient times are just as likely to come from the passing on of the lunar age of a person rather than the annual one. Noah’s claimed age is likely to have been originally a reference to 900 moons or months. 900/12 = 75 years old. Soil is a mix of past living organisms and various grounded rock from river or other water erosion silt. Normally, the land gets its living stuff from the very things growing on it. But if everyone is eating or consuming it, where could the soil get it’s new living stuff to keep the soil black (good)? If it is not continuously replenished, eventually their will be no good soil left. Therefore, you get desert.

 Signature 

I eat without fear of certain Death from The Tree of Knowledge because with wisdom, we may one day break free from its mortal curse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 June 2013 04:31 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 119 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2885
Joined  2011-08-15

Posted: 15 June 2013 12:31 AM     [ Report ]   [ Ignore ]   [ # 117 ]
Jr. Member

Total Posts:  100
Joined  2013-06-01
Scott,
Yes, it is being more accepted that there were two floods. The last one around 2807BC time period. Myself I have no way of knowing. Only going on the theories by researchers.
As far as the pieces of the puzzles I have, yes there was a great flood.
Nola, I don’t think lived to be 900 or whatever years old. The records were lost. And it took some time to get back in order.
The good part is, if it was a flood, then the proof in buried.
Notice that Egypt went from mud to stone after 2807BC.
They say Ur was by the ocean, it is now, what, I think seventy miles away.

Mike, who’s accepting the idea that a flood in Egypt during the Early Dynastic period changed Egyptian culture? At that time proto dynastic upper and lower kingdoms were uniting to form the first Dynasty era under Narmur (some Egypologists believe him to be Menes) and the Egyptians began to create temple complexes, later beginning the massive civil projects that led to the pyramids. No flood caused this, it was the Egyptians themselves. They do have a flood story but that would be typical as the Nile floods twice annually and the people depended on this for their grain supply. And if you’re mentioning “Noah” that Semetic character was a rip off of the Sumerian folk tale “Gilgamesh” where Utnapistim is tipped off by a god to build an ark. And who said that the Sumerian city of Ur was anywhere near the ocean? There are maps of the period that clearly show Sumian cities in the exact position where later archeologists found their remains, e.g. The Ebla tablet.

 

Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 June 2013 11:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 120 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  483
Joined  2013-06-01

First of all, by ‘Great Flood’, you seem to be implying a world flood as far as I and most are concerned who use the term. Certainly there were likely great big floods here and there for various reasons. But these aren’t the same thing. Also, even if temporary local flooding due to tsunamis were a possible supporting candidate for flood myths, these stories are everywhere at all times and places supporting different religious stories. Either way, any flooding has much more natural explanations than mystical ones of any particular religious claim.

Ages of people in ancient times are just as likely to come from the passing on of the lunar age of a person rather than the annual one. Noah’s claimed age is likely to have been originally a reference to 900 moons or months. 900/12 = 75 years old. Soil is a mix of past living organisms and various grounded rock from river or other water erosion silt. Normally, the land gets its living stuff from the very things growing on it. But if everyone is eating or consuming it, where could the soil get it’s new living stuff to keep the soil black (good)? If it is not continuously replenished, eventually their will be no good soil left. Therefore, you get desert.
***************************************************************
What I have read is about a Great Flood that they say effected every civilization around the world. The flood of 2807 affected the weather in Mexico and South America too.

And the silt layers instead of being a tenth of an inch are several feet thick in areas. Reports of 8 to 11 feet in Ur.

And yes, Noah could have been 75, but then that would mean they were missing records for years in the linage of man. My understanding is they wanted to show relationship going back to Adam. In other words the 900 was not about math, it was about loss of the names of people and history after the flood.

[ Edited: 15 June 2013 01:08 PM by MikeYohe ]
Profile
 
 
   
8 of 23
8
 
‹‹ A Thitd Sex?      Excellent definition ››