It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: undo
ice age. black sea flood. they never happened?
but it does mean that they aren't impossible. and if they aren't impossible, they are no longer under the definition of "not possible."
how? rocks have molecular and atomic properties - many containing crystals, and crystals are used in technology today. so are metals, and they had access to metals as well. heck even the book of genesis talks about there being "good gold" in the land of havilah.
well you're the one that assumed that ancient egypt was to be understood as anti-biblical, and that i was embracing pagan egypt.
your belief structure hinges on the idea that ancient history is entirely religious, when i think it's historical, which also includes, among other things, descriptions of their religious activities.
originally posted by: undo
when there was no death for humans before that
“The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.”
originally posted by: undo
what is the fall narrative about
originally posted by: undo
and why does jesus do away with death in the book of revelation, if it's such a necessary thing?
originally posted by: undo
animals die, does that mean the adam, who were formed in the image of elohim did?
originally posted by: undo
why use it as a threat "thou wilt surely die", if it was just business as usual.
originally posted by: Develo
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
The ancient world didn't undergo any global catastrophes either.
That's a very bad argument because the ancient world faced many global changes and catastrophes like the rising of the sea that created the Mediterranean sea and submerged the Doggerland, the eruption of Thira creating a tsunami, the Storegga Slide and many other events easily impressing the humans from the late paleolithic. These civilizations, though without a written culture, had very developed oral cultures and used epics and poems to remember and transmit their knowledge and stories.
Actually most people studying myths and religions agree that almost all myths from all cultures and religions can be traced back to 2 original myths, one from Africa and one from Oceania if I remember correctly (I can check later if anyone is interested).
Passages like the flood are also very common and most likely refer to real events like a tidal wave in or the people living in Doggerland being forced to leave their lands because of the rising of the sea.
within the confines of science
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Those are all localized catastrophes. In order for a catastrophe to live up to the "global" adjective, it needs to affect the ENTIRE world and all of its civilizations simultaneously. I'm not arguing that catastrophes didn't happen in the past, just that no global ones happened.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Source? While I've heard that many religions stole from other religions, I have NEVER heard someone say that all myths can be traced back to 2 original myths.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Possibly, but it is damn hard to read between what is fact and what is fiction to the point that the only thing I can say for sure is that a particularly nasty flood happened thousands of years ago.
originally posted by: Develo
The end of the ice age was certainly not localized and certainly caused a lot of water-related catastrophes all over the place where most neolithic humans lived.
After that it's just a matter of time for different cultures to share and spread there local stories and it becomes a new mythos. That's how culture works. I mean you can see in thread that even Americans believe in the events in the bible even if:
- it did not happen in their country
- they weren't there when it happens
Sure I'll post it later when I get the info. It's not because you are not aware of it that it doesn't exist. Plenty of anthropologists are studying this possibility.
P.S.: these myths are creation myth so of course they are 100% allegorical. No man was alive when the universe was created.
Yet they are very interesting because they show how most different cultures have common roots
I agree, it's hard. The bible is a book full of old myths. Yet it doesn't mean these myths (besides the creation myth, creation myths are different things) cannot be inspired by real events dramatized over time.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Yes, but that only matters to people who lived on the coast. People inland probably didn't notice a thing, except maybe a shorter trip to the shore.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Believing in something doesn't mean it is real. It is entirely possible to believe a lie.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Actually, that is kind of what I believe for the entire bible (jesus story and all), but the problem is that we are looking what we would call historical fiction today and trying to piece together the REAL parts of history from them. When I do it, I start by discarding all supernatural claims as they cannot be true without outside help. Until evidence of that outside help is produced, there is no point entertaining those ideas as true.
originally posted by: Develo
Google Doggerland, we are talking about huge continental mass disappearing. Surely that would mark the minds of people back then.
Also people then weren't sedentary. They knew vast amount of land.
There is a huge spectrum of possibilities between a truth and a lie. Studying history will show you that it's almost impossible to know the factual truth regarding past events. Every account is at least biased and sometimes exaggerated or downright deformed.
It's not because a story isn't "true" that it's a lie. The bible is considered a spiritual book by religious people, whether it's factual or not doesn't matter that much if what interests you is the spiritual aspect.
That's what I'm doing too, I think we agree on most things. To me the bible is the mythos of the Jewish people and the story of a Jewish mystics maybe dramatized with passages from older myths.
I dig it for spiritual reasons and because it's a great historical source if taken in context.
The problem is always with fundies when they consider the Bible to be analyzed as "the word of god" and without putting it back in context, but honestly fundies represent a minority.
Even the Church fathers recognized that Genesis was the Jewish creation myth. Not a description of physical events.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
But even you have to have some belief in SOME of the supernatural claims in the bible to be a Christian. If you believe that Jesus was a small time cult leader whose name got hyped to godhood, then there is no point in calling yourself a Christian since Jesus wouldn't be a path towards salvation. He'd be just another preacher.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Oh I'm aware that the Christian fundamentalism we see today is a rather recent development, but keep in mind that when these myths were first written down they were believed to be the truth.
originally posted by: Develo
What makes you think I call myself a Christian?
Also there is no need to believe in the supernatural claims of the Bible to study it's hidden spiritual teachings.
Spiritual things take place inside the individual. It's a transformative process. It has nothing to do with the exoteric stories in the Bible. If people get stuck at the exoteric level, it's not my problem. It's where the separation is made between those who truly want to understand the message of the Bible, and those who simply read it out of tradition or social pressure.
That's a gross mistake. Just like fairy tales actually contain hidden teachings yet people know very well they are fiction, a great majority of myths are nothing but a vehicle to transmit and teach lessons. People wrote them for that purpose and knew it very well.
It's part of a long tradition of mystery cults and an even older tradition of storytelling as an education method, before writing existed. And it's for that reason that we can still find these hidden teachings today.
Again, if some gullible people think myths aren't myths, it's because they are gullible, not because the writer was.
Again, if some gullible people think myths aren't myths, it's because they are gullible, not because the writer was.
So by the time that writing came along to record them, the people writing them would not have the slightest idea where those stories came from and if they were true or not.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
However, I am willing to bet there are two different mythology tales being told here. The embellished "true" history myths and the allegory to teach a lesson myths. The problem is that over the ages we've lost the ability to tell which ones are which.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I guess I was just assuming. Are you not?
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
I dunno. The only thing I got out of it was the Golden Rule. Other than that, I see little use for it outside of studying it like ancient mythology to understand what beliefs go into the religion.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
People have ALWAYS been superstitious. While I won't discount the idea that people distrustful of religion have always existed, I think it is naive to think that the majority of the people reading these stories as well as writing them didn't truly believe they were the truth.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
But see the writer of these myths was just writing down the stories they've heard their whole lives. There is nothing to suggest that they too didn't believe them as well. It's not like these stories are coming directly from their imaginations. You said it yourself that they were passed down orally for generations. So by the time that writing came along to record them, the people writing them would not have the slightest idea where those stories came from and if they were true or not.
It became a requirement to believe that your king was a god personified, and I'm sure that these particular god-kings probably believed their own bs. Though it is tough to say who believed what.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: undo
This is all pseudo-science since no such tech like this actually exists. It is all theoretical. And if WE haven't invented it yet, the ancients sure as crap didn't invent it. Saying that they did is an assumption without evidence.