Survey Results: Origins and Evolution

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by KingJames1337

 

Like I said. It's a primordial soup of ancient tales. Tales that have existed since before the religion did. After all, Moses founded Judaism, but all those tales are older than he is.

If you want my honest truthful thought, when I look at the History of Egypt, sometimes I replace "gods" with "god" and see what I get. It sometimes is interesting. Because Egypt is renown for rewriting their own history. I imagine it could be that Moses was brought up under the tales, found some more tales when he was in exile, and then they consumed those tales as they marched through the desert and into Canaan. Those were oral at first, and in time written down. Bare in mind the Old Testament was written down during the Exile. Those tales come directly from when the Jews were quite literally bathing in that primordial soup. I see no reason to view Zoser's religion as anything more than the retelling of some imported myths from Arabia, as is the tendencies of all such things in that region.

edit on 1-9-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

Simply put, it could be very likely Zoser's stuff is so similar to Christianity's stuff because Zoser may have been a Jew lost in Persia.

edit on 1-9-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

edit on 1-9-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)

So why king Cyrus's tolerance to the Jews and their religion why would he care? Why didn't he just do the exact same thing as the Babylonians or the Assyrians tolerance wasn't common in the past why would he be any different. I doubt Zoaroaster was a Jew why would the Persians accept the religion of an outsider and if he was a Jew wouldn't he preach the teachings of yehovah which lacked any battles between good and evil.

reply to post by KingJames1337


You don't know if it lacked any battles of good and evil. Again, the Old Testament was assembled during the exile. Ergo, there could have been local oral traditions of just such a battle, and you can can well tell it was a tradition made true by the words of Christ and his apostles in the New Testament. Could have been lost, then re-revealed by God.

Tolerance was actually quite common here and there. Even Israel had sanction cities for sinners. If the book of Judith is even partially true, those of the East were perfectly willing to follow the God of Israel.

Daniel's faith in God seemed tolerated at least partially for a time.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by nenothtu

 

Sometimes the best preachers are the ones that have lived half their lives as Satan.

Still nice to see and hear such things.

That passage also tells me to beware the man who claims to have an iron grip on absolute truth - he'll lie to you about other stuff, too!

reply to post by nenothtu


Yep, that's for sure. I only deal in absolutes that have been revealed through scientific pursuits or my personal spiritual path. And even then, there's a careful hierarchy between absolute truth, personal truth...ah hell, now I sound like Picard.

reply to post by Gorman91


"In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, in order to fulfill the word of The Lord spoken by Jeremiah, The Lord moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia to make a proclamation throughout his realm and to put it in writing: "This is what Cyrus king of Persia says: "The Lord, The God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth and He has appointed me to build a Temple [see Temples] for Him at Jerusalem in Judah. Anyone of his people among you - may his God be with him, and let him go up to Jerusalem in Judah and build The Temple of The Lord, The God of Israel, The God who is in Jerusalem." (Ezra 1:1-3)

Why allow them to rebuild the temple unless something convinced him.

reply to post by KingJames1337


I have no idea what this has to do with Zoser. :/

reply to post by Gorman91


The final savior of the world, Saoshyant, will be born to a virgin impregnated by the seed of Zoroaster while bathing in a lake. Saoshyant will raise the dead – including those in both heaven and hell – for final judgment, returning the wicked to hell to be purged of bodily sin. Next, all will wade through a river of molten metal in which the righteous will not burn. Heavenly forces will ultimately triumph over evil, rendering it forever impotent. Saoshyant and Ahura Mazda will offer a bull as a final sacrifice for all time, and all men will become immortal. Mountains will again flatten and valleys will rise; heaven will descend to the moon, and the earth will rise to meet them both.[38]

That sounds a lot like Jesus, I don't think some Arabic tribes would have a story that coincides with Jesus nor did the Jews.

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by KingJames1337

I'll take what you say about the snake representing adversity, perhaps as in an accident can kill you in a second? Perhaps the snake was their version of the critically acclaimed 1000 ways to die show if you've seen that but it still leaves the question why did the serpent tempt people to eat from the tree of good and evil any tablet mentioning good and evil?

I don't know of any tablets addressing good and evil right off the top of my head. Of course, there's always the possibility that I missed it because their conceptions of good and evil may have differed from mine.

I think at least one answer was presented right there in your question, the key being the word "tempted". You don't need a literal snake to understand the allegory of "temptation", and how caving in to it may be bad for you. As a matter of fact, some of the times I've encountered the MOST "adversity" have been those when I succumbed to "temptation"...

No actual snakes were harmed during the production of that adversity... I should have listened to the book, instead of making the movie...

Yeah a serpent was probably just an animal used to represent temptation though I'am not sure what he is being tempted from. Call me Samuel Jackson because I'am tired of these snakes.

reply to post by KingJames1337


I think so. After all, how do you know that was created after the fact Jesus existed? When Rome fell, crazy stuff happened. Entire histories were re-written that we just today are beginning to learn about. There's really no way of telling that anything was 100% not influenced by something else prior to the year 1500 or so.

Hell, there's even rumors that the Quran was fabricated by Syrian Christians attempting to evangelize the middle east. Whose to say that's false, and that they didn't pull it on Zoser too?

reply to post by KingJames1337


I said a bit back, it could just be a product of evolution. I mean, there was some 200 million years or so where fearing and distrusting reptiles was beneficial to one's health and well being. Nature would select such creatures for survival.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by KingJames1337

 

I think so. After all, how do you know that was created after the fact Jesus existed? When Rome fell, crazy stuff happened. Entire histories were re-written that we just today are beginning to learn about. There's really no way of telling that anything was 100% not influenced by something else prior to the year 1500 or so.

Hell, there's even rumors that the Quran was fabricated by Syrian Christians attempting to evangelize the middle east. Whose to say that's false, and that they didn't pull it on Zoser too?

Actually, prior to 586 Bce(pre-exile) the Hebrew books didn't mention the devil at all after the exile he is mentioned 4 times mentions of resurrection, heaven and hell and other things aren't mentioned in pre-exile books but rather post exile. Also zoaroastarianism or something of the like might account for the eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil as zoaroastarianism mentions all people have the choice of good and evil unfortunately the blocking of the tree of life still doesn't make sense.

reply to post by Gorman91


Sorry for the King Cyrus post I got tired and forgot what we were debating.

reply to post by KingJames1337


Not so sure. Even as slaves they understood the devil in the sense of Seth or other gods. I'm also not so sure much of any of what they believed was written down prior to exile, and what was probably was destroyed. In our own society, the introduction to new elements in religion usually results in tremendous conflict and division. The near universal acceptance of the devil's existence when those things were written down suggests they did know about it, if only in the oral sense.

To return to the Book of ENoch, remember when I said it ain't good for scriptural truth, but it is good for context? The phrase nephilim is mentioned but twice in the whole of the Old Testament. And yet the book of Enoch is full of it. Again, this suggests a more oral origins.

Remember, ancient Hebrew was based deeply on elder's knowledge and tradition. Unwritten facts passed down through generation.

And I don't see any Christian-mormon like division within the Hebrews. They argued over if there was a Resurrection or not, but not really if there was a devil or not. Seems to me like it either already existed when they went into exile, or the Zosers got the idea from them. Like I said, the speculative date for Zoser is 1000 BC to 600BC. That's a huge time. He could simply have been a Jew lost in Persia.

Originally posted by KingJames1337
reply to post by Gorman91

 

Sorry for the King Cyrus post I got tired and forgot what we were debating.

hahaha. You've no clue how many times that happens to me in scholarly debates like these. I sound a hell of a lot more intellectual online than in real life, because I have time to digest what I'm thinking and saying.

reply to post by KingJames1337


i performed a strong's concordance search for the word "satan" and the first time it appears is in the days of king david, in reference to his decision to perform a census on israel
www.blueletterbible.org...

the word "devil" doesn't appear till the new testament book of matthew
www.blueletterbible.org...

the word "Lucifer" appears only once, and it's in the old testament book of isaiah
www.blueletterbible.org...

other references are not quite so obvious, like the "covering cherub" verses in ezekiel
www.blueletterbible.org...

there are countless references to "the serpent" starting from genesis although some are clearly
about snakes, some are not or appear to be double meanings, for example

Num 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten , when he looketh upon it, shall live .

a fiery serpent is a seraph [an angel). there's a foreshadowing of jesus there AND one of these


sitchin mentions that this is actually the symbol of enki and represents the "serpent in the tree" (of life) and depicted his station among the anunnaki as a geneticist (creation scientist). if so, this would prove that 6000 years ago, somebody already knew what DNA looked like. i found that symbol all over ancient mesopotamia

reply to post by undo

Nice research. I've seen that symbol too in various pictures, it seems pretty unlikely that it is just a coincidence that a picture Resembling DNA in the association with the alleged creator(who formed the brotherhood of the snake) would keep popping up.

Originally posted by KingJames1337
reply to post by undo

 

Nice research. I've seen that symbol too in various pictures, it seems pretty unlikely that it is just a coincidence that a picture Resembling DNA in the association with the alleged creator(who formed the brotherhood of the snake) would keep popping up.

i find it especially interesting in light of the way it is depicted as being opened by the winged staff, and when you look at the video of dna transcription. at about 37 second mark, watch that thing opening the dna strands.

here's a page discussing the difference between the caduceus and the staff of asclepius
drblayney.com...

Originally posted by nenothtu

Shawnee.

Dropped to Earth north of the Great Lakes, and the elders think it was probably the Mississippi River where the battle with the others took place. There's also a legend of a big battle in Kentucky for turf where the entirety of the opposition (a race of red-haired giants, some say), man woman and child, were erased from the planet as physical beings. That battle was the origin of the name "Dark and Bloody Ground" for that state. After the battle, NO Indian of any tribe was allowed to settle permanently there, because the spirits of the dead forbade it. They would only allow hunting there to support families in the starving times - no permanent settlement. One was tried in the early 1700's at Eskippakithiki, but it only lasted about 20 years.

interesting. now an anthropologist would tell you that your ancestors didn't drop out of the heavens, you merely wandered over the straits or what have you, and although that may be true at some point in your lineage, the original story is probably what happened WAY before you arrived in north america.

see i has this little theory that native americans are very much related to egyptian semites, and egyptian semites are related to literally everybody lol they got everything south of egypt and everthing east and north of egypt. it's all in there. theoretically, you are a mix of caucasian and african and asian.

nenothtu

hey maybe this is a relative of yours
bluelotusgrove.elementforge.com...

Originally posted by type0civ
I missed out on this one....and I wonder what the result of a question like - Is homo sapien the product of another NON supernatural life form?

Yes the correct question was ruined by the addition of "Supernatural".