The Trinity was a model of God made up in order to justify the idea of believing in ONE God, and still having made Jesus God, and also the Spirit as God, and also considering the Father of Jesus God. That meant that Christians are not polytheist but still monotheist. This is an incoherent concept that completely confuses Christianity and who the Almighty really is.
Most people do not read or pay much attention to John 20:30-31 where the author of this gospel gives a reason for writing it, which is to show that Jesus is the Messiah, the son of God. Being the Messiah means being a descendant of king David, the promised heir of his kingdom, and to be the son of God has several meanings, one of which is a creation from the Almighty just as Adam was called also a son of God. Luke 1:35 actually defines why Jesus is called the son of God and this is because he is a creation of the Almighty, it is because the Almighty conceived him in Mary without a male parent, Jesus is the only begotten son of God in this sense.
Did the lions get any of that delicious stew? They're starving and they already decided to spare Daniel, so he's really pushing his luck if he eats food in front of them. Imagine the small of hot meat filling that den!
The irony of how often theists accuse atheist of saying "you believe everything came from nothing!" is one of the most annoying issues. I am constantly linking the Wikipedia article on _creatio ex nihilo_ for theists. ETA: Hell yeah, Trogdor!
It's still hard for me to understand why it matters so much whether God created the universe from water or whether he created the universe from nothing.
The people at BibleProject recently did a months-long exploration of the chaos dragon theme throughout the Bible (Tim Mackie and John Collins would be a fun interview). They traced the 'tannin' & Leviathan, from Genesis (creation, garden, Cain & Abel...) all the way through to the end. Sadly, they skipped over the Apocrypha. From that, I came to summarize the dragon as the disorganizing entropic force opposed to God's organizing efforts, always in constant tension with each other. Which makes all humans dragons in a way. Mythology is far more fascinating and even "true" than facts and figures. And it's kind of funny that creatio ex nihilo was in its own way created ex nihilo.
and apparently Cyrus didn't know all the trap doors and secret passages ways And his own temple , I don't see how anyone can read that story and think of it anything other than fiction
Isn't the King in the Book of Daniel Nebuchadnezzar? You said it was Cyrus. Cyrus was the king who overthrew Nebuchadnezzar and allowed the Jews to rebuild the Temple. Am I missing something? Or am I misremembering Daniel? It's been a long time since I read it.
The tales in Daniel as presented in typical bibles are out of sequence, and span some different periods. Sacrilegious Discourse is reading it now and they made a point of noting some of the background info mentioned about the books texts being out of order to group them by thematic style. And of course they're myths, often containing historical figures but not necessarily historically accurate, or even making much realistic sense. So it might just be a contradiction which apologists twist themselves in knots to make "harmonize." Also, see 48:24 where they explicitly cover this, but in a different way than I mention.
One of the most revealing things about biblical scholarship is the continued use of "apocrypha" to refer to texts like 2 Macc and Belle and Dragon. Just goes to show how inundated with Protestantism historical scholarship really is. I expect that as time goes on and those Prot presuppositions are being stripped away, as they already are in Mariology (showing that Marian veneration began in the third century if not earlier) that we should expect this name to fall out of fashion.
"I am he" is Jesus claiming he that he is the Messiah, not God. Everyone was waiting for the Messiah in that day. Jesus claims he is the Messiah several times in the New Testament. He tells us to pray "Our Father who is in heaven". Why would Jesus say that if he is God and he is currently on earth next to them. He said if you hate me, you hate my Father also. He prays to his Father for his disciples. It is foolish to believe that Jesus is claiming to be the Creator, God the Father, but rather it makes perfect sense to understand that Jesus has the divine spirit in him (the word of God) which we can also have in us if we believe in the teaching of Jesus. If we listen to his words and repent and accept the word of God like Jesus did, then that word becomes flesh in us. Then will we be saved, and we can claim that Jesus is our savior because we now have that heart of flesh. Do not be deceived. Jesus calls the ones who Obey God his "brothers and sisters" not his children. It's all right there in the book if you read it for yourself. Find out more on thehighestofthemountains including the world-famous brain maps that show the incredible technology we are created with.
"Starting in the second century we've got this effort on the part of Christians to intellectualize the gospel, the apologists take over. These are educated folks who are trying to make the Gospel palatable for the Greco-Roman intelligentsia so the Gospel can then be disseminated on a higher social level rather than the traditional notion of Christianity being a religion for women and slaves." If I have negotiated your words correctly, I think what you're trying to say is that Christian apologists mixed Timeaus with the Gospel, thus perverting it. I completely agree with this. However, when I try to stop the spread of pesky misinformation about the Bible (or other religious matters), how am I any different? I'm asking this honestly. In my own community, I am viewed as somewhat heretical because I challenge what I deem to be misinformation. How can I be sure I am not following the path of early Christian apologists in perverting rather than converting?
I don't think Dan used the word 'perverting' and you shouldn't use it either. Things changed, that's objective, while 'perverting' is judgemental. If you want objective truth, you need to remain objective and detached. You want to know what version is closer to the truth, and you suspect, and that's commendable, that something being older doesn't mean always more truthful. But, ask yourself, what do you really want to accomplish? Do you want a final text to believe in, without inconvenient doubts? Because that approach is never going to be objective. If you really want to be welcome in your community, probably you should just stop. Whatever you are going to find is going to mean a lot for you, but probably not for others.
Nothing on its own is 1 thing. And it’s almost everywhere. We can claim to have explored most of earth but that’s like 25% so the primordial waters story means officially only less then 25% of what we’ve discovered and still most unknown one shouldn’t conclude to know it all as little by little as it chips away the surface only of that 1/4 of a percent , like less than 1% with maybe 50% of that in logs and so on. Can anyone say they know or don’t know openly? Beyond the sky is a vast place that served as the base for anything to exist since 2 things can’t occupy the same space at the same time, that’s the purpose of nothing (space). If you really want to know how is it possible that everything came from nothing may require a bit of explanation using the terms in physics but since the internet anyone who wants to can become more rounded and no real need to be a specialist in any field to understand , like a Planck hole. Can’t recall who made the claim after Planck passed but if one could go into the core of a Planck hole , more like a orb and everything goes through it and it through they as the fabric of time and space but the only thing said to be able to go through one. As a example of what that resembles it’s like us here, surrounded by air, to leave in a ship passed the van Allen radiation belts and out into space is a good analogy. But strings are said to not be able to pass but do like through it slightly. One could suggest that those can serve as portals to parallel universes . It’s fair to say that because once one passes through a Planck hole it could be filled with planets and galaxies or just a singe galaxy in the middle of it and the strings from this universe can only peek through the other side and nothing else. One theory suggest the Big Bang itself was a product of black holes slung around the vastness of nothing and as two or more transverse and came close to each other at theoretical 2x light speed the pull was strong enough as they departed past the point of near collision and opened one of the Planck holes just long enough to let from a parallel the primordial ingredient or ingredients which gave rise to our parallel. Plenty of situations and plausible at that one can dabble in . To say no is to mirror the sentiment that nothing could have made it all as this content implies. Impossible from nothing impossible. It’s about as possible as a camel going through the eye of a needle ? 😄
So using the more correct interpretation it's more possible to accept the standard models of planetary formation and even biogenesis and evolution. God is the great tinkerer.
This is marvellous, thank you. I was just rereading The Name of the Rose, and goggling at the surreal weirdness of the Apocalypse stuff, this has been an insight and a joy.
In reference to the second part of the episode, about ancestor worship and leaving food offerings, I highly recommend folks look into Georges Bataille and his concept of sacrifice and the accursed share. It's super interesting IMO.
It remains coincidental, to say the least, that the arguments of Dr. McClellan (who is himself personally LDS) so often line up very well with LDS theology, namely: -That Christ was not God from all eternity -Denial of the Trinity as being biblical -God (Adonai/Elohim) has a physical body -Mormons are Christian (despite the fact they did not previous consider themselves to be, and Joseph Smith called Christianity the Church of the Devil) -Ancient Israelites were polytheists/monolators/henotheists -The universe/matter was pre-existent These points are ostensibly the scholarly consensus, so perhaps that is why the LDS church has delved so deep into critical scholarship in recent decades.
The whole ex nihilo (sp?) vs ex materia argument sounds a lot like a "my God is better than your god because *He* made everything out of nothing but *yours* had to have something to work with" kind of argument.
Your more right than you think. I had my pastor tell the congregation once "Even if scientists create life from dirt one day -- I will tell them 'go get your own dirt'".
The creation of language gives the ability to inform another of the idea you have. The more the idea is accepted, the more people believe it to be true. Who created language? Latin Lana, wool, or vellus. To pull tthe wool over the eyes, of velum, to scribe things into existence, like the arc of the sun , etch a character upon a rock. make an indent into clay, are you impressed? How do you guage the lana you are fed to believe in, like a secret covenant ? When you discover the seeking of a golden fleece is rigged upon the ship of Argo Navis, and realise it is nothing but narcisissm, what is your life like afterwards. Welcome to the book of the dead. Hathor is El Shaddai is the Dragon. The beast gains its power from the Dragon. The creation of everything where the waters reside upon the deep, Tehom is where the dragon is born, watch it rise in its time. Langueo,,latin to weaken, we live in the mental constraint, the age of languere. Governmental, there is no mistake.
@@lde-m8688 Who would have known that scriptures were written to hide in plain sight what is to be revealed, when people that read it have no idea what to look for. Making a mockery of something that is difficult to comprehend, is easier than putting in the effort to understand it as it stands. Job 38: 33 Strange that peter known as the rock, is also allegory of Cephas, or in a lateral slant, Cepheus upon the celestial sphere. Matthew 16:23 Maybe the Greek Myth of Kronus eating his children might help, but i dont think it would help at all. God is a flesh eater, another pointer, but it induces nothing but ridicule, which is ironic in its entirety. Satan incites David to take a census, it is now accepted as law.1 Chronicles 21:1 Who controls the planet? Take care, its a jungle out there.
Language itself probably rose 100,000s of years ago. The foundation of language is temple culture in Mesopotamia. The first temple is the temple of E-Absu in Eridu 5300 BCE which was part of the establishment of a stable polytheism in S. Mesopotamia. In and around 4000 BCE as the copper age becomes a increasingly important the Kura-Araxas culture settles into the original metal gathering areas north of the Tigris region forcing the Mesopotamians to expand their metal ore gathering east-west. Two villages north of Eridu on the Euphrates merge to create Uruk which rapidly gained power given its access to trade (Eridu was an Iskand in a swamp, and Ur and early city was abandoned, probably flooded out, but starts to come back as Uruk is rising). This begins the Uruk period. The settlement itself is formed under two gods, a “Venus like” protogoddess and a a sky sprite. The Uruk Culture sees expanding trade growth with upstream outposts and the need for a trading system that has “legs” on it. Within this context the Temple life expands with an attempt to organize the cities under the priesthoods resulting in hubs for trade under the celestial sky, dinger An, effectively the priesthood of An at E-Anna (the white temple, as the temple grows to higher and higher Elevations on its pyramids. In this context of increased inter polity trade there needs to be a system of value accounting. Around 3500 BCE we see this gravitating toward a perfunctory writing system (3300 BCE) which is a writing system in 3100 BCE (Early Sumer, Early Bronze Age). The typical documents we see are temple accounting records. By the time writing begins the creation story of Eridu was probably already a thing in which the world of Eridu was dominated once by the water sprite Absu and he probably had a consort NinAbsu (Tiamat, Tahom in Semitic). The biblical Tahom is more like the Eriduans would have imagined her powers, as a natural being that simply existed and did things without any divine vendetta. The Absu homolog plays a role in the biblical flood myth. Within the construct by the 25th century BCE there was a recognition of the replacement ontology of Absu within Enki which was a proper god, within the context of Eridu, which saw itself as formative (as opposed to Uruks claim) the daughter/grandaughter of the water spirits was Nammu. In the mythology Nammu parthenogenically gives rise to Enki. In later mythology she is order by the divine council in Uruk to make workers so that the lower gods do not need to toil upon the land growing barley and making beer (which process plays a major part in earliest writing). What we need to understand here is that Mesopotamia has next to nothing in terms of resources except mud, it has lots of clay for making craft ware, building irrigation works, and bricks for temples. So it is natural to them that if men were to be crafted they would be formed from clay. So Nammu sets out to make men, she consults the wise Enki, who gives her detailed instructions on how to make men of clay, and she begins making men to do the gods work. How should we fit this into our understanding of God(s). The first thing we need to understand is that the early religion of Eridu, never mentioned in the Bible, plays an esoteric role in the foundational biblical mythologies for two primary reasons. First, when it came to exporting gods and belief structures Mesopotamia simply was dominant until the Persian period. To be more specific, in and around 26th to 27th century the Sumerians renewed that problem riddled expansion up the middle Euphrates into the upper Euphrates and Canaan. At the time Ebla dominated trade, within 200 years you see the gods of Ebla fading and the appearance of a fatherly like El and later theophorics to Ia (Essentially Enki and a prototype to Yahweh that later formed in the Arava). As the old system of gods fell El, the most high, rose to the top of the Canaanite pantheon. By the peak of Akkad, El (and its many other ethnic names) as a god was constrained to a wilderness god and whose priest resided in Tabernacle on the peaks of mountains. IOW not a high god of a great city like Ebla once was. This probably represents the suppression of Ebla by Mari. The second reason as mentioned is that some of the earliest kings of Israel probably recognized Ea/Ia as a deity from Mesopotamia.
@@Darisiabgal7573 The reality of civilization being much older than is imagined in scriptures, is pointed towards in the video above, when the discourse relates to creation from what is already in place. If one understands that Anu, the mythological sky god ruled and then was demoted for some reasoning expressed by Marduk, this can be correlated to a change of mindset, which is understood if one turns to vedic scriptures. Ishtar being Anu's daughter is parrelled in greek myth with two Aphrodites, Pandemos and Urania, and the introduction of this can be found in the Judgement of Paris, which correlates to Lebanon. The division between a ruling elite and the subjugated as well as a military can be seen upon the Naqada Label- Time has become fixed within the minds of people as well as regulated trade and industry. Governance has become established. This is not discussed in Scriptures at all, time, money along with trade and government all being accepted as natural ocurrences that just are, which is a clue as to something being hidden. Something that i should expound upon is Abaddon, but i will leave it here as people are perplexed at what i have already written, which makes me understand that somethings are beyond the cognitive reach of those that still want to believe in superstition.
If "non-being-stuff" is things like dust that the world was made out of, what does making out of "being-stuff" look like? Taking wheels and a box to make a cart? Two things with function coming together to make another thing with function?
*What were the skies (“Heaven”) created from* in Genesis 1:1? The land (“earth”) had been formless and void (or whatever) and the dragon Tehom (”the deep”) was already there, but I don’t see a precedent for the skies.
He separates the Heavens from the Earth, implying that they were mixed together before he separated them. Unclear if the mixed up material was a homogenized amorphous mass, or was heterogeneous chunks of heaven and earth mixed together. The later suggests there was a pre-Creation Reese’s Peanut Butter cup event, where chunks of chocolate, I mean heaven, got mixed up with earthly peanut butter.
@@MarcosElMalo2 Where are “heavens” separated from land? In 1:7, the sky is created as a separator of the waters, but it does not say what the vault/sky was created from.
@@scienceexplains302 it's gods breathe ; winds is spirit (energy/life) it needs (earth/water) to create life, Hoovering over it matter will then regenerate life. Earth /seas will bring forth live when contacted with air/oxygen. Simple Heaven & Earth (twin urges/ demiurg) are/is the true creator. The dead void mass is the body of the slaughtered dragon ; Rebirth out of water (includes earth) and spirit (includes fire, the 4th element).
Most Monday’s I can power through Dan Beecher’s annoying voice and talk. Not today though. Today ain’t that day. Not sure which is worse, Dan’s voice or Bart’s laugh.
I’m sorry you don’t like my voice. That must be difficult for you. You want certain content, but there’s something that’s preventing you from enjoying it. I get that. We’ve all had that experience. I just want you to think about this: your comments/complaints might not have the effect you want. Unfortunately for you, I’m not going anywhere. If you want to listen to the show, you’re going to have both of us. Sorry. But also, your complaining can make the experience of the show less enjoyable for others. It just brings down the room, so to speak. Is that what you want? ‘Cause it’s kind of a bummer. Look- if it were just about me and my feelings, I wouldn’t care. I mean, it doesn’t feel great to have people pick apart my hard work, but I can handle it. It does bother me some, though, when I know that your comments are making other people uncomfortable or diminishing their experience. Maybe consider that in the future?
@@danielbeecher8053 you absolutely have a point, one that didn’t cross my mind. If it means anything, I sincerely apologize. I’m at an age where little things annoy me and I’m inconsiderately vocal about it, when I should probably consider others in the room, so to speak. I hope you can accept my apology, as I also apologize to the others in the comments as well. I will continue to follow the podcast and work my way through my personal annoyances and take into consideration that while you may not be my cup of tea, you bring another element to the podcast that others may enjoy.
Obviously, the effects of the Exodus were much less than many people think. The Israelites only built store cities. The plagues probably only affected the Delta area.
Foundations girl friends opinions wow wow wow She Franceca Stavrakopoulou still kindergarden to Neville Goddard very good coaching for MAN some good and dam plays flesh and blood bodies obey I AM.
