Drifting wrote:I've found it's never been wise to challenge Buff on his biblical knowledge.
I'm sure Tobin will apologise for doubting you...
I'm not that knowledgeable about the Bible, but I do know a bit about the development of Biblical monotheism and the origin of the gods of the Bible. The scholarly views I present are probably at odds with whatever fever dream revelation Tobin thinks he had, however.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Buffalo wrote:Your interpretation is anachronistic, and one used by divinity school grads and preachers. The explanation I gave is the scholarly interpretation.
Hogwash. You claim that El is the Canaanite deity in the context and dress it up to appear that way by patently ignoring the fact that El is used in 3 general ways in the Bible. 1) 'El' is used to mean God. 2) As the Canaanite diety. 3) To mean divine - as in divine assembly which is what virtually all the Bible interpretations use in this context. You create a pseudo-intellectual interpretation that the Psalmist is referring to the Canaanite Pantheon in this instance. I find that bizarre and out of place in the Bible here (and in particularly in Psalms). You are welcome to your view, but I don't endorse it and it certainly isn't one the Jews (or Jesus) living during that period would have embraced.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Buffalo wrote:Your interpretation is anachronistic, and one used by divinity school grads and preachers. The explanation I gave is the scholarly interpretation.
Hogwash. You claim that El is the Canaanite deity in the context and dress it up to appear that way by patently ignoring the fact that El is used in 3 general ways in the Bible. 1) 'El' is used to mean God. 2) As the Canaanite diety. 3) To mean divine - as in divine assembly which is what virtually all the Bible interpretations use in this context. You create a pseudo-intellectual interpretation that the Psalmist is referring to the Canaanite Pantheon in this instance. I find that bizarre and out of place in the Bible here (and in particularly in Psalms). You are welcome to your view, but I don't endorse it and it certainly isn't one the Jews (or Jesus) living during that period would have embraced.
On the contrary, the Jews would never have recognized your anachronistic, post protestant reformation views on their ideas about gods.
I can't do your homework for you. You might do some reading if you're really interested in learning something about this subject. I'm not an expert by any means, but I have done SOME research. You're just regurgitating the faith-promoting fluff of modern Christian apologists.
The founding god of Israel was in fact El (IsraEL). This was the same god worshiped by the Ugarites, Canaanites, and others. Later on they adopted Yahweh (another god borrowed from previous cultures) as their national god and combined him with El. Much later still they started thinking of the old gods as angels or other lesser beings.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Apr 03, 2012 8:52 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
Buffalo wrote:On the contrary, the Jews would never have recognized your anachronistic, post protestant reformation views on their ideas about gods.
ROFL The Jews of Jesus time were not pantheists. I'm done with you. You can't make such ludicrous statements and have me take you at all seriously.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Buffalo wrote:On the contrary, the Jews would never have recognized your anachronistic, post protestant reformation views on their ideas about gods.
ROFL The Jews of Jesus time were not pantheists. I'm done with you. You can't make such ludicrous statements and have me take you at all seriously.
I never said they were. I'm sorry that your ignorance on this subject has caused you to also become angry with me. I'm here to help if you should actually decide you want to learn something on this subject.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
wow, you really are deep under that rock...besides you really haven't addressed the point at all, yet.
as for what the church teaches, maybe you should find things out before you claim knowledge of them: Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He possesses all knowledge and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become like our Heavenly Father. This is exaltation. http://www.LDS.org/manual/gospel-princi ... n?lang=eng Gospel Principles is the "fundamental" teaching manual...used for the classes which have investigators, etc...
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
I'm not angry with you. I just think your position is something that is completely made-up and based on the most tenuous of reasoning. It is certainly outside of centuries of traditional understanding nor does it fit the understanding that Jesus or the Jews of his time would have had. So, as far as this discussion is concerned, it is basically non-sense. And I'll happily read the other discussions.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
subgenius wrote:wow, you really are deep under that rock...besides you really haven't addressed the point at all, yet. as for what the church teaches, maybe you should find things out before you claim knowledge of them: Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He possesses all knowledge and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become like our Heavenly Father. This is exaltation. http://www.LDS.org/manual/gospel-princi ... n?lang=eng Gospel Principles is the "fundamental" teaching manual...used for the classes which have investigators, etc...
I agree with that quote. We will not become God nor can we, but we will become exalted Celestial beings like God. However, we will be unlike God in that we cannot save ourselves nor can we be a perfect example since all fall short except God. The pernicious doctrine I'm against is the one teaching man will become God. This is impossible. We are simply incapable since God has always been perfect and is essential for our salvation. We cannot save ourselves nor be that example. Mormons that teach such things ignore that part of God and pretend that sharing in all that God has and does makes us God. It does not.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
I'm not angry with you. I just think your position is something that is completely made-up and based on the most tenuous of reasoning. It is certainly outside of centuries of traditional understanding nor does it fit the understanding that Jesus or the Jews of his time would have had. So, as far as this discussion is concerned, it is basically non-sense. And I'll happily read the other discussions.
My position is consistent with the findings of archeology and serious Bible scholarship. You might try at least reading a summary of the book I recommended.
You're rejecting it because it contradicts what Jesus taught, not on the basis of any evidence. Your null hypothesis is that Jesus is Lord, ergo he knew what he was talking about.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
