Evolutionary news

[Beagle]

The Council of Nicea did not promote ANY women, good or bad, in the NT.

Mary Magdalene was unavoidable, but her role was greatly diminished.

[Minimalist]

of course the older serpents were all 100ft long with big teeth and had a nasty habit of attacking the boat of the sun god

I've got an uncle who adds a couple of inches to every fish he ever caught every time he tells a story. Same principle in action.

Your Sumerian 'serpent' probably started life out as a gekko.

[marduk]

Your Sumerian 'serpent' probably started life out as a gekko.

we're not talking about the derivation
we're talking about the source

[Guest]

Give me a call when you find a talking snake

you wouldn't believe it if i found one,youwould accuse me of playing some type of trick. now if you recall the story correctly,only ONE talked, not all and it had help.

i'm wondering where the Hebrews got the idea from

isn't it amazing how it is always God and the Bible that do the copying but the non-God societies are the ones living and acting according to God's rules.

lte's put the shoes on the right feet,it was the other societies that changed the truth to fit what they believed and not the other way around.

The Council of Nicea did not promote ANY women, good or bad, in the NT.

why would they? it was about what was scriptural and what wasn't. had nothing to do with equality or women being prominent.

[marduk]

isn't it amazing how it is always God and the Bible that do the copying but the non-God societies are the ones living and acting according to God's rules.

not when you understand the timeline

[Guest]

not when you understand the timeline

i understand the timeline. i accept more data than you so yours is skewered by the omission of facts and sources. your side leaps to conclusions based upon a limited perspective and a limited use of the evidence.

you think that just because the sumerians wrote it down, that they were the originating source but you can't prove it nor can you say that they didn't copy it themselves.

[ReneDescartes]

ARch nowI am the one asking for proof .It is widely accepted that the Sumerian civilisation preceded the israelites .We can trace back with enough evidence a lot of stories from the Sumerianand the babylonians that ended up in the bible afterwards .You are the one pretending those culturesstole it from the israelites .Back up your claim or just tell us it is you personal belief .Both answers will do fine .

[marduk]

you think that just because the sumerians wrote it down, that they were the originating source but you can't prove it nor can you say that they didn't copy it themselves.

Bet ?

[Guest]

ARch nowI am the one asking for proof .It is widely accepted that the Sumerian civilisation preceded the israelites

now i have never said that the sumerians came after the israelites, we all know that the israleites started with abraham who came after organized societies.

i am saying that the sumerians just changed the story from theoriginating source and that they weren't the ones to first write or talk about the flood or creation.

of course my sources are the ancient texts you all deny or won't accept so you won't think i have proven my case but in Gen. chapter 11 verses 10 to 27 we see a connecting thread that would establish the line of communication in which the true story could and probably was preserved.

when society grew large enough, i am sure other beliefs crept in and the original histories went through revisions in which the accounts were changed to fit the dominate belief in each civilization.

since we know that the alternative stories were written down and preserved we can safely conclude that the original was also. since we know that Noah and his family knew the truth, and they pre-dated the sumerians, we know that the sumerian legends are just copies taken and changed from the original.

thus those societies and people who did not follow God's morality would be the ones to copy, change and lie not those people and civilizations who did accept God's morality and followed it.

itis unrealistic to conclude that those who believed and followed such laws would even consider stealing from another society and making the account their own. the reverse would be true but that society following God's ways would have their own miracles, their own true stories and would not need to make copies.

[marduk]

quite frankly thats crap Arch
the fact that you think Hebrew which is a fully formed language preceeds Sumerian which is a primitive agglutinative language tells me that you
1) are blinded by your faith
2) dont know anything about languages
3) havent actually read the sumerian accounts

[ReneDescartes]

quoteArch when society grew large enough, i am sure other beliefs crept in and the original histories went through revisions in which the accounts were changed to fit the dominate belief in each civilization.endquote
Exactly what I said,but please quote me completely :
The original story was sumerian as sumer preceded the israelites.We can thus safely deduct the israelites changed the story to fit their dominate belief .

[Minimalist]

we all know that the israleites started with abraham who came after organized societies.

No we don't.

As a matter of fact there is utterly no proof that the world of the patriarchs ever existed. Just more fantasy.

[marduk]

there is a lot of evidence that Abraham existed and that also his son Ishmael existed. no sign whatsoever of Isaac but supporting evidence of some of the symbology of the Isaac and Abraham story which of course doesnt support the biblical version of events at all
in fact it actually proves that they are fictitious

[Minimalist]

You are going to confuse arch talking like that.

[Beagle]

http://www.hermetics.org/Abraham2.html

Well, just to add to the confusion - the link between Abraham and Brahma seems pretty obvious.