[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
…other than yourself, that is.
;)[/quote]
Get it right, I’m a “provincial philistine,” remember?
!!![/quote]
And a walking contradiction, at that. You’re a provincial philistine, who is strong as Samson, with the jawbone of an ass!
Who IS the God of this’’ World’’ or ‘‘Age’’ depending on the which Bible
one uses referring to then?
The fact that the description of Satan as “another god” (El acheer) was very common among rabbis,
They knew that his power was a derivative power and PERMITTED to be great, (Ephesians 2:2,
Ephesians 6:12.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Ahhh…Colonel Ketchup is joining with Colonel Mustard?[/quote]
General Habanero, if you don’t mind.
[quote]Karado wrote:
There are at LEAST two ‘Gods’…The Bible says Satan is the ‘‘God’’ of this World (2 Corinthians 4:4),
and one of the 10 Commandment is: ‘‘thou shalt not have any God before me’’…Interesting
that the commandment DOES NOT say, ‘there are no other Gods in existence’.
יהוה is the ‘One’ and only God however that created the Universe and is the Almighty.
[/quote]
Actually many Gods. Early Judaism was henotheistic as opposed to monotheistic. However the act of acknowledging the existence of other Gods was forbidden as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was ‘jealous.’ I’m sure there are some who would argue against this but they would be engaging in a futile act as the OT is full of clues and references to the henotheistic nature of early Judaism. Polytheism was universal in the ancient world with the possible exception of Zoroastrianism. However Zoroastrianism contains elements of dualism.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]SexMachine wrote:
[quote]Karado wrote:
There are at LEAST two ‘Gods’…The Bible says Satan is the ‘‘God’’ of this World (2 Corinthians 4:4),
and one of the 10 Commandment is: ‘‘thou shalt not have any God before me’’…Interesting
that the commandment DOES NOT say, ‘there are no other Gods in existence’.
יהוה is the ‘One’ and only God however that created the Universe and is the Almighty.
[/quote]
Actually many Gods. Early Judaism was henotheistic as opposed to monotheistic. However the act of acknowledging the existence of other Gods was forbidden as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob was ‘jealous.’ I’m sure there are some who would argue against this but they would be engaging in a futile act as the OT is full of clues and references to the henotheistic nature of early Judaism. Polytheism was universal in the ancient world with the possible exception of Zoroastrianism. However Zoroastrianism contains elements of dualism.
[/quote]
Not entirely accurate. The term you probably should’ve used is monolatry.
Satan, who certainly is not a god but rather a created being with considerable power (for reasons we really don’t comprehend), is taught as being the instigator or “god behind the god” of all paganism. In other words, there is only one God – the God of Abraham and Creator of the universe – and an adversary who was of course created by God and subsequently fell from his exalted position as the principal angel in heaven. That adversary is represented by all false gods/idols. All of them. Every last one.
[/quote]
That may be a Rabbinical or Christian interpretation but it’s not the interpretation I gained from the OT. However, I won’t argue with it as I am in no position to argue a point upon which I have such little understanding.
BTW, Did you know Mama Cass choking on a Sandwich is an urban
myth?..she had a coronary…
It’s refreshing to finally talk Scripture after over 30 pages.
They may be “false” Gods, but there is nowhere where it says they don’t exist
in like manner that “false Prophets” exist, but they are false nevertheless.
Deuteronomy 10:17
“For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords” (plural usage)
1st Samuel 28:13
And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou And the woman said unto Saul,
I saw gods ascending out of the Earth. (hollow earth theorists have fun with this one)
Deuteronomy 28:14
Thou shalt not … go after other gods to serve them (it’s impossible to “serve” something that doesn’t exist.)
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Throughout the Old and New Testament when the text refers to other gods it is either expressed or implied that they are “false” gods.
“I am the LORD, and there is no other; apart from me there is no God.”
Isaiah 45:5[/quote]
Mostly yes. The book of Isaiah was written during the Babylonian exile and after. However there are interesting references in other, older parts of the Bible.
[quote]Karado wrote:
(it’s impossible to “serve” something that doesn’t exist.)
[/quote]
Don’t underestimate the power of imagination.
Thanks for sharing.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Agreed math is a discovery and not some random belief or man made invention.
[/quote]
Everything we know is ‘discovered’ we create nothing. Nobody has ever had an original thought even. We didn’t invent the car, we discovered it could be done. We didn’t invent the wheel, we discovered that something round, rolls. We didn’t invent fire, we discovered fire. We didn’t invent science, we discovered it.
That all exists beyond our knowledge of it as does much, much more we have yet to discover.[/quote]
Pre-humanist thinking. It’s also one of the tricks that the early Church used to create believers (followers). If it’s written down it must be true since we can’t create anything. [/quote]
No, it’s plain fact. Give me an original thought or create something original with no precedent. I won’t hold my breath. We can reorganize things, but those ‘things’ already exist. [/quote]
And that’s the trick. Anything I write you will simply dismiss as not really being original. You’ll claim that it already existed and whoever was the first to come up with it was not a creator but a discoverer. But I’ll play. Poetry. Man invented poetry. Now tell us all how man discovered it rather than created it. Was he digging for gold one day and pulled out a metaphor?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Then I suppose “post humanist” thinking is the arrogant notion that humans are significant in any way, and we are suddenly great because we have iPhones and movies and shit?
[/quote]
There is no such thing as post humanist thinking.
Dante didn’t have an iPhone so I don’t see the connection.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Agreed math is a discovery and not some random belief or man made invention.
[/quote]
Everything we know is ‘discovered’ we create nothing. Nobody has ever had an original thought even. We didn’t invent the car, we discovered it could be done. We didn’t invent the wheel, we discovered that something round, rolls. We didn’t invent fire, we discovered fire. We didn’t invent science, we discovered it.
That all exists beyond our knowledge of it as does much, much more we have yet to discover.[/quote]
Pre-humanist thinking. It’s also one of the tricks that the early Church used to create believers (followers). If it’s written down it must be true since we can’t create anything. [/quote]
No, it’s plain fact. Give me an original thought or create something original with no precedent. I won’t hold my breath. We can reorganize things, but those ‘things’ already exist. [/quote]
And that’s the trick. Anything I write you will simply dismiss as not really being original. You’ll claim that it already existed and whoever was the first to come up with it was not a creator but a discoverer. But I’ll play. Poetry. Man invented poetry. Now tell us all how man discovered it rather than created it. Was he digging for gold one day and pulled out a metaphor? [/quote]
It’s silly to see it as a trick. It simply a fact. Poetry? The reorganization of words, meanings and sounds to elicit a particular response or emotion? No that’s not original. It’s reorganizing things we are already aware of to make us aware of something we may previously not been aware of. We discovered that is we can organizes sounds with attached meanings in a particular way, we can convey meanings that the words and sounds themselves we previously couldn’t articulate. But, yes the sounds, meanings and understanding exist, we just discover them. The arts are just another way to understand the world around us.
It’s not a trick, it just a simple fact.
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Then I suppose “post humanist” thinking is the arrogant notion that humans are significant in any way, and we are suddenly great because we have iPhones and movies and shit?
[/quote]
There is no such thing as post humanist thinking.
Dante didn’t have an iPhone so I don’t see the connection. [/quote]
I feel like… You’re missing my point. Leaving the entire exchange would help that.
[quote]Karado wrote:
Then 2nd Corinthians is wrong and you are right pat…Sorry.[/quote]
Your crappy reading comprehension is not my fault. 2nd Corinthians is talking about assigning the being and essence of God to things that are not. Not that there are other ‘gods’, but people worship things as if they were God. How you missed that is beyond me.
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Agreed math is a discovery and not some random belief or man made invention.
[/quote]
Everything we know is ‘discovered’ we create nothing. Nobody has ever had an original thought even. We didn’t invent the car, we discovered it could be done. We didn’t invent the wheel, we discovered that something round, rolls. We didn’t invent fire, we discovered fire. We didn’t invent science, we discovered it.
That all exists beyond our knowledge of it as does much, much more we have yet to discover.[/quote]
Would you say all of those discoveries you listed are facts, or merely beliefs and inventions like dmaddox stated?
[/quote]
Well if you want to get really, really specific, all the substance of the physical are technically beliefs. It does not mean they are not true or they don’t exist, it means we are limited in our ability to prove them beyond a shadow of a doubt that they exist. That they are more than just perception.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]zecarlo wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Agreed math is a discovery and not some random belief or man made invention.
[/quote]
Everything we know is ‘discovered’ we create nothing. Nobody has ever had an original thought even. We didn’t invent the car, we discovered it could be done. We didn’t invent the wheel, we discovered that something round, rolls. We didn’t invent fire, we discovered fire. We didn’t invent science, we discovered it.
That all exists beyond our knowledge of it as does much, much more we have yet to discover.[/quote]
Pre-humanist thinking. It’s also one of the tricks that the early Church used to create believers (followers). If it’s written down it must be true since we can’t create anything. [/quote]
No, it’s plain fact. Give me an original thought or create something original with no precedent. I won’t hold my breath. We can reorganize things, but those ‘things’ already exist. [/quote]
And that’s the trick. Anything I write you will simply dismiss as not really being original. You’ll claim that it already existed and whoever was the first to come up with it was not a creator but a discoverer. But I’ll play. Poetry. Man invented poetry. Now tell us all how man discovered it rather than created it. Was he digging for gold one day and pulled out a metaphor? [/quote]
It’s silly to see it as a trick. It simply a fact. Poetry? The reorganization of words, meanings and sounds to elicit a particular response or emotion? No that’s not original. It’s reorganizing things we are already aware of to make us aware of something we may previously not been aware of. We discovered that is we can organizes sounds with attached meanings in a particular way, we can convey meanings that the words and sounds themselves we previously couldn’t articulate. But, yes the sounds, meanings and understanding exist, we just discover them. The arts are just another way to understand the world around us.
It’s not a trick, it just a simple fact.[/quote]
So the poet’s choices are not his creation but rather he just happens to discover them? When Shakespeare has Juliet ask, “what’s in a name,” he was simply rearranging some words?
The arts are not a way to understand the world around us (that’s science) but the world within us. When a poet writes about a tree it isn’t about the tree.
I suppose you’ll also claim that a Coltrane solo is not original since he was using musical notes and scales that already existed, an instrument that he did not invent and an art form that he did not originate.