Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Discussion and Debate > Physical & Life Sciences > Creation & Evolution
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Calendar Mark Forums Read

Creation & Evolution Forum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.

Reply
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #231  
Unread 17th December 2004, 07:53 PM
Aron-Ra's Avatar
Senior Veteran

52 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: United States Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 3rd July 2004
Location: Deep in the heart of the Bible belt
Posts: 4,734
Blessings: 1,080,202
Reps: 740,063,552 (power: 740,078)
Aron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond repute
Aron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond repute
Oncedeceived.

There is no reason to post anything if you can't do it right. I have finished my reply to your previous post. But I'm not going to submit it until all your replies in this series are complete. It doesn't make any sense not to present your argument adequately on the excuse of inadequate time. Take as long as you need. If you can't present a sufficient argument now, save it, and post one tomorrow that is at least worthwhile.
__________________
"To see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." --Benjamin Franklin
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." --Frederich Nietzche`
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --Mark Twain
"Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding," --Reverend Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #232  
Unread 18th December 2004, 07:35 AM
Oncedeceived's Avatar
Senior Veteran

Gender: Female Faith: Christian Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 11th July 2003
Posts: 13,024
Blessings: 26,169,851
My Mood Sunshine
Reps: 203,885,503,539,474,208 (power: 203,885,503,539,499)
Oncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond repute
Oncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Aron-Ra
Oncedeceived.

There is no reason to post anything if you can't do it right. I have finished my reply to your previous post. But I'm not going to submit it until all your replies in this series are complete. It doesn't make any sense not to present your argument adequately on the excuse of inadequate time. Take as long as you need. If you can't present a sufficient argument now, save it, and post one tomorrow that is at least worthwhile.

Do as you wish. It doesn't matter to me.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Unread 19th December 2004, 12:21 PM
Aron-Ra's Avatar
Senior Veteran

52 Gender: Male Faith: Atheist Country: United States Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 3rd July 2004
Location: Deep in the heart of the Bible belt
Posts: 4,734
Blessings: 1,080,202
Reps: 740,063,552 (power: 740,078)
Aron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond repute
Aron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond reputeAron-Ra has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Aron-Ra
I have finished my reply to your previous post. But I'm not going to submit it until all your replies in this series are complete.
Originally Posted by Oncedeceived
Do as you wish. It doesn't matter to me.
I wouldn't want to interrupt. It would be rude. And there are already a couple of posts I really wanted answered, but that you never replied to. So I am afraid that replying prematurely might mean more posts that wouldn't be answered in their proper order later on. These should be presented coherently. So I'll just bite my tongue as I read each of your posts, and not correct any of them until its my turn.
__________________
"To see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." --Benjamin Franklin
"Faith means not wanting to know what is true." --Frederich Nietzche`
"Faith is believing what you know ain't so." --Mark Twain
"Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding," --Reverend Martin Luther
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Unread 19th December 2004, 05:36 PM
Yamialpha's Avatar
Celeritas

25 Gender: Male Faith: Christian Country: United States Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 5th October 2004
Posts: 2,494
Blessings: 135,084
Reps: 8,802 (power: 21)
Yamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to all
Yamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to allYamialpha is a name known to all
Originally Posted by Jet Black
I notice alot of creationists come here and make grandiose proclaations about the evidence, but I have to ask, are you really capable of making a judgement on this evidence? Do you really understand it sufficiently well to actually make a good contribution to the debate? or are you just toeing the party line? I dno't mean to come across as agressive in this post, but it does concern me that many of the creationist posters are not really adressing any of the evidence and are not actually learning anything about the opposing view, preferring to just flippantly dismiss anything that disagrees with their preconcieved worldview.

Perhaps others (even myself) are guilty of doing the same, however the difference I notice with the evolutionists, is that we tend to put forth a significant amount of evidence and analysis of the evidence, and this is something I think is lacking from the creationist side.

To the creationists, please recognise that you do not know it all, and you are not all experts on every facet of science, and please read the evidence that the evolutionists put forth. If you have a problem with it, please try to make clear in detail what your problems with the data are, and then perhaps you might either stand a better chance of convincing the opposition that you are right, or allow them to provide a better explanation and help you to learn. Flippant dismissals get nobody anywhere, and merely add to the frustration of those who often spend a good deal of time writing out lengthy responses to your problems.

I hope that we can all discuss the issues sensibly and maturely,

Jet.
Very true. Creationists do have a tendency to throw their hands up and say "God made it this way." rather than have verifiable proof. Anyone who has done research in the theistic view of science knows that there is evidence in the world to prove creationism and refute many of the ideals of evolutionism. Good point Jet.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Unread 19th December 2004, 05:41 PM
Tomk80's Avatar
Titleless

34 Gender: Male Faith: Agnostic Country: Netherlands Member For 5 Years Fisherman
 
Join Date: 27th April 2004
Location: Maastricht
Posts: 11,702
Blessings: 25,123,328
Reps: 116,711,775,025,674,400 (power: 116,711,775,025,696)
Tomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond repute
Tomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond reputeTomk80 has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Yamialpha
Very true. Creationists do have a tendency to throw their hands up and say "God made it this way." rather than have verifiable proof. Anyone who has done research in the theistic view of science knows that there is evidence in the world to prove creationism and refute many of the ideals of evolutionism. Good point Jet.
Ideals of evolution? Since when is evolution some ideological movement?
__________________
Tom

'What luck for rulers, that men do not think.'
-Ascribed to Adolf Hitler-
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glas by Lewis Caroll-

Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is suggestive, but what they conceal is vital.
--Aaron Levenstein
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Unread 19th December 2004, 05:58 PM
Oncedeceived's Avatar
Senior Veteran

Gender: Female Faith: Christian Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 11th July 2003
Posts: 13,024
Blessings: 26,169,851
My Mood Sunshine
Reps: 203,885,503,539,474,208 (power: 203,885,503,539,499)
Oncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond repute
Oncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Aron-Ra
I was surprised when I saw that date, and wondered where you found it. Then I realized that it came from my own source. I thought it said BCE. I figured it must be a typo, because if Zarathustra wrote the Avesta, as all my sources said he did, then that date should have ended in BCE, not CE, and certainly not AD. So I looked into the history of the Yashts to confirm my suspicion. Sure enough, the Yashts of Mithra are among the writings attributed to Zarathustra, and "redacted" into "younger Avestan" during the dates you suggest. Some of the poems contained in this part of the Avesta present themselves as though written by him. Other evidence suggests it is likely that he did write some of these other Yashts, as the Zoroastrians claim he did. And if he did, then they are as much as 1200 years older than this passage implies, and would still pre-date Isaiah by centuries.
The only real archeological evidence that can be used to date anything due to Zoroastra are the Gathas. No one is certain when Zarathustra (Zoroastra) lived and in fact many scholars differ greatly on the date. It has a spread of anywhere between 1200 BC to 600 BC. The Gathas the only tangible and physical evidence of Zoroastra which are thought to be written by him. They are dated as early as 1200 BC to the 6 century BC. This dating though does not come from dating an original manuscript or physical article containing the words but only on the language used and it is possible and some think that the language of the Gathas, like Latin and Sanskrit, is an artificially sustained sacred language. If this is truly the case, the language would continue to be used in the literature of religion long after it had ceased to be a functional spoken language. If this is the case, the Gathas were simply composed during the sixth century B.C. in an archaic tongue. Unfortunately, so far with the evidence that we have now, it is impossible to be sure of the date.

Now if we take the earlier date of say 1200 BC, we find that the Biblical aspects that you claim that are borrowed are still much earlier. Abraham's birth is dated around 2056 BC I believe and that he left Ur in 1900 BC or so. The early era of Judaism is cited for around 1650 BC (this is the first mention of Yahweh yet I can't remember as of yet where this was found). Which of course pre-date Isaiah. Isaiah is considered to be from 950 BC or there about so even then if the late date is actual then Isaiah would pre-date them as well.

It doesn't help that Roman Mithraists tried to obscure all evidence of their Persian origins, (again, according to these same sources). And that makes it impossible to present a conclusive argument on their history. That's the problem with archaeology. Unlike paleontology, there are no absolute dating methods. Everything is contextual. The Zoroastrians believe that the Mithraic tradition is 1200 years older than you say they are, because you're basing your conclusion on the archaeological date. But you say that your god was worshipped 1500 years before the very earliest archaeological record of that deity, so you're both in the same boat. If I accept the contextual and circumstantial evidence for your position, then you should accept the same for the Mithraic position.
Even if it could be proven that the Roman Mithraists were indeed a cult derived from the cult Zorastra the timeline is pre-dated by the dates of the time of the patriarchs.

Well, actually logic tells me that Abraham shouldn't precede the beginning of the Hebrew oral tradition by 400 years, and that Moses wouldn't have come along before Akenaten.
What do you mean that Abraham shouldn't precede the beginning of the Hebrew oral tradition? Abraham is the beginning of the Hebrew tradition itself. Moses did come before Akenaten. Akenaten came around 1367-1350 BC and Moses came in around 1496-1450 BC.

But the point is that Zarathustra's Avesta was the first mention of several concepts that hadn't yet been adopted by Semitic monotheism; one of them being the dichotomy the wise lord of the Kingdom of Justice and Truth or the Kingdom of the Lie under the Opposer of Faith. The books Moses allegedly compiled didn't include any such concept. And the first books that did weren't written until almost Jesus' time.
Be specific. Genesis speaks about Good and evil, speaks about punishment and so forth. So I am not sure what you are referring to here.
I am proposing something that perhaps you're not getting because of our respective mindsets at the onset. Being a creationist, you probably imagine everything poofing into existence, as it is now, all at once, and that may include your Bible.
Well as usual you are wrong. I don't think that everything "poofed" into existence all at once. I don't think that the Bible did either which should be clear by our discussion but then again.
After all, I remember tele-evangelist, Kevin Copeland claiming that the entirety of the Bible had already been written, by God, before he ever created light. So you believe something similar. I don't know. Its an absurd concept to me, but I know there are people who believe this.
People believe many things that I feel absurd as well. But Kevin Copeland does not represent my viewpoint or me for that matter.
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Unread 19th December 2004, 06:00 PM
Oncedeceived's Avatar
Senior Veteran

Gender: Female Faith: Christian Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 11th July 2003
Posts: 13,024
Blessings: 26,169,851
My Mood Sunshine
Reps: 203,885,503,539,474,208 (power: 203,885,503,539,499)
Oncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond repute
Oncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond reputeOncedeceived has a reputation beyond repute
Obviously, as an "evolutionist", I don't see it that way. What I propose is that your belief system was slowly molded into its current form by adopting and adapting various concepts over many generations, the same way you might say that all the other religions formed except yours. I suggest that none of your Biblical authors, nor the Hebrew religious tradition itself included any mention of posthumous judgements for the option of Heaven or Hell until after the influence of Zarathustra's religion.
I beg to differ. Sheol which means hell is used some 65 times in the OT.:

Genesis 37:33-35; Genesis 42:37-38; Genesis 44:27-31; Numbers 16:23-33; Deuteronomy 32:22; 1 Samuel 2:6; 2 Samuel 22:5-6; 1 Kings 2:6; 1 Kings 2:9; Job 7:9-10; Job 11:7-8; Job 14:11-14; Job 17:13-16; Job 21:13; Job 24:19; Job 26:6; Psalms 6:5; Psalms 9:17; Psalms 16:10; Psalms 18:4-5; Psalms 30:3; Psalms 31:17; Psalms 49:14-15; Psalms 55:15; Psalms 86:13; Psalms 88:3; Psalms 89:48; Psalms 116:3; Psalms 139:8; Psalms 141:7; Proverbs 1:11-12; Proverbs 5:5; Proverbs 7:27; Proverbs 9:18; Proverbs 15:11; Proverbs 15:24; Proverbs 23:14; Proverbs 27:20; Proverbs 30:16; Ecclesiastes 9:10; Isaiah 5:14; Isaiah 7:11; Isaiah 14:11; Isaiah 14:15; Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:18; Isaiah 38:10; Isaiah 38:18; Isaiah 57:9; Ezekiel 31:15-17; Ezekiel 32:21; Ezekiel 32:27; Hosea 13:14; Amos 9:2; Jonah 2:2; Habbakuk 2:5

And the word Gehenna:

2 Chronicles 28:3; 33:6; 2 Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 7:31; 19:2-6; 32:35. We quote Jeremiah, 19:2-6, which speaks of the Jews worshipping pagan idols and committing abominations:

"19:2. And you shall go out to the Ben-Hinnom Valley which is at the entrance of the Harsith Gate, and you shall call there the words that I will speak to you. 19:3. And you shall say; Hearken to the word of the Lord, O kings of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; so said the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel; Behold I am bringing evil upon this place, which whoever hears, his ears will tingle. 19:4. Because they forsook Me and they estranged this place and burnt incense therein to other gods, which they had not known, they, their forefathers, and the kings of Judah, and they filled this place with the blood of innocent people. 19:5. And they built the high places of Baal to burn their children with fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command, neither did I speak nor did it enter My mind. 19:6. Therefore, behold days are coming, says the Lord, when this place will no longer be called Topheth or Ben-Hinnom Valley, but the Valley of Slaughter."

Daniel speaks of Heaven as well as Psalms.
I didn't claim that. You said that Roman Mithraism wasn't based on any earlier representation of Mithra from Persia, based (I suspect) on your position that the "Younger Avestas" came along after the Roman version. All I said about this inscription was just what this site said it was; archaeological evidence of a transition from Eastern influence which already existed, which was later modified into Roman Mithraism.
You were claiming an inscription that was not considered to be authentic to this cult. The date I used was for the oldest "authentic" piece to that cult.
I did read it, all the way through, before I posted anything about it. And I did understand it, or I wouldn't have done so. But it seems that you did not understand it.
I did most certainly understand it. You claimed that this earlier date was for Roman Mithraism and it was not. The later date that I cited in your source was considered the oldest evidence which was dated much later.
There was a rich intermingling of religious systems that came together in Asia Minor. That Mithraic worship was present in Asia Minor from ancient times is evident through the great number of theophorous names of rulers to be found in the region, such as Mithridates Eupator, the last ruler of Pontus.1 One possible explanation for why the name of Mithra was chosen is that it had particular appeal to the militaristic mentality

Right here you are supporting my position with your source. It states that the Roman Mithraistic cult chose a name for their militaristic mentality. They chose this meaning that they were not derived by the earlier religion. The name Mithra in early religion was actually Mitra rather than Mithra. There is no evidence to date that clearly links the two other than the group of Roman cultists taking the name for their cult. In fact , the practices of the cult were not the same as Zorastrain cult practices.
on account of the ancient Iranian recognition of Mithra as a protector of kings and warrior-defender of truth. Beskow suggests that the presence of peculiar private societies that existed in Bosporan cities, that were since 110 B.C.E. under the control of Mithridates Eupator, indicate a prototype for later Roman Mithraism.
But that the Roman cultists would relate to this and take these on would still not mean that they originated in the earlier form.
2 He explains that the societies were concerned with the worship of Oriental deities, were headed by a leader termed Pater, excluded women, were composed primarily of aristocratic soldiers, and were limited to groups of 15-20 persons.3 The size of the societal groups suggests a striking parallel to the Mithraea found later throughout the Roman Empire, the largest of which could only accommodate roughly 40 persons and most accommodated roughly between one and two dozen.4 Also, plaques with a tauroctone (That is, just the bull-slaying, to differentiate from the more complex "Tauroctony" of later Roman Mithraism that involved additional complex astrological allusions and figures.) image have been found in Crimea (which was absorbed into the Pontic kingdom in 110. B.C.E). Beskow writes:

Another possible piece of evidence is offered by five terracotta plaques with a tauroctone, found in Crimea and taken into the records of Mithraic monuments by Cumont and Vermaseren. If they are Mithraic, they are certainly the oldest known representations of Mithras tauroctone; the somewhat varying dates given by Russian archaeologists will set the beginning of the first century C.E. as a terminus ad quem, which is also said to have been confirmed by the stratigraphic conditions.5

Also some evidence suggests that the original prototypes of Roman Mithraism may have had more Iranian influence in their character.6 It is clear that when it was adopted into the Roman culture, obvious Iranian vestiges were dropped, attested by the fact that all Roman Mithraic inscriptions are in either Greek or Latin.7 Finally, the oldest inscription that is agreed by consensus to be Roman Mithraic was found in Asia Minor, dating to 77-78 C.E, by a Roman prefect.8
7 Finally, the oldest inscription that is agreed by consensus to be Roman Mithraic was found in Asia Minor, dating to 77-78 C.E, by a Roman prefect

So again, the oldest Roman Mithraic article found is dated 77-78 AD. Which is what I pointed out. You gave the other quote without this last quote which made it seem that the dates were earlier when they were in fact much later. These are not known to be evidence for the Roman Mithraic cult.
Not far from the region, in ancient Armenia, a strong echo of Persian influence had been solidly established through the conservative character of the Zoroastrianism practiced there, indicating the great expanse of territory that was put under Persian influence, and therefore, exposed to Mithraic cults.9 Although, from this one can not argue that particular tenets governing the worship of Mithra survived transition from East to Asia Minor to West, we can at least thus clearly indicate a line of migration in the recognition of the god and his status. Certainly, a great deal of fusion among religion systems occurred in Asia Minor, where the ancient traditions of Mesopotamia and Greece met and embraced in some of the most interesting ways.
This is a very prominent point to the discussion, it can not be shown that Roman Mithra worship was the same as the earlier version of the Zoroastrian cult. The particular belief systems that you profess of the Roman Mithra cult are not in evidence prior to the Old Testament.
Also, it seems to be the case that the type of Mithraism that, for instance, offers a potential precedent for Roman Mithraea in the private societies noted above also wasn't a standard Zoroastrian cultic recognition of Mithra. Indeed, private (secret?) societies surrounding the recognition and worship of a deity other than Ahura-Mazda could easily constitute a heretical movement. Such a theoretical heretical Mithraism may entertain alternate versions of the creation story and so to an extent bridge the gap between the Mithras (sic) and Tauroctony in the Roman Empire and earlier Zoroastrian recognition of Mithra.

Clearly this is a problem with your position as you are trying to make a connection of Zoroastraism as the origin of the borrowing when in fact, it can not be shown that Roman Mithraism held any of the same beliefs of that sect.
Along with the private societies in Bosporan cities, a revealing inscription dating much earlier to c. 358 B.C.E. from the region of Caria, in southern Asia Minor, suggests that there was a syncretic movement between Hellenistic and Persian/Medean divinities in the region. In this particular Aramaic inscription, the epithet ksathrapati is identified with Apollo, which for Iranians would correspond to Mithra.10 Further evidence that this inscription was not the product of Zoroastrian belief is that the Old Persian term krp', a cognate of karapan, is used to designate the cult. The latter is a term used by Zoroaster in the Gathas to denote non-Zoroastrian priests.11
Same problem.
They're saying that this inscription is earlier evidence of Mithraism, at least 600 years older than the Younger Avestas, implying that Zarathustra probably did write them after all, centuries earlier than the Dead Sea Scrolls.
The avestas were dated around 600 BC on linguistics alone, there are no actual originals of this. So on one hand you claim unsubstanciated dates for known dates (original artifacts). Yes the Dead Sea Scrolls date later but they are copies of much, much earlier forms. I have shown that Biblical concepts pre-date Zarathustra.
What this last passage is telling you is that the latter Mithraism, adapted for Rome, arose out of traditional Zoroastrianism as an unwelcome heretical cult, the same way Christianity rose out of Judaism.
It is not telling me that. What it is saying is that it did not adhere to the same belief system that came before and that any borrowing of concepts is totally unproven if not totally false. When you cite Zoroastrianism as the dating for the belief systems that are considered to be borrowed by Judaism then this proves to be unvalid. You can not cite any evidence that brings these certain beliefs in prior to Biblical terms.
Hence all the secrecy. Get it?
Considering all the secrecy, the fact that ALL the evidence is only imagery rather than textual, and the fact that in Judaism any drifting from the original Torah was forbidden; it would be most unlikely that Judaism would have taken anything from another cult especially one that was very secretive. Get it?
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Unread 20th December 2004, 03:56 AM
Jet Black's Avatar
WinAce > cdesign proponentsists

35 Gender: Female Faith: Atheist Country: England Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 24th June 2003
Location: Chiark
Posts: 18,427
Blessings: 185,533
Reps: 16,712 (power: 46)
Jet Black is a splendid one to behold
Jet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to behold
Originally Posted by Yamialpha
Anyone who has done research in the theistic view of science knows that there is evidence in the world to prove creationism and refute many of the ideals of evolutionism.
what ideals of evolution? that's like saying "the ideals of gravitationalism" and please do either go into the post I made in more detail or further clarify your statements, rather than regale us with your pithy statements.
__________________
MSci MSc ARCS DIC PhD..... yes, I am bragging.
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Unread 20th December 2004, 03:58 AM
Jet Black's Avatar
WinAce > cdesign proponentsists

35 Gender: Female Faith: Atheist Country: England Member For 5 Years
View Profile Pic
 
Join Date: 24th June 2003
Location: Chiark
Posts: 18,427
Blessings: 185,533
Reps: 16,712 (power: 46)
Jet Black is a splendid one to behold
Jet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to beholdJet Black is a splendid one to behold
Originally Posted by awstar
Like I said, I'm way out of my field here, so I'll defer to your understanding of what could or could not happen genetically. What would the possibility that some of this forbidden meat contain viruses that affect the human genome? or would that be included in the poison you are referring to?
very very slim. I wound't really worry too much about distortions of the human genome, these happen often enough anyway, and I can't really see any theological justification as to why a given protein (that God designed anyway according to some) would be a bad thing.
__________________
MSci MSc ARCS DIC PhD..... yes, I am bragging.
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Unread 20th December 2004, 05:20 AM
Regular Member

Faith: Methodist Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 21st August 2004
Posts: 299
Blessings: 149,171
Reps: 101 (power: 0)
awstar has a spectacular aura aboutawstar has a spectacular aura about
Originally Posted by Jet Black
... I can't really see any theological justification as to why a given protein (that God designed anyway according to some) would be a bad thing.
We may not know the reason, but it would be consistent with forbidding Adam from the eating from one tree, when all the others are freely given to him to eat. There's a certain pattern here that, in a way only God can make happen, serves as His signature.

Personally, I believe that God is preparing His people for the time when they are to eat only the one true source of spiritual nurishment -- the bread of life that He will eventually provide in His Son Jesus.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Return to Creation & Evolution

Thread Tools
Display Modes


 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:37 AM.