Another look at the moon landing.

[trophy33]

The way it's told doesn't make it a fictional accounting. Which seems to be what you're implying. Christians come up with the idea that it's "mythological drama" because they feel it doesn't gel with science. But God clearly defies science at times. It's scientifically impossible for a woman to become impregnated by a spirit entity. It's scientifically impossible for a man who's truly been dead for three days to come back to life. It's scientifically impossible for three separate beings to be one in the same. Much less be each other's father and son.

Christians come with the idea that its a mythological drama, because it has obvious signs of a creation drama and mythological elements.

Miracles like the virgin birth or the spiritual dimensions are not scientifically impossible, they are just scientifically unrepeatable and untestable. The physical history, age of the Earth of the existence of the firmament can be scientifically tested.

 

[ozso]

Christians come with the idea that its a mythological drama, because it has obvious signs of a creation drama and mythological elements.

So what's the point of it? That this and that never really happened?

Miracles like the virgin birth or the spiritual dimensions are not scientifically impossible, they are just scientifically unrepeatable and untestable. The physical history, age of the Earth of the existence of the firmament can be scientifically tested.

 

[ozso]

Gen 1:6 is not the only biblical reference to the Mesopotamian concept of firmament. The firmament in G 1:6 does not float in a vacuum and we cannot ascribe whatever we want to it, but it has its cultural context. Bible dictionaries might help you with this.

What's the conclusion supposed to be?

 

[Apple Sky]

Gen 1:6 is not the only biblical reference to the Mesopotamian concept of firmament. The firmament in G 1:6 does not float in a vacuum and we cannot ascribe whatever we want to it,

We don't - Try reading other passages that relate to the firmament, that tells you what the firmament is.

What is the firmament according to the Bible?

The rabbis viewed the heavens to be a solid object spread over the Earth, which was described with the biblical Hebrew word for the firmament, raki'a. Two images were used to describe it: either as a dome, or as a tent.

King James Bible
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

 

[trophy33]

We don't - Try reading other passages that relate to the firmament, that tells you what the firmament is.

What is the firmament according to the Bible?

I know the other passages related to the firmament. I am saying we cannot ascribe any modern idea we want to it (like "atmosphere", "space", "galaxy" etc.), we must consider the cultural context and the Mesopotamian cosmology.

My difference from you is that I do not accept the Mesopotamian cosmology to be inspired or even dictated by God and I do not believe in any absurdly massive and expensive conspiracy about space. I would not say that we disagree about what the firmament was supposed to be, in the mind of the bronze-age people.

 

[ozso]

I know the other passages related to the firmament. I am saying we cannot ascribe any modern idea we want to it (like "atmosphere", "space", "galaxy" etc.), we must consider the cultural context and the Mesopotamian cosmology.

My difference from you is that I do not accept the Mesopotamian cosmology to be inspired or even dictated by God and I do not believe in any absurdly massive and expensive conspiracy about space. I would not say that we disagree about what the firmament was supposed to be, in the mind of the bronze-age people.

That happens when the Bible is viewed the same way one would view Gilgamesh.

 

[Apple Sky]

I know the other passages related to the firmament. I am saying we cannot ascribe any modern idea we want to it (like "atmosphere", "space", "galaxy" etc.), we must consider the cultural context and the Mesopotamian cosmology.

Why must we ? Because it fits in withe your veiws ?

 

[ozso]

Moses, a man who experienced 40 days of one-on-one communication with God, yet didn't know or understand anything any better than the average bronze-age Mesopotamian.

 

[Apple Sky]

If you recognize Sibrel’s name, it could be for his 2001 documentary, A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon, one of the first in-depth and most influential videos attempting to discredit the moon landing. But he’s most often remembered for being the guy who got right-hooked by Buzz Aldrin.

“If I walked on the moon, if I really walked on the moon, and somebody thought otherwise, I would find that hysterically funny,” Sibrel tells me. “If someone said I did not walk on the moon when I really did, that would be like throwing a feather at me. Why would throwing a feather at me make me so violently angry that I’d punch somebody in the face?”

Because it did & here it is filmed Buzz punching Sibrel.

 

[ozso]

If you recognize Sibrel’s name, it could be for his 2001 documentary, A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon, one of the first in-depth and most influential videos attempting to discredit the moon landing. But he’s most often remembered for being the guy who got right-hooked by Buzz Aldrin.

“If I walked on the moon, if I really walked on the moon, and somebody thought otherwise, I would find that hysterically funny,” Sibrel tells me. “If someone said I did not walk on the moon when I really did, that would be like throwing a feather at me. Why would throwing a feather at me make me so violently angry that I’d punch somebody in the face?”

Because it did & here it is filmed Buzz punching Sibrel.

He was stalking harassing and verbally abusing an elderly man. He fully had that punch coming.

 

[trophy33]

So what's the point of it? That this and that never really happened?

Not literally, no. The point of the creation mythos is a cultural teaching, establishing cultural roots (creation myths were in the beginnings of all ancient nations; it served the purpose of establishing their identity).

The theological point of the Genesis 1, which is different from other nations in Mesopotamia, was that the creation is not divine, but separated from the Creator.

 

[trophy33]

What's the conclusion supposed to be?

Conclusion of what?

 

[trophy33]

Why must we ? Because it fits in withe your veiws ?

Because its the rule number one of reading any text - context. If you want to insert your own ideas into the head of the author, you are not reading anymore.

 

[ozso]

Not literally, no. The point of creation mythos is a cultural teaching, establishing cultural roots (creation myths were in the beginnings of all ancient nations).

The theological point of the Genesis 1, which is different from other nations in Mesopotamia, was that the creation is not divine, but separated from the Creator.

Moses spent a lot of time with God, and he wrote down what God told him about how God created the world. The fact that Jesus refers to Adam and Eve and the flood, is proof that those things really happened. That other Mesopotamians had their version of it means nothing other than their myths were based on actual events.

 

[trophy33]

Moses spent a lot of time with God, and he wrote down what God told him about how God created the world.

Genesis was not written by Moses. Its even established that Gen 1 and Gen 2 are from totally different sources.

The fact that Jesus refers to Adam and Eve and the flood, is proof that those things really happened.

No, its only a proof that He found these Jewish cultural traditions useful for teaching His point.

 

[ozso]

Conclusion of what?

Of what you're saying. So far it's been fairly vague and just talk about how things were in Mesopotamia. God created the world as described: True or False? Everything about Adam and Eve was" True or False? The flood and Noah's ark happened as described: True or False?

 

[trophy33]

Of what you're saying. So far it's been fairly vague and just talk about how things were in Mesopotamia. God created the world as described: True or False? Everything about Adam and Eve was" True or False? The flood and Noah's ark happened as described: True or False?

Not literally, no. The form/genre is not literal.

 

[ozso]

Genesis was not written by Moses. Its even established that Gen 1 and Gen 2 are from totally different sources.

Established by whom. And who wrote it, how did it become part of the Pentateuch?

No, its only a proof that He found these Jewish cultural traditions useful for teaching His point.

No way, Jesus spoke of these things as though they took place. So did Paul.

 

[ozso]

Not literally, no. The form/genre is not literal.

So you're saying it's all false.

 

[trophy33]

Established by whom. And who wrote it, how did it become part of the Pentateuch?

For such questions it would be best if you bought a good Bible dictionary. If you do not want to, sources like wikipedia must be enough.

No way, Jesus spoke of these things as though they took place. So did Paul.

It may seem so, when you do not understand the role of mythos and of Scriptures in ancient societies. They did not use scientific formulations when teaching their point, they used the culturally accepted stories.