Something in the Bible that is actually supported by evidence

[mark kennedy]

People need to research the words, like "eden" and "garden."

They need to understand that eden means a place of pleasure, and a garden is a fenced off area.
These ideas suggest the importance of human consciousness in its ability to separate man from lower life forms.

It suggests that this place is the mind.

With that view, it becomes a story concerned withthe differentiation of the seven Freudian sources of our internal thoughts, (the seven spirits of Revelation).

We see the logical Superego interacting with the Anima, the woman's intuition found in us all.
Influenced by these thoughts the Libido acts upon the drives and desires that send "him" on the mission that opposes the good shepherd of Conscience.

Interesting analogy, reminds me of, John Bunyan, Holy War.

I'm not into the Freudian stuff but are you the artist?

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

The Semites mutilated and corrupted Sumerian myths during the exilic period. The early geneaology in Genesis is in fact non-Semitic (the Sumerians were not Semites) and the Jews then redacted/altered a lot of the genealologies to insert themselves. In regards to ethnology however, both the Semites and Sumerians are Caucasoid, and this is the only race the Old Testament really deals with because of its limited scope of ethnography (middle-east, south-east europe and north africa). I think it may have been possible of a trade route with Western Europe, as Tarshish is usually identified with Spain, the rest of the globe though was never mapped or explored. So the authors didn't believe Adam gave birth to the other (non-Caucasoid) races.

You do know Sumerian myths are in the form of coniform tablets right? The Old Testament is a collection that has transcended thousands of years. Not just as a poetic, genealogical riddle. The Old Testament, especially the first five books, has been preserved as part of a culture. These are not in a dead language, found in a cave and subject to the latest linguistic analysis.

It's a lot like the whole evolution mess, if you are more interested in old bones and dirt as proof I'll look into it. If you want to insist that Genesis is somehow attributable to Sumerian myths I would say you need a lot more then these some dusty old tablets found in a cave. The Bible has a living history, legacy and chain of custody, it stands up well as an historical document.

Have a nice day,
Mark

 

[Huram Abi]

Interesting analogy, reminds me of, John Bunyan, Holy War.

I'm not into the Freudian stuff but are you the artist?

Grace and peace,
Mark

It's not Freudian. It's a mixup of the freudian apparatus and some concepts of Jung. In any case, it is a wrongful representation of both.

 

[mark kennedy]

The oldest fragments of the Old Testament only date to the 2nd century BC, which is pushed back no more than 600 BC. That's the limit though.

Sumerian cuneiform tablets predate the oldest physical copies of the Old Testament by 2000 or so years.

If the OT predates the Sumerian myths - where are the earlier sources?

I never said the Hebrew texts were older, I wasn't giving the bibliographical tests a second thought. They were in the custody of those you would expect these writings to be with, the Hebrews in general and the Levites particularly. The way the Old Testament was preserved goes to the credibility of the text, placing it exactly where it is supposed to be, in the custody of the Hebrews.

Coniform tablets simply don't have any history except as an artifact, there are no Sumerian religious system going back the entire span of time represented within the pages. What you don't seem to understand is that the Old Testament is a primary source document with excellent credibility while these tablets have no living history.

But I'll tell you what, if you want to compare the content and credibility of the coniform tablets to the Hebrew canon, I'm up for that. If you want to take a look at the credibility and bibliographical comparisons of the New Testament to just about anything from antiquity count me in. Just taking the age of the tablets alone as a preference ignores the human history that is well known and continues to this day. Not all evidences are relics, some history is alive and associated with the pages of Scripture throughout it's history.

 

[mark kennedy]

It's not Freudian. It's a mixup of the freudian apparatus and some concepts of Jung. In any case, it is a wrongful representation of both.

Its not a very good representation of the Menorah either. At any rate, thanks for the explanation.

 

[Loudmouth]

The way the Old Testament was preserved goes to the credibility of the text, . . .

No, it just goes to its popularity.

Coniform tablets simply don't have any history except as an artifact, there are no Sumerian religious system going back the entire span of time represented within the pages. What you don't seem to understand is that the Old Testament is a primary source document with excellent credibility while these tablets have no living history.

Again, preservation in no way indicates accuracy, only popularity.

But I'll tell you what, if you want to compare the content and credibility of the coniform tablets to the Hebrew canon, I'm up for that.

Just taking the age of the tablets alone as a preference ignores the human history that is well known and continues to this day.

A recent global flood and a young Earth are both contradicted by the evidence.

 

[cupid dave]

Interesting analogy, reminds me of, John Bunyan, Holy War.

I'm not into the Freudian stuff but are you the artist?

Grace and peace,
Mark

Well if the graphics look artsy it isn't my own personal work.
i stole the pic from Revelation21:The evolution of the new human paradigm


You do believe people have Egos, right????

 

[cupid dave]

Its not a very good representation of the Menorah either. At any rate, thanks for the explanation.

?
The menorah didn't look that bad...

... and the Bible writers seem to love Freud and Jundian psychology:

1) Lucifer = ............... Id
2) Satan =........ .........Libido
3) Mammon = ............ Ego
4) Devil = ..................Anima
5) Beelzebub = .......... Self
6) False Prophet =.......Superego
7) False Shepherd = ... Harmony

8) The Good Shepherd = ...Conscience

 

[Huram Abi]

Well if the graphics look artsy it isn't my own personal work.
i stole the pic from Revelation21:The evolution of the new human paradigm


You do believe people have Egos, right????

That's your website, Cupid. It, in fact, is your personal work.

 

[ryeaber]

Nowhere does Genesis say Adam was the first man in the context you are saying.

Referenced this in another thread and thought of you. It may not say this about Adam, but it does about Eve (Genesis 3:20), and don't they go hand in hand? If all life sprang from Eve, but not Adam, does that mean that the bible implies Eve was the mother of all through multiple husbands?

 

[Phred]

Referenced this in another thread and thought of you. It may not say this about Adam, but it does about Eve (Genesis 3:20), and don't they go hand in hand? If all life sprang from Eve, but not Adam, does that mean that the bible implies Eve was the mother of all through multiple husbands?