Origins of the Universe. (Creation versus science. Do they contradict?)

[Mousetrap]

I agree that poetry can be read with many different meanings; that's the function of poetry.  The bible I do not consider poetry; it is simply prose from very ancient peoples trying to make sense of their world.  The idioticy is trying to make it fit today's world.  The Prophet is poetry; that's why I return to it time for it is poetry that speaks to me.  The bible is mainly trash that is used in destructive ways.

Idioticy?
Realy.
To get it to make it to fit today's world?
Now how do you explain Kant who wrote exactly what we discovered about the Nebular theory?
Do you know that Oorsted pondered about what Kant said about the Nebular theory, and came up with many discoveries when he investigated the description?
Kant was the first person to describe in detail things such as conservation of energy?
Guys, all you have to do is tell me why Kant took the Bible, and postulated the Nebular theory whivh you as atheists uses today, and claiming the Bible can not describe science.
It was not I that came up with MY theories, but Kant who came up with YOUR theories!

[Mousetrap]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal - Osiris as he was known in Egypt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal_Cycle - see the Death of Ba'al (Ba'al vs Mot)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beelzebub ... on the reasonable accusation against Jesus (in the light of the resurrection story).

http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=12531.0 - for a local string on the true origins of Judaism

Yam wants to rule over the other gods and be the most powerful of all
Baʿal Hadad opposes Yam and slays him
Baʿal Hadad, with the help of Anath and Athirat, persuades El to allow him a palace
Baʿal Hadad commissions Kothar-wa-Khasis to build him a palace.
King of the gods and ruler of the world seeks to subjugate Mot
Mot kills Baʿal Hadad
Anath brutally kills Mot, grinds him up and scatters his ashes
Baʿal Hadad returns to Mount Saphon
Mot, having recovered from being ground up and scattered, challenges Baʿal Hadad
Baʿal Hadad refuses; Mot submits
Baʿal Hadad rules again

This is very far fetched indeed.
Please show me how can anyone make a correlation between Ba'al and Jesus.

[Mousetrap]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal - Osiris as he was known in Egypt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baal_Cycle - see the Death of Ba'al (Ba'al vs Mot)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beelzebub ... on the reasonable accusation against Jesus (in the light of the resurrection story).

http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=12531.0 - for a local string on the true origins of Judaism

Judaism is a Canaanite tribal religion, combined eventually with Midianite henotheism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetragrammaton)  Biblical Hebrew itself is a court language of Canaanite origin.  Most words are of pre-Davidic origin though, from pre-Semitic.  There are only a few that come from other sources ... though many of the ideas of the Tanakh come from the surrounding Babylonian and Egyptian culture.

Midianite henotheism eventually became Islam ... the original Mecca was in Midian, not the current location.  The Muslims are liars in part.

Mandeans are closest to the original followers of John the Baptist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandaeans) ... who may be historical

Samaritans are closest to the original followers of Moses (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samaritans) ... a made up messiah also

Canaanite religion may have been influenced by Pharaoh Akhenaten's solar monotheism.  Psalm 104 is derivative of the Pharaoh's Hymn to the Aten, though it was ultimately derivative from the Canaanite worship of El.  Read The Hebrew Goddess by Raphael Patai.  The false messiahship of King Josiah, and the Babylonian Exile, forged the Tanakh (OT) as we know it, it didn't exist before 500 BCE, and then only as a partisan document of one sect in Persian Judea.  There were multiple Judaisms until the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and even after that.  There were two Jewish temples in Egypt after the exile of Jeremiah.

In other words, Judaism was a polytheist religion (all those bad kings in Israel and Judah and Solomon too).  It remained polytheist, as did Christianity and Islam (see demonology and angelology) until even today, in many circles.  Until the Enlightenment in Europe, demonology and angelology, Kabbalah, Sufism and Trinitarianism dominated theology.  So called religious fundamentalism (strict monotheism) is a recent phenomena in the West (late 19th century starting in England and expanding to America (California oil magnate funded) in the early 20th).  The religious side of monotheism (as opposed to secular mono-epistemology) was largely driven by puritanism in Islam and later, in Protestantism.  Without the example of the synagogue and the mosque, there would have been no Protestantism or Enlightenment.

Christianity itself is largely Phoenician (See Adonis) and Egyptian (Horus).  That origin is visible in the seams of the NT if you look, and in subsequent Church developments (Desert Fathers/Mothers and St Cyril).  Recommendation ... continue to study, and you may get a more mature view of G-d.  Abrahamic religion has a kernel of truth to it, but the clergy cover it up ... G-d is as close as your jugular vein .. consult that.

Tell you what we can do,
At a later stage I would like to discuss this in detail.
I made a thorough study of Mythology, and Christianity, and could not find any relation between the 2.
This for later, first the creation epoch of the Bible as science's description of the Origins of the Universe from Genesis.

[trdsf]

Guys, all you have to do is tell me why Kant took the Bible, and postulated the Nebular theory whivh you as atheists uses today, and claiming the Bible can not describe science.

I corrected you on this: Kant's source was Thomas Wright.  If you continue to assert it, it is a deliberate lie on your part.

[Mike Cl]

Mike, how did you miss out on the fact that Gen 1 speaks of the creation of 7 days, but Gen 2 is a detailed description on how God interacted with Adam on the 6th day?
Check again.

I didn't 'miss out', but simply read the words as printed.  You need to check again.  Well, in your case, never mind.  You are so faithful (willfully blind) you would not see it anyway.

[Mike Cl]

Idioticy?
Realy.
To get it to make it to fit today's world?
Now how do you explain Kant who wrote exactly what we discovered about the Nebular theory?
Do you know that Oorsted pondered about what Kant said about the Nebular theory, and came up with many discoveries when he investigated the description?
Kant was the first person to describe in detail things such as conservation of energy?
Guys, all you have to do is tell me why Kant took the Bible, and postulated the Nebular theory whivh you as atheists uses today, and claiming the Bible can not describe science.
It was not I that came up with MY theories, but Kant who came up with YOUR theories!

You can, apparently, read.  So, yes, 'Idioticy'.  I kant explain Kant, and don't want to try.  And you don't have any 'theories'--not one.  You have a bag full of hypothesis without a shred of facts to back them up.  So, believe what you want.  I still chose to use reason and facts for what I think. 

[Hydra009]

I do not believe in a God that had its origins from matter.

The most famous fictional character of all time, and the writers never bothered to give him a backstory.  Now that's some seriously lazy writing right there.  If it weren't for a rabid (and uncritical) fandom, this stuff would've fallen by the wayside ages ago.

[trdsf]

This is very far fetched indeed.
Please show me how can anyone make a correlation between Ba'al and Jesus.

Easy.  Both are not gods, both are sourced from Middle Eastern nomadic myth and legend...

[sdelsolray]

And the Bible does not say the Stars were created on the 4th day.
It says that the Sun and Moon started to shine on the 4th day, and the stars also.

...
The Bible does not say that the Stars were made on the 4th day, but they started to shine.
...

You lie.

Genesis 1:16-19 (KJV)
"16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day."

In any event, even if the stars "started to shine" (your words) on the fourth day, those stars had yet to form any oxygen, which only occurs late in a star's life and is not ejected from the star into space until the end-life of the star.  Thus, no water on the first day.

And, there would be no elements heavier than lithium in your nebular cloud from which our solar system formed, including the Earth.  Please explain where the heavier elements came from using, of course, relevant science.

[Mousetrap]

I corrected you on this: Kant's source was Thomas Wright.  If you continue to assert it, it is a deliberate lie on your part.

But why would you say I am a liar and the Nebular theory is ascribed to Wright.
On the contrary, Kant postulated the Nebular Theory, Wright described the Milky Way, and speculated that the distant stars can be clusters of stars.
Kant even mentioned Wright in his works.
Did you read the Universal History?
Did you also read Wrights' Hypothesis?

There is a huge difference between Kant's book and Wright's.

Happy reading.

[trdsf]

But why would you say I am a liar and the Nebular theory is ascribed to Wright.
On the contrary, Kant postulated the Nebular Theory, Wright described the Milky Way, and speculated that the distant stars can be clusters of stars.
Kant even mentioned Wright in his works.
Did you read the Universal History?
Did you also read Wrights' Hypothesis?

There is a huge difference between Kant's book and Wright's.

Happy reading.

I say it because it's true -- Kant's inspiration was not Genesis.  Every time you claim it was, as you have after being corrected, you lie.  QED.

[Baruch]

This is very far fetched indeed.
Please show me how can anyone make a correlation between Ba'al and Jesus.

One can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.  Is that really you, Mr Ed (TV talking horse)?  I am surprised you escaped the glue factory.

[Baruch]

Easy.  Both are not gods, both are sourced from Middle Eastern nomadic myth and legend...

Egyptians and Babylonians were settled people, so were Canaanites (they gave us the alef-beth).  Don't accuse everyone there of goat fucking.  But yes, almost everyone until very recently was polytheist (monotheism likes to claim an antique origin, but that is a clerical lie).  Most people still believe in the socialist tooth fairy.

[Hakurei Reimu]

Still silent about my posts?
http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=12764.msg1222854#msg1222854
http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=12764.msg1222868#msg1222868

Is it because you are actually afraid of answering them, and revealing to yourself that what I say is, after all, has greater merit than your words?

Of course not. Your ego won't allow it.

[Cavebear]

Hey, Mousetrap...

I predicted you would ignore the post below, provide creationist nonsense or grace us with your own invented dogma from the Religion of Mousetrapâ,,¢ -- a religion of one.

So far, you are ignoring the obvious identified fault in Genesis.  In my book, that makes you a coward, a disingenuous creationist and/or a willfully ignorant chump.  Of course, you can be all three at the same time.

Mousetrap thinks he is so smart pushing his ideas of the bible without comprehending science.