Confession of a former christian

quote:

---

There was no Greek alphabet before 300BCE??? Greek is derived from Hebrew??? Dear God, you are stupid.

---

It is not my opnion: I quoted a source [Josephus], and stated a date 300 BCE. Now you can counter it by showing us greek alphabeticals pre-300 BCE.Here's some more: democrasy was NOT a greek innovation; what is translated as democrasy in greek history was NOT democrasy. Democrasy comes from the OT laws.

quote:

---

For most of the twentieth century, scholars dated the Iliad and the Odyssey to the late 9th or to the 8th century BC. Most still argue for this period, notably Barry B. Powell (who has proposed a link between the writing of the Iliad and the invention of the Greek alphabet), G.S. Kirk, and Richard Janko; while a few others (including Martin West and Richard Seaford) now prefer a date in the 7th or even the 6th century BC.
The existence of a single author for the poems is disputed as the poems themselves show evidence of a long oral tradition and hence, possible multiple authors.

​

Mythological Characters in the Iliad
Although gods, goddesses, and demi-gods play a large role in the plot of the Iliad, scholars note that the portrayal of gods by Homer represents a break from the ways in which Greeks actually observed their religion. The gods of the Iliad were crafted to suit the author's needs in telling his story instead of to give an ideal representation of how the Greeks viewed their mythological figures. Herodotus, the classical historian, even went so far as to say that Homer and his contemporary, Hesiod, first named and described the characteristics and appearances of the gods.[23]

​

Iliad - Wikipedia

​

The ancient Greeks generally believed that Homer was a historical individual, but some modern scholars are skeptical. No reliable biographical information about Homer has been handed down from classical antiquity, and Martin West has said that "Homer" is "not the name of a historical poet, but a fictitious or constructed name."[1] The poems are now widely regarded as the culmination of a long tradition of orally composed poetry, but the way in which they reached their final written form, and the role of an individual poet, or poets, in this process, is disputed. For some scholars, such as Geoffrey Kirk, both poems were created by a single author whose individual genius composed them while drawing much of his material from various traditional stories. Others, such as Martin West, hold that the epics were composed by different poets. Gregory Nagy maintains that the epics are not the creation of any individual, but rather slowly evolved towards their final form over a period of centuries; in this view, they are the collective work of generations of poets.
Homer - Wikipedia

---

This work contains no historical factors, such as real peoples' names or datings, and has no independent writings from other sources to verify it as a historical description. It was positively not an alphabetical writings. The Psalms, alphabetical [Hebrew] is positively evidenced as 3000 years old, and a work of historicity - w/ names and datings.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Shellfish are scavengers, and consume foods which can quickly turn toxic, with no means of indentifying this. It is a law very advanced for its time, from a biological pov.Feeding an animal before yourself is very correct. If you own an animal, it is absolutely dependent on you for its existence, for you have taken from it its own means to survive. An animal owner must make provision for his animals, or sell them off.Not destroying a food bearing tree is the first environmental law in recorded history. It means, humans are stewards of the planet, thus given dominion - they have this onus. It also means, one can destroy non-food bearing trees, like bamboo, in any amounts for other uses. Yes, there are laws where an icon tree cannot be destroyed to erect a building - because this makes people plan future buildings w/o destroying their eco systems. Today, many compensatory laws are set up to adjust to this law, such as planting numerous similar trees elsewhere to make up for the loss; this is also the case in animal conversation - if kangaroos over breed and have to be destroyed, for example, then new kangaroo populations must be set up elsewhere.The point is, regardless of your preferred views, despite its anciency and that new religions emerged post-OT, the OT laws are what makes the world turn today - exclusively. All animal rights laws come from the OT. The world does not follow any laws not contained in the OT - not a oner. Amazing, but true.

To be fair you only quoted an author, you did not quote THE source. I, in particular, would like a reference to support Josephus translating the OT into Greek, many thanks.You may be interested to know that the FIRST translation of the OT into Greek was the Septuagint, which was eventually rejected by Jews because of the huge amount of errors in it. I am not sure what you really mean here, are you saying that there was no Greek writings before 300 bce? Sorry, but this is complete nonsense.The OT laws very much support a theocracy.Where in the OT does it say anything about the majority of the population deciding what is going to happen?The OT very much promotes devotion to God and following His rules a regulations.I don't know which websites you are reading, but you need to be a bit more critical of your sources.

You really do talk some shit! You never been to a Chinese restaurant?What do you think pandas prefer to eat? The Bible endorses polygamy does it? What about suicide, does the Bible endorse that? It's amazing how much garbage you believe is true.Edited by Brian, : spelling

quote:

---

You may be interested to know that the FIRST translation of the OT into Greek was the Septuagint,

---

Yes, and that date was 300 BCE.

quote:

---

I am not sure what you really mean here, are you saying that there was no Greek writings before 300 bce?

---

No 'alphabtical' writings. Picture writings can be seen much before greece existed, like in the pyramids. The OT marks the first alphabetical books.

quote:

---

Democrasy comes from the OT laws.

​

Sorry, but this is complete nonsense.

​

The OT laws very much support a theocracy.

---

Not so. The seperation of state and religion comes from the OT: the prophet of the day represents the people, and the king reps the state: the people, via the prophet, have greater rights and can impeach a king. The prophet Nathan could have ordered King david's execution. In ancient times, the law could not be adapted to individual votings, nor did this ever occur in Greece. In greek's edition, non-citizens, non-property owners and women could not vote: it was based on a hirachy system of the rich.

quote:

---

Where in the OT does it say anything about the majority of the population deciding what is going to happen?

---

It surely does, and predates the greek, also giving the only correct meaning of democrasy:

quote:

---

Ex 23/ 2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil;

---

This means, you 'will' and must follow a majority which is not evil [not corrupted/enforced]; however, before securing such votes, it must be assured the voting is free and by choice. This is where today's system fails: Arafat was able to get 96% of the votes, but was beaten by Sadaam Hussein who got 100% of the votes. That is not democrasy. This is a true form of democrasy, which terminology & definition has to be first made in the negative ['shall not'], because this factor comes before any voting can be taken.

quote:

---

neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice

---

It is a violation to side with a known corrupt democrasy for a personal benefit. True, pristine democrasy.

quote:

---

To be fair you only quoted an author, you did not quote THE source. I, in particular, would like a reference to support Josephus translating the OT into Greek, many thanks.

---

You bet its there, I've read it. This is a 20-volume set of writings, but I know where its located.

You should know, in ancient times, people were mostly vegetarian, and only consumed meat on special occassions. Destroying a food bearing tree was a great violation. Most ancient people prayed to trees.

Suicide is a sin. Polygamy was not allowed after the law was given; adultry was a law. Women's rights also comes from the OT.

Well given that the oldest Hebrew OT texts we have are the Dead Sea Scrolls, which the oldest are 2nd c. bce, that makes the Greek older in my book. But what about Homer, Herodotus, Hecateus, Thucydides? These are way older than 300 bce.I'll address the rest of your points when I have time.

This is not separation of church and state: it is precedent of church over state, which is the exact problem the idea of "separation of church and state" was devised to combat. This is not the definition of democracy, regardless of what you insist. Democracy is rule by the people, which also includes rule by an "evil" people. (Demos = people, kratos = rule). This scripture is still insisting on "rule of religion" or "rule of God," ("theocracy," theos = god, kratos - rule). In this system (and in this scripture), people do not rule, they just obey. No, it doesn't. It means "thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil."

---

I'm Thylacosmilus.Darwin loves you.

Or Aristotle, Plato, Sophocles, Aeschylus, Euripides, Sappho, Pindar, Xenophon, and so on. Hell, Alexander the Great died in 323 BCE which is earlier than 300.But then IaJ would probably just claim they were all Hebrews writing in Aramaic, they were just assumed to be Greek by the deluded people of today known as 'everyone else on earth.'If IaJ is considered a spokesman, it would be enough to drive St. Augustine to renounce Christianity IMO.Edited by anglagard, : add something remotely on topic

---

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis BaconThe more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

quote:

---

Well given that the oldest Hebrew OT texts we have are the Dead Sea Scrolls, which the oldest are 2nd c. bce, that makes the Greek older in my book.

---

Lol! And your hurling names at me! The scrolls represent 100s of copies of much more ancient docs - where the heck do u think the greeks got their script to translate from - there is no monotheism outside or predating the OT? Have you not learnt of Alexander, and his deliberations with the temple preists to allow this translation? Have you heard of the psalms, confirmed as 3000 years with the Dan Tel discovery - these mention Moses numerously, and allign with all the OT narratives, and there was no greeks 3000 years ago.

quote:

---

But what about Homer, Herodotus, Hecateus, Thucydides? These are way older than 300 bce.

---

What about Homer - I'm not even sure if he was a real figure. But his dating is not that old - relatively. The greeks are kin with the original Philistines, from the agean sea basin; the Macedoneans predate the greeks. The way to prove greeks had alphabetical writings is to evidence one pre-300, the date they translated the OT. Why are we even debating this - most links of the first alphabetical writings list the Hebrew in the top three, some nominate it, controversially, in reverse order, namely the phoenecian came after the Hebrew, and there is some credence to this view.It is blatant the greeks got their 'alpha beta' from the Hebrew 'alef bet', as well as a host of concepts, laws and beliefs, which they later transfered into the NT. The greeks conquered Persia, and met Jews in Mesopotamia, after they were exiled their via Babylon - the Jews then held the most prominant places in the greek admn [eg. Paul was a 4th generation secular greek jew and a member of its parlaiment] The greeks were hooked on images and deities, gay, shellfish and pork - and Alexander's dream of uniting these two into one religion fell after he suddenly died [or was assassinated] - because the greeks could not abandon their traditions, and its preists started rebelling over the OT influences, which was clearly far more advanced than the hellinist bleiefs. The greek preists then suggested an amalgamation of the religions, and they never forgave the Jews for refusing to enjoin zeus with Yahweh, and thus antisemitism was embedded into the gospels via the greeks. Christianity was fostered by greeks, and most of the gospels are in this script, brim full of greek/helenist traditions [sunday as the sacred day, 25 Dec birth of Mithras - son of apolo who sacrificed himself, etc]Truth is, at least it infers and inclines that way, that a host of falsehoods were inserted into the gospels, and this has become a sacred, non-negotiable belief. What's more ridiculous than charging a people with Deicide - does it not smack of hellinist dieties head bashing each other? Or who's heard of any example outside the gospels, where jews revel over the death of another jew - this is unheard of in all their 4000 year history and a sin in the OT, but it cannot be detached anymore from the core doctrines of the gospels. How does one get a christian to see it that way today - no way, hose. A cherished lie transcends a disdained truth - and the greeks caused the seperation of christianity from its mother religion - by raising Jesus as a deity.

quote:

---

This is not separation of church and state: it is precedent of church over state, which is the exact problem the idea of "separation of church and state" was devised to combat.

---

I understand that most of the folk see it that way, but this is because the OT was seen as part of the christian bible for 2000 years and spread that way with a force, while these two beliefs were in polar opposittes in their core doctrines. Jews were forbidden to voice an alternative view, and literally ghettoes and segrated in medevial europe. Today, all anti-religionists dump all religions in one green bag. Thus you say the OT was the precedent of the NT, but consider the two doctrines, and you find that only one advocates equal rights to strangers and inhabitants alike [regardless of beliefs], while the other says, NO SALVATION BUT TRU THE NT. So one promotes equal rights, and commands one not to vex a stranger, while the other says all strangers who do not accept JC are bad guys doomed to hell forever, etc, etc.The medevial church later reverted to the OT mode by default: the vatican was not the ruling body anymore, which occured only recently. While 3000 years ago in Israel, her greatest king [David], had to seccumb to the command of the prophet: where have you seen a king, and a most powerful conquering one, be impeached by an old prophet anyhere in geo-history? This is the equivalent of state and religion, whereby the king must rule via the law - same as a US President cannot violate the constitution and can be impeached - this was not so in Europe or Arabia. This is one reason the OT laws were disdained: it was seen as a danger to monarchs and rulers, its laws too stringent in justice. The US constitution is based on the OT, including its seperation of religion from state: there was no other place to get this from, and it represents the reverse of medevial europe.

quote:

---

IamJoseph writes:
Ex 23/ 2 Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil;

​

This is not the definition of democracy, regardless of what you insist. Democracy is rule by the people, which also includes rule by an "evil" people. (Demos = people, kratos = rule). This scripture is still insisting on "rule of religion" or "rule of God," ("theocracy," theos = god, kratos - rule). In this system (and in this scripture), people do not rule, they just obey.

---

Wrong. Yes, democrasy can be voted upon by evil people - but w/o enforcement and with the agreed laws as the foundation - and this has to be the first and foremost the applicable law in democrasy. The rule of God cannot be voted against, the people already assigned themselves to this covenant, but they are free to leave that belief. You are confusing things - today's atheist syndrome was not the problem in any part of the ancient world - the greeks did not vote whether zeus should be abolished, only who would rule, and some secondary matters voted upon: in greece or any part of the ancient world, one would be executed for challenging the country's core doctrines, and was never voted upon. What today's atheist view is, that America, a christian country, should be free to vote whether to accept christianity or not; this is a different paradigm from a democratic voting situation. Core doctrines, or constitutional changes, are varied from periodical democratic voting instances: we vote for a president, and he has to abide the constitution.But there is no question that seperation of state and belief came from the OT, while this was antithetical in mdevial, european christianity: 100s of 1000s of people were killed and forcefully converted - there was no state - the church was the state, and any Pope or revered person challenging the church faced the rake and death. Some 90% of all christians today were forcefully converted via their ancesters.

quote:

---

IamJoseph writes:
This (Ex 23:2) means, you 'will' and must follow a majority which is not evil...

​

No, it doesn't. It means "thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil."

---

Yes, and there is no other reading of it. It took me a while also to see through this conclusion, but it is 100% correct, as with a maths equation. When a conditional negative law appears, it means that law is permitted when the negative condition does not apply - this is also a common tort in judiciary law, and this comes from the OT laws. There is no other meaning to 'not follow a corrupt multitude', than 'to follow a non-corrupt multitude' - else you have a superfluous commandment/law.Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

Wrong. The resemblance is because both derive from the Phoenician alphabet, really an abjad, or proto-alphabet, because it has only consonant sounds. The Greek alphabet is the first to include vowel as well as consonant sounds, and is therefore the first full alphabet. This alphabet dates from the 9th or 8th century B.C. Wrong again. The Greek language existed for some centuries before this, and there were two (non-phonetic) written forms, Linear A and Linear B.So, Greek language dates from about 3,500 years ago, and Greek alphabetical writing from about 2,800 years ago. It was the first alphabet with symbols for vowel sounds, therefore the first true alphabet.That'll offend your racial patriotism, won't it?