neologist wrote:I didn't say anything about which chapter, fur face.
Sir.
I just said before as contrasted to after.
In fact, you did
not say before as contrasted to after. If that were what you meant, you can hardly expect me to have known it if you didn't say it.
It would not signify, however, because the fact remains that Genesis Chapter Two does not mention angels, and you are inserting what you want to believe into that text, when it patently does not say what you allege it means.
The English general James Wolfe died on September 13, 1759, on the fields below the city walls of Québec. The justifiably respected historian Simon Schama has written a book, one portion of which deals with his death, in which Schama alleges that Wolfe had committed "suicide by combat." His argument is convincing, and believe he is correct. I don't
know that he is correct, however. All i do know for a fact (as well as anything in history can be known for a fact) is that Wolfe was struck, consecutively, by three French musket balls, and died on the field less than an hour after the first ball shattered his wrist. I
believe that he marched on to his death purposefully, but i don't
know it. There is a world of difference between what we believe and what we know. I object to your habit, a habit all too common among the religionists, of purporting that what you believe is in fact what you know, when that is clearly not the case.
Quote:I know you disdain scripture . . .
I do not "disdain" scripture--i disdain the claims of those who allege that scripture describes the literal truth when it clearly cannot be stated to a certainty that this is so. More than that, i disdain those who elaborate on scripture, often asserting that which scripture clearly does not say, simply because that is what they believe, and want to allege scripture as their authority.
Quote: . . . but Job 38:7 gives insight as to who might have been included in The word 'us' when it refers to the time of creation when "all the sons of God began shouting in applause. . . " Not a plural god but separate creations.
This ignores that the texts of Genesis and of Job were written at different times and by different authors. Most modern and reliable scholarship considers that although portions may survive from earlier legends, the book itself as it now exists is a postexilic product, which is to say, that it was written after the return from the Babylonian captivity. It can hardly be said to be a conclusive source for textual criticism of Genesis, which is very likely based on several external mythic sources, as well as oral sources which date back to far before the Captivity. Furthermore, Genesis, as was all of the Pentateuch, was edited after the Captivity, and the ambiguity which i have pointed out was not then removed, explained or elaborated.
You have also selectively quote Job Chapter 38, another favorite tactic of the religionist involved in amateur exegesis:
Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me. Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
It is not at all clear from this that Job 38 refers to the same "us" which appears in Genesis 2 when it refers to the "sons of God." It could just as well have referred to those singing morning stars, and it could just as well have meant something entirely different.
You just don't know.
That doggerel about "Jack" clearly does not refer to me, as i am not a proselytizing atheist, i do not make a religion of atheism, and i never wear hats. You're letting a petty fit of temper get the better of you.
