kuonphobos

292

@superstay: Aha I see...I think

anyway the game at hand

Four Musicians who are certainly better than Justin Beiber

@superstay: I admit that I am a bit bewildered by the second portion of your reply and hope that I did not cause offense as none was intended

by scousers I merely meant four blokes from Liverpool

BTW reading the entry for "scousers" on the Urban Dictionary is quite hilarious and it seems they get a bum wrap from other inhabitants of the British Isles.

Lauren Cohan (I think that's it's spelled)

A few thoughts:

The Book of Genesis is most likely a compilation of numerous fragments compiled during the Diaspora which is the time when the people of Israel wereexiled to and under the dominion of Babylon.

There are certainly two different creation accounts in this compilation. It is not chronological. And it is not indended to be "straight history" the way we understand history today. As a creation "myth" (and I am using this word VERY carefully because it is loaded) the intent of these early passeges in Genesis are to create a refutation against the creation myths of the surrounding peoples. For example, in the very early passages (Genesis 1:1-19) the etymological origins of the terms translated as the "Deep" or the "Sun" are actually the names of the various local gods associated with those bodies. The intention of these early passages is basically to say "Our God made Your gods"

Adam and Eve are not proper names but merely Anglicized versions of Hebrew terms simply meaning man and woman. This probably applies to both accounts and upon consideration still can apply even in the statements about Jesus being the "Second Adam"

These are things I have read over the years and studied. I am not trying to state them as fact or as if my opinion is superior to anyone elses. I just think it is important to keep in mind some of the figurative nature of these early passages.

I also would like to state that recent studies of the genetic origins of humanity lean very strongly towards the theory of an common progenitor for the entire human species. National Geographic being one taht comes to mind. Also studies in linguistics lean in this direction as well.

I really like that pic of T Swift on the right

War (a strange circle just evolved)

@TheNooseIsLoose said:

@kuonphobos said:

Why can't a person just take a moment, state their thoughts as clearly as they can and then just step back? Of course there will be dissagreement. Any time people are putting forward statements about absolutes there are bound to be conflicts of logic. But why take it so personally?

I think that I can make a very measured logical argument (argument for those who may not know is a neutral term of ones position not necessarily the negative connotation which is more widely used) for my belief system but I am hesitant to enter such an environment of childish oneupsmanship.

I am exasperated. I went through High School once already. That was enough.

How's the weather up there on your high horse?

I have considered for a little while whether I should respond to this in this environment but I would just like to ask what prompted this response?

Men in tights (sorry again) =)

283