Assuming a god created us as in Genesis...

Personally though I feel like the Enûma Eliš is so much more epic than Genesis
 
Personally though I feel like the Enûma Eliš is so much more epic than Genesis

I assume that you have read at least a few of Zecharia Sitchin's books. I've read all of them and it appears that the Genesis account is - to a significant degree - copied from the Enuma Elish.
 
Personally though I feel like the Enûma Eliš is so much more epic than Genesis

I assume that you have read at least a few of Zecharia Sitchin's books. I've read all of them and it appears that the Genesis account is - to a significant degree - copied from the Enuma Elish.

I have always loved Ancient Mesopotamian mythology, and I will read any translations and interpretations of the ancient tablets. Actually, when I was a child, I first read a stylized version of the Babylonian creation story in the Necronomicon, and I loved it. It also had a very beautiful and interesting version of the Descent of Ishtar myth. Eventually I came to find more accurate and scholarly versions and translations of the Enûma Eliš ... for example, Oxford World Classics' "Myths from Mesopotamia", and others.

As for Sitchin, I started reading one of his books but never finished it. "End of Days". It was awesome but kind of ummm... kind of out there. I watched all of Ancient Aliens though and they are always talking about him so I have a general idea of some of his theories. Even though I'm totally down with the ideas of "the gods" being extraterrestrial and all... I don't favor the idea of Marduk and Tiamat representing some kind of interplanetary collision... but I totally respect how Sitchin was really thinking outside the box and exploring ideas beyond traditional interpretation. Still, I prefer to imagine Tiamat as a great draconic manifestation of Chaos and the primordial abyss, with cosmic attributes beyond human comprehension
...
 
Last edited:
Holograms: Hurlyburly


In the apocalypto novel "The Stand" (Stephen King), two groups of desperate and unusual human beings vie for dominion in a ravaged land.


There is no love without self-defense. This is why Americans love horror films such as Tobe Hooper's "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" [1974] and John Carpenter's "Halloween [1978]. The Hooper film is about a chainsaw-wielding maniac named Leatherface, and the Carpenter film is about a masked stalker who haunts Halloween Eve.


To understand love, we should try to make models of hypnosis. This is the symbolic significance of the Golem (from Judaism), and it has applications to the visceral imagery in Genesis and "The Satanic Verses" (Salman Rushdie).



:afro:


Golem

Michael Myers vs. Leatherface (FanFiction.net)



poster.jpg
 
Does it make ANY sort of sense to create males first, with a penis, but no females with a vagina for the penis?

All female groups of some animals can reproduce (sharks and fishes, some reptiles, etc..) All male groups cannot.

Major fail; Read Genesis before posting. God created "Man" both Male and Female.
Geesh! Do you ever get ANYTHING Biblical correct?

Actually, you need to read the Bible, too. Contrary to popular belief, there are two creation accounts in Genesis and these accounts contain multiple contradictions. The first creation story is told in Genesis 1:1 to 2:3, and the second story is from Genesis 2:4-25.

According the First Chapter of Genesis, on day five the fishes and birdies were brought forth; and on day six all other creatures great and small were created, and then and only then were Adam and Eve created together. I will not quote the verses since everyone has heard this story many times and should know it by heart.

However, there is another creation account in the Second Chapter of Genesis which says that Adam was created first, then the animals, and finally Eve. This is the creation sequence as described in Genesis Chapter 2:15-23, KJV (I have eliminated verse numbers for easier reading and edited for brevity without changing substance):

“And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

“And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.

“And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”

Now it is clear from the quoted scripture that God first created Adam, then the animals and finally Eve. There is simply no way to interpret these words to give any other order of creation. The Bible says that Adam was alone in the garden and God decided that Adam needed a helpmate. The flow of the narrative proves that Adam was created before the animals, and there is a single sentence which establishes this beyond the possibility of debate; “And..the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air.....; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him.”

The word “but” in the above sentence is a conjunction which shows that the sentences prior to and subsequent to this conjunction are related. The context shows that the latter sentence diminishes or restricts the former, so that the proper definition of “but” is: still, yet, or in spite of . This shows that God was attempting to create a helpmate for his first creation, Adam, but initially failed. Of course, God would not attempt to find a helpmate for a non-existing being, so that Adam clearly was created prior to the animals. It is logically and linguistically impossible to read the above verses and interpret the order of creation in any way other than: Adam, then the animals, then Eve.

There are many other contradictions between the two versions, such as Genesis 1:20 which says that birds and fowl were created out of the water and Genesis 2:19 which claims they were created out of the ground. This has caused many Christians to believe the accounts are not to be taken literally, but allegorically. The official position of the Catholic Church is that the Creation accounts should not be taken literally.
One account is the spiritual creation
the other is the physical.
The spiritual keeps on existing after the physical dies
Pretty simple to me
If catholics don't believe in a literal creation how do they come up with original sin. I;m not catholic btw
The creation, the fall of adam and eve and the atonement of Jesus Christ are so intertwined to gether as to believe one you have to believe the other. To reject one you have to reject the other
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top