Facts About Judaism

[ding]

No excuses, You're just taking an ignorant position where You pretend to to actually know Judaism more than Jews themselves,

Actually this isn’t true at all. If you go back to the beginning of this thread I expressed a sincere desire to understand what Jews believe.

It is the evasiveness of Jews to discuss their faith that is the problem. So if I have gotten anything wrong, which I don’t believe I have, you have no one to blame but yourselves.

But what exactly have I gotten wrong?

Well then let me help You out - the question is a logical fallacy.

Though it may be easier for some weak minds, there's no commandment to believe.
The commandment is to know.

Exactly.

You haven’t demonstrated either.

 

[rylah]

and this is turning into a shallow and boring attempt at disputations, which is typical for all the religions that inherited their limited knowledge of G-d from Judaism, but at the same time still carrying an unconscious primordial detest for the fact that Jews put You in front of a choice between paganism that sees spirituality as an experience of climbing a ladder upwards to trying desperately reach infinity, and monotheism that reveals prophecy as a ladder of infinity reaching down to humanity.

It’s actually my contention that the original meaning of the oral accounts of the Torah (Genesis 1, chapters 1-11) that had been passed down orally for thousands of years from generation to generation before Moses recorded them in writing has been lost through time.

Such that even you do not know their original meaning.

Why do You even believe there's an "original" meaning,
rather than say an infinite wisdom for each given generation?

Stop with Your dogmas, this is becoming very boring.
There's a reason why we remained in our numbers for the last 2000 yrs,
You didn't succeed converting us out of existence - You won't now.

And we're definitely not interested in hearing what You think Judaism is "really all about".
For a nation as vibrant as Israel - well that's just too shallow and boring.

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.

Judaism thought is all about the art of questioning.
When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey of connecting to G-d.
That's just dry static pride.

 

[ding]

It’s actually my contention that the original meaning of the oral accounts of the Torah (Genesis 1, chapters 1-11) that had been passed down orally for thousands of years from generation to generation before Moses recorded them in writing has been lost through time.

Such that even you do not know their original meaning.

Why do You even believe there's an "original" meaning,
rather than say an infinite wisdom for each given generation?

Stop with Your dogmas, this is becoming very boring.
There's a reason why we remained in our numbers for the last 2000 yrs,
You didn't succeed converting us out of existence - You won't now.

And we're definitely not interested in hearing what You think Judaism is "really all about".
For a nation as vibrant as Israel - well that's just too shallow and boring.

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.
Judaism is all about the art of questioning.

When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey or connection.
That's just dry static pride.

No. That’s not what you said.

You are failing at the art of questioning.

Yes, pride is a bad thing. But you are the one being prideful. You don’t like the content of my posts so you attack me instead because you can’t argue the content.

 

[rylah]

Probably because You have a dualistic vision, while I have a holistic universal one, that allows me to live with seemingly opposite ideas, focus seemingly.

Jewish thought is majorly based on argumentation, not one cancelling the other, even though one might be chosen as preferable, but basically holding both as true. This happens naturally at conclusion of many Talmudic discussions, and of course seemingly contradicting prophecies.

Same goes with the Jewish outlook on paganism as well as the Christian and Islamic religions,
instead of outright denying their validity, Jewish sages always looked for the sparks of truth in them, and G-d's purpose in their mere existence.

Even if we were to put the divine aside for a moment, this is a much healthier attitude to life and wisdom, than shallows, simplistic dogmatic fear of truth.

You don’t know what I believe. You never asked.

I believe that G-d is existence. Is that a dualistic vision or a holistic universal one?

I believe that G-d created the material world so that G-d could experience the material world through us. Is that a dualistic vision or a holistic universal one?

I believe that everything works for good. Is that a dualistic vision or a holistic universal one?

I believe that successful behaviors naturally lead lead to success and failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. I believe that standards exist for reasons and when we violate those standards the consequences will make themselves known and will reveal the reason for the standard. I believe that life is effectively a test and that we are constantly being tested, and that our lessons will continue to be returned to us until we learn from them. Are these dualistic visions or are they holistic universal ones.

I never needed to be taught to search for value in all things. World religions have much more in common than not. I don’t profess to know the religion of another better than an adherent of that religion. It’s not my faith. But as long as I remember that they are human beings just like me I don’t have to fail miserably at it.

I look at each faith in the best possible light. It is literally the only way to discover the value in anything.

Yes this view is definitely dualistic.
Life is not a test but a (leveled down) giving.

I see. But you didn’t address the other ones. What about the other ones?

And don’t Jews believe that Satan is an angel who works for God whose job is to tempt and test humans? Isn’t that the Jewish understanding of the account of Job?

So if I believe that life is a test, how is that any different than the Jewish belief that Satan’s job is to test us?

You don't see beyond the test, its purpose.
There's no "job"... it's just a leveling down of truth for a limited vessel.

A soul just shies away from receiving "free bread".

Again... you don’t know what I believe.

I understand the purpose just fine: to progress us.

You've just presented what You believe.
I'm not interested in such a shallow framework of relationship with G-d.

 

[ding]

It’s actually my contention that the original meaning of the oral accounts of the Torah (Genesis 1, chapters 1-11) that had been passed down orally for thousands of years from generation to generation before Moses recorded them in writing has been lost through time.

Such that even you do not know their original meaning.

Why do You even believe there's an "original" meaning,
rather than say an infinite wisdom for each given generation?

Stop with Your dogmas, this is becoming very boring.
There's a reason why we remained in our numbers for the last 2000 yrs,
You didn't succeed converting us out of existence - You won't now.

And we're definitely not interested in hearing what You think Judaism is "really all about".
For a nation as vibrant as Israel - well that's just too shallow and boring.

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.

Judaism thought is all about the art of questioning.
When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey of connecting to G-d.
That's just dry static pride.

There’s nothing dogmatic about saying chapters 1-11 record the allegorical accounts of world history that all nations shared before the great migration from the cradle of civilization.

If anything it shows the veracity of the accounts.

 

[rylah]

Why do You even believe there's an "original" meaning,
rather than say an infinite wisdom for each given generation?

Stop with Your dogmas, this is becoming very boring.
There's a reason why we remained in our numbers for the last 2000 yrs,
You didn't succeed converting us out of existence - You won't now.

And we're definitely not interested in hearing what You think Judaism is "really all about".
For a nation as vibrant as Israel - well that's just too shallow and boring.

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.
Judaism is all about the art of questioning.

When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey or connection.
That's just dry static pride.

No. That’s not what you said.

You are failing at the art of questioning.

Yes, pride is a bad thing. But you are the one being prideful. You don’t like the content of my posts so you attack me instead because you can’t argue the content.

Well, it seems I'm talking to deaf man, who answers faster than it takes one to think anything through. Like a boring answering machine.

 

[ding]

You don’t know what I believe. You never asked.

I believe that G-d is existence. Is that a dualistic vision or a holistic universal one?

I believe that G-d created the material world so that G-d could experience the material world through us. Is that a dualistic vision or a holistic universal one?

I believe that everything works for good. Is that a dualistic vision or a holistic universal one?

I believe that successful behaviors naturally lead lead to success and failed behaviors naturally lead to failure. I believe that standards exist for reasons and when we violate those standards the consequences will make themselves known and will reveal the reason for the standard. I believe that life is effectively a test and that we are constantly being tested, and that our lessons will continue to be returned to us until we learn from them. Are these dualistic visions or are they holistic universal ones.

I never needed to be taught to search for value in all things. World religions have much more in common than not. I don’t profess to know the religion of another better than an adherent of that religion. It’s not my faith. But as long as I remember that they are human beings just like me I don’t have to fail miserably at it.

I look at each faith in the best possible light. It is literally the only way to discover the value in anything.

Yes this view is definitely dualistic.
Life is not a test but a (leveled down) giving.

I see. But you didn’t address the other ones. What about the other ones?

And don’t Jews believe that Satan is an angel who works for God whose job is to tempt and test humans? Isn’t that the Jewish understanding of the account of Job?

So if I believe that life is a test, how is that any different than the Jewish belief that Satan’s job is to test us?

You don't see beyond the test, its purpose.
There's no "job"... it's just a leveling down of truth for a limited vessel.

A soul just shies away from receiving "free bread".

Again... you don’t know what I believe.

I understand the purpose just fine: to progress us.

You've just presented what You believe.
I'm not interested in such a shallow framework of relationship with G-d.

I don’t see my relationship with G-d as shallow although G-d probably does.

Do you see your relationship with G-d as shallow? Because if you don’t how could you see someone else’s relationship with G-d as shallow.

 

[ding]

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.
Judaism is all about the art of questioning.

When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey or connection.
That's just dry static pride.

No. That’s not what you said.

You are failing at the art of questioning.

Yes, pride is a bad thing. But you are the one being prideful. You don’t like the content of my posts so you attack me instead because you can’t argue the content.

Well, it seems I'm talking to deaf man, who answers faster than it takes one to think anything through. Like a boring answering machine.

I’m a fast thinker. Blame G-d.

My answers are well thought out because I have been thinking about these questions for a long time.

And did you just blame me for you not being able to keep up? Look, if my responses weren’t thought through you would be able to easily poke holes in them instead of complaining I am responding too fast.

 

[rylah]

Why do You even believe there's an "original" meaning,
rather than say an infinite wisdom for each given generation?

Stop with Your dogmas, this is becoming very boring.
There's a reason why we remained in our numbers for the last 2000 yrs,
You didn't succeed converting us out of existence - You won't now.

And we're definitely not interested in hearing what You think Judaism is "really all about".
For a nation as vibrant as Israel - well that's just too shallow and boring.

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.

Judaism thought is all about the art of questioning.
When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey of connecting to G-d.
That's just dry static pride.

There’s nothing dogmatic about saying chapters 1-11 record the allegorical accounts of world history that all nations shared before the great migration from the cradle of civilization.

If anything it shows the veracity of the accounts.

To claim that chapter 1 has anything to do with world history,
is ridiculous at best. That's 3rd grade reading comprehension.

You really bore me.
Can I ask You find someone else to bother?

 

[rylah]

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.
Judaism is all about the art of questioning.

When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey or connection.
That's just dry static pride.

No. That’s not what you said.

You are failing at the art of questioning.

Yes, pride is a bad thing. But you are the one being prideful. You don’t like the content of my posts so you attack me instead because you can’t argue the content.

Well, it seems I'm talking to deaf man, who answers faster than it takes one to think anything through. Like a boring answering machine.

I’m a fast thinker. Blame G-d.

My answers are well thought out because I have been thinking about these questions for a long time.

Yep like I said, a boring answering machine.
Like those algorithms on sites that intend to sell me stuff, pretending to be human.

 

[Mindful]

No excuses, You're just taking an ignorant position where You pretend to to actually know Judaism more than Jews themselves,

Actually this isn’t true at all. If you go back to the beginning of this thread I expressed a sincere desire to understand what Jews believe.

It is the evasiveness of Jews to discuss their faith that is the problem. So if I have gotten anything wrong, which I don’t believe I have, you have no one to blame but yourselves.

But what exactly have I gotten wrong?

Well then let me help You out - the question is a logical fallacy.

Though it may be easier for some weak minds, there's no commandment to believe.
The commandment is to know.

Exactly.

You haven’t demonstrated either.

I'm not answerable or obligated to you.

 

[ding]

Because the first eleven chapters of the Torah addresses the important origin questions, is the allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia which all nations share and contains important truths that were meant to be passed down.

Yes, each account has layers of knowledge that can be discovered but only in the context of the original meaning. For if the original meaning is lost than the lessor secondary lessons take on more meaning than intended and make it easier to lose the main points.

I’m not using any dogma. I am using logic. One of the implications of G-d being existence is G-d being logic.

What do you believe the account of the Tower of Babel is all about?

The Tower of Babel was an attempt to make all humanity "hostage children", people who may never be judged for not knowing better, or having the opportunity to. The purpose of Nimrod was that commandments never apply to humanity.

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.

Judaism thought is all about the art of questioning.
When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey of connecting to G-d.
That's just dry static pride.

There’s nothing dogmatic about saying chapters 1-11 record the allegorical accounts of world history that all nations shared before the great migration from the cradle of civilization.

If anything it shows the veracity of the accounts.

To claim that chapter 1 has anything to do with world history,
is ridiculous at best. That's 3rd grade reading comprehension.

You really bore me.
Can I ask You find someone else to bother?

Was the migration from Mesopotamia a historical event?

When did it occur? Does it fit the timeline in the Torah?

And lastly how did the account of the first eleven chapters of Genesis end up as symbols in the Chinese language 800 years before Moses recorded them?

While I am on this subject, is it your belief that Moses wrote the first eleven chapters of Genesis? Or do you believe these accounts had been passed down orally from generation to generation for thousands of years before Moses recorded them in writing?

 

[ding]

No excuses, You're just taking an ignorant position where You pretend to to actually know Judaism more than Jews themselves,

Actually this isn’t true at all. If you go back to the beginning of this thread I expressed a sincere desire to understand what Jews believe.

It is the evasiveness of Jews to discuss their faith that is the problem. So if I have gotten anything wrong, which I don’t believe I have, you have no one to blame but yourselves.

But what exactly have I gotten wrong?

Well then let me help You out - the question is a logical fallacy.

Though it may be easier for some weak minds, there's no commandment to believe.
The commandment is to know.

Exactly.

You haven’t demonstrated either.

I'm not answerable or obligated to you.

Never said you were. I only claimed you are evasive about your beliefs.

 

[ding]

Wrong. It was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization; a historical event.

Thus proving the original meaning was lost through time by your people.

Well, that's why I said Your dogmatic attitude is boring.
Judaism is all about the art of questioning.

When one is full of himself, there's just no question and there's no journey or connection.
That's just dry static pride.

No. That’s not what you said.

You are failing at the art of questioning.

Yes, pride is a bad thing. But you are the one being prideful. You don’t like the content of my posts so you attack me instead because you can’t argue the content.

Well, it seems I'm talking to deaf man, who answers faster than it takes one to think anything through. Like a boring answering machine.

I’m a fast thinker. Blame G-d.

My answers are well thought out because I have been thinking about these questions for a long time.

Yep like I said, a boring answering machine.
Like those algorithms on sites that intend to sell me stuff, pretending to be human.

That’s your pride talking.

 

[rylah]

Well, I've been discovering the Yiddish culture recently.
The wisdom, humor, the curses...oh the curses those really were an art form on their own .

Here's a short video I really liked:

(WARNING - TURN THE VOLUME DOWN)

 

[Mindful]

Actually this isn’t true at all. If you go back to the beginning of this thread I expressed a sincere desire to understand what Jews believe.

It is the evasiveness of Jews to discuss their faith that is the problem. So if I have gotten anything wrong, which I don’t believe I have, you have no one to blame but yourselves.

But what exactly have I gotten wrong?

Well then let me help You out - the question is a logical fallacy.

Though it may be easier for some weak minds, there's no commandment to believe.
The commandment is to know.

Exactly.

You haven’t demonstrated either.

I'm not answerable or obligated to you.

Never said you were. I only claimed you are evasive about your beliefs.

You've got a nerve.

 

[ding]

No excuses, You're just taking an ignorant position where You pretend to to actually know Judaism more than Jews themselves, and this is turning into a shallow and boring attempt at disputations, which is typical for all the religions that inherited their limited knowledge of G-d from Judaism, but at the same time still carrying an unconscious primordial detest for the fact that Jews put You in front of a choice between paganism that sees spirituality as an experience of climbing a ladder upwards to trying desperately reach infinity, and monotheism that reveals prophecy as a ladder of infinity reaching down to humanity.

Ok, so I already addressed the first point when I showed that I did first seek out what Jews believed about God.

I don’t detest Jews. I detest the arrogant and rude behaviors of Jews posting on this board.

Again... you don’t know what I believe although I have since explained in great detail what I believe.

The first is putting man into an unattainable equation, that fuels unconscious anger at G-d and infinite pessimism, while the later fuels a never-ending optimism.

I am infinitely optimistic of my journey because I never blame God for my errors. God will be the first one to tell you that you control your destiny. So I can only assume you are projecting your feelings here because it makes no sense why you would have a positive opinion of yourself and a negative opinion of others.

I didn't say You were a saint, that's too earthy for Christianity and Islam, rather figuratively referred to the impossible demand both expect from humanity of being angel-like pure robotic beings. That is an inner psychological contradiction tearing the psyche apart. While Jewish thought, well...it was intended for human beings with full knowledge of their limitations and advantages over such as angels.

As for Your shallow proposal to teach me what our text say or mean, let me just politely reserve the right to chuckle on the side, and refer You further to the Barcelona Disputations, where that charade was already played out, for all to see the level to which such "arguments" usually reserve to when the clerics just can't seem to convert a learned Jewish sage with their pseudo-intellectual arguments.

I think the argument I made initially was pretty clear and simple - all is part of G-d's plan, You just changed the cause and effect expecting dualism to win the argument against a holistic attitude.

That Your last statement in the end, is just the cherry on top of how people can be driven by blind religious denial of things in front of their eyes, and the reason why 2000 yrs ago there was no other way to pass that knowledge but by tricking Your egos, so that You still believe You were the ones to do it on Your own - and a great example of what it takes to be a true teacher,
who You may like it or not - are Israel.

I don’t expect perfection from man. Besides, being perfect does not mean doing perfect things. It means to exist perfectly.

I’ve already proven you don’t know what it means. The only question remaining is do you have the courage to try to fix it or not.

 

[ding]

Well then let me help You out - the question is a logical fallacy.

Though it may be easier for some weak minds, there's no commandment to believe.
The commandment is to know.

Exactly.

You haven’t demonstrated either.

I'm not answerable or obligated to you.

Never said you were. I only claimed you are evasive about your beliefs.

You've got a nerve.

And then some.

 

[Mindful]

Exactly.

You haven’t demonstrated either.

I'm not answerable or obligated to you.

Never said you were. I only claimed you are evasive about your beliefs.

You've got a nerve.

And then some.

Do one.

 

[Mindful]

I'm not answerable or obligated to you.

Never said you were. I only claimed you are evasive about your beliefs.

You've got a nerve.

And then some.

Do one.

Ok. This is me not being evasive like you.

Point #1: Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share.


The first five books of the Bible (known as the Torah) were written by Moses - an adopted son of the king of Egypt - in approximately 1400 B.C.. These five books focus on the beginning of the nation of Israel; but the first 11 chapters of the Torah records the history that all nations have in common. These allegorical accounts of the history of the world had been passed down from generation to generation orally for thousands of years. Moses did not really write the first 11 chapters of the Bible. Moses was the first Hebrew to record them.


Approximately 800 years before Moses recorded the allegorical accounts of the history of the world. The Chinese recorded this history as symbols in the Chinese language. They drew pictures to express words or ideas. Simple pictures were combined to make more complex thoughts. They used well known history and common everyday things to make a word so people could easily remember it. The account of Genesis found it's way into the Chinese written language because the Chinese had migrated from the cradle of civilization. Prior to this migration they all shared a common history and religion.


The Bible even explains how it was possible for the Chinese to record the account of Genesis 800 years before Moses recorded it. The account of the Tower of Babel was the allegorical account of the great migration from Mesopotamia. This also explains why all ancient cultures have an account of a great flood. Because they all shared a common history and religion before the great migration from the cradle of civilization.


Point #2: Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, the creation of the universe and everything in it from nothing and the evolution of space and time from cosmic evolution through the evolution of consciousness.


We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.


Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.



Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.


Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.


Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation and describes that the universe was created in steps or stage or phases. Scientific evidence tells us that the universe started out as subatomic particles and very quickly formed hydrogen and helium. This is called cosmic evolution. The hydrogen and helium formed stellar structures such as galaxies. This is called stellar evolution. The supernovas of stars created all of the elements and compounds that we see through fusion. This is called chemical evolution. All of these stages or phases had to occur before inanimate matter could make the leap to life. An event we still do not fully understand although the best understanding is that it can only occur in hot, wet conditions with an atmosphere rich in certain chemical compounds. Even with these condition being present we do not know how these chemical compounds could fold themselves in just the correct sequence to create life capable of replicating itself. The amount of information required for life to replicate is staggering. But however life made this leap we know it had to begin from a single celled organism and evolved into evermore increasing complex life forms up to the point that beings that know and create eventually arose.


Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis tells us that space and time had a beginning, that it was created in steps and that life came from inanimate matter.


Point #3: We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. We will never make a fair assessment on whether spirit created the material world or not using that technique.


So if we start from the belief that the first eleven chapters of the Torah are an allegorical account of world history before the great migration from Mesopotamia - which was an actual historical event - then the first eleven chapters of the Torah takes on new meaning. Seen in this light these accounts should be viewed less like fairy tales and more like how important information was passed down in ancient times. Just as the Chinese used well known history and everyday things as symbols in their written language to make words easier to remember, ancient man used stories to pass down historical events and important knowledge to future generations. Interspersed in these allegorical accounts of history are wisdoms that they deemed important enough to pass down and remember. Such as man knows right from wrong and when he violates it, rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he didn't do wrong. Most people don't even realize this wisdom is in the Torah because they read it critically instead of searching for the wisdom that ancient man knew and found important enough to include in his account of world history.


We have to keep in mind that these accounts are 6,000 years old and were passed down orally from one generation to the next for thousands of years. Surely ancient man believed these accounts were of the utmost importance otherwise they would not have been passed down for thousands of years before they were recorded in writing. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. Unfortunately, we are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning. If you were to ask almost any Jew what the Tower of Babel was about he would have no clue that it was the allegorical account of the great migration from the cradle of civilization. That is not intended to be a criticism. It is intended to be an illustration of just how difficult a task it is to discover the original meaning from ancient accounts from 6,000 years ago. We read these texts like they were written yesterday looking for ways to discredit them and make ourselves feel superior rather than seeking the original meaning and wisdom. Shame on us.


Point #4: The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body.


At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. If the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.


So we need to start from that position and examine the evidence we have at our disposal which is creation itself. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. And how space and time has evolved. And how we perceive God.


If we perceive God to be some magical fairy tale then everything we see will skew to that result. There won't be one single thing that we will agree with or accept. Whereas if we were trying to objectively analyze the evidence for spirit creating the material world we would listen to the whole argument and not look for trivial things to nitpick.


But since this is my argument we will use my perception of God. Which is there no thing that can describe God because God is no thing. God is not matter and energy like us and God exists outside of our four dimension space time. In fact the premise is that God is no thing. That God is a spirit. A spirit is no thing. Being things we can't possibly relate to being no things. A two dimensional being would have an easier time trying to understand our third dimension than we - a four dimensional being - would in trying to understand a multi-dimensional being outside of our space time. The closest I can come to and later confirm with the physical laws is that God is consciousness. That Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.


Point #5: A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal.


So now that a realistic perception of God has been established we need to examine the only evidence at our disposal. It should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.


We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds beings that know and create.


The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.


If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.


All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.


Point #6: Man believes in a universal right and wrong.


If the universe were created through natural process and we are an accidental happenstance of matter and energy doing what matter and energy do, then there should be no expectation for absolute morals. Morals can be anything we want them to be. The problem is that nature does have a preference for an outcome. Societies and people which behave with virtue experience order and harmony. Societies and people which behave without virtue experience disorder and chaos. So we can see from the outcomes that not all behaviors have equal outcomes. That some behaviors have better outcomes and some behaviors have worse outcomes. This is the moral law at work. If the universe was created by spirit for the express purpose of creating beings that know and create we would expect that we would receive feedback on how we behave. The problem is that violating moral laws are not like violating physical laws. When we violate a physical law the consequences are immediate. If you try to defy gravity by jumping off a roof you will fall. Whereas the consequences for violating a moral law are more probabilistic in nature; many times we get away with it.


Morals are effectively standards. For any given thing there exists a standard which is the highest possible standard. This standard exists independent of anything else. It is in effect a universal standard. It exists for a reason. When we deviate from this standard and normalize our deviance from the standard, eventually the reason the standard exists will be discovered. The reason this happens is because error cannot stand. Eventually error will fail and the truth will be discovered. Thus proving that morals cannot be anything we want them to be but are indeed based upon some universal code of common decency that is independent of man.


So the question that naturally begs to be asked is if there is a universal code of common decency that is independent of man how come we all don't behave the same way when it comes to right and wrong? The reason man doesn't behave the same way is because of subjectivity. The difference between being objective and being subjective is bias. Bias is eliminated when there is no preference for an outcome. To eliminate a preference for an outcome one must have no thought of the consequences to one's self. If one does not practice this they will see subjective truth instead of objective truth. Subjective truth leads to moral relativism. Where consequences to self and preferences for an outcome leads to rationalizations of right and wrong.


Man does know right from wrong and when he violates it rather than abandoning the concept of right and wrong he rationalizes he did not violate it. You can see this behavior in almost all quarrels and disagreements. At the heart of every quarrel and disagreement is a belief in a universal right and wrong. So even though each side believes right to be different each side expects the other to believe their side should be universally known and accepted. It is this behavior which tells us there is an expectation for an absolute truth.


If there were never a universal truth that existed man would never have an expectation of fairness to begin with because fairness would have no meaning. The fact that each of us has an expectation of fairness and that we expect everyone else to follow ought to raise our suspicion on the origin of that expectation.


Point #7: We can use our own experiences to understand what revelations are.


If we start with the premise that spirit created the material world and created laws of nature which not only predestined beings that know and create to arise but also to mold or evolve their level of consciousness, then it is not a giant leap to believe that besides the constant feedback we receive from the universe that either correct or reinforce our behaviors that we would also receive revelations from the spirit which connects but is not a part of the material world.


The data overwhelmingly shows that man is a spiritual being. It is for good reason that David Foster Wallace said that we all worship something and the only choice in the matter is what we choose to worship. We are literally hardwired for it. Throughout history every society has overwhelmingly held the belief that man is more than just matter and that there is a higher power than man. When we look at the data today we see that more and more people are rejecting organized religion but have not abandoned their belief that they are more than just matter or that there is a force which connects or binds us all. From the atheist's vantage point these beliefs exist because of evolutionary forces. But the reality is that even that argument confirms that spirituality offers a functional advantage over materialism. According to natural selection there are two main components; functional advantage and transfer of functional advantage to the next generation. So even natural selection confirms that spirituality is a behavior which leads to success. Otherwise, according to natural selection, it would have been abandoned long ago. As mankind has gained more and more knowledge of his natural surroundings his desire for spirituality has not diminished. In fact, the more materialistic we became the less satisfied we became.


So it is for good reason that we should keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with his creatures outside of the laws of nature which act as compensating and reinforcing laws of behavior. It would be illogical to believe that the intelligence behind creation of space and time would not provide some level of instruction or guidance. The question is what would that actually look like. And for that answer we must look at our own experiences as a guide to the answer.


From my own personal experiences I have had revelations that when they popped into my head I instantly recognized that they were true. Mind you I am not describing religious revelations, but ordinary everyday kind of things about my ordinary everyday issues that I am confronted with. Usually they happen in the morning when I am in that halfway state of being asleep and being awake. There is only one time when we are not conscious of self and that is when we are asleep. So it makes perfect sense to me that that is the time I am most receptive to the spirit which binds us but is not a part of the material world. This is how I believe revelations work. And this is how I believe ancient man received his revelations. Not a burning bush, or an angel appearing, but ordinary men being in a state of mind receptive to the spirit that binds us but is not a part of the material world. In this light, I can imagine ancient man having an image of how creation of space and time unfolded. Not having the scientific knowledge that we have today, he captured the allegorical account of creation in his own way. So while others may nit pick the exact details or sequence because it does not satisfy their modern view of the world, they miss out on the bigger picture which is that ancient man pretty much nailed what we know today. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe.


And lastly, let's not forget or diminish the importance of ancient man believing so highly in these accounts that he passed them down orally from generation to generation for thousands of years. I can't think of anything which is comparable. It seems to me that it would be a travesty to dismiss these accounts as fairy tales.



Summary and Conclusion:


Genesis is the allegorical account of the history of the world that all people share. Chapter 1 and 2 of Genesis is the allegorical account of creation. Specifically, that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe. We need to stop reading the Bible like we think it is a fairy tale. These are allegorical accounts of history that ancient man deemed important enough to orally pass down from generation to generation for thousands of years. We shouldn't view these accounts using the context of the modern world. We are so far removed from these events that we have lost all original meaning which is why some modern men view these accounts as fairy tales instead of what they really are; ancient man's allegorical account of world history.


The closest thing we can come to perceiving God is that God is consciousness without a body. A case for spirit creating the material world can be made by examining the evidence that we have at our disposal. Some of the most compelling evidence is man's belief in universal right and wrong and his unwillingness to abandon this concept even when he violates it.


Good reasons do exist for us to keep an open mind about the possibility of the creator of space and time communicating with us. We can use our own experiences as proxies to better understand what form these revelations may take. When taken in this light, ancient man's revelation that the universe did have a beginning and that man is a product of the universe is not that far fetched.

Next.