God Is Not The Creator

Submitted by: Mornaf 7 years ago in
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/6274502/God-is-not-the-Creator-claims-academic.html

Textual analysis suggests a different bibl.ical story than what we are accustomed to hearing
There are 82 comments:
Female 158
When is Baalthazaq not commenting (arguing) on something religous? Every time something has to do with religon, he`s making the first comment I see!
0
Reply
Male 2
The problem with those grasping at a Biblical "translation error" concept is that they are unable to produce any. And when they believe they do, they point at misinterpretations as proof, not translations. Now, if we can understand they are interpretations, then there can be no delusion. So, I challenge anyone to produce errors in translations that matter.
Here`s your chance to move out of the sandbox of pseudo-intellectual tantrums and your fits of slander into a coherent debate.
0
Reply
Male 2
Its interesting that no statements from the Bible have been proven false, errant interpretations perhaps, yet this goes on while science revises its own misunderstandings almost daily.

Sure, self-cleaning and custodial efforts may seem a noble attribute and a mark of some purity in science, but pales when we just compare the records of ID and evolution.

The sciences of anthropology, astronomy and geology are ever proving the ancient Biblical record. The path of scientific revolution today: These disciplines first ridiculed, then adjust in moderation, then retreat from comment, and then reluctantly, confirm the Biblical record.

If God didn`t create everything then logic can only submit it hasn`t been created and we then must believe it just exists by some scientific version of faith. The conundrum-dilemma is that while we as creation eternally speculate and revise, only God can assert and prove things were not created.

0
Reply
Male 4,546
zerocyde:
1) I`m fairly sure Hinduism, for one, isn`t all about "The bible is 100% fact".
2) Even Christianity, is not all about "The Bible is 100% fact".
3) This doesn`t dispute that the Bible is fact.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
"Who even cares, it`s all just speculation, truth is no one can prove or disprove God`s existance or the fundamental foundations of science, so instead of worrying about what other people beleive, beleive what you want."

Most of the modern world rests on the fundamental foundations of science. It is proven to be a reliable thing, one that we all trust our lives to all the time without thinking about it.

Putting it on a par with religion is ridiculous.

0
Reply
Male 2,552
>Max

YEAY! A Monthy Python quote! Love it, and this article being about petty religious details, this is with one of the best timed quotes I have ever seen!

0
Reply
Male 3,255
Interesting idea, but religion is all about "BIBLE = FACT REMOVE EVEN 1 `THE` AND YOU`RE A dratING HEATHEN" and the non-religious already don`t care so I don`t really know who this info is meant for.
0
Reply
Male 1,646
im not gonna even look at the comments, but i can already assume there are like 17 pages of religious fanatics and atheists flaming it out. good job on another successful flame war IAB.
0
Reply
Male 384
there`s no story, just comments for me.. anyone else have this problem?
0
Reply
Male 308
good call, herr ubermeister...
0
Reply
Male 2,605
Split hairs that ultimately lead nowhere. Next?
0
Reply
Male 4,680
"According to them there used to be an enormous body of water in which monsters were living, covered in darkness, she said."
LOVECRAFT WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG
0
Reply
Male 4,290
joey: I`m pretty sure it was sarcasm from Megido.

[quote]Prof Van Wolde added: "The traditional view of God the Creator is untenable now."[/quote]

What do you mean, "now"?

0
Reply
Male 174
@ Megido: You really don`t help the Christian image, I`m a Christian and I don`t feel the need to tell every one that my faith (because that`s what it is a FAITH!) is any better than someone elses.
0
Reply
Male 439
Well since any good christian KNOWS that the bible is infallible and 100% true this just can`t be right.
0
Reply
Male 174
Who even cares, it`s all just speculation, truth is no one can prove or disprove God`s existance or the fundamental foundations of science, so instead of worrying about what other people beleive, beleive what you want.

I think science has much better time spent researching in other areas rather than worrying about what people beleive.

0
Reply
Male 3,425
Here`s my theory. God created nothing.
0
Reply
Male 500
Obadiah, his servants. There shall, in that time, be rumours of things going astray, erm, and there shall be a great confusion as to where things really are, and nobody will really know where lieth those little things wi-- with the sort of raffia work base that has an attachment. At this time, a friend shall lose his friend`s hammer and the young shall not know where lieth the things possessed by their fathers that their fathers put there only just the night before, about eight o`clock. Yea, it is written in the book of Cyril that, in that time, shall the third one...
0
Reply
Female 528
"That is the bigest problem...the bible was not translated right"

The biggest problem with the Bible is people keep putting it in the non-fiction section

0
Reply
Male 702
I knew it! Aliens!!!!!
0
Reply
Male 12,365
"That is the bigest problem...the bible was not translated right"

I think that`s only one of the major problems and I think it goes deeper than that. I`d say that the Christian bible *can`t* be translated completely accurately. Not without time travel, anyway, and even then the explanatory notes required to put the translation into the correct cultural contexts might be longer than the text itself. For example, we`re no longer considering how to overthrow older religions in which ritual sex occurs in temples - that`s a crucial context for most of the alleged prohibitions on homosexuality.

Even with the much more recent new testament, there are simple translation issues even without context. For example, Paul uses the word arsenokoitai (transliterated Greek). What does it mean? No-one knows. It appears very rarely and is never defined. It`s usually translated as "homosexual men", but that`s just forcing the text to fit a preconceived idea.

0
Reply
Female 3,828
well i thought it was interesting.
0
Reply
Male 2,548
The Hebrew Midrash says that there are seventy faces to the Torah...this means that there are 70 ways to interpret every facet. Jews having been doing it for thousands of years already.
0
Reply
Male 1,918
That is the bigest problem...the bible was not translated right
0
Reply
Male 4,593
Again, it`s just all so silly.
0
Reply
Female 15,763
"If I wasn`t posting second, I`d say Angillion is purposely agreeing with me on random topics to freak me out"

Why can`t wee be frieeends!

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"I could actually believe this. Everyone always takes the bible so literally, but they forget that it has been translated multiple times by humans (capable of mistakes)from Hebrew, to Latin, to German, to English. I am open to hearing different interpretations of the bible because I know there are translational errors in it."

It was also spoken long before it was written, so there`s more scope for mistakes there. The new testament was selected from a far larger number of Christian writings and the selection was done by a council of church leaders more than 3 centuries later - lots of scope for mistakes there.

Even if the original was the truth (which is purely a matter of faith) and that everyone involved in making the current versions was trying to be as accurate as possible (which is proven to be untrue - they were modified for political reasons), there is still a huge scope for errors.

0
Reply
Male 10,440
As to the argument of "Bible vs. feces, which is more useful?", I should point out that as most bibles are made of paper, it will take a few months for them to biodegrade into something worth anything, unlike feces, which can be used as a beneficial fertilizer strait away. Alternatively, the bible can be recycled into paper, although this process is costly and redundant, it is a plus.

Finally both articles can be burned as a source of energy. Although the bible smells just as bad as the feces, its evil maniacal content increases its combustion efficiency, placing it in the lead, for the moment.

0
Reply
Male 86
I could actually believe this. Everyone always takes the bible so literally, but they forget that it has been translated multiple times by humans (capable of mistakes)from Hebrew, to Latin, to German, to English. I am open to hearing different interpretations of the bible because I know there are translational errors in it.
0
Reply
Male 2,582
Still a crock pot full of make believe.
0
Reply
Male 299
I was wondering when this would pop up here...
And look, another IAB religious debate, right on time.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
".... If I wasn`t posting second, I`d say Angillion is purposely agreeing with me on random topics to freak me out... "

I invented a time machine and I`m using it just to freak you out! Muahahahaha!

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"That`s really interesting, I find it fascinating how nobody really understands the language, with different interpretations of words and stuff. It`d be weird if it happened to English in the future."

It happens with English in the present (and has happened in the past). It often happens with translation between languages, especially languages that are very different and come from different cultures. The best known example in modern times is translating between Japanese and English.

It`s made worse when translating millenia-old Hebrew from a culture long dead into modern English (or any other language) and all the more so since vowels are left out in written Hebrew. As a result, many of the words could any one of several words, depending on which vowel(s) were meant to be there. That obviously leaves a huge leeway for interpretation.

0
Reply
Male 3,619
fatninja01 made my day
0
Reply
Male 4,546
.... If I wasn`t posting second, I`d say Angillion is purposely agreeing with me on random topics to freak me out...
0
Reply
Male 4,546
I think this is pretty cool actually.

I love different biblical translations.

Although I think those saying the argument is weak have a point, doesn`t she say herself that the word does literally mean create, but the fact that it is consistently followed by two nouns suggests it could be separated instead?

An argument that "this is the correct interpretation", is not that strong, although, I`m sure her research goes into further detail.

0
Reply
Male 12,365
"People trying to disprove her, I must say, are a little arrogant. I mean think about it, she spends her entire life on this stuff, you really think you know better? I`ll leave it to the experts and believe what I want."

There are two glaring flaws in her argument that do not need years of study to understand.

i) Her premise that the Judeo-Christian creation story has had one word mistranslated for years in all translations is simply wrong. There are translations which state or imply that the creation stories(*) in the Torah/OT are about God transforming the earth, not creating it.

ii) Using creation stories from other religions to correct the Judeo-Christian one is theologically flawed - from a Judeo-Christian point of view, other religions can`t be more correct than Judaism/Christianity.

* Plural intended - the OT contains two different creation stories, which is wierdly overlooked.

0
Reply
Male 162
"Yeah, it doesn`t matter. Catholicism doesn`t care about these things. It`s all about the estabilshment for them rather than having a point or truth."

You can go ahead and believe that, I can prove it wrong with about 80% of the Catholic population. As for the article the idea that things have been misinterpreted is not new. The Hebrew Language is far far richer than English and what the Jews may have been trying to illustrate could very well have been glossed over through history. The problem emerges when you are trying to ascertain "exactly" what the author`s point was. Ex nilio vs already there in a sense limits the powers of God. Something that is contradicted in Exodus. Again, what was the true meaning of Genesis? Gotta look at all of it.

0
Reply
Male 2,309
How is that a weak argument? So you are telling me a lay person has a deeper understanding than a person who devotes their entire career focus on it?

Seriously? I mean, you are merely saying it is weak, but you haven`t proven it really is weak.

I don`t know that much about Scientology, and someone who is more knowledgeable of it could tell me WAY more about how it is supposed to be interpreted then I could.

It is up to me to decide whether or not that I believe what is said is true--not that their definition is false, but what it is postulating or saying.

No one here can really deny that validity of this. It`s obvious that it has been researched thoroughly enough to come to this conclusion. Other translations have found this same error.

You can accept it or not, but this is the REAL translation.

0
Reply
Male 525
"AND ENOUGH WITH THE RELIGIOUS POSTS! I WANT TO SEE DOGS RIDING UNICYCLES!!!"

I`ll second that

0
Reply
Male 25,416
This is a job for mythbusters!
0
Reply
Male 1,929
Yeah, it doesn`t matter. Catholicism doesn`t care about these things. It`s all about the estabilshment for them rather than having a point or truth.

BTW, another rumoured mistranslation: The commandment is more "thou shalt not murder" than "thou shalt not kill".

AND ENOUGH WITH THE RELIGIOUS POSTS! I WANT TO SEE DOGS RIDING UNICYCLES!!!

0
Reply
Male 820
[quote]Also, sea monsters lolwut?[/quote]

well, while you`re believing mythology, Beowulf killed them all.

0
Reply
Male 1,403
id like to read her thesis
0
Reply
Male 928
"People trying to disprove her, I must say, are a little arrogant. I mean think about it, she spends her entire life on this stuff, you really think you know better? I`ll leave it to the experts and believe what I want."

Really weak argument. People spend their entire lives on all sorts of things. That doesn`t make them infallible authorities on the subject. High-ranking Scientologists spend their whole lives on Scientology. Does that mean that reasonable people who haven`t spent any time on Scientology don`t know better? Of course not.

In any case, debating how God created the earth is like debating the average wingspan of fairies. We don`t have any evidence that the being even exists, much less information about the details.

0
Reply
Male 2,309
one*
0
Reply
Male 2,309
no on really cares about their religion anymore--they just care about themselves ultimately, and use religion to bend their conscience in all sorts of cognitive leaps and bounds. This doesn`t change their understanding at all. Interesting though.
0
Reply
Male 2,309
No--it was a formless WASTE. Think about it. It was neither water, nor earth--nor heaven. It was almost like a unity of forces in a sense. Which is curious--because scientist are currently have a hypothesis that the universe was superimposed between all forces of nature. I say it is a hypothesis because it is currently untestable--unless we could study a blackhole indepth at the singularity level. Maybe CERN will discern such a thing by revealing primordial particles--but I`m digressing so hard.

Just realize that the bible is a story--not factual. Science is a far more reliable authority on the matters of the universe, and perhaps morality is better settled in the realm of strong humanism with philosophy to sate one`s intellectual capacities--rather than put up iron curtains for our understanding to evade in order to protect our egos fragility.

So, go read a few things. This is interesting I`d say, but it doesn`t change anything. No one is outraged because

0
Reply
Male 72
Genesis 1:2 (New International Version) - "Now the Earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

I`m reading a bible right here that never claims that God created this planet. It was originally a lifeless water planet.

Soooo, I guess that makes that scholar`s discovery pretty insignificant if one can simply read that all God really did was start life on earth IN THE BIBLE lol.

0
Reply
Male 1,204
People trying to disprove her, I must say, are a little arrogant. I mean think about it, she spends her entire life on this stuff, you really think you know better? I`ll leave it to the experts and believe what I want.
0
Reply
Male 5,314
oh wait, i dont care. ta-da
0
Reply
Male 478
nobody cares.
0
Reply
Male 541
This is slightly more believable... but the notion of `God` still bogus.
0
Reply
Female 180
That`s really interesting, I find it fascinating how nobody really understands the language, with different interpretations of words and stuff. It`d be weird if it happened to English in the future.
0
Reply
Male 312
Moenkie created the shaved soap sculpture and the dookie in the toilet

look i can create two things at once but god sure can`t hurrr

Every side of these arguments piss me off...

0
Reply
Male 62
Can we just go ahead and put a ban on religious posts? They make my days worse... It`ll take fancylad to cheer me up now!
0
Reply
Male 312
Her "finds" make no sense.

"She said technically "bara" does mean "create" but added: "Something was wrong with the verb.

"God was the subject (God created), followed by two or more objects. Why did God not create just one thing or animal, but always more?"

She concluded that God did not create, he separated: the Earth from the Heaven, the land from the sea, the sea monsters from the birds and the swarming at the ground."

I mean srsly, what? It`s being explained right there, but the explanation makes no sense.

Also, sea monsters lolwut?

0
Reply
Male 9,305
"who believes the Bible has been wrongly translated for thousands of years."

You don`t say... (O_O)

0
Reply
Male 949
God isn`t real, so why should I care about this?
0
Reply
Male 51
What drives me crazy is that there are people who so firmly believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old...Despite existing proof.
0
Reply
Male 1,485
lol, its funny to see religeous and scientific people arguing all the time
0
Reply
Female 1,395
Good for her, but it wont make a blind bit of difference.
0
Reply
Male 525
The first thing Tak did, he wrote himself.

The second thing Tak did, he wrote the Laws.

The third thing Tak did, he wrote the World.

The fourth thing Tak did, he wrote a cave.

The fifth thing Tak did, he wrote a geode, an egg of stone.

And in the twilight of the mouth of the cave, the geode hatched, and the Brothers were born.

The first Brother walked toward the light, and stood under the open sky. Thus he became too tall. He was the first Man. He found no Laws and he was enlightened.

The second Brother walked toward the darkness, and stood under a roof of stone. Thus he achieved the correct height. He was the first Dwarf. He found the Laws Tak had written, and he was endarkened.

But some of the living sprit of Tak was trapped in broken stone egg, and it became the first Troll, wandering the world unbidden and unwanted, without soul or purpose, learning or understanding. fearful of light and darkness it shambles forever in twilight, knowing nothing, learning nothing, cr

0
Reply
Male 1,381
this isn`t new. anyone who`s studied the original hebrew knows this stuff. lame.
0
Reply
Male 601
Now I`m sure, if any religious people accept this idea, that they`ll say "Oh of course, that`s why we have fossils `n sh*t, because the Earth was already here." and just continue to find ways to fit their beliefs into what has been scientifically proven...
0
Reply
Male 3,369
This just makes me laugh!

It seems more like a case of "Lets change the creation mythology because it dosnt fit with the acctual facts and physical evidence".

0
Reply
Male 592
wow that totally made me not care less about religion then already
0
Reply
Male 2,551
Interesting, but I`m still no believer.
No matter how much I`d want to believe in this kind of stuff; heaven, hell, God, etc, I just can`t.
0
Reply
Male 2,309
I already knew this stuff.
0
Reply
Male 4,745
LOL!
0
Reply
Male 610
that doesn`t make any sense how "god created the heavens and earth" was supposed to read "god found a cool planet and was all like let`s chill here, imma make some animals an` crap"
0
Reply
Male 542
Kind of interesting. I don`t really care about the details, for me, it`s just comforting to believe in something.
0
Reply
Male 1,190
There is a larger issue, whether "Holy Texts" have any validity at all!!

The Truth is, I am sure, much stranger than some white guy with a beard snapping his fingers to the tune of his sub angels and creating the universe.

0
Reply
Male 198
Holy Bajeeses!! this forum is going to have a field day of arguments. I predicted it guys...
0
Reply
Female 1,578
interesting
0
Reply
Male 147
Blaphemy? Lol this is nothing.

God is dead, Jesus is a liar, and the holy spirit is wine the catholic church gives to children before they rape them.

Now THATS blasphemy.

0
Reply
Male 1,442
There is umptenth different translation views of the Bible. I think they find a new one every month.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
:D silly christians. Now their world will be turned on its head. I`m going to rub it in their enraged little faces!
0
Reply
Female 1,893
that makes more sence
0
Reply
Male 1,093
wow, blaspheme much?
0
Reply
Male 1,623
So they were wrong according to both themselves and common reason?
0
Reply
Male 820
Link: God Is Not The Creator [Rate Link] - Textual analysis suggests a different bibl.ical story than what we are accustomed to hearing
0
Reply