Derek Kidner’s Adam and Eve Model

[LogosOfLogic (Light Life Love)]

@LogosOfLogic

There are no anthropomorphic qualities in God. That is the valid point why God is the righteous true king because he doesn’t demand anything from his subjects like a human king would do.That’s why it’s divine quality, not a human one

@RonSewell

You contradict yourself in two lines.

Actually I do not contradict myself, and you didn’t finish quoting me as to the context of what I was saying.

There is no anthropomorphic projection of the human qualities of king unto God.God is the first true original king and that’s why it is valid. It’s from the top down and not from the bottom up.

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@LogosOfLogic

@Roy

By the way, how do you know that the Egyptians originally only worshipped Ra?

Scholars have long debated whether traditional Egyptian religion ever asserted that the multiple gods were, on a deeper level, unified. Reasons for this debate include the practice of syncretism, which might suggest that all the separate gods could ultimately merge into one, and the tendency of Egyptian texts to credit a particular god with power that surpasses all other deities. Another point of contention is the appearance of the word “god” in wisdom literature, where the term does not refer to a specific deity or group of deities.[144]

In the early 20th century, for instance, E. A. Wallis Budge believed that Egyptian commoners were polytheistic, but knowledge of the true monotheistic nature of the religion was reserved for the elite, who wrote the wisdom literature.[

Hornung, Erik (1982) [German edition 1971]. Conceptions of God in Egypt: The One and the Many. Translated by John Baines. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-1223-3.

So you don’t know that “the ancient Egyptians worshipped 1 god Ra initially”, and have no evidence to support that claim.

You haven’t even got anything that indicates that if there was original monotheism that the first deity was Ra instead or Horus, Amun, Mehet-Weret, Ptah or one of the many others who varied in importance over Egypt’s history.

Are you just assuming original monotheism of Ra because it fits your theory?

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@LogosOfLogic

@Tim

Also, even if “most religions were originally monotheistic” it does not follow that they are the same god.

It does logically follow if there is only one God in actuality only 1 God in all of existence.

Not if religions were invented, which is a premise of your ‘must start with one god’ argument.

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@Dan_Eastwood

Or for that matter, this does not rule out unknown gods wise enough to stay out of mortal affairs.

My AD&D universe includes the “Church of unknown gods”, whose clerics have no powers because they don’t worship any of the known deities, but are searching for additional ones they believe must exist.

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@Tim

The more I look into @LogosOfLogic’s claims about Comparative Religion, the more Procrustian they seem - …

Pedantry time: because his name was Procrustes, not Procrust, it should be Procrustean. Cf Shakespearean, Dantean, Archimedean, Popean vs Spenserian, Pickwickian, Churchillian, Cartesian. Caesarean sections are misnamed.

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@Tim

I suppose I should not be surprised at this, LogosOfLogic appears to be an apologist rather than a scholar, and thus more interested in winning their argument than in coming to grips with the nuances of this field.

I get the impression that unlike many new arrivals, he’s not really interested in ‘winning’, only in confirming and advertising his ideas.

[Tim]

@LogosOfLogic

Revelation 4 is describing God’s throne.If God is not literally a king , then why does he literally have a throne?

Perhaps because bishops also get thrones, and just perhaps a God ranks as a religious figure at least slightly above bishop?

The syllogism:

1. Kings have thrones.

2. God has a throne.

3. Therefore God is a king.

… is blatantly fallacious.

Otherwise the following would hold:

1. Cheetahs have legs.

2. I have legs.

3. Therefore I’m a cheetah.

[CaveatLector]

Dear Logos:

You remind me a little bit of my younger (2021) self when I first entered this forum.

I entered as a Christian who (although I did not realize it at the time) was in the beginning of a deconstruction journey. Your path of course need not mirror my own.

I came seeking information about Creation, Intelligent Design and Evolution. I was already predisposed to take an Evolutionary stance, so found little resistance there.

I was however more of a confirmed Theist and decided I could proudly brandish my William Lane Craig arguments and win on the battlefield of ideas.

I quickly discovered that the battle is not so easily won, and while I do respect Dr. Craig’s contributions to the field, he is not the last word on the subject. You have not quoted him yourself that I see, but I point this out only to illustrate my own journey.

I learned that these conversations span multiple fields and are much, much more complicated than I realized. I needed intellectual space, so I took a break from the forum, duly chastened and hopefully a tiny bit wiser.

I pursued my own lines of inquiry, delving mostly into OT and NT criticism. Fascinating fields, regardless of your faith commitments (or none at all).

I have since returned and find myself closer to the end of my deconstruction journey. I still don’t fully know where I land.

If I may offer, in all kindness, a few thoughts to help you in your own journey:

1. Do not assume that the Bible is “the Word of God”, nor assume that it is inerrant or inspired. Call its bluff. If it really is those things, then careful analysis and observation should prove it to possess those qualities.
2. Allow the data to drive you. Let the evidential chips fall where they may. Ask yourself if the data truly compels you to believe, or if you simply want to choose the potentially weaker side. In some cases, either choice is fine, but be honest with your choice and understand that at many points along the way you will have to beg the question in favor of your position. Own those points and recognize that others (like many of the very thoughtful people here) have drawn different conclusions.

I mean this kindly, as a friend and fellow human being who is also trying to figure out this thing we call “life”.

Allow your experience on this forum to challenge you. It did me, and I am a better person for it.

[LogosOfLogic (Light Life Love)]

Thank you for your kind words and advice. I can see that you are sincere and that you cared enough to reach out, mighty obliged.

I will take your advice as to learning as much as I can while growing on my life journey. As you stated this forum is one where a layman such as myself can have meaningful converstions with highly intelligent, articulate, educated, thoughtful, and deliberate people.

I think we both have good intentions and we want to just share the light and love and life. I hope your deconstruction still left with you with faith in your heart and a firm unwavering belief in the one true God.

Hope upon hope and trial upon trial
It is my heart the wick that burns as the flame and the candle embrace
It is my soul that yearns for the perfection of grace
When the lock and key are joined then one may enter
In a chamber absent of light rests the divine spark in the center
The highest high and the lowest low as of yet still so far to go…
We chose our words we chose our path
Lose your wars lose your wrath
Be as wise as serpents and feed not that which is holy
There is One God and One God only
Be as innocent as doves and cast not pearls before swine
Nearer to you than your veins lies the Divine entwined
The twin holds the secret of the fisherman’s pearl of great price
The kingdom is on the inside the world but a device
Corrals of truth lie beneath and mask the hidden treasure
Love cannot be counted and love cannot be measured

Peace Shalom Shlama Salam

[Dan_Eastwood]

@LogosOfLogic

I WILL ADMIT MY MISTAKE I SHOULD HAVE PUT “ANCIENT” HINDUS AGREED WITH ME 100%.

How many ancient Hindus have you surveyed?

There is a difference - as I’ve pointed out several times already - between a Christian reading a translation of the Hindi {?} text and the Hindu religion interpreted by its followers. AND a further difference from the ancient religion, which would require study of the ancient history, culture and customs, or at least asking someone who knows the subject.

You could still be right, but it’s quite unlikely, and even then not “word for word”. Imagine if a Christian tried to interpret the Bible in the context of modern western culture, ignoring the history and culture of the Ancient Near East - THAT HAPPENS TOO - but it’s another topic