Atheism->Deism->Theism (page 3)

Christ Alone

Goddesses who were worshipped over two hundred thousand years ago

Where is this claim from? You have written history from 200,000 years ago? Is this based on carbon dating?

sabastious

In your special little universe, time runs BACKWARDS??????

Humans that lived 200,000 years ago are 200,000 years younger than us if you look at humanity as a single entity. They didn't have as much information and therefore their understanding of everything will be younger, including their understanding of their creator.

-Sab

sabastious

I apologize that you thought I was labeling you as a stereotyper...

Well my title has three labels in it which are often used for stereotyping, so I thought you were directing your post at those. Sorry if I misunderstood.

-Sab

sabastious

Where is this claim from? You have written history from 200,000 years ago? Is this based on carbon dating?

It's based on discovered artifacts.

-Sab

ziddina

For Christ Alone:

These links discuss the "Berekhat Ram" female figurine and the "Tan-Tan Venus" figurine, both female icons found in strata that dates back to Homo erectus - around 300,000 to 200,000 years ago... The Berekhat Ram figurine was found in Israel, ironically...

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/classicalarch/readings/Berekhat_Ram.pdf

http://www.originsnet.org/nenatoolsfems/

http://www.donsmaps.com/tantanvenus.html

Since "carbon" dating is only accurate to around 50,000 years, obviously these times are NOT based on that technique.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acheulean

Dating the Acheulean

Providing calendrical dates and ordered chronological sequences in the study of early stone tool manufacture is often accomplished through one or more geological techniques, such as radiometric dating, often potassium-argon dating, and magnetostratigraphy. From the Konso Formation of Ethiopia, Acheulean hand-axes are dated to about 1.5 million years ago using radiometric dating of deposits containing volcanic ashes.[3] However, the earliest accepted examples of the Acheulean currently known come from the West Turkana region of Kenya and were first described by a French-led archaeology team.[4] These particular Acheulean tools were recently dated through the method of magnetostratigraphy to about 1.76 million years ago, making them the oldest not only in Africa but the world.[5] From geological dating of sedimentary deposits, it appears that the Acheulan originated in Africa and spread to Asian, Middle Eastern, and European areas sometime between 1.5 million years ago and about 800 thousand years ago [6][7]

Presence of Acheulean tools in South Asia have also been found to be dated as far as 1.5 million years ago.[8]

In individual regions, this dating can be considerably refined; in Europe for example, Acheulean methods did not reach the continent until around 400,000 years ago; and in smaller study areas, the date ranges can be much shorter. Numerical dates can be misleading, however, and it is common to associate examples of this early human tool industry with one or more glacial or interglacial periods or with a particular early species of human. The earliest user of Acheulean tools was Homo ergaster, who first appeared about 1.8 million years ago. Not all researchers use this formal name, and instead prefer to call these users early Homo erectus.[2] ..."

And this site mentions a new dating method that indicates an even earlier range for the "Acheulean" cultures...

http://www.historyofinformation.com/expanded.php?id=2345

And Christ Alone may not want to wade thru THIS pdf, but I'm linking it in order to come back to it and read it thru, when I have more time:

http://sspa.boisestate.edu/anthropology/files/2010/06/acheulian-sahara-geoarchaeology.pdf

Obviously, the dating methods are based on more than "finding artifacts"...

tec

Goddesses who were worshipped over two hundred thousand years ago are OBVIOUSLY older than your 3,500-to-4,000-year-old Middle-Eastern tribal 'god.

You assume that God was not known before the writings about him?

I think we have had this conversation before, but oldest known does not = oldest. Nor does it equal correct.

As well, people have changed how they view God based on what they see in the physical world. God is not male. God is not female. God is spirit. But it would make sense that some seeking out their creator would assign that creator a female gender... simply by observing how females bring forth life.

So if we learn about the spiritual based on our observations of the physical (and humans tend to do just this...we need to SEE something to be able to grasp it); then it makes sense that our understanding would expand a bit more with our understanding of the physical.

Peace,

tammy

rather be in hades

Except when it changes as new discoveries are made. In every age scientists believed that they had the right knowledge of how the universe worked, until a new theory was developed or a new discovery came along that showed that the old was was accurate. Sounds like "facts" are relative to the time.

you're confusing laws with theory

laws don't change, theories do

ziddina

"You assume that God was not known before the writings about him?..." tec

The fact that the bible's middle-eastern male god was only mentioned from around 3,500 - 4,000 years ago, EVEN THOUGH WRITING IS MUCH OLDER, is solid evidence that "he" was not worshipped prior to that time.

Which pretty much negates 'him' as the "true" deity.

tec

Sab, that was an extremely well articulated essay on your observations. Well done!

Peace,

tammy

rather be in hades

i think some of the push back comes when believers throw out bits and pieces suggesting they have the "one true faith" or insinuate that christians/nonbelievers have no morals. and then there's the agnostics are cowards bit.

what i don't think is push back is correcting statements that are scientifcally not true.

Atheism->Deism->Theism

Share this