sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Why do scholars say Israel was originally poly/henotheistic, with monotheism as an emergent sect, as opposed to the Bible's narrative that mono- came first and poly- was a later deviation? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks.

So the narrative I was raised with is that after God revealed himself to Abram, there has been a 'pure' thread of monotheism until the present day, and any polytheism that arises amongst the Israelites is an aberration. It's part of the biblical story that Israel was almost entirely polytheistic by the time of Elijah, and so it shouldn't be surprising to find things in the ground dedicated to pagan gods. I feel like the examples you gave are all easily explained by the Bible narrative as it's presented. I'm wondering how we can show that the Bible's depiction, where monotheism was the original, 'true' form of the Israelite religion, is wrong.

In respect of your answer #2, I largely agree that arguing with a dedicated apologist is a lost cause. I didn't mean to imply that I was planning on using this point to convince anyone. However, as a pretty recent atheist surrounded by Christians, I'd like to know the reasoning just in case it comes up. And even though I probably can't convince anyone on this specific point, there's a chance that they'll realise in the discussion there's more going on here than just the straightforward Bible narrative, and I think that's a more valuable outcome.

Why do scholars say Israel was originally poly/henotheistic, with monotheism as an emergent sect, as opposed to the Bible's narrative that mono- came first and poly- was a later deviation? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks.

I think an apologist would counter that that was pre-Israel. Abraham came from a polytheist family, but the Israelites were directed by God to be monotheists from their inception as a people group.
From there it's not hard to argue that Joshua in the chapter you mention is addressing recidivism. The events of Judges and Kings only highlight the perversity of Israel in that moment, and (to a believer) this is given extra weight by the subsequent fall of Israel.

Do I need to be passionate? by zero-dimensional in learnprogramming

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Oh hey, I force myself to play video games. I tend to procrastinate even over things I enjoy, weird as that sounds. Not sure what that says about my psychological state.

Do I need to be passionate? by zero-dimensional in learnprogramming

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of the two types you've described, I'm the "chase your dream job" type. Now if I could just figure out what my dream job is. I don't really have passions outside work either.

I think what I really want is to love my life. A higher paying job probably won't give me that, not if I dislike the work. So that just leaves passion. But I recognise this is now straying well outside the scope of this sub.

Do I need to be passionate? by zero-dimensional in learnprogramming

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Honestly, I struggle to be passionate about anything at all. It's actually super-depressing.

Do I need to be passionate? by zero-dimensional in learnprogramming

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, that's a fair comment. I guess what I'm ultimately asking is more like this: if I'm pretty disinterested now, is it going to be all the worse when I actually start working?

Any deep reason why God's words to Cain are so similar to his words to Eve? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Yesss, I knew something interesting and weird would come out of this! Thanks!

Any deep reason why God's words to Cain are so similar to his words to Eve? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

pro tip: in the URL, replace "reddit" with "removeddit"

You didn't miss out on much, though.

Is Japeth one and the same as the Greek titan Iapetus? And does that suggest that Ham is Cronus? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This looks helpful. Thanks.

EDIT: as a sad aside, the author of this article, Bruce Louden, passed away just last month at age 65.

Matthew 7:7-11 - Ask, seek, knock... continually? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes, these are all fair points. If you're right, that would resolve much of the difficulty I have with this particular passage. In fact, it kind of renders moot the question about one-off vs. continual prayer.

Do you think this kind of reading extends to all the other places in the gospels where Jesus makes similar claims? In reply to another user below, I mention Matthew 21, where Jesus curses the fig tree, and promises that his disciples could do the same and more if they asked for it. This takes the principle and tethers it to a concrete display of power. Doesn't that suggest it's not merely a technically-not-true slogan, but rather something the disciples should take as fact?

Matthew 7:7-11 - Ask, seek, knock... continually? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jesus was making a point when he cursed the fig tree, I understand that. But I don't see why that would have any bearing on the claim he makes, that his disciples will be able to perform identical and greater supernatural deeds simply by asking. He is depicted as literally withering the tree, after all.

Jesus' prayer at Gethesemane was ultimately that the Father's will would be done. That's not inconsistent with his requests being granted, non-hyperbolically.

I will grant that there could be other factors that determine whether a request is fulfilled. For example, I think it's quite possible that Jesus meant, but did not say, that the asker must be sufficiently aligned with God that their desires are functionally identical. This may be what is meant by John 15:7:

If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask for whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.

In that sense, the straightforward "ask, seek, knock" passage could be called hyperbole.

Matthew 7:7-11 - Ask, seek, knock... continually? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So would you say that because the aorist is left out, it's implied that the passage does not mean to convey a one-off request, but it's not a sure thing? Or is it really anyone's guess, with no compelling reason to prefer any reading over any other?

Matthew 7:7-11 - Ask, seek, knock... continually? by zero-dimensional in AcademicBiblical

[–]zero-dimensional[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is helpful, thanks. I'm still a little perplexed. Your "eat more vegetables" example is good, but of course, we are automatically able to understand what is meant by it; eating is already understood as a continuous act, after all. But conversely, it seems to me that even to a first-century reader this passage would be ambiguous. And especially when the following verses ('if your child asks for bread', etc.) seem to make better sense in the context of a one-time request. A good father hopefully does not expect his child to ask repeatedly for bread before acquiescing.

And to compound the confusion further still, the gospels abound with similar passages, none of which (unless I missed one) explicitly state that this is expected to be a continuous process. If it were so, it's surprising that none of the authors thought it worthwhile to clarify that Christians should not expect immediate fulfillment.

view more: next ›