Quote# 123547

[Note: Todd JQB changed his name earlier, he used to be VX3, and the day before, SEDAGIV]

"As a teacher of biblical history I will have to weigh in and say (username removed) is correct . The 2 different accounts of creation in Genesis 1 & 2 as two separate creation myths from different sources has been the consensus view of scholarship for quite some time. These two 2 mythological accounts were compiled at some point early during the Babylonian exile when the Torah was written."

No, you are both incorrect.

"Actually our opinion in on line with the vast majority of academic biblical scholarship. There is no more debate on this issue the creation account in the Bible is an amalgamation of the Akkadian source known as the Enuma Elish and the Sumerian source known as the Epic of Gilgamesh and also included in some areas both Greek and Phoenician elements. The Genesis creation account was written in between 600 and 400 BC."

No it isn't. You're incorrect in your unsupported statements.

"Your denial of historical facts does not change the reality of my statements that are supported by the overwhelming amount of academic studies of Genesis of the last several decades. I'm sure it will come as a shock but we have a very good idea of the origins of Jehovah and how his worship evolved over time from the cannanite pantheon of gods son of the cheif god El until Jehovah was worshipped as part of a divine couple with his female consort Asherah until around 600 BC. We even have evidence of child sacrifices being done in Israel as part of the worship of Jehovah until the Persian period that lasted until 400 BC."

You can make up whatever you want and call it a "historical fact" to your heart's content. It doesn't make it true. It also doesn't change the reality that your statements are incorrect and quite frankly, ridiculous.

"Well we have now 100 years of archeological data from Isreal and Egypt. We have the Ugaritic Texts discovered in Ras Sharma in 1928 and tablets found in Israel dated to the 8th century that demonstrates the facts stated and these have been part of the standard curriculum of Old Testament studies of every major theological seminary in the Western world for a long time."

You have nothing but speculation based on false information and the bigoted agenda of the anti-religious, anti-Bible crowd.

"I know you are troubled by this but this "information"' has been known for quite some time. The overwhelming majority of scholars are believers and many are committed Christians yet they agree with the conclusions of mainstream scholarship based on on an objective analysis of the historical evidentiary material from both archeological and written sources. The position of biblical minimalism regarding the Old Testament has been the practically unanimous view for a few decades."

I'm not troubled at all, except by the fact that while I reject nonsense, you buy into it. You can keep making absurd sweeping comments ("the overwhelming majority of scholars are believers.....") that you've deluded yourself into believing, but the reality is otherwise.

"It's not a matter of buying into it. These historical facts are part of the academic curriculum. The reality is you don't know what scholars are saying and you don't know what is being taught to students in Old Testament history classes. I know because I am in those classes. Even conservative Biblical colleges agree with the consensus in OT studies."

They're not facts, they're "facts". The reality is you simply are naive enough to buy into anything you read.

"No this is the result of 25 years of experience and research in the field. These "facts" are what is taught in every Old Testament history class. Biblical minimalism represents the practically unanimous view. Here is a good article by Old Testament professor Philip Davies (University of Sheffield) that explains misconceptions on this.
I'm on the process of researching my masters dissertation that will basically demonstrate that Judaism resulted by a process of algamation of ancient. Cannanite religion with Zoroastrianism when the Israelites remodeled there religious practices in the image of the religion of Babylon. I will go as far as stating that the New Testament would not exist if the Israelites had not been in exile since most of the concepts that led to the foundation of Christianity were borrowed from the Persians."

Completely incorrect.

Todd JQB, Disqus - Religion 24 Comments [1/9/2017 10:59:40 PM]
Fundie Index: 13
Submitted By: Jocasta

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 | bottom


Why exactly does this booger-brain change his name daily? Does he believe we're gullible enough to assume it's a bunch of different people expressing exactly the same views? That's almost as pathetic as his "arguments".

1/10/2017 2:15:13 AM


Todd JQB/VX3/SEDAGIV: "I don't have to show you no stinking evidence! I say it, you have to accept it, *that settles it!*"

1/10/2017 2:48:44 AM

Shepard Solus

The world's longest "NUH-UHHHH". All that's missing is them lying on the ground, flailing their arms & kicking their legs. His prior quoted posts are no different. Is that seriously all he knows? Just plug his ears and scream "NOOOO" when he hears something he doesn't like?

And you don't get to throw public temper tantrums and maintain total anonymity while named, Seddy.

1/10/2017 3:00:25 AM

Psycho Tits

Even worse than the ignorance of whateverhisnameis is that mixture of arrogance and complete wrongness.

ETA: Went to a religiously-affiliated university and learned about the Enuma Elish 20+ years ago, along with its relationship to the Genesis accounts, This was part of the curriculum in this OT class, which was taught by a preacher who wore a massive cross around his neck everywhere he went, had six kids, and was a fundie of sorts - but one who would at least look at new ideas and who could hold an intelligent conversation with all comers. He dealt in apologetics but if he, or any of my profs, saw what'shisnames' "argumentsm," the namecallimg commenter would have received a very, very poor grade - assuming they'd accept this at all. Truly dumb work wss given a zero or marked as incomplete.

1/10/2017 3:06:00 AM

Pharaoh Bastethotep

Note: Todd JQB changed his name earlier, he used to be VX3, and the day before, SEDAGIV

Harry slammed his book shut. It wasn't really a book, because the pages were made of lasers and the words were made of headless women making godless love to dragons made out of motorcycles, but it was still reading.

"Gumbledorp, if you don't stop, we'll starve, and no one will be around to kill everyone in the universe if we get around to bringing everyone back to life after we killed them."

"I am no longer Scrumblegort."

The ancient man dropped some of the planets he was juggling.

"The worlds have shifted. I am Dumblecop, of the Darkmeal."

He flexed one of his legs, which was made of pistols, and kicked a planet in half.

"Bugger your Darkmeal, faggart of a thousand suns."

Dumblecop sniffed.

"And what of it? Is it a sin, should a man feel like faggarting a sun or a thousand? Why should the suns heave through the void, if not to be skewer't bypon ourn fagpoles?"

Harry cast a glance at the book. Unsavory sounds emanated from a particularly damned chapter. He was hungry. He looked at a nearby cup. It had a faded brown film on the bottom. He thought about chumpits.

1/10/2017 5:12:53 AM

Mister Spak

". You can keep making absurd sweeping comments "

1/10/2017 5:29:51 AM

Dizzy Dream

That's a rather long way of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "la la la. I'm not listening."

1/10/2017 6:07:37 AM


This is by no means unusual and something I've been pointing out for years.

There are Biblical scholars, within this body there is a consensus of Biblical origins derived from studies of all the religions related to and BEFORE Old Testament books. There are historian in their ranks or connected who have built up the histories of the various kingdoms going back about 4000 years of certainty of said kingdoms, their areas and myths/religions. They come from all walks of Abrahamic religious sects and cultures.

Except two.

Evangelists and Southern Baptists and fundamental offshoots. These groups have NO Biblical scholars AT ALL. These groups, represented well by our visitor Jerry, are dogmatic preacher worshipping sheeple committed to the KJB ONLY because they're told to be. Even reading it seems beyond them let alone any in depth study of it.

1/10/2017 6:25:14 AM

Doubting Thomas

This is little more than just saying, "Nuh uh" to every point their opponent makes.

1/10/2017 6:32:06 AM


So remember, when your argument doesn't have a leg to stand on, just call the other side ridiculous. If that doesn't work, stick your fingers in your ears and make noise until they go away, thus ensuring your victory.

Whatever username you use, you're still a dumb child.

1/10/2017 6:56:33 AM

Pharaoh Bastethotep

As far as I see it, fundamentalism is a Bible* cargo cult. It does care not care about God's creation, but neither does it actually care about its Holy Book, its context and its long and complex history: It is nothing but a provider of simple answers for all questions and stage for petty power fantasies.
This is the reason behind KJO: They do not want to understand the Bible, they just want to memorise the "right answers".

* replace with other Holy Book as (in)appropriate.

1/10/2017 7:06:37 AM


This sort of non-sense is precisely why many people have a problem with religion. You may not like the facts, but they are still the facts.

1/10/2017 7:23:34 AM


Ah, the ever-reliable Mister Spak and his reflecting elements.

Your mirror polish bills must be terrifying, fundies.

1/10/2017 7:33:28 AM


@Pharaoh Bastethotep

Thank you! Now I'm off to toast chumpits for breakfast.

1/10/2017 7:50:56 AM


1/10/2017 8:09:34 AM


To mangle a quote,

"I reject your reality, and substitute this sheep's bladder!"

And now you must worship my sheep's bladder. It's incontrovertible!

edit: (from Rational Wiki)

"Pigeon chess" or "like playing chess with a pigeon" is a figure of speech originating from a comment made in March 2005 on Amazon by Scott D. Weitzenhoffer regarding Eugenie Scott's book Evolution vs. Creationism: An introduction:

”Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."

1/10/2017 8:39:45 AM

Jocasta McFucken

This guy is a Jehovah's Witness, or that's where the evidence points. He's often caught cutting and pasting information from the Watchtower website. HOWEVER, he also seems to want so desperately to be viewed as a raging jerk troll from hell...maybe it's just best to let him have his way.

Newsflash: He's changed his name again. He's now Eddie 30Z.
Newsflash 2: And again. Now he is JohnnyJohnJohn.

1/10/2017 9:28:59 AM


Unless your name is Israel Finkelstein, I pretty much don't want to hear anything you have to say about "Biblical history."

1/10/2017 11:17:12 AM


This is the most hilarious and pure case of nuh-uh-ing I have ever seen here. The scholar makes a beautiful attempt to try and actually educate Todd, each paragraph he keeps his cool and remains eloquent, and Todd just shoots out 'nuh-uh' and nothing more. Not an alternative, not even a reason why he might be wrong.

1/10/2017 11:59:47 AM


I've heard better arguments from 3-year-olds.

1/10/2017 12:33:26 PM


An all too familiar theist/conservative/Republican reaction to evidence.

He's right about one thing though. Conclusions are not facts but are based upon inferences drawn from facts. Some of the things called a "fact" above, such as the creation account being an amalgamation of the Enuma Elish and the Epic of Gilgamesh, are really conclusions inferred from facts.

1/10/2017 1:55:04 PM


Thank you for that laser-targeted rebuttal, Todd. I'm convinced.

1/10/2017 4:51:54 PM

Old Viking

There is no way Judaism is associated with algamation.

1/10/2017 4:53:21 PM


1/10/2017 11:01:27 PM

1 | top: comments page