Masonry prerequisite for Monotheism?

[NP300]

That is absolutely baloeny. There are artefacts from the first temple period quoting the Torah.

I'd like to see the evidence. Is there a full Torah written down from before the Babylonian exile? I would say that most likely such artifacts are quoting a VERBAL tradition fo the Torah, parts of which must have existed before the Babylonian exile.

 

[Ariks]

Of course there is. The commandment to have only one god:

It only says that they shall not worship other gods. It doesn't say that there is only one god in the entire universe, nor that the other gods are false.

The Torah/Old Tesmanent is full of vestiges of the older Jewish beliefs. There is a part where Yahwe says that "WE" shall do this and that....

There are even two inconsistent creation stories in the Bible.

I guess you need to read the original in Hebrew. I can't say much about the Christian translations, they are full of errors. There is only one creation story in the Torah - I'm really curious - where is the second one that is inconsistent?

 

[Ariks]

I'd like to see the evidence. Is there a full Torah written down from before the Babylonian exile? I would say that most likely such artifacts are quoting a VERBAL tradition fo the Torah, parts of which must have existed before the Babylonian exile.

There is none. How could there be. The artefacts with exact quotes are evidence enough. If you personally think that this is not enough proof that's your take - however there is even less evidence to suggest that the Torah was written down in Babylon - in fact it is only a vague theory based on similarities which btw most Mesopotamian religions share.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

There are even two inconsistent creation stories in the Bible.

They are not inconsistent, Genesis 2 is merely thematically arranged(and focused on the creation of man) Genesis 1 is more chronologically arranged (and labeled explicitly so)

And Masonry is a prerequisite for Monotheism merely as a delaying method for Monotheism. (one could also say you have to have the time in Egypt with Pyramids before you can have the Exodus)

 

[Ariks]

They are not inconsistent, one is merely thematically arranged (and focused on the creation of man) the other is more chronologically arranged (and labeled explicitly so)

Also - somethig where Jewish interpretation is different from christian theology is that the creation of mankind e.g. Adam and Eve is not the physical creation but the creation of the soul. The vessel which is the human body is seperate and thus it is no problem for us that the human body is a descendent of apes .

And Masonry is a prerequisite for Monotheism merely as a delaying method for Monotheism. (one could also say you have to have the time in Egypt with Pyramids before you can have the Exodus)

Aye, something is needed to delay the tech. The Pyramids are a nice spin, havn't thought of that . Although the slaves were probably not used to build the Pyramids but they had to build other structures. But hey, thats masonary too .

 

[monitor173]

In Orthodox and Catholic Christianity the saints and the virgin are technically venerated but the parallel with polytheism is evident, especially since the Church appropriated polytheistic beliefs and declared them to be the celebration of some Saint's birth.

That's actually a VERY interesting discussion, but far beyond the scope of this discussion (as well as the extent to which you are willing or able to evaluate things from an existentially broader perspective).

The Abrahamic God clearly has not been able to defeat Satan, at least not yet, so it really doesn't seem all that different from Zoroastrianism. Satan is functionally like an anti-God in the Abrahamic religions. Also, some versions of Zoroastrianism approach the Abrahamic way of looking at things.

It is quite evident, particularly when it comes to concepts such as angels. The Torah/Old Testament wasn't written down until the Babylonian exile. It was written while the Jews were in Babylon, under the rule of the Persian empire. If you would like to believe that the similarities are all a coincidence you are free to do so but to me the conclusion is evident.

- Kid: mummy, what's the difference between an elephant and a mouse?
- Mother: why, what a silly question to ask, why do you ask an obvious question like that?
- Kid: well, a mouse has four legs, a body and a tail, and a long nose. An elephant has every one of those too, how do you tell them apart?
- Mother: umm, well...
- Kid: they're the same thing aren't they mummy?
- Mother: well, not quite, let me explain...
- Kid: and they're both grey too ... look! look at the grey skin on that ellie!
- Mother: Well mice aren't really grey, and they have fur, not skin like that el...
- Kid: No. I'm not listening any more. My mind's made up, and I won't believe anything you say to tell me that I'm wrong.
- Mother: ...

I think that's an arbitrary distinction because Judaism, Islam and Christianity are not 100% monotheistic either.

The trinity is defined as three gods in one.

Judaism retains vestiges of polytheism.

Kabbalism also includes elements of polytheism.

Hm, oh dear. I guess this is what people mean when they talk about missing the boat entirely (and the pier along with it). My fault for bringing this kind of discussion to an entirely inappropriate crowd, and bringing this kind of embarassment to the fore, but I never had high hopes. If I might suggest one thing before I log off, I ask you to read up carefully on the Athanasian creed and see what it states precisely and clearly with regards to the Holy Trinity.

 

[NP300]

I guess you need to read the original in Hebrew. I can't say much about the Christian translations, they are full of errors. There is only one creation story in the Torah - I'm really curious - where is the second one that is inconsistent?

So the Christian ones are full of errors but the Jewsih ones are error free as dictated by God himself?

It's in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. In one God creates the animals before man. In the other he creates man after the animals.

By the way it also says "Let US make man in OUR image", that is, a plural.

In the part on Noah, in one part it says that he took 7 pairs of each for the birds. In another parts it says it took 1 pair of each type of bird.


A reference:
http://users.cyberone.com.au/myers/bible.html

 

[NP300]

Hm, oh dear. I guess this is what people mean when they talk about missing the boat entirely (and the pier along with it). My fault for bringing this kind of discussion to an entirely inappropriate crowd, and bringing this kind of embarassment to the fore, but I never had high hopes.

Oh yes, we shall all bow down to such superior knowledge, of which none of us is worthy since we are an "inappropriate crowd".

As for your insulting comparison of me to a child, a more appropriate example would be a child asking why man has similarities to old fossils of the "ape-men". It is because man is descended from them. Judaism took ideas from Zoroastrianism, which evidently include the dualism. It just mutated the dualism into monotheism, though the difference between the two is minimal.

 

[monitor173]

It was never my intention to state that there was any issue of superiority. I apologise if this is what was conveyed. I also didn't mean to sound insulting, but we brits can have a funny sense of humour and that can be a little difficult to impress via a medium like this. Especially that anecdote about the girl and her mother, it was merely an amusing representation of the dangers of drawing inappropriate analogies.

There was never any issue of disrespect, far from it. Already from the limited discussion there has been, it is clear that you are (at least apparently) an intrinsically intelligent individual. You also remind me a little too much of my own personal issues in the distant past; when I approached everything of existential value along similarly demarcated and limited paradigms. I remember how angry that made me as an individual and how that skewed and coloured everything I perceived.

I also did not mean to sound dismissive, so I hope we can continue this discussion (later) in a civil manner.

 

[Ariks]

So the Christian ones are full of errors but the Jewsih ones are error free as dictated by God himself?

Yes, the original is in Hebrew with the late texts in Arameic. All other versions are only translations. The structure of the Hebrew language and how it is used and interpreted is very different then latin or english - thus if you want to discuss certain passages or single use of words IN DETAIL like the one you are quoting below "Let us make man in our image" you will have to discuss the original in Hebrew with the context and commentary of the sages. Otherwhise it's going nowhere.

It's in Genesis 1 and Genesis 2. In one God creates the animals before man. In the other he creates man after the animals.

One is the creation of the soul and one is the creation of the vessel.

In the part on Noah, in one part it says that he took 7 pairs of each for the birds. In another parts it says it took 1 pair of each type of bird.

G-d's commands to Noah to take pairs of animals as well as seven pairs of kosher animals and birds, are two separate matters. The pairs of animals were for the survival and continuation of the species. These animals, we are taught, came on their own by instinct of selfpreservation. On the other hand, Noah had to bring into the ark the other animals, whose destiny, so to speak, was the Altar and the dinner table.

Also... I just had a look at your source... it's a site of a self-declared weirdo esotherical anti-semite whose goal is to "destroy judaism" for "its cultural revolution against paganism" .

 

[Yoshua]

See this is one of my beefs with religion. Can never get a discussion going about it without someone's nose getting bent out of shape over it. Just isn't worth it when all we're really duscussing is myth's and faerie tales.

 

[Intruder13]

"Polytheism" being a requisite for a Monotheism is also a little worrying, seeing that the latter (although an historical progression from the former) is essentially an absolute and fundamental rejection of all the ideologies associated with the former. Shouldn't a parallel tech progression be more appropriate?

I try to think of polytheism issue as the after effects of "the fall". (Think: Tower of Babylon rebellion).

I noticed that the loading screen has dialog from the Bible, if only slightly modified, "...the earth was without form and void". The game also starts players at 4000 B.C., which indicates to me that the programmers allowed for young earth creationism.

 

[Siggy19]

1. Judaism originally did not have any concept of Satan (as pure evil, anyway), or an afterlife (the Grave was all that was mentioned) or of a Messiah providing anything other than leadership. None of that is in the Torah (the five books of Moses).

2. Judaism does appear to have two slightly different Genesis tales... one in which Adam is created and then a wife and another in which they are created together. This is sometimes used to claim that Eve was Adam's second wife. His first was supposedly Lilith, who was born at the same time as he was. However, she was a shrew and so Adam divorced her and asked God for a replacement that would be a little more passive.

3. It is generally accepted by people who are interested in religion, but are not religious that the period in biblical history up to the Exodus was probably myth derived from a combination of pure fantasy and tribal solidarity. From then onwards, it was largely an accurate oral history until it was written down about 300 years later during the Babylonian exile. Thus, Babylon inspired much of the myth and the laws, while the history was more 'Jewish'.

4. Judaism does seem to accept that there were other Gods around at the time in a number of places. However, it does make it clear that those Gods were not relevent to the Jewish people. It does not indicate whether the other Gods were genuinely powerful or whether they were simply doing the bidding of YHWH.

5. The original language of the Bible (5 books of Moses part) is Hebrew and there are some words and phrases that are not easily translated (or that are not meaningful nowadays). For example, I was told (and cannot guarantee that it is true) that the word used for 'day' in the Genesis creation story actually just means 'period of time'... perhaps a day, perhaps and eon... which would make the 6 day creation into a scientifically accurate 6 stage creation possibly taking billions of years. The use of plural words by God is especially questionable since I doubt that Hebrew included that grammar... it is much more of a King James thing.

6. Kabbalah is as much to do with Judaism as Christianity is to Jesus... one may have inspired the other, but that does not mean that the two are directly linked. Jesus was a Jew until the day he died. His brother James ran the Church after he died... in Jerusalem and with the assumption that Christianity was a sect within Judaism - following the same kosher laws etc. Paul never met Jesus and created what became the Catholic church in Rome. I very much doubt that Jesus would be pleased with what some of the people who claim to follow his teaching have done. Similarly, Kabbalah is Judaism on Acid. Everything has 360 different meanings, some of which are in conflict with each other, but that is okay because those dayglo orange elephants dancing around my head tell me it is.

7. This is all about religion and no God worthy of worship would want us to fight about it... it is a little wierd that so many people have died because they beleived in the wrong Lord of Peace.

 

[narmox]

5: I prefer Asimov's version, a short story where Moses is writing the Bible and after sending it to his publisher they returned his work to him saying "4.5 billion years of history for Creation is way too long and boring, please shorten it" so Moses made it into 6 days

 

[Supa]

How it happened The french title is "Au prix du Papyrus". At the price of papyrus That's an eye catcher title.

 

[dh_epic]

I can't speak for masonry's role... but I can say that Polytheism was a part of the early Jewish faith. Not that Jews believed in many Gods, but they acknowledged that other Gods might exist, but it was their God (Yahweh) who watched over them.

Judaism didn't start out as belief in one God, but it did start out as worship of one God. Eventually it evolved to say that all other Gods are false.

Of course, this evolution isn't documented in holy scriptures, but are the product of archaeological and scientific research.

 

[Ariks]

1. Judaism originally did not have any concept of Satan (as pure evil, anyway), or an afterlife (the Grave was all that was mentioned) or of a Messiah providing anything other than leadership. None of that is in the Torah (the five books of Moses).

Judaism has indeed a concept of Satan - it is completly different to the Christian concept though. And it has not changed ever since. Satan is not evil by itself. There is no struggle between G-d and Satan. Since G-d is the creater of everything it was G-d who created Satan, and he is a messenger of, and subservient to, G-d. His mission is to try to deter people from doing G-d's will. G-d wants us to resist Satan and, thereby, earn our reward.

Quote: The Zohar compares the Satan to a harlot who is hired by a king to try to seduce his son, because the king wants to test his son's morality and worthiness. Both the king and the harlot (who is devoted to the king) really want the son to stand firm and reject the harlot's advances.

2. Judaism does appear to have two slightly different Genesis tales... one in which Adam is created and then a wife and another in which they are created together. This is sometimes used to claim that Eve was Adam's second wife. His first was supposedly Lilith, who was born at the same time as he was. However, she was a shrew and so Adam divorced her and asked God for a replacement that would be a little more passive.

Again, the tale of Adam and Eve is not the creation of the physical man but only the creation of his soul. Secondly, there is no mentioning of Lilith in the Torah - the five book of Moses. The only mentioning of "Lilith" would be in Ishayahu although in a completly different context and certainly not in context with Adam. Ishayahu is describing the destruction of Edom. He is using 'lilith' as a metaphor for his listeners.

3. It is generally accepted by people who are interested in religion, but are not religious that the period in biblical history up to the Exodus was probably myth derived from a combination of pure fantasy and tribal solidarity. From then onwards, it was largely an accurate oral history until it was written down about 300 years later during the Babylonian exile. Thus, Babylon inspired much of the myth and the laws, while the history was more 'Jewish'.

Actually, the most current secular theory I read about is that the Torah was written down 800 BCE by a King of Judah to legitimate his rule. Note how the theories always have to correct themselve to an earlier date because archeology is disproving their theories.

4. Judaism does seem to accept that there were other Gods around at the time in a number of places. However, it does make it clear that those Gods were not relevent to the Jewish people. It does not indicate whether the other Gods were genuinely powerful or whether they were simply doing the bidding of YHWH.

You can quote the passages and I will disprove you... this is simply untrue.

5. The original language of the Bible (5 books of Moses part) is Hebrew and there are some words and phrases that are not easily translated (or that are not meaningful nowadays). For example, I was told (and cannot guarantee that it is true) that the word used for 'day' in the Genesis creation story actually just means 'period of time'... perhaps a day, perhaps and eon...

The literal meaning of the word used is indeed 'day'. However, we Jews do not read the Torah literal only. There are two schools of thought about this subject - one will agree that day in this context means eon - another school of thought will say that it is not relevant at all (I have a link to a detailed answer of this school of thought which I'd be happy to forward to those who are really interested in this subject - it is a very deep subject and some Rabbies have different views about it).

7. This is all about religion and no God worthy of worship would want us to fight about it... it is a little wierd that so many people have died because they beleived in the wrong Lord of Peace.

Hard to believe but I'm not very religious. But the Tanach is more than just a religious text. For us Jews it is the history of our nation (Ooops, I mean Civilization ) as well. To paraphrase: Everyone is free to read it, use them, start their own religions with them, I don't care... but nobody should tell me what I have to believe according to their foreign interpretation of _my_ books. I don't neccessarily see this as a fight. I think it's quite interesting.

 

[LoneWolf5050]

The natural progression of religions is animism/shamanism -> pantheism -> polytheism -> monotheism.

You're missing the last one:

... -> monotheism -> atheism

--Julian

 

[ChosenOne]

My Nation is called Free Masonry United, my empire is called NEW WORLD ORDER, leader: Chosen One.

I destroyed egypt and mongolia.. I have the rest of the other nations on their knees. I plan to take them into the wings of the NEW WORLD ORDER.

 

[c-mattio]

monotheism -> atheism

I did kind of mention it under the context of humanism, but yes there is some who would suggest the next state of religious evolution is a belief in humans having absolute power and responsibilty in their own destiny with no reference to another force.

I do owe an apology to monitor173, I should not have used fundamental with its inherent religious connotations, and my argument was supposed to be devoid of religious weighting. However, I disagree that you viewpoint is absolutist rather than relativitic. You point out yourself that you approach the question from a Christian basis, which surely gives overwhelming relativity to you interpretation.

As it stands, conclusions drawn from archaeology suggest that polytheism is a prerequisite for monotheism in terms of cultural evolution. The curious thing about the monotheistic religions is that they fail to explain why large, polytheistic societies evolved without the one true God intervening much earlier in the life of man. Unless I have missed something. Please tell me if I have.