Religion, Dinosaurs, A.I. and Aliens

[TheVisitor]

Here it is...I knew I had it somewhere.
First we establish the connection between "Sarpa" and the "Serpent".
From the Encyclopedic Theosophical Glossary http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/etgloss/sar-sec.htm

"There is a strong mystical parallel, and possibly some remote etymological connection, between the Sanskrit sarpa (serpent) and the Hebrew saraph, the parallel doubtless arising in the same esoteric thread of mystical thought. See also SERAPHIM"

Then we make the connection from "Serpent" to "Sir". Piece of cake.
http://twf.wikia.com/wiki/Sir_Serpent

 

[Dywyddyr]

"There is a strong mystical parallel, and possibly some remote etymological connection, between the Sanskrit sarpa (serpent) and the Hebrew saraph

Er, doesn't that contradict your earlier statement

Originally Posted by TheVisitor
There is a relationship of the Sanskrit word "Sarpa" to the Hebrew word "Saraph".

Then we make the connection from "Serpent" to "Sir". Piece of cake.
http://twf.wikia.com/wiki/Sir_Serpent

:roflmao:
:bravo:

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

First we establish the connection between "Sarpa" and the "Serpent". From the Encyclopedic Theosophical Glossary: "There is a strong mystical parallel, and possibly some remote etymological connection, between the Sanskrit sarpa (serpent) and the Hebrew saraph, the parallel doubtless arising in the same esoteric thread of mystical thought. See also SERAPHIM."

* * * * NOTE FROM THE LINGUISTICS MODERATOR * * * *

Coincidences abound in linguistics.

The Italian word for "woman" is donna and the Japanese word is onna. Pure coincidence.

Sanskrit is an Indo-European language and Hebrew is an Afro-Asiatic language. The two families are unrelated, at least as far back as we can look into the era before writing was invented. And of course the reason we can't look back any farther is that everything about a language, including its vocabulary, phonetics, grammar, syntax--its entire worldview--seems to almost completely turn over in ten thousand years.

Therefore serpent and saraph are not related by ancestry. Are they related by borrowing?

Since "serpent" and cognate words exist in both the Western (e.g., Latin) and Eastern (e.g. Sanskrit) branches of the Indo-European family, it is a word that goes all the way back to proto-Indo-European ca. 4000BCE. It cannot be a borrowing from Hebrew, a language which did not yet exist, about an archetype in Judaism, a religion which did not yet exist. Since many of the legends in the Torah are retellings of Babylonian legends, perhaps the Indo-Europeans borrowed the word for "snake" from the ancestors of the Babylonians. If there is evidence for this hypothesis, it needs to be presented.

At this point there's no evidence that the Indo-Europeans borrowed their word from the Jews or their ancestors. Did the borrowing go the other way?

At the time the Torah was written, the Indo-Europeans had already split into several tribes and had begun their two-pronged diaspora into India and Europe. It's conceivable that the Jews had encountered one of the eastern tribes on its way east from the Indo-European Urheimat in the Anatolia/Georgia region, and borrowed their word for snake. Stranger things have happened. But again, we need evidence for this hypothesis before we can take it seriously.

So far, the hypothesis that the Hebrew and Sanskrit words are related remains pure speculation because there is no evidence to support it. Occam's Razor says we should examine and disprove the simplest possible explanation for a phenomenon before we waste our time examining more complicated explanations. The simplest possible explanation for the similarity of these two words is coincidence, and it will be almost impossible to disprove until we invent time travel.

 

[Forceman]

NOt literally

I'm working on it, I know I left it somewhere.
While I'm looking for it consider this.

There is a reference to Lucifer having children that fill the world with cities.

ISAIAH 14:12
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!

ISAIAH 14:17
[That] made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; [that] opened not the house of his prisoners?

ISAIAH 14:21
Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers; that they do not rise, nor possess the land, nor fill the face of the world with cities.

It might not literally be his children, for it says that he is the "Father of all lies", and that those who sow discord, strife, and confusion are his children- the children of darkness. We, the sons of God, are not angels (really second angels are humans) but we are called sons of God because of the sacrifice of the Lamb of God, His Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven. Anyone who commits moral sin is under his parentage, and I don't think Satan has a wife. Those who follow him are his children, while those who follow Elohim are His children.

 

[TheVisitor]

-It might not literally be his children, for it says that he is the "Father of all lies"...
-I don't think Satan has a wife. Those who follow him are his children, while those who follow Elohim are His children.

Does He have a wife? Isaiah 14 compares him with the king of Babylon. Rev.18 describes a women also called Babylon.
She committed fornication with ..."The kings of the earth."

Lucifer was a cherub, not a seraph....many believe the serpent was really Asmodeus- a type of emissary of Satan/Lucifer.

Lucifer's name is only mentioned in Isaiah 14 in a proverb against the king of Babylon.
It is the king of Tyrus in Ezekiel 28 who was the anointed cherub spoken of being in Eden the garden of God.
A similar reference describes the leader the "others" in Eden envied in Ezekiel 31.
All of these may have been Lucifer, but maybe not.
Because Ezekiel 31 brings up another question; "Who were the other people in Eden"?

Something happened in Eden that appears to have involved more than just Adam and Eve.
How this happened and who was really there is the metaphorical subject of Ezekiel 31. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ezekiel+31&version=KJV)
A vision given as prophecy to Ezekiel for the king of Egypt tells the Pharaoh he is like those in this past event.
It's about the "Trees of Eden". These "trees" were not natural trees. It is a metaphor. They were people.

Jesus told many parables about "trees" that referred to people.
He said "you shall know them by their fruit, and their fruit are their teachings".
The redeemed of the Lord shall be called the trees of righteousness.
In Proverbs 11:30 "The fruit of the righteous [is] a tree of life"

Now think of the trees in the garden of Eden mentioned in Genesis.
God told Adam; You may freely eat of any of the trees, except the one in the midst, because their "fruit" was good.
The serpent told Eve; "If you (eat of/partake/become one with) this one tree...you'll become as the gods"
The Lord did say of the man Adam; "he has become as one of us".
Adam and Eve then hid amongst "the trees"... to hide from God afterwards.
These "Trees of Eden" in Ezekiel 31:14 were "all delivered unto death, to the nether parts of the earth, in the midst of the children of men.

 

[Dredd]

Wow, you have perfectly described the educational system of officialdom. Well done. Now I will read some comments. : cool:

 

[Dredd]

The New Testament has some of the most radical statements about that subject matter (devil). :shrug:

 

[Pabs]

* * * * NOTE FROM THE LINGUISTICS MODERATOR * * * *

Coincidences abound in linguistics.

The Italian word for "woman" is donna and the Japanese word is onna. Pure coincidence.

Sanskrit is an Indo-European language and Hebrew is an Afro-Asiatic language. The two families are unrelated, at least as far back as we can look into the era before writing was invented. And of course the reason we can't look back any farther is that everything about a language, including its vocabulary, phonetics, grammar, syntax--its entire worldview--seems to almost completely turn over in ten thousand years.

Therefore serpent and saraph are not related by ancestry. Are they related by borrowing?

Since "serpent" and cognate words exist in both the Western (e.g., Latin) and Eastern (e.g. Sanskrit) branches of the Indo-European family, it is a word that goes all the way back to proto-Indo-European ca. 4000BCE. It cannot be a borrowing from Hebrew, a language which did not yet exist, about an archetype in Judaism, a religion which did not yet exist. Since many of the legends in the Torah are retellings of Babylonian legends, perhaps the Indo-Europeans borrowed the word for "snake" from the ancestors of the Babylonians. If there is evidence for this hypothesis, it needs to be presented.

At this point there's no evidence that the Indo-Europeans borrowed their word from the Jews or their ancestors. Did the borrowing go the other way?

At the time the Torah was written, the Indo-Europeans had already split into several tribes and had begun their two-pronged diaspora into India and Europe. It's conceivable that the Jews had encountered one of the eastern tribes on its way east from the Indo-European Urheimat in the Anatolia/Georgia region, and borrowed their word for snake. Stranger things have happened. But again, we need evidence for this hypothesis before we can take it seriously.

So far, the hypothesis that the Hebrew and Sanskrit words are related remains pure speculation because there is no evidence to support it. Occam's Razor says we should examine and disprove the simplest possible explanation for a phenomenon before we waste our time examining more complicated explanations. The simplest possible explanation for the similarity of these two words is coincidence, and it will be almost impossible to disprove until we invent time travel.

Maybe the Hittites (who were in contact with Jews, Egyptians etc.. and were mentioned in the Old Testament) had a word that is closely related to the Sanskrit saraph (or at least the Proto-IndoEuropean root of Saraph) and that word was loaned to the Jews/Hebrew language?

 

[alinko]

I find it strange that a religious person would believe in dinosaurs but not in evolution.
[edit]
Hmm i see, they believe the dinosaurs were around together with humans (!)[/QUOTE
not exactly coz in the bible it clearly states ,well it dosent mention dinosaurs,but as it states, long long time ago god created the heaven and the earth was with out form, and he cast saitan from heaven down to earth, and well i didnt really studdy the bible well enough, but i think thats when the dinosaus were alive, and saitan distroyed the earth, and god decided to fix the earth and i think he said let there be light. i mean the bible if studied properly i mean for any scientist u wouldent have to belive it but just studdie it. then u copuld come to some conclusion of how thins came into place, and latter would acknowledg that there is a devine creator

 

[alinko]

I find it strange that a religious person would believe in dinosaurs but not in evolution.
[edit]
Hmm i see, they believe the dinosaurs were around together with humans (!)[/QUOTE



not exactly coz in the bible it clearly states ,well it dosent mention dinosaurs,but as it states, long long time ago god created the heaven and the earth was with out form, and he cast saitan from heaven down to earth, and well i didnt really studdy the bible well enough, but i think thats when the dinosaus were alive, and saitan distroyed the earth, and god decided to fix the earth and i think he said let there be light. i mean the bible if studied properly i mean for any scientist u wouldent have to belive it but just studdie it. then u copuld come to some conclusion of how thins came into place, and latter would acknowledg that there is a devine creator

 

[Actual Facts]

And Alien life, I think most Christians deny that more or less because they feel that they, as humans on Earth, are unique and therefore the only life in the Universe.

Which is absurd when one considers the fact that, in the Gospel of John, Jesus himself claims to have been half extraterrestrial.

"... ye are of this world; I am not of this world." -- Jesus Christ, John 8:23

"In my Father's house [heaven/outerspace] are many mansions [planets]: if it were not so, I would have told you." -- Jesus Christ, John 14:2

"My kingdom is not of this world...." -- Jesus Christ, John 18:36

 

[TheVisitor]

In the Gospel of John, Jesus himself claims to have been half extraterrestrial.

He never said half. A virgin conceived and was overshadowed by the Holy Ghost.
Jesus Himself called Mary "woman", not mother.
He was all God, not just half. If that were so what would you have God doing?
This isn't the story of Hercules.

Remember when His disciples said; "show us the Father?
He answered and said; "have I been with you so long and you still don't know, if you've seen me you've seen the Father."

Calling Him an extraterrestrial may be in some ways technically correct.
That term alone however falls far short of describing all that He is.
The scriptures aren't describing just another creation.
They say He was the Creator Himself who alone exists outside the whole of creation.
Beyond Angels, ET's and any other created being we don't know about.

 

[lightgigantic]

Just curious. How does our Christian, Hindu and Muslim bretheren here explain the dinosaurs and when they lived,

the general consensus seems to be that they appear in different yugas (or possible the tail end of the one we are in). IOW cyclic time means its all coming around sometime

the possibility of an A.I. coming into existence in the next 20 years

Depends on how it comes ... although if you want to talk of the next twenty years, it will probably involve incorporating an inferior model of intelligence so that AI can be lumped in with it (Much like synthesizing dna is heralded as "creating life", although its not really)

and the possibility of alien life?

Scriptures reference 400 000 species of humans spread over 3 general levels of the universe (we are in the middle)

 

[TheVisitor]

Depends on how it comes ... although if you want to talk of the next twenty years, it will probably involve incorporating an inferior model of intelligence so that AI can be lumped in with it...

The coming singularity...
That would be the single stupidest and possibly the last thing the human race will ever live to do.
Most people would think creating nuclear weapons was #1 on the stupid list.
But I think this one would bump it right out of first place.

Might as well open up the gate to hell. Build host bodies that are stronger, smarter and longer lived.
We all know what happens to the "geniuses" after they build the ultimate weapon for the bad guys, right?

Maybe that's what they've been saving all the bombs for.
You'd think in sixty-five years somebody would have pushed the big red button by now.
That just isn't natural. Defies human nature come to think of it.

 

[Big Chiller]

I'm a Muslim and I believe (hehe) in hard science, no problems here.

Though I have had some interesting chats with Muslims who adopt the anti-evolution stand.

Can one use hard science on a past event without having enough evidence to work with on this event?

 

[sifreak21]

OOH, that's the angle. I thought you meant they denied the existence of dinosaurs.

Oh, well then. Well, with my experience with Christians, the majority I know don't think they existed at the same time, or they rarely even think about the topic. I think those that think they walked the Earth at the same time are the more hardcore Creationist groups.

it has been proven that dinos and humans co exsited at one point in time

 

[lightgigantic]

The coming singularity...
That would be the single stupidest and possibly the last thing the human race will ever live to do.
Most people would think creating nuclear weapons was #1 on the stupid list.
But I think this one would bump it right out of first place.

Might as well open up the gate to hell. Build host bodies that are stronger, smarter and longer lived.
We all know what happens to the "geniuses" after they build the ultimate weapon for the bad guys, right?

Maybe that's what they've been saving all the bombs for.
You'd think in sixty-five years somebody would have pushed the big red button by now.
That just isn't natural. Defies human nature come to think of it.

Maybe they should just place nuclear armament in the hands of dancing nao robots or something ... just to be safe

 

[Shadow1]

.

yeah, in islam, we do beleive that the univerce is crownling with living planets, and also we beleive in another intelligent race, djins(not genes, or lamp genes!!!!) also we beleive that one day, all humans will unite together, to fight an ennemy that they don't know where is he from, and unknow race, aliens, and others, say, that thos are djins, that are making them selves look like aliens as we think, because we can't see djins, inless they shows up, and we beleive that the djins, are more developed than us,
so yeah we do belvei in aliens, in other living planets, other intelligent race....enjoy your self.
dinausors?
i don't know, i think no,
but their is something about wormholes, and the formation of earth, and of human(in islam, human is made of clay,(clay is, the earth soil, + water) you can check google, and see, that humans are about 70% water i think, and the rest is other minirals, that are all found in mud, it's like a mud pie, i just saw a tv show about it in national geography last night, human is like a mud pie, and 1% uranium, but not the uranium like in the bombs or the nuclear power plants) i talked about this, because i always wondered, what? human are from clay? yeah right! but now, in the tv show, they used the word, humans, are 70 % water(i think, or maybe 80, i forgot) and the rest, are minirals, so humans, are like a mudd pie
etc...

 

[science man]

Just curious. How does our Christian, Hindu and Muslim bretheren here explain the dinosaurs and when they lived, the possibilty of an A.I. coming into existence in the next 20 years and the possibility of alien life?

~String

Keep in mind that I'm only speaking for Christians when I say this because I am one. I think we believe that God created the dinosours and then them to create us and that he created the aliens. As for A.I. I don't believe that, that can be a topic of this question because that is a matter of our interlligence. It's a matter of if we are able create that.

Peace be unto you

 

[Dywyddyr]

it has been proven that dinos and humans co exsited at one point in time

Proven?
Link please.