Re: Public Nudity: Innocent or Sin?

Stuffed Tiger <[email protected]> Sun, 14 Jun 26 13:16:15 UTC
Newsgroups rec.nude,alt.christnet.nudism
Organization Usenet.Farm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I went back an reread this whole thread, of which I quote only a tiny,
random part below. What a treat! This is certainly an amazing group of
intelligent people. Very enjoyable. Nice to know this is what nudists
are like on the inside. 


On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:23:31 -0000, "David Looser"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Terry J. Wood" <[email protected]> wrote in message 
>news:[email protected]...
>> "David Looser" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> Are you aware of the Epic of Gilgamesh? It is the oldest known written
>>> story in existance, dating from around 2300BC (whereas Genesis as a
>>> written text dates only from around 700BC). Gilgamesh also contains a
>>> flood story with some uncanny similarities with that in the Bible.
>>> Either the version in the Bible was based on that in Gilgamesh, or
>>> both have a common source.
>>
>> You're not saying that the Unerring Word was plagiarized, are you? :-)
>
>'Fraid so!. It seems likely that much of Genesis was based on earlier 
>traditional stories as well. It's just that these earlier versions 
>apparently haven't survived, though it's always possible that archaeology 
>may yet find something. The Epic of Gilgamesh was only discovered in the 
>19th C, written on thousands of clay tablets.
>>
>> It's a shame that people are unwilling to accept that the Bible tells you
>> how to go to Heaven, not how the heavens go.  If they could just accept
>> that then they wouldn't be so threatened by reason and the fossil record.
>
>Indeed. Christianity seems to have survived the scientific realisation that 
>the earth is not the centre of the universe, but merely the 3rd planet of a 
>minor solar-system, quite well. So why should the notion that humans are 
>part of the animal kingdom and not the result of "special creation" be seen 
>as so threatening?
>
>I've often wondered how Bible literalists explain away the fact that humans 
>are actually created twice in Genesis. In Genesis 1 God creates men and 
>women together by a simple act of will. Then in Genesis 2 "The Lord God" 
>laboriously fashions Adam out of mud, and only some time later creates Eve 
>from one of Adam's ribs.
>
>David.
>