"That is a faulty assumption and doesn't belong here."
No faulty assumption , look at the genome project , it is estimated the dna mutated around 3000 years bce , affecting the pigment , thus brining white people , but why would this mutation stay prevalent ? well i'm in a rush , i'll write more on this later.
Stick to aliens please.
Don't you have a separate (and incomplete I might add) thread to discuss evolution instead of doing it here?
Today's advancement allows us to interpret the scripture differently , but it still doesnt discard it or it's authenticity , it merely restates the fact that something very strange happened during the time our civilizations came to being.
This is contradictory to what you state next.
After all, by your own words,:
now when you read the events of moses and the like , we can see that he could have been experiencing another technologically advanced civilization
If moses could have been experiencing a "technological advanced civilization", then he wasn't experiencing "god". If he wasn't experiencing god, then his teachings aren't divine. If his teachings weren't divine, then everything that follows after his as suspect since it could also have been a "tech. ad. civ." experience and not god.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
--Arthur C. Clarke, 1961
Thus if we interpret the scriptures, according to you, to take into account modern advance by, for example, suggesting that Moses saw had a "tech. adv. civ." experience, then that undeniably "discard it or it's authenticity " or those writings as coming from god, as divine.
Of course , before we had technology , all of this was interpreted divinely , we had no electricity , we didnt have lightbulbs , no cars , airplanes
Doesn't this statement naturally lead to the belief that in fact, all of religion could be possibly based on technology we didn't understand and not divine? It doesn't state that it is "THE" one and only possibility, but isn't it a possibility none the less?
