Flaws in the Scriptures

Or you will no doubt take your marbles and ... what? The Bible errs in asserting God(s).

I'm curious as to what value there is in insisting that supernatural events are impossible because they are supernatural ...

I could play devil's advocate here, but I won't. Note, however:

quote:

---

In contrasting the Western religions with science, the most important vriterion of distinction is that the supernatural or spiritual realm is unknowable ... Given this fiat by the theistic believers, science simply ignores the supernatural as being outside the scope of scientific inquiry. Scientists in effect are saying:

• You religious believers set up your postulates as truths, and we take you at your word. By definition, you render your beliefs unassailable and unavailable.

This attitude is not one of surrender, but simply an expression of the logical impossibility of proving the existence of something about which nothing can possibly be known through scientific investigation.

​

- Understanding Science: An Introduction to Concepts and Issues by Arthur N. Strahler

---

By the way, wasn't it wonderful of the Gods to create such a robust fossil record? It gives us a powerful message about what might have been, while ...

I suspect that an honest review will show that the issue is not one of "reconciling certain verses", but of reconciling the current [Masoretic] text with early variants. What you see in the Masoretic is almost certainly examples of harmonization similar to that done with Deuteronomy 2:8.

Given the caveat that the term "Masoretic tradition" is vague enough to cover a good deal of textual territory, the idea of a 2nd century standardization seems a bit naive. Tov writes:

quote:

---

The name Masoretic Text refers to a group of manuscripts which are closely related to each other. Many of the elements of these manuscripts including their final form were determined in the early Middle Ages, but they continue a much earlier tradition. The name Masoretic Text was given to this group because of the apparatus of the Masorah attached to it ... This apparatus, which was added to the consonantal base, developed from earlier traditions in the seventh to eleventh centuries -- the main developments occuring in the beginning of the tenth century with the activity of the Ben Asher family in Tiberias.

​

- see Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible

---

To denigrate the DSS evidence as "handful of fragments" is absurd. Can you suggest any scholar in the field of textual criticism who shares that opinion? What you'll find, instead, is scholar after scholar speaking of the obvious textual pluralism of the 2nd Temple Period. Perhaps most interesting is the evidence for a Septuagint Vorlage, well attested at Qumran. The history since then has been one of attempting to resolve textual variance, a process well documented in Fixing God's Torah: The Accuracy of the Hebrew Bible Text in Jewish Law.[This message has been edited by ConsequentAtheist, 11-22-2003]

Thanks for the clarification. I did, in fact, misread your sentence about standardization, for which I apologize.By the way, may I recommend Bible as Book: The Hebrew Bible and Judaean Desert Discoveries.

Brilliant. That is neither realistic nor relevant. At any stage in transmission there exists the possibility of error as well as the possibility of error correction.Furthermore, you know little or nothing about the "original" text. Read Deuteronomy 32:8 and tell us: does the urtext stand closer to the many proto-Masoretic variants, or to some vorlage of the Septuagint, or to the Samaritan Torah? How do you know?

Good. Does the urtext of Deuteronomy 32:9 stand closer to the many proto-Masoretic variants, or to some vorlage of the Septuagint, or to the Samaritan Torah? How do you know?

How very convenient.Tell me. Does the urtext of Deuteronomy 32:8 stand closer to the many proto-Masoretic variants, or to some vorlage of the Septuagint, or to the Samaritan Torah? How do you know?

Having asked:

• Does the urtext of Deuteronomy 32:8 stand closer to the many proto-Masoretic variants, or to some vorlage of the Septuagint, or to the Samaritan Torah? How do you know?

Perhaps you should know more about the textual transmission of your Bible. I'll leave that to Apostle for now. Just look up the words that you don't understand. You'll be better for it.