|
QuickSearch
Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ] |
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total) |
| |
Contrarian | |
Total: 894,053 Year: 5,165/6,534 Month: 8/577 Week: 76/135 Day: 7/1 Hour: 0/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 3697 days) Posts: 415 From: Australia Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Hebrew Bible (Butterflytyrant and IamJoseph Only) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
You have initiated this thread, in response to my understanding of the Hebrew bible, but not because I argue against any other religious writings. One can respect all religions while also defending against unfound and eronous interpretations or attacks on other belief systems.
quote: Books can be in scroll or parchment form, but it must show a multi-page continueing narrative. Yes I accept the scrolls' 250 BCE dates. This does not mean the writings were composed on that date, obviously it is much older, with 100's of copies found in the parcel, and 1000's of bits of writings, obviously destroyed in the fires of Rome which burned down all of Jerusalem city cubit by cubit. It is amazing that anything of the scrolls survived. While we do not have a 3,500 original scroll, which is believed to be contained in an arc hidden away or destroyed, we have loads of evidence [as opposed hard proof] of these writings being much earlier. We have evidence the Greeks first translated this document in 300 BCE [The Septuagint], but more impacting are the dates, places, events and cross nation interactions mentioned in the Hebrew bible - almost all of these descriptions have been vindicated. The writings have also been evidenced by relics of the Temple, coins and post writings from the book of kings [evidenced in the Tel Dal find which confirmed King David], and numerous wars listed in the books between 1000 BCE to the scrolls datings. Conclusion: all things being relative, there is no writings anywhere more historically and factually evidenced than the Hebrew. In fact, I know of no earlier alphabetical books predating the Hebrew bible or any other alphabetical work for centuries after that. This may also be the reason why we do not have earlier writings - this was a long term, expensive project akin to building a great monolith - many people never knew how to write 3,500 years ago, while we find advanced alphabetical works dated 3000 years ago [Book of Joshua, the Psalms, etc]. What is your point in questioning such formidable evidence? quote: Yes, of course it is unique. It introduced many things, including creationism, monotheism, science, medicine, democrasy, what became known as evolution, judiciary laws, the first cencus in the millions, the first mention of the philistines, mount ararat, mount nebo, the first king, the first human name, the oldest active calendar. One can go on and on. That is unique. quote: The point is you cannot show another earlier recording of the universe being finite. You don't need a text, but you do need evidence. I gave you that above and you cannot show such equivalence elsewhere. Nor does it matter if you use the 250 BCE date - it is still the oldest record of a finite universe. quote: If it mentioned species we can be sure it is a fake - the term was invented recently. Of curse, 'KINDS' is more authentic of its period, yet applicable today. Of course, seperation by terrain and habitat is more fundamental than skeletal and hidden genes. The first thing one sees of a zebra and a fish is terrain not their hidden organs. Does OK mean you agree Genesis first recorded life form groupings - you are not forthcoming here, which leads only to a circular arguement? quote: You need to show DAY and WEEK. The seven week cycle was required to be stated before accounting harvest periods and rremembering anniversary laws which followed. This says Genesis is intelligent and it's writings are in the correct protocol. quote: There is no history pre-Hebrew calendar: no names, nations, wars, kings, etc. In contrast, we have a calendar listing events of 5772 years, and substanially evidenced, to the extent of anything which can be evidenced. Show us an earlier reference of Mount Ararat - or a name older than Adam? So I am not using the Hebrew writings as its own self evidence; we have no alternate factors which can serve as a counter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Because you are expected to know what you are arguing against. The Hebrew bible contains the first scientific cencus, as well as the first graduation of a tribal group to a nation - the word NATION OF ISRAEL is used after the cencus following the Egyptian exodus, retained thereafter thoughout the remaining five books, with sub-totals of age and gender, accounting to 3 million Israelites and also a mixed multitide of other people. How can you not know this and argue the point? This passage also shows that math was concurrent with the Hebrew writings at that time, to the extent there is no errors when the sub-totals and grand total are tallied, with names of tribal leaders and in fractions of counts. If you know of an earlier cencus than please enlighten us? quote: Refute it? There is a list of many pages from Ch 1 to Ch 2 which records a cencus: quote: quote: I already did. Any multi-page continueing narrative [book, scroll, parchment, etc] in alphabetical mode older than the Hebrew will suffice. quote: The precedence factor rules. Otherwise I can be the author of all of Shakespeare's works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: The term OT is a political stunt and I see it as derogatory. It is called the Hebrew bible in english. As can be seen by your own posts, it is not old but very active in contemporary discussions of science & history today in all forums, more so than any other theological writings. Old infers negated - yet its laws rule us today exclusively. quote: All of the writings and books are in the scrolls parcel, excepting only the book of Esther, which was written in Babylon 2,700 years ago, after the Babylon invasion and exodus there. This book also mentions the Hebrew bible and a host of books which were obviously written earlier - which I account as proof of the Hebrew writings' datings. quote: You may be confusing laws with traditions. There are 613 laws [commandments] in the Hebrew Mosaic - the five books. These are all active today. quote: The Hebrew bible is also Christianity's field - it is its foundation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: This one you have lost and I won't indulge with you further on it. The term 'multi-page continueing narrative' was qualified and embedded, prempting your runaway nonesense. Think 'BOOK OF DUETERONOMY & BOOK OF KINGS'. quote: No I don't. Your notion the 100's of copies of scrolls and 1000's of excerpts found were all originated in 250 BCE is utter nonesense. quote: No I do not. If 100's of copies of a scroll was found and dated to 250 BCE it means it was originated many centuries before. If a book speaks of a temple existing and we have proof that temple stood and was destroyed in 586 BCE it is proof of my position and negates your nonesense. Bite the bullet. quote: I agree your nonesense should be considered nonesense. quote: The Hindu bible affirms Genesis is correct and credible. The Creation account of Genesis is unique, notwithstanding there are other accounts. The premise of Christianity and Islam comes from the Hebrew bible - they are not unique. quote: There is no disproof or alternative of the Genesis account from science. It is why this issue is still hotly debated. quote: The first seperation of medicine, a faculty of science, was first seperated from the occult here: quote: quote: 'LET THE MAJORITY DECIDE' is not democrasy and leaves the population open to great corruption - else Hitler and Sadaam Hussein were the most democratically elected humans. Democrasy according to the Hebrew bible, which predates the Greeks is only as follows: Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice; (Ex. 23:2) (negative). To give the decision according to the majority, when there is a difference of opinion among the members. (Ex. 23:2) (affirmative). Not to hear one of the parties to a suit in the absence of the other party (Ex. 23:1) (CCN65). To examine witnesses thoroughly (Deut. 13:15) (affirmative). quote: All of the factors in Darwin's evolution cmes from Genesis, including: The first seperartion of life forms in their correct protocol, and by the most fundamental factors of terrain and habitat. Natural Seection occurs via a seed output from the host parents, with a directive program which ensures continuety of the same species. There is no evolution without these factors. Darwin is totally wrong in subscribing to external factors impacting and leaving out internal ones - there is no evolution without Genesis' seed factor! Hamurabi is post Abraham and Moses. quote: I am countering your claims with proof. You are not putting up any counters: please show us another document older than Genesis which lists life form groupings or that repro is based on the seed of the host parents? quote: There are 100s of copies of Genesis in the dead sea scroll and these are now freely available on the net. The case is proven, whether you admit this or not. quote: Nonesense. The first grouping of life forms is in Genesis. The term 'KINDS' is the only and best one for what later became species. There is no other reading of the verses in Genesis. quote: What does OK mean? quote: No, I don't. quote: DAY & WEEK, first appearing in Genesis is hardly conjecture. Its hard copy. quote: You have to show an older active calendar - you have not. Which part is blather? quote: No sir, its not negatable and I am not half way there. I gave you hard copy proof of the world's first scientific cencus. Bite the bullet like a mench. quote: You have lost this one as well. Bite the bullet. quote: OK, let's play looney tunes. I am now the first one to say the sun will rise tomorrow. The precedence factor is hereby negated. Happy? quote: Duh! Tell me smart/a. If we have a book which mentions a temple in 250 BCE, and proof a temple was destroyed in 586 BCE in the same location - what do you think that means!? quote: I did deal with this with no possibility of confusion. It is not refutable by any means.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: The creation story in Genesis is unique, containing a host of premises not seen elsewhere, including geo-historical locations and premises which are now embedded in science. quote: Think, 'BOOK OF DUETERONOMY & BOOK OF KINGS'. And you cannot produce a scroll or a book with a multi-page narrative in the alphabetical mode. Why is that? quote: Its not my claim - its in the text and not open to any other reading in its context or wording. quote: Will it make any difference to your desperate and continuing nonsense? quote: quote: Research - what research!? 24 copies of The Book of Genesis have been found in the scrolls parcel. Hello?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: You are getting more desperate as you post! Your assumption the first verse of Genesis is open to questioning is ridiculous. Do you even realize taking your wild assumption of an inferred later addition of the opening verse still renders the verse as first no matter which dating you want to use - are you even aware till a few centuries ago, the Hebrew bible is the only theology which did NOT say the earth is flat!? Be good to yourself and accept defeat!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: I already posted a list of the scrolls found. Of note this list includes the 'BOOK' of Genesis: quote: I already defended the premise of your accusation the first verse is missing is bogus and even if this was the case, the runaway assumption that verse was never existent remains bogus. I also responded that whatever date you wish to use - be it even 1000 or 2000 years later, the first verse in Genesis remains the first and only writings which states the universe is finite: the premise of a finite universe was only established recently after the Hubble plank discovery!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: No sir, its not my job to cater to your nonsense. Any sane, half honest debater would acknowledge there is absolutely no reason to question the first verse of Genesis belonging to the verse verse in that book. There are loads of other evidencing reasons to confirm this but not required. Eg. the seperate translations in Hebrew, the Greek [Septuagint] and the Latin versions. The inference this verse was not in the scrolls or that it does not belong there is nothing other than shameless. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: That is not a credible refutation of what is considered one of the greatest history proofs per se. While there are fragments and bits containing partial verses and words, these have been put together by the world's best experts, crossed against other fragments of the same writings in multiple scrolls, and this constitutes 100% proof of its dating and content. Additionally, there is the Greek Septuagint of 300 BCE, described in Greek archives and which led to the KJ latin edition. This says the work was at least a few centuries older than the date of production of these scrolls. Further back, we have no such alphabetical books from any source whatsoever, for upto 800 years after the given dates of the original Hebrew scroll. Such writings are also backed by 100's of relics and monuments which writings align with the content seen in the scrolls, such as the 2,900 year Tel Dan discovery; the 586 BCE Babylon destruction recorded in Jeremia; the second temple under Ezra; and a 3,500 year Egyptian stone stelle; these confirm the book of Kings and the book of Exodus as having real history behind it. When this is compared with writings much later, we see greater proof in the older Hebrew writings. The scrolls can become very disturbing also, as in a host of new scrolls found, which describe small topical details of the period, yet has no mention whatsoever of anything contained in the Gospels - which dating is smack in the middle of the scrolls. It questions, or even indicates, the Gospels could not have been writen till the third century! This is just an opinion and I may be in error of such a conclusion, but it is still a controversial item. One has to be honest in their refutation, as opposed negating what is clearly one of the best affirmations of the ancient history of the planet via such implausible and unreasonable rejections.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
The links refer to picture writings. There would have been a mode of accounting days, but there is no way one can say the DAY [as in evening and morning] can be seen in those links. These are conclusions derived from examining the pictures, e.g. a roof denotes a house; the sun or moon denotes a day; etc. The week was also first made as a pi like number in Genesis to calculate seasons, harvests and pregnancies, as well as a diarised record of history spanning 3000 years, Adam to Moses.
Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Cursive means nothing. The writings of the Armana are picture image writings in blocks, words represented by images; if you give the word cursive as alphabetical of such stone etchings of drawings, then you would have had loads of alphabetical books: where are they!? Further, the verse you quote does not sanction what is a day, but merely 'today', as in 'when'. This is very different from the application seen in the Genesis creation chapter, where the day and week are introduced as time divisions impacting the planet, when no history or life forms yet occured, noting what constitutes a 'day' - namely the rising and setting of the sun. The advent of 'hours' was yet not applicable in this instant. Chalk and cheese! quote: Did I make up the absence of a single aplphabetical book - of nations which were much older and mightier? Of note, I am not saying there was no writings. Hebrew was a late comer in the ancient world, 1,500 years after the Pyramids were built, well after India had a thriving commerce. Yet the Hebrew came up with the first advanced mode of writings, including the most advanced content; even the first 'historical' writings with identifiable names, places, events and datings, and remained so for some 800 years thereafter. Such is not seen in Egyptian, Babylonian, Phoenecian, Sumerian, Indian, Chinese or any place else. Its a fact, not my opinion. Its also mysterious that a group of desert wondering slaves would do so - there was no place to lift off from! quote: quote: The week was made as a measurement constant, a time period with definitive impacts as a standout. The division of seven days as a week, and the division of weeks for harvest, was introduced as governing constants. France tried to alter this constant, overturning the 7 days to 10 days - it failed! Understand what 'solemn assembly' refers to in terms of days and weeks: quote: quote: Lol! The period is derived from the Hebrew calendar, the oldest active one today and the most accurate. It is diarised with events, years and time via numbers, dates, dod & dob's, and calcuable. Both the day and the date of the giving of the 10 commandments can thus be verified of a period of 5772 years, from Adam to Moses [Mosaic five books]; thereafter by follow-up writings [Book of Kings; Isaiah; etc]; thereafter to today. Why accuse me of not reading! quote: Please tell us the date of the Pharoah's birthday!?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
There is more than sufficient evidence to affirm the dating of the Hebrew bible, with no reason to question it. The Hebrew writings is varied both in kind and degree from anything similar anywhere. If we read there was a war with Egypt and the Hebrews, it is evidenced in an Egyptian stone relic, with the mention of the word 'Israel' and 'war' dated 3,500 years ago. Beat that! When we read that Mount Nebo is in Moab [Jordan today] and that it offered a grand view of a whole country, you can go to Jordan today as one of 1000's of tourists do and enjoy this view. Beat that!
These are not retrospective writings because these stats were introduced here, with no previous record of it. It is like the words Palestinians [Philistines]; Jerusalem; Hebron; Israel; Abraham - these words are only known today via the Hebrew bible exclusively. You are downplaying a host of new introductions, diminishing and negating them, then employing false items as transcending. It is called blatant denial.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
An interesting 3rd century BCE pre-Christian, pre-Roman relic from an independent source. It claims the five books were written by Moses, who introduced alphabetical writings to the Israelites, and that this was passed on to the Phoenecians, then to the Greeks. I have held this view in opposition to the widespread acceptance of it, because we have zero evidence the alphabets came from elsewhere, and loads of hard copy evidence of ancient Hebrew alphabeticals. Such a relic gives credibility to the Hebrew writings.
quote: quote: Source: quote: quote: Firstly, the detail of Mount Nebo is geographically and historically correct; secondly it is the first recording of this stat; the ds scrolls alone suffices here. Moab did not even have writings till relatively recent times. Its a sign of insanity to keep rejecting the irrefutable. quote: You are manufacturing negations with ubsurdities. There is no contradiction that Israel is mentioned in an Egytpian stelle - the people were called as Israel; its source remains the Hebrew bible. Why twist a proof as dis-proof?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Surprise, surprise again! HIEROGLYPHS are pictures - not alphabeticals. It is a well known fact ancient Egypt was not vested in alphabetical writings despite its advantage of time and power. Perhaps you should cease making bold cursive statements in every post till you at least get something right? quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 2943 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
Like millions, you are shakled with an agenda based dis-history from Europe - this has seeped into dictionaries and encyclopedia and universities as if representing true historical reality. The pursuit for true reality cannot be based on belief but demands reality based hard proof:
Where are the 1000's of Egyptian alphabetical books predating the Hebrew - or of the Greek, Phonecian or whatever else you've got - which museums? Did those nations become dispersed around the world with exiles - were their nations sacked and razed, looted and spread across the world - or are their books lost? Did you ask such questions, ponder it and pursue the actual, real historical truth for proof? No you did not - that takes more than copy and paste. The fundamental things apply.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022