Designated Hittah for the DH
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
28-06-2013, 02:56 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  dodging the skewering you received.

I saw PJ getting crucified.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 03:02 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This is why I can't get anything accomplished here. You're changing the subject utterly and dodging the skewering you received.

That's a laughable dodge of my point. You said the Septuagint isn't scripture, but it's what Jesus quotes in the New Testament. In point of fact, the Septuagint is very much scripture, as it appears in your New Testament.

(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You cited the Septuagint as proof that the Hebrew Bible had been redacted post composition. Then I pointed out it's a TRANSLATION of the HB. You sound like the thousands of people out there that confuse "the Bible's been changed thousands of times" with "the Bible's been translated thousands of times".

You obviously don't understand. Up until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint was the oldest version of the Old Testament in existence, dating in fragments to around the turn of the era, and in complete manuscripts to the third and fourth centuries CE. The Hebrew version upon which your modern translations are based come from around 1000 CE. That Hebrew version contains variants and alterations of the text of the Old Testament that are demonstrably secondary to their Septuagint counterparts. In other words, the Septuagint is demonstrably more original in many places. The Dead Sea Scrolls give us the firmest evidence of the state of the Hebrew Bible in the Hebrew around the time of the Septuagint, and it provides numerous examples of support for the Septuagint version, as well as variants that differ from both the Septuagint and the later Hebrew version, and are demonstrably most original. The Masoretic Text has numerous, numerous demonstrable errors in it. Even the Jewish scribes recognized that, as I said. Perhaps you don't know what a qere reading is.

(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Thanks for correcting my poor use of the indefinite article. That's about all that was accurate in your refutation, for example:

You are cherry picking what you want from Essene traditions.

This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Essenes. You claimed that only one word of the book of Isaiah had changed between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text, which is utterly and completely untrue.

(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The Essenes were secretive and a Messianic cult in terms of they had a different Messiah than the one who came.

Meaningless dogmas. Your comments have nothing at all to do with the legitimacy of the Dead Sea Scrolls as text-critical witnesses, and not a word of what I said is problematic in the least. This is my career, and I'll thank you to provide something more than "Nu-uh!" the next time you insist I am incompetent at it.

My Blog
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes maklelan's post
28-06-2013, 03:04 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(28-06-2013 03:02 PM)maklelan Wrote:  
(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This is why I can't get anything accomplished here. You're changing the subject utterly and dodging the skewering you received.

That's a laughable dodge of my point. You said the Septuagint isn't scripture, but it's what Jesus quotes in the New Testament. In point of fact, the Septuagint is very much scripture, as it appears in your New Testament.

(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You cited the Septuagint as proof that the Hebrew Bible had been redacted post composition. Then I pointed out it's a TRANSLATION of the HB. You sound like the thousands of people out there that confuse "the Bible's been changed thousands of times" with "the Bible's been translated thousands of times".

You obviously don't understand. Up until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint was the oldest version of the Old Testament in existence, dating in fragments to around the turn of the era, and in complete manuscripts to the third and fourth centuries CE. The Hebrew version upon which your modern translations are based come from around 1000 CE. That Hebrew version contains variants and alterations of the text of the Old Testament that are demonstrably secondary to their Septuagint counterparts. In other words, the Septuagint is demonstrably more original in many places. The Dead Sea Scrolls give us the firmest evidence of the state of the Hebrew Bible in the Hebrew around the time of the Septuagint, and it provides numerous examples of support for the Septuagint version, as well as variants that differ from both the Septuagint and the later Hebrew version, and are demonstrably most original. The Masoretic Text has numerous, numerous demonstrable errors in it. Even the Jewish scribes recognized that, as I said. Perhaps you don't know what a qere reading is.

(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Thanks for correcting my poor use of the indefinite article. That's about all that was accurate in your refutation, for example:

You are cherry picking what you want from Essene traditions.

This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Essenes. You claimed that only one word of the book of Isaiah had changed between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text, which is utterly and completely untrue.

(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The Essenes were secretive and a Messianic cult in terms of they had a different Messiah than the one who came.

Meaningless dogmas. Your comments have nothing at all to do with the legitimacy of the Dead Sea Scrolls as text-critical witnesses, and not a word of what I said is problematic in the least. This is my career, and I'll thank you to provide something more than "Nu-uh!" the next time you insist I am incompetent at it.

Well this is the level of the usual fundy trolls we get, understand now why we were a little wary at just taking your word for things now Mek?

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-06-2013, 03:11 PM (This post was last modified: 28-06-2013 03:20 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(28-06-2013 02:53 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:So, now all you have to do is prove that, with all the examples of ALL the other texts you have evidence for, and all the other examples you have examined, and ALL the data about all the changes.
Please present it in table form. Tomorrow will be fine. Please include at least two examples of Chineese, Japanese, Hindi, Sumerian, Egyptian, and Greek literature for comparison. You DO have those I assume to make that assertion credibly, right ?
You wouldn't just be talking out of your ass again now would you ?

BB, really? Really?

We have five (?) copies extant of Suetonius, we know Homeric epics constantly changed, we know we're not sure if Caesar wrote his panegyric or if it was ghost written, etc. and we have 22,000 (?) New Testament fragments and letters from the first two centuries after Christ. You're asking for a table and there are entire books on the subject of the received canon.

You might as well ask me for "books proving Hitler did immoral things".

Yes really.
Seriously. Your problem is far greater than Greek and Roman texts.
You claimed it was THE MOST accurately transmitted text in human history. Obviously anyone in good faith making that claim has the evidence to back it up.
I want to see the evidence from ALL the major writing cultures in human history.
Monday will be fine.
Table form please.
You do have the evidence for this claim, right, Mr. All-of-a-sudden-evidence-respector/requestor ?
You are not lying - exaggerating again are you ?
Are you ?
Provide a reference, show us the evidence, or retract the claim.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
01-07-2013, 10:57 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(28-06-2013 02:51 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  This is why I can't get anything accomplished here.

To ask the obvious question, what exactly is it that you're trying to accomplish here?

Religious disputes are like arguments in a madhouse over which inmate really is Napoleon.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cufflink's post
01-07-2013, 02:51 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Quote:That's a laughable dodge of my point. You said the Septuagint isn't scripture, but it's what Jesus quotes in the New Testament. In point of fact, the Septuagint is very much scripture, as it appears in your New Testament.

Now you're dodging and frankly, either fabricating or gilding a lily, since Jesus is commonly understood to have spoken Aramaic to His peers and Hebrew in the synagogue. The Septuagint is not the Hebrew Bible, it is a translation of the HB quoted by New Testament authors. They also quoted pagan poets and the apocrypha.

Quote:You obviously don't understand. Up until the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint was the oldest version of the Old Testament in existence, dating in fragments to around the turn of the era, and in complete manuscripts to the third and fourth centuries CE. The Hebrew version upon which your modern translations are based come from around 1000 CE. That Hebrew version contains variants and alterations of the text of the Old Testament that are demonstrably secondary to their Septuagint counterparts. In other words, the Septuagint is demonstrably more original in many places. The Dead Sea Scrolls give us the firmest evidence of the state of the Hebrew Bible in the Hebrew around the time of the Septuagint, and it provides numerous examples of support for the Septuagint version, as well as variants that differ from both the Septuagint and the later Hebrew version, and are demonstrably most original. The Masoretic Text has numerous, numerous demonstrable errors in it. Even the Jewish scribes recognized that, as I said. Perhaps you don't know what a qere reading is.

I think you don't understand or are trying to obfuscate here. How does the omission of vowel points help your case? Also, the Dead Sea Scrolls are understood not as synagogue objects for regular liturgical use but as people... wait for it... burying scriptures and messianic prophecies in caves.

You are continuing to make a case for changes to the Hebrew scriptures from changes to Greek translations of same, in this case undertaken by people with an agenda.

Quote:This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Essenes. You claimed that only one word of the book of Isaiah had changed between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text, which is utterly and completely untrue.

I stand corrected. I'd heard it was all of Isaiah, I think someone was looking at excerpts. Here's better information from a reliable source:

The Isaiah scrolls found at Qumran closed that gap to within 500 years of the original manuscript. Interestingly, when scholars compared the MT of Isaiah to the Isaiah scroll of Qumran, the correspondence was astounding. The texts from Qumran proved to be word-for-word identical to our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text. The 5 percent of variation consisted primarily of obvious slips of the pen and spelling alterations (Archer, 1974, p. 25). Further, there were no major doctrinal differences between the accepted and Qumran texts (see Table 1 below). This forcibly demonstrated the accuracy with which scribes copied sacred texts, and bolstered our confidence in the Bible’s textual integrity (see Yamauchi, 1972, p. 130). The Dead Sea Scrolls have increased our confidence that faithful scribal transcription substantially has preserved the original content of Isaiah.

https://www.apologeticspress.org/apconte...rticle=357

Quote:Meaningless dogmas. Your comments have nothing at all to do with the legitimacy of the Dead Sea Scrolls as text-critical witnesses, and not a word of what I said is problematic in the least. This is my career, and I'll thank you to provide something more than "Nu-uh!" the next time you insist I am incompetent at it.

I didn't say you were incompentent in your career of scholarship. I will repeat that the scrolls most Jews knew for millennia before the Qumran discoveries were as the precious Word of God to be revered and kept in a synagogue, copies being time consuming and precious items. Then we found some buried away like time capsules by a community little understood and known to be involved in sectarian doctrinal disputes with their fellow Jews.

We can likewise look at translations today and see differences, in some cases, great ones. All these differences are based on doctrinal differences. Do you disagree?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2013, 02:53 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Quote:You claimed it was THE MOST accurately transmitted text in human history. Obviously anyone in good faith making that claim has the evidence to back it up.
I want to see the evidence from ALL the major writing cultures in human history.

You can start with this, or you can read from among many fine books with exhaustive detail on the subject:

http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Since the earliest extant manuscripts, we know both the HB and NT have not changed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-07-2013, 03:44 PM (This post was last modified: 01-07-2013 04:54 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
(01-07-2013 02:53 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:You claimed it was THE MOST accurately transmitted text in human history. Obviously anyone in good faith making that claim has the evidence to back it up.
I want to see the evidence from ALL the major writing cultures in human history.

You can start with this, or you can read from among many fine books with exhaustive detail on the subject:

http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

Since the earliest extant manuscripts, we know both the HB and NT have not changed.

"We know" nothing of the sort. You assert something with no evidence, as per your usual fundie exaggerations, (lies).
No one here has any reason to buy any snake oil from you.
The pathetic little reference you provided is not going to cut it.
So I see you're talking out your ass again, as usual.
YOU made an assertion. Back it up with examples FROM ALL WRITING CULTURES, in the entire world, compared to ALL the Bible texts or your credibility here drops even lower. I actually don't know how it *could* get any lower, since the way it is now, if you say anything, one just assumes the opposite is true.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
01-07-2013, 04:21 PM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
I write the following with Christian apologists in mind.

I find the debates and arguments regarding the OT, NT, Pentateuch etc. very interesting. I know some of the members here have spent an inordinate amount of time researching and studying these ancient texts and kudos to them, knowledge is good.

But here's the thing, at the end of the day, the climax to these writings revolve around the supernatural. So even if we had perfect knowledge of who, when, what and how about them, they are still a work of fiction.

These writings suggest virgins can conceive without intercourse and give birth without losing their virginity, men can walk on water, blindness can be cured with spit and dead men come back to life. You might as well be discussing the Iliad and say that since you can historically prove the existence of Homer and the geographical locations mentioned in the book it then follows that chimeras, giant cyclops and sirens exist.

I applaud the researchers but their findings will never turn the impossible into reality.

Carry on.

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Full Circle's post
02-07-2013, 10:50 AM
RE: Designated Hittah for the DH
Quote:"We know" nothing of the sort. You assert something with no evidence, as per your usual fundie exaggerations, (lies).
No one here has any reason to buy any snake oil from you.
The pathetic little reference you provided is not going to cut it.
So I see you're talking out your ass again, as usual.
YOU made an assertion. Back it up with examples FROM ALL WRITING CULTURES, in the entire world, compared to ALL the Bible texts or your credibility here drops even lower. I actually don't know how it *could* get any lower, since the way it is now, if you say anything, one just assumes the opposite is true.

What is your refutation of the evidence I posted which included several dozen examples? Is the above rant it?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: