Red Sea Scrolls?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-11-2013, 12:45 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(26-11-2013 12:35 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  WTF is a "red" sea scroll? Angel

I honestly thought is was a bad typo... Drinking Beverage

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 01:32 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(25-11-2013 11:23 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  faith cannot contradict science, science cannot contradict faith for truth cannot contradict truth blah blah blah...

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 01:34 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(26-11-2013 12:45 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(26-11-2013 12:35 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  WTF is a "red" sea scroll? Angel

I honestly thought is was a bad typo... Drinking Beverage

I did too.

It's Special Pleadings all the way down!


Magic Talking Snakes STFU -- revenantx77


You can't have your special pleading and eat it too. -- WillHop
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 05:37 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(25-11-2013 11:17 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(25-11-2013 10:43 PM)grizzlysnake Wrote:  well yeah, the text changes according to which culture it finds itself in, they love adding things to make it relevant to the political/cultural environment.
Ever consider telling the guy that the bible shares similar stories from Egypt and Mesopotamian? Egypt even became monotheistic for a time when the Pharaoh Akhenaten declared Aten to be the only god of Egypt by destroying and erasing any references to the old gods. Only Akhenaten and his wife Nefertiti were the only ones who could communicate with the one god.

So Akhenaten was basically a royal Egyptian Jesus? Consider
I was thinking Emperor Constantine when he converted but not the speaking to god thing. Of course whatever he said goes and just might be the reason why Christianity is so popular these daysTongue Its all a numbers game.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 05:44 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
The 'r' key is directly adjacent to the 'd' and 'e' key on a standard QWERTY keyboard layout. Then again, it could be an mildly embarrassing mistake. Doesn't really matter. I mean what he knows. Tongue

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 05:53 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(26-11-2013 12:35 AM)houseofcantor Wrote:  WTF is a "red" sea scroll? Angel

I think it's reference to the old pro/anti commie debate:

Better Red than Dead? Discuss.

Drinking Beverage

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
26-11-2013, 05:53 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
Come on guys, both seas have a biblical significance, they are close to each other and their names are similar. I get them confused all the time too.

"Behind every great pirate, there is a great butt."
-Guybrush Threepwood-
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 06:09 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
Perhaps you can educate Mr second husband on their true heretical nature: http://www.coghomeschool.org/site/cog_ar...CROLLS.txt

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 07:45 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(25-11-2013 10:23 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(25-11-2013 09:54 PM)SparkByTouch Wrote:  So my mom's second husband claims that a discovery of "Red Sea Scrolls" is proof that the bible is the true word of "god".

There is only so much one Atheist can research!
Join me and give your input/research into this "discovery"!


According to The Oxford Companion to Archaeology:

The biblical manuscripts from Qumran, which include at least fragments from every book of the Old Testament, except perhaps for the Book of Esther, provide a far older cross section of scriptural tradition than that available to scholars before. While some of the Qumran biblical manuscripts are nearly identical to the Masoretic, or traditional, Hebrew text of the Old Testament, some manuscripts of the books of Exodus and Samuel found in Cave Four exhibit dramatic differences in both language and content. In their astonishing range of textual variants, the Qumran biblical discoveries have prompted scholars to reconsider the once-accepted theories of the development of the modern biblical text from only three manuscript families: of the Masoretic text, of the Hebrew original of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around A.D. 100.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Sc...gnificance


It's proof that the texts changed over time. Hardly the evidence one would expect for a divinely inspired inerrant text. Drinking Beverage

The Qumran'ers were a sectarian group that lived in seclusion for generations--they added apocryphal writings to the texts they held so dear as a cult--and were not in what every other Jewish person did in synagogue or the Temple.

Saying their documents make the OT canon "fluid" is akin to saying the Qu'ran proves the Bible was subject to intense scrutinity for its validity until the 7th century CE.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-11-2013, 08:21 AM
RE: Red Sea Scrolls?
(26-11-2013 07:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The Qumran'ers were a sectarian group that lived in seclusion for generations--they added apocryphal writings to the texts they held so dear as a cult--and were not in what every other Jewish person did in synagogue or the Temple.

Saying their documents make the OT canon "fluid" is akin to saying the Qu'ran proves the Bible was subject to intense scrutinity for its validity until the 7th century CE.

And dismissing their changes and interpretations just because they are divergent ignores the fact that the books obviously can, and did, change. You missed the entire point once again PJ...

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: