Jump to content
Externet

Sources for the Bible ?

Recommended Posts

Humans also historically settle near sources of water. Unsurprisingly, water sources often flood during heavy storm seasons, so stories of floods are embedded in human cultures LONG before christianity ever came along. It's no surprise the early christians borrowed existing pagan stories to make their own flavor of stories more palatable and familiar to the natives they were trying to convert.

See also: How common stories of virgin birth are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ant Sinclair said:

Do you know of any Deluges around 50,000 years ago Sensei?

...you always have flooding, if too much of ice is melting very quickly e.g. after every ice age..

In the article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

you have graph of historical ice ages:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age#/media/File:Ice_Age_Temperature.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, iNow said:

See also: How common stories of virgin birth are

They are common, but from memory, the virgin birth legend in Christianity stems from a mis-translation. I can't give chapter and verse from memory, but I'm pretty sure that the original wording meant "maiden" and it was translated as virgin. So the stories were built up to match a prophesy that never was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/13/2019 at 11:31 PM, Externet said:

Whenever the Bible contents was decided; was there a choice of ancient manuscripts or versions from where material was chosen discarding other not-preferred sources ?  (or a mixture of sources)

Is there somewhere access to such not-used text sources translated to any modern language ?

Example:  If there was a historical version on how tall was the cross that the skinny guy was crucified; is the height not mentioned by considered irrelevant ?

 

A cornucopia of available writings

https://www.sacred-texts.com/

Jehovah’s Witnesses claim that the cross was an actual X shape and that the literal translation is simply tree. I would imagine that the height of the cross would be relative to to the Roman in charge  of accomplishing the task I have read that the Romans considered a wooden pole sufficient. For crucifying the common Christian when done for display. I believe it was Christians who made the claim of martyrs made and the methods used.  I also read that the practice  was originally reserved by the romans to punish slaves in large numbersI have read that the cross has its roots in ancient paganism and that the current version of the cross as a Christian symbol came about three centuries after the coming of Christ around the time of Constantine. From the world Atlas, found after Googling history of the cross.

On 10/25/2019 at 4:13 PM, mistermack said:

They are common, but from memory, the virgin birth legend in Christianity stems from a mis-translation. I can't give chapter and verse from memory, but I'm pretty sure that the original wording meant "maiden" and it was translated as virgin. So the stories were built up to match a prophesy that never was.

I believe the assumption was  that in the times referenced any maiden would presumably be a virgin. So the original would have said something to the effect a young maiden would be found to be with child which with assumption becomes a young virgin found to be with child it becomes even more interesting when you read how Islam deals with both Mary and Jesus and how it is presented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jajrussel said:

I believe the assumption was  that in the times referenced any maiden would presumably be a virgin. So the original would have said something to the effect a young maiden would be found to be with child which with assumption becomes a young virgin found to be with child it becomes even more interesting when you read how Islam deals with both Mary and Jesus and how it is presented.

 I found it a bit ambiguous when I first read the reference, but it arises out of a translation from Hebrew to Greek. Apparently, at the time, the Jews were outraged by the terrible quality of the translation of the Hebrew Bible in general, considering it changing the word of God, and this is just one example.

Wikipedia says this about the matter

Matthew uses Isaiah 7:14 to support his narrative, but scholars agree that the Hebrew word used in Isaiah, "almah", signifies a girl of childbearing age without reference to virginity, and was aimed at Isaiah's own immediate circumstances.[17][18]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_birth_of_Jesus   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read as much as I've been able to. Basically I think I concur with Mistermack.

My take is: Different compilations of very old myths (some going as far back as the origins of agricultural societies) by Judahite intelligentsia, a clique that really started to come in from the cold under king Josiah (c. 640–609) of Judah after the Assyrian domination started waning and the rival kingdom of Israel was no more. King Josiah is known to have declared the finding of a book (believed to be Deuteronomy by most scholars) during some refurbishing works of the First Temple of Jerusalem. Writings and re-writings and juxtaposed interpretations and re-interpretations in many layers were added, culminating in 'final' compilation by priest Ezra, after Babilonian exile at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar II in which some myths show signs of having been fused, e.g., the Adam and Eve narrative. Then that intelligentsia revived under the Persian king Cyrus the Great. Then the books were lost after the Greek, and later Roman, domination. Most sources remaining were Greek translations plus scattered documents in old synagogues, in old Hebrew script. Then the Dead Sea Scrolls appeared in the XXth Century, showing stark contrast in interpretation in certain excerpts, e.g., the 'virgin' attribute of Mary, which is very clearly a mistranslation from Hebrew to Greek. "Ha-almah," the original Hebrew, is translated as "young woman" or "maid," while the word for "virgin," "bethulah," appears nowhere in the originals. Someone picked the Greek word "parthenos," leading to centuries of confusion.

The story of Noah and the Flood is probably a re-telling of the story of Uta-Napishtim, from The Epic of Gilgamesh.

What archaeology really seems to be telling us is that both the Israelites and Judahites were matter-of-factly polytheists. It's even possible that that went on well into the time of Greek domination by Alexander the Great.

Bibliography: The Bible Unearthed

Israel Finkelstein & Neil A. Silberman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/22/2019 at 12:24 PM, dimreepr said:

Crucifiction? Yes, good, out of the door one cross each, line on the left...

No. Freedom for me. I get to go live on an island somewhere...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

No. Freedom for me. I get to go live on an island somewhere...

Yet here we are in a resurrected post. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Yet here we are in a resurrected post. 

Better in one than nailed to one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.