It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Who wrote the Torah?

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: UnBreakable
Sorry, I can't put much stock in fifth or sixth-hand stories,

Yet you don't seem to have a problem putting stock in out right lies...

IF the Bible were a fairy tale, WHY is it coming true?

The prophecies in the bible have been 100% accurate.

IF it were a fairy tale, why does it transform lives?

IF it were a fairy tale, WHY would millions risk their very lives and be put to death for simply possessing it?

The laws of probability PROVE that it is anything BUT a fairy tale.


The chances of just 48 out of the 456 prophecies being fulfilled in one person are 1 in 10 to the 157 power.

That's — 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

"All this illustrates why it is absolutely impossible for anyone to have fulfilled the Messianic prophecies by chance. In fact, a leading authority on the probability theory, Emile Borel states that once we go past one chance in 10 to the 50th power, the probabilities are so small it's impossible to think they will ever occur."

LINK




edit on 22-7-2014 by Murgatroid because: I felt like it..




posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

Please tell me what outright lie I'm putting stock in. Just because someone wrote decades later that JC rose from the dead, I'm supposed to take that as fact? Just because YOU believe something happened doesn't apply to MY belief system. And the sources you provide were written by people who were actually present during the genesis of biblical times, or writing 2,000 years after the fact? So I guess Jonah lived in the stomach of a great fish for three days because the Bible says so.



posted on Jul, 22 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Murgatroid

originally posted by: UnBreakable
Sorry, I can't put much stock in fifth or sixth-hand stories,

Yet you don't seem to have a problem putting stock in out right lies...

IF the Bible were a fairy tale, WHY is it coming true?

The prophecies in the bible have been 100% accurate.

IF it were a fairy tale, why does it transform lives?

IF it were a fairy tale, WHY would millions risk their very lives and be put to death for simply possessing it?

The laws of probability PROVE that it is anything BUT a fairy tale.


The chances of just 48 out of the 456 prophecies being fulfilled in one person are 1 in 10 to the 157 power.

That's — 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,
000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

"All this illustrates why it is absolutely impossible for anyone to have fulfilled the Messianic prophecies by chance. In fact, a leading authority on the probability theory, Emile Borel states that once we go past one chance in 10 to the 50th power, the probabilities are so small it's impossible to think they will ever occur."

LINK





You keep saying this, but not providing any evidence whatsoever. What exactly is 'coming true?' What are all these prophecies that were fulfilled. Keeping in mind that you can't use your own religious scripture which has to be taken on faith as proof of a fulfilled prophecy.

Hint: there are none. Oh wait...but there was a psalm that talked about 30 pieces of silver...then the New Testament said Judas betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver...absolute proof of god! Assuming you take scripture at its word without any evidence whatsoever...then yea, total proof!lol
edit on 22-7-2014 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Murgatroid

Interesting method of counting odds in your quote. I would love to see the function behind that number. Prophecy and beauty obviously have a thing in common, it exists only in the eye of the beholder.
edit on 23-7-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: obv



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 04:22 AM
link   
Perhaps a link that Stormdancer777 gave me recently can throw some light on the origins of the Torah..

hindufocus.wordpress.com...



In his History of the Jews, the Jewish scholar and theologian Flavius Josephus (37 – 100 A.D.), wrote that the Greek philosopher Aristotle had said: “…These Jews are derived from the Indian philosophers; they are named by the Indians Calani.” (Book I:22.)

Clearchus of Soli wrote, “The Jews descend from the philosophers of India. The philosophers are called in India Calanians and in Syria Jews. The name of their capital is very difficult to pronounce. It is called ‘Jerusalem.’”

“Megasthenes, who was sent to India by Seleucus Nicator, about three hundred years before Christ, and whose accounts from new inquiries are every day acquiring additional credit, says that the Jews ‘were an Indian tribe or sect called Kalani…’” (Anacalypsis, by Godfrey Higgins, Vol. I; p. 400.)


Connection Between Ancient Indian And Hebrew Language...
www.viewzone.com...

2012 news report of lost tribe Indian Jews allowed into Israel:
www.newser.com...


edit on 23 7 2014 by glend because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: glend
Very very interesting articles and much is believable to be studied more. I thank you for the honest way in which you presented your post. I do believe that there is far more in knowledge just as your articles have stated and yes it is very possible that the mystery of Abraham could even be found in India. They are a very brilliant and peace loving people who seldom interfere in other peoples affairs.



posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   
a reply to: glend

Could you please quote from Josephus? I haven't even heard of the book you or Stormdancer777 refer to "History of the Jews". The books of Flavius Josephus are:

  • Ioudaike archaiologia (Antiquities of the Jews)
  • Peri tou Ioudaikou polemou (War of the Jews)
  • Pros Apiona (Against Apion)
  • Iosephou bios (The Life of Josephus)

    First book of Antiquities contains 22 chapters, and the 22nd chapter is titled "HOW ISAAC DIED, AND WAS BURIED IN HEBRON". No mention of whether India or Aristotle.

    First book of War of the Jews has 33 chapters. 22nd chapter is titled "THE MURDER OF ARISTOBULUS AND HYRCANUS, THE HIGH PRIESTS, AS ALSO OF MARIAMNE THE QUEEN." No mention here either of whether Aristotle or India.

    The texts of Josephus ==> sacred-texts.com...

    Now Antiquities does mention India a couple of times, but nothing I can see mentioning whether Aristotle or Indian Jews or the Torah being from India. Would love a quote and the correct book, chapter and verse if available.
    edit on 23-7-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: Misc



  • posted on Jul, 23 2014 @ 09:39 PM
    link   
    a reply to: Utnapisjtim
    Yes History refers to Antiquities. Book 17-20, 6 lines down from top of page 487:
    "These Jews are derived from Indian philosophers, they are named by the Indians Calani" etc

    Hope this link works in ATS, it is long...
    books.google.com.au/books?id=wRY4AQAAMAAJ&pg=PA487&dq=Flavius+Josephus+The+Antiquities+Of+The+Jews+These+Jews+are+derived+from+the+Indian+philosophers &hl=en&sa=X&ei=ZGzQU--DD9K58gXK44KACQ&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Flavius%20Josephus%20The%20Antiquities%20Of%20The%20Jews%20These%20Jews%20are%20deri ved%20from%20the%20Indian%20philosophers&f=false


    Edit: Link doesn't work I have mailed to you
    edit on 23 7 2014 by glend because: (no reason given)

    edit on 23 7 2014 by glend because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 03:47 AM
    link   
    a reply to: Utnapisjtim

    This effort seems to me to be like getting all the possible data on an orchestra, including detailed information on the musicians, and the makes and models of all the instruments they're using, to understand the symphony.

    I mean no offense, but my personal experience has been that the Bible is spiritually interactive and alive! So it is no good trying to break it down into its elements, when the whole works together in wonderous ways.



    posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 05:01 AM
    link   
    a reply to: glend

    An interesting tidbit, and it could very well be that certain post-exile Indian Jews returned to Jerusalem at the time of Aristotle. I have to read up on my Josephus obviously. However the works of Josephus was a favourite of the Church, and it has been proven to the state of boredom how the Church on several occasions changed and edited Josephus to found their claim to power. Still today, people of education and integrity quote Josephus as the first non-Christian to have written about Jesus. It is however fallacy to go down that lane. It was forged in.

    I'm not saying that the quote you provided here is a forgery though, to be honest I have never even heard of it before and it caught my interest. For more modern renditions of ol' Flavius, go to sacred-texts.com... it's also better for quoting and sharing. Also the quote you provided isn't from either Antiquities or War of the Jews, it's from 'Against Apion', a third less known work of Flavius Josephus.



    posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 05:08 AM
    link   
    a reply to: Maigret

    Oh, the Bible can manage the scrutiny of science alright. What fails in the process is Church dogma and worldly doctrines styled by the same Church. It wasn't until the eighties that the Catholic Church finally acknowledged that hey, the Earth isn't the center of the Universe, and what do you know, Copernicus was right after all, it's actually the Sun that centers our planetary carousel. Too bad they killed and tortured thousands of people for claiming this over the centuries. See my sig for more....



    posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 05:25 AM
    link   
    a reply to: Utnapisjtim

    The Documentary Hypothesis was discredited nearly 100 years ago.

    Its almost random attribution of parts of sentences to different authors, hundreds of years apart makes no sense.

    In my studies trying to understand why the attributed text is attributed to the particular editor, I can see little logic behind Wellhausens divisions. My conclusion is that the whole hypothesis is BS.



    posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 05:48 AM
    link   
    a reply to: chr0naut

    OK. So now you're saying that in 100 years knowledge diminishes into oblivion, while 4000 years makes knowledge eternal and perfect? You forget that textual criticism is an ancient science that's been around about as long as there have been texts to study and now, still, a century later it holds water and withstands scrutiny and is a hypothesis that is still kept in high regard by quite a few serious scholars in the field.

    The Bible is not written by God, or even dictated by God, it was inspired by God and written over a coarse of nearly 3000 years by many different writers belonging to different nations and sects. Inspired by God, just as Indiana Jones was inspired by Howard Carter and were written by many script writers. Even the Church admits to that these days. The Bible isn't a golden calf worthy of worship, it is a literary masterpiece meant to be read by kings, priests and prophets.
    edit on 24-7-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: by many



    posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 12:10 AM
    link   

    originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
    a reply to: chr0naut

    OK. So now you're saying that in 100 years knowledge diminishes into oblivion, while 4000 years makes knowledge eternal and perfect? You forget that textual criticism is an ancient science that's been around about as long as there have been texts to study and now, still, a century later it holds water and withstands scrutiny and is a hypothesis that is still kept in high regard by quite a few serious scholars in the field.

    The Bible is not written by God, or even dictated by God, it was inspired by God and written over a coarse of nearly 3000 years by many different writers belonging to different nations and sects. Inspired by God, just as Indiana Jones was inspired by Howard Carter and were written by many script writers. Even the Church admits to that these days. The Bible isn't a golden calf worthy of worship, it is a literary masterpiece meant to be read by kings, priests and prophets.


    I was just replying that the Documentary Hypothesis (or JEDP Hypothesis) does not appear to me to be valid. There are many others who would agree.

    There are a plethora of alternate modern hypotheses that disagree with each other and make any conclusion about authorship of the Torah less and less clear.

    Also, the possibility that Moses was the author of the pentateuch (the traditional view) has never been decisively dismissed, either.

    The issues which promted Wellhausen & others were based upon inconsistencies in a single author's story being their creation (i.e: a fiction). But if that single author compiled actual eyewitness reports from multiple sources, then all the 'incosistencies' in expression and recollection vanish, as does the basis for the DH.

    Remember that Hebrew itself was somewhat of a proto-language for a newly post-tribal people, at the time.

    The "Toledot" hypothesis that relates to the Akkadian clay tablet library structure would hardly be included in a late-written or multi-author document (who would not use clay tablets) and yet there it is in Genesis, very clearly.

    edit on 25/7/2014 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 06:25 AM
    link   

    originally posted by: chr0naut

    originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
    a reply to: chr0naut

    OK. So now you're saying that in 100 years knowledge diminishes into oblivion, while 4000 years makes knowledge eternal and perfect? You forget that textual criticism is an ancient science that's been around about as long as there have been texts to study and now, still, a century later it holds water and withstands scrutiny and is a hypothesis that is still kept in high regard by quite a few serious scholars in the field.

    The Bible is not written by God, or even dictated by God, it was inspired by God and written over a coarse of nearly 3000 years by many different writers belonging to different nations and sects. Inspired by God, just as Indiana Jones was inspired by Howard Carter and were written by many script writers. Even the Church admits to that these days. The Bible isn't a golden calf worthy of worship, it is a literary masterpiece meant to be read by kings, priests and prophets.


    I was just replying that the Documentary Hypothesis (or JEDP Hypothesis) does not appear to me to be valid. There are many others who would agree.


    Yes, sorry, got a bit carried away here.


    There are a plethora of alternate modern hypotheses that disagree with each other and make any conclusion about authorship of the Torah less and less clear.

    Also, the possibility that Moses was the author of the pentateuch (the traditional view) has never been decisively dismissed, either.


    Oh dear. According to the Torah itself, Moses wrote a book of laws that was small enough for him to carry alone together with the two slates with the ten commandments, and small enough to be placed in the smaller ark (not the golden one, the wooden one, a small box). And small enough that he could write it over a coarse of a the usual forty days. Now forty means simply many and forty days means a long time, it might be longer and it might be shorter time, but just copying a Torah takes about one and a half years, let alone binding it up, editing out mistakes and figuring out how to write it in the first place. The Torah is a hefty work of esoteria, and there is no chance in hell that one person could have written it. This is partly why people draw the God card, it was a miracle, it was designed by God and Moses copied it in a trance which made horns and light beams extend from his forehead. No wonder.


    The issues which promted Wellhausen & others were based upon inconsistencies in a single author's story being their creation (i.e: a fiction). But if that single author compiled actual eyewitness reports from multiple sources, then all the 'incosistencies' in expression and recollection vanish, as does the basis for the DH.


    There is nothing in Wellhousen's work that even slightly suggest it's a work of fiction, those are your words. It's not a work of fiction, but a collection of historic myths gathered from the cultures around Mesopotamia, and deep esoteria, coupled with very real, though primitive, sets of laws. Who said it was fiction? You did. You learn about Wellhousen in theology studies and religious science in University, and it is sold as good fish to the students. Any linguist would recognise the methods used and this is the way we can trace old mss. For instance, there are about 10,000 "originals" to the four gospels in the NT. Their inter-connectivity, dating and such shows an intricate, but understandable, chronology showing quite a bit of relevance and such. It doesn't mean it's fiction, just that it was a popular work to be copying and studies also show there was quite a battle at times between different doctrines of translation and how certain ones includes great parts others simply don't etc. However, studies have shown that the three synoptic gospels rely on a common source, often nicknamed Q.


    Remember that Hebrew itself was somewhat of a proto-language for a newly post-tribal people, at the time.


    Hebrew, a proto-language? Indo-European is a proto language. Hebrew is a full fledged language. Back in the time of Moses, if there even existed written Hebrew, the letters looked completely different from the Aramaic square script we call Hebrew today. Hebrew was invented around when King David is supposed to have lived, it came about at a time of renaissance when Israel was safe and sound back in the cradle in the Land. Not even trace fragments of anything Torah related has been found from this period. Hardly anything really.


    The "Toledot" hypothesis that relates to the Akkadian clay tablet library structure would hardly be included in a late-written or multi-author document (who would not use clay tablets) and yet there it is in Genesis, very clearly.


    According to Wikipedia: "the hypothesis received some support from R. K. Harrison (1969) but otherwise remained without acceptance in scholarly circles."

    The idea that Moses made the Torah based on a whole library of slates and clay tables that apparently Abraham brought with him from Ur, well, it's a long shot. Back then the usual library was a handful of learned men who had memorised different books, much the same way some Muslims today memorise the Koran or similar with certain Jews, to keep the old ways alive as the world burns to ashes.
    edit on 25-7-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: David



    posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 07:08 AM
    link   

    originally posted by: Murgatroid
    IF the Bible were a fairy tale, WHY is it coming true?


    Because people are making it come true? The bible is not so much a prophecy as it is a PLAN or a grand conspiracy. Ever heard of the term "Plan of God"? It's used quite a few times in OT. The Freemasons and other such fraternities where the rich and powerful meet, they operate with 100-year plans and such. Think about a lodge meeting among 30+ degree masons sometimes around the dawn of the 20th century, discussing who should start the wars to end all wars, in order to best fulfill 'the prophecy'. How to deal with "the Jewish problem" as they used to term it back then, when to establish the UN, and what about the structure of Europe, is the age of the kings over? This and stuff like what would be acceptable ways to utilise the newly discovered nuclear energy....

    The Bus schedule is a work of prophecy in your world?
    edit on 28-7-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: misc



    posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 03:23 PM
    link   
    oh what an interesting topic!
    i believe moses did write the earliest version of torah, that was then summarily re-written by J and E, etc. i have a theory on all this, that goes thusly:

    according to the text, the sons of noah spread out around the world after the (black sea) flood. the son who went to egypt, was ham -- and ham is the etymology for khem (egypt). i think he (actually "they", as the m designates ham is a plural word) was returning to egypt, not going there for the first time.

    moses was raised in the house of pharaoh ahmose and was taught both the khemetic version of the creation and flood accounts by the scholars of egypt, and also the noahic (mesopotamian) version by his own mother, who was working as his nanny in pharaoh's household. surely at some point, moses realized these were the same stories, just with different cultural slants, different word usage, and name variants. i believe this is where he must've asked for divine inspiration on what to write down. now follow me here for a moment:

    most of the israelite people at the time, were quite egyptianized, and would've recognized the meanings of certain egyptian words moreso than others, even if those less recognizable words were from their home culture, which in this case, would've been mesopotamia. so moses did something really quite brilliant. allow me to explain:

    adam was the egyptian atum, the gods of creation. eventually atum was said to be a single god, however, this isn't accurate as the m in atum designates it as a plural (as does the m in adam). earlier in the mesopotamian version, the sumerian kings list describes the first king as alulim. this is essentially the same word as adam and atum, from an earlier dialect of mesopotamia. alulim also is the etymological forerunner of elohim. the creation had been named after its creators. (don't freak out yet, there's 2 layers of information here under the heading of "creator"). moses had his work cut out for him.

    to solve this dilemma and to simplify the information, moses opted to describe the created as atum/adam and the creator as alulim/elohim, even though all the words are identical, the only missing ingredient to merge the whole picture is the understanding that the created adam were named after their creators, the adam/atum/alulim/elohim

    elohim and alulim are also plural words (designated by the "m" at the end), so how do we get a singular creator? easy. a singular adam/atum/alulim/elohim in the royal "we" voice, created the plural adam, males and females, from multiple adam/atum/elohim/alulim templates.

    edit on 28-7-2014 by undo because: (no reason given)



    posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 05:13 PM
    link   
    a reply to: undo

    For instance, If we don't consider the context validity of the different sources, the Bible basically says that Moses and God co-authored the torah, but it's not the so called "Five books of Moses". In Hebrew, torah simply means law. Moses didn't write the Pentateuch, if we are to believe the Exodus tale, he wrote down the first law of justice for the freed slaves he brought out of Egypt. Nowhere does it say that Moses wrote the Sefer Torah or the Pentateuch. Like I said in a couple of earlier replies to others in this thread earlier, if Moses wrote Exodus, why would he refer to himself in third person? "When Moses did this or the other, He did that and more" and what's more, in the end of the Torah, the authors describe Moses' death scene. That's quite the miracle if it was Moses who wrote that.



    posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 05:18 PM
    link   
    a reply to: Utnapisjtim

    I think the fact atum=adam is evidence of moses' hand prints all over torah



    posted on Jul, 28 2014 @ 05:43 PM
    link   
    a reply to: undo

    I believe that Moses were schooled in the Egyptian mysteries, and as an Egyptian prince he would have access to any Egyptian library or school of thought. Whether he wrote anything of this down, or if he brought any scrolls with him? It's hard to say. But the myths in the Torah aren't so much about Egyptian mythology as Mesopotamian. There are a few allusions to Egyptian lore, like how the princess who discovered Moses among the 'Soof' and named him her own son-- must have thought he was a reincarnation of Osiris, who arrived to the world in exactly the same manner.

    Atum is the name many Hermetics use for God. I can't really see the impact other than the old mantra as above so below. Adam is derived out of the Hebrew word Adama, which is a kind of red ochre clay rich in iron-oxides, the same as your blood. The soil in Eden was that of Adama (think beast of the Earth). In much the same way the seven headed dragon Yamm came from the Yam, meaning Sea (think Second Beast of the Sea).



    new topics

    top topics



     
    19
    << 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

    log in

    join