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.
Up until 300 years ago the bible was written and spoken in Latin only.
God inscribed the Ten Commandments into stone: "God said to Moses, 'Come up to Me, to the mountain, and remain there. I will give you the stone tablets, the Torah and the commandment that I have written for [the people's] instruction.'"
Originally posted by Jehosephat
The dead sea scrolls contained a manuscripts of the old testement that were 1000 years older then previosuly know copies and show that during that thousand years, and time leading up to the present they were acuratly translated.
Even the King James bible which was made in 1611 was made with not having all of the differant translations of the time and manuscripts. Except for word order, or spelling, there is no significant differance in content from what we have today.
Truely you can say that the Bible is God breathed and has not been changed or corrupted.
norm
Originally posted by Liberal1984
According to the bible Mosses wrote the Ten Commandments as they were dictated to him by God himself somewhere on Mount Everest.
Originally posted by dissbelief
Wycliff and Tyndale were great men of the faith, but did not translate anything from the "original" greek or hebrew texts. There are no original texts in existence today... but there are also no original texts of any great works of antiquity. There are however more surviving copies of the bible, full or in pieces, from various times, places, and language groups, than any other great written work of antiquity. Giving the Bible, at the very least, as much historical credidibility as any other ancient work.
But liberal doesnt want to discuss the historicity of the bible, liberal is just looking for a fight i think...and its late, and i'm way too tired.
You guys have fun.
Originally posted by KSoze
Well, the Dead Sea Scrolls didn't show this exactly...what it showed was there were varying texts circulating around this time...for there are some books that agree with the Septuagint LXX and there are those that agree with the MSS...in addition, there are those that don't agree with either text...
So, to say that it was god breathed is a little far-fetched because god wouldn't breathe conflicting texts into existence. Not to mention those texts that were found in the DSS that are not found in the modern day bible anymore...
The Tanakh was redacted and compiled by the "great" assembly; the scribes altered the original...either intentional or unintentional...however, they were not above tampering with the text
Unlike the Sumerian clay tablets, there are NO original sources of the Tanakh-Old Testament that have been found to date.
Originally posted by Jehosephat
YOu are mistake there are two parts to the dead sea scrolls. There are the writings Jewsih religious teachings which you metion, and manuscripts of the old testements which I was talking about.
It is interesting to note that the book of Esther was not included in the Dead Sea scroll. TO say there isn't any originals doesn't mean much when you comparte differant copies of said manuscripts 1000 years apart and find the content hasn't changed
...For example we have a scroll of the complete book of Isaiah dating from the second century before Christ. It is a thousand years older than any previous Hebrew Scripture document that we had before 1947.
Even though not all of the scrolls are unrolled and translated more than half a century later, the answers are coming clear. The texts are amazingly similar to the documents we already have. The variations are less than two percent, and not a single teaching or doctrine of the Bible we have is altered. Rather than posing a threat to the Christian faith, the Dead Sea Scrolls have, in fact, provided convincing support for the genuineness of God's revelation as given to us in the Bible.
some new Bible translations have added approximately 70 words to the end of 1 Samuel 10. The passage tells us that a certain king Nahash gouged out the eyes of the Israelites. While the text itself is of little consequence, it raises some very basic questions. Are new parts of the Bible still coming to light? Don't we have God's complete revelation? How is this possible?
Such questions need a forthright answer, and that answer is to trust in God's provision. This trust embraces our faith in His plan for the universe, and in His sending of His son to our needy world. Therefore, it also certainly embraces our trust in His revelation. If we trust Him with our destiny, we can trust His provision of exactly what we need to know and receive from Him.
Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
I thought that the Vedic scriptures were far older than any existing Biblical texts. And the cunieform tablets from Sumer, which from my recollection, predate Abraham, are also quite a bit older. And then I also read, and am in agreement with, theories which lay out the evidence to support that the oldest Egyptian hieroglyphics predate any Biblical texts now extant.
Chinese civilization was very advanced 5 millenia ago too..... apparently, and so their 40+ unopened ancient royal tombs may well hold more texts that are older. In my reading, the most popular candidate for authorship of the Jewish Pentateuch, the oldest chapters in the Christian Bible, was the Royal Egyptian exile, Moses. The bits about his death and burial are clearly not his doing, though. I like David Rohl's contention that Akhnaten, Egypt's first monotheist Pharoah, who was exiled for being one, and whose name was stricken from monuments nationwide, could have lived at the same time as Moses, and therefore would probably be the same guy. Tutmoses interestingly translates into DavidMoses, t and d being interchangeable, and v and u also being so. Ramses, or Ra-Moses is another famous name that hints at Moses' possible Royal Egyptian heritage.
Originally posted by sinta_ilfirin
Originally posted by Liberal1984
According to the bible Mosses wrote the Ten Commandments as they were dictated to him by God himself somewhere on Mount Everest.
Just thought I'd let you know that it was Mount Sinai, not Mount Everest. They are in completely different parts of the world.
Don't have time to answer any of the other questions right now; but I thought I'd at least point out one portion of your question that is wrong.
Originally posted by Frosty
The Christian bible has been altered more than a few times in the few hundreds years after the first gospels were written. This was meant to withold information.
Originally posted by Jehosephat
The dead sea scrolls contained a manuscripts of the old testement that were 1000 years older then previosuly know copies and show that during that thousand years, and time leading up to the present they were acuratly translated.
Even the King James bible which was made in 1611 was made with not having all of the differant translations of the time and manuscripts.
Originally posted by shaunybaby
so you've actually read the dead sea scrolls and read the other copies of the bible and compared the ancient arabic versions, with the greek versions, with the hebrew versions, with the KJV (original) in the old english language (of which you would find it almost impossible to understand one sentence) and thus come to the conclusion that not much has changed in the text?
i doubt it very much if you've compared all of those versions let alone understand all of them.