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.
originally posted by: coomba98
a reply to: Padawan Parazurvan Googlemiser
But Padawan he did give you a reference!
The Dead Sea Scrolls. This is a manuscript that you yourself said on many occasions that you hold higher than the Bible! Yet now its not good enough. Guess it doesnt fit with YOUR agenda.
Then you get mad and upset because you realize your contradictions but refuse to admit it making you even more angry.
Your one strange entertaining Padawan, Padawan.
Coomba98
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: coomba98
Yeah and for the record, I said my Bible used the (canonical) Dead Sea Scrolls in translation.
So obviously I didn't say anything negative about them. You assumed that we were talking about the extra-biblical scrolls but that was not the case.
I never had an issue with anything to do with the DSS period and never said anything of the sort. And nobody quoted anything from the extra-canonical scrolls either. I never had an issue with anything that wasn't just plain in error.
So while I would love to talk to someone who name calls like he or she is a junior high school girl or boy and assumes the most ridiculous and incorrect things to flex his (lack of) intellect I am going to have to refrain because foolishness is contagious.
originally posted by: Padawan Parazurvan Googlemiser
a reply to: coomba98
I am going to have to refrain because foolishness is contagious.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: coomba98
Yeah and for the record, I said my Bible used the (canonical) Dead Sea Scrolls in translation.
So obviously I didn't say anything negative about them. You assumed that we were talking about the extra-biblical scrolls but that was not the case.
I never had an issue with anything to do with the DSS period and never said anything of the sort. And nobody quoted anything from the extra-canonical scrolls either. I never had an issue with anything that wasn't just plain in error.
So while I would love to talk to someone who name calls like he or she is a junior high school girl or boy and assumes the most ridiculous and incorrect things to flex his (lack of) intellect I am going to have to refrain because foolishness is contagious.
The book of Exodus is canonical.
DSS 4Q22 is described as "paleoExodus" because it uses paleo-Hebrew characters (an ancient character set), not because it is not the book of Exodus.
DSS 4Q22 is Exodus.
DSS 4Q22 is canonical.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: coomba98
Yeah and for the record, I said my Bible used the (canonical) Dead Sea Scrolls in translation.
So obviously I didn't say anything negative about them. You assumed that we were talking about the extra-biblical scrolls but that was not the case.
I never had an issue with anything to do with the DSS period and never said anything of the sort. And nobody quoted anything from the extra-canonical scrolls either. I never had an issue with anything that wasn't just plain in error.
So while I would love to talk to someone who name calls like he or she is a junior high school girl or boy and assumes the most ridiculous and incorrect things to flex his (lack of) intellect I am going to have to refrain because foolishness is contagious.
The book of Exodus is canonical.
DSS 4Q22 is described as "paleoExodus" because it uses paleo-Hebrew characters (an ancient character set), not because it is not the book of Exodus.
DSS 4Q22 is Exodus.
DSS 4Q22 is canonical.
originally posted by: Parazurvan
While I have looked into the Hebrew book of Jasher which is mentioned in the Bible as the book of the Correct Record or Sephir ha-Yasher, nothing about the story is different except the Levite's are not the killers the people just killed each other, about 3000. It would seem the gold powder made them crazy in this version. Book of Jasher chapter 82
I also have a chapter from a book called Lost Secrets of the Ark that goes into detail on all 3 aspects of my OP, Moses, Egypt and monoatomic gold. Make of it what you will.
Lost Secrets of the Ark
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
While I have looked into the Hebrew book of Jasher which is mentioned in the Bible as the book of the Correct Record or Sephir ha-Yasher, nothing about the story is different except the Levite's are not the killers the people just killed each other, about 3000. It would seem the gold powder made them crazy in this version. Book of Jasher chapter 82
I also have a chapter from a book called Lost Secrets of the Ark that goes into detail on all 3 aspects of my OP, Moses, Egypt and monoatomic gold. Make of it what you will.
Lost Secrets of the Ark
According to 2nd Samuel 1:17-18 (from the Septuagint): "17 Then David sung this funereal Ode over Saul, and over Jonathan his son, and gave orders that the children of Juda should 18 learn it. Behold it is written in the book of Jasher" .
OK, so, where in the "book of Jasher" that you quote is that ode? It isn't there. That is because the real book of Jashur is lost and the one you referenced is well known to be a medieval fake.
originally posted by: Parazurvan
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
While I have looked into the Hebrew book of Jasher which is mentioned in the Bible as the book of the Correct Record or Sephir ha-Yasher, nothing about the story is different except the Levite's are not the killers the people just killed each other, about 3000. It would seem the gold powder made them crazy in this version. Book of Jasher chapter 82
I also have a chapter from a book called Lost Secrets of the Ark that goes into detail on all 3 aspects of my OP, Moses, Egypt and monoatomic gold. Make of it what you will.
Lost Secrets of the Ark
According to 2nd Samuel 1:17-18 (from the Septuagint): "17 Then David sung this funereal Ode over Saul, and over Jonathan his son, and gave orders that the children of Juda should 18 learn it. Behold it is written in the book of Jasher" .
OK, so, where in the "book of Jasher" that you quote is that ode? It isn't there. That is because the real book of Jashur is lost and the one you referenced is well known to be a medieval fake.
What ode are you talking about?
The book of Jasher is far from lost here is a link to the chapter I was referring too
Book of Jasher
Save yourself the effort I don't just make up stuff. The book of Jasher is easy to find and is the real book of Jasher.
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
That is not my problem. I don't believe it is a fake any more than any other so your opinion and no one else's makes a difference.
Don't fault me for checking out a book to help and get information. Plenty of Jews regard Jasher as legitimate and I don't need your approval to reference a book.
It didn't provide any extra information anyway so there is nothing to contest. Basically I just read a book, get over it.
It beats chasing someone for the specific purpose of catching them in error.
Find something positive to say, stop trying to catch me making a mistake. I know you're mad because you have been unable, but it is getting childish.
If you have nothing to add to the topic I'm done being audited by Agent Obsessive of the division of chronically mistaken know it alls.
originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Parazurvan
And since I am consuming all the possible ways to refute you, I'll also mention the perspective of the author of Exodus. If you recall, Moses (the attributed author) was absent during the manufacture of the idol.
The only accounts of the manufacture of the idol given to Moses, were obvious lies. The whole "we put it in the fire and it came out like that" is a fairly obvious lie.
Moses probably knew a little about the process of making a gilded idol, which is why he knew to burn it to oxide, grind it up and sicken the people with its salts, as punishment.
It is obvious that the only way for Moses to know of the method of manufacture of the idol was to have inferred it, or been told by another informant (who may have given unreliable testament) or to have been told it by God. Since Moses didn't say the knowledge came from God, he inferred it or it was hearsay.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
That is not my problem. I don't believe it is a fake any more than any other so your opinion and no one else's makes a difference.
Don't fault me for checking out a book to help and get information. Plenty of Jews regard Jasher as legitimate and I don't need your approval to reference a book.
It didn't provide any extra information anyway so there is nothing to contest. Basically I just read a book, get over it.
It beats chasing someone for the specific purpose of catching them in error.
Find something positive to say, stop trying to catch me making a mistake. I know you're mad because you have been unable, but it is getting childish.
If you have nothing to add to the topic I'm done being audited by Agent Obsessive of the division of chronically mistaken know it alls.
If that is the authentic book of Jasher then 2nd Samuel must be inauthentic. If 2nd Samuel is inauthentic then half of the proof that there ever was a historical book of Jasher, and therefore the justification for the naming of the fake, disappears with it.
originally posted by: Parazurvan
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
That is not my problem. I don't believe it is a fake any more than any other so your opinion and no one else's makes a difference.
Don't fault me for checking out a book to help and get information. Plenty of Jews regard Jasher as legitimate and I don't need your approval to reference a book.
It didn't provide any extra information anyway so there is nothing to contest. Basically I just read a book, get over it.
It beats chasing someone for the specific purpose of catching them in error.
Find something positive to say, stop trying to catch me making a mistake. I know you're mad because you have been unable, but it is getting childish.
If you have nothing to add to the topic I'm done being audited by Agent Obsessive of the division of chronically mistaken know it alls.
If that is the authentic book of Jasher then 2nd Samuel must be inauthentic. If 2nd Samuel is inauthentic then half of the proof that there ever was a historical book of Jasher, and therefore the justification for the naming of the fake, disappears with it.
Lastly there is no point in arguing about Jasher because it didn't have anything to do with the thread.
But for the record, that particular version has been authenticated by orthodox Rabbi's as a legitimate historical but non canonical book.
Other than that nobody knows. I am familiar with the different illegitimate versions and I supplied the correct one.
But it never did provide any information relevant to this thread rendering it mute and your argument irrelevant.
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
originally posted by: chr0naut
originally posted by: Parazurvan
a reply to: chr0naut
That is not my problem. I don't believe it is a fake any more than any other so your opinion and no one else's makes a difference.
Don't fault me for checking out a book to help and get information. Plenty of Jews regard Jasher as legitimate and I don't need your approval to reference a book.
It didn't provide any extra information anyway so there is nothing to contest. Basically I just read a book, get over it.
It beats chasing someone for the specific purpose of catching them in error.
Find something positive to say, stop trying to catch me making a mistake. I know you're mad because you have been unable, but it is getting childish.
If you have nothing to add to the topic I'm done being audited by Agent Obsessive of the division of chronically mistaken know it alls.
If that is the authentic book of Jasher then 2nd Samuel must be inauthentic. If 2nd Samuel is inauthentic then half of the proof that there ever was a historical book of Jasher, and therefore the justification for the naming of the fake, disappears with it.
Lastly there is no point in arguing about Jasher because it didn't have anything to do with the thread.
But for the record, that particular version has been authenticated by orthodox Rabbi's as a legitimate historical but non canonical book.
Other than that nobody knows. I am familiar with the different illegitimate versions and I supplied the correct one.
But it never did provide any information relevant to this thread rendering it mute and your argument irrelevant.
I think you mean 'moot', not 'mute'.