Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Where do you come up with such nonsense? You truly don't know what you're talking about. I know of no prevalent system wherein mistakes were not punishable by death. The Masoretes were a relatively recent (7th century ce) phenomena and, while they were fastidious at copying the scrolls, the output was only as good as the input selected. And what was most instructive about the DDS was the pluriformity of textual variants discovered.
What is your favorite book/author in this field?
This must be rude week. No one can seem to say anything to anyone in a respectful manner. I get it from approx 20 years of being almost obsessed with things biblical. I have seen every debate available on the subject on u-tube or google. I have read transcripts of debates not found in video and even have a small library of audio debates.
Are you suggesting that in a society where a disobedient child, an unchaste women, or a dozen other relatively minor offenses were punishable by death they would have balked at killing someone for distorting the word of God. There was nothing more valuable to the Hebrews than their religion most of the time except when they periodically went chasing after their neibors women and Gods. I am not suggesting this was an official or wide spread practice but I have heard competent scholars say that it happened. No matter what level of punishment was most practiced there is every indication that copying the word of God and even oral traditions was serious buisness and never taken lightly. There were countless mechanisms in place to make absolutely sure that things were faithfully transmitted. They counted the number of words on a page forwards and in reverse. They counted letters the same way, they identified the middle word and counted both ways. The work was reviewed by many people and the same tests were done over and over. You have some very suprising claims (to me anyway) for a follower of Judaism. The NT I am far more familiar with and there is simply no argument for any large scale corruption of the texts. Even the critics like Ehrman agree that a modern bible has approx 5% error and 99% of those are known and indicated. Is the point you driving at that the text of the bible is unreliable?
:sad4:
This cpu erased my last post so you are getting the stripped down version. I like Dr White, Dr Brown, Bart Ehrman, etc... I only study debates because I like real time scrutiny from the opposite side. I also have read to a certain extent the early Fathers.
That's it ignore time.
Your antisemitic aside is noted.
Given your incessant anti-Judaic rants, I imagine you've heard all manner of things, and I have zero reason to respect your judgment of the sources as being competent scholars. But, again, feel free to substantiate any of this drivel if and when you have the ability to do so.
You appear more than a little awkward when you backpeddle.
There is every indication of a significant pluriformity of text and the very act of committing the oral tradition to writing was driven by alarm at the growing lack of fidelity in oral transmission. Even so, the Talmud is a veritable landmine of conflicting recollections about a wide variety of issue. Once again you prove yourself to be irresponsibly ignorant of the topic.
You are speaking of the Masoretes from the 7th century ce onward, i.e., after many, many centuries of oral and textual transmission. Once again, your dirth of knowledge is more than a little embarrassing.
It's called history. If you read more you might be less surprised.
I honestly dont know who you think you're fooling.
I spend a great deal of time defending Israel and I find them fascinating and honorable in a sea of dishonorable nations. I even considered fighting for them when I got out of the Navy. Either tone down your rediculous insinuations or this discussion is over. I will address the rest of this stuff after I consider your response to this one.
What the heck is wrong with you? Are you confusing me with someone else? I have been accused of being too pro-Israel at times and have accepted that with pride. I am not sure you are capable of a reasonable discussion.
I give up. You are no longer even using words.
Yes 3 times cover to cover plus, yes and even have his debate transcipts and even capitalise his name most of the time (I kid), I am an amateur historian and specialise in military history with many hours of college credit in the subject. Currently reading Lee's Lieutenants by Freeman and the wars of the OT.
Depends on what you mean by Christian and sect, usually critics have no idea where to draw the lines and just arbitrarily choose where to do so based on whatever allows them to retain their preconceptions. You would need to clarify these issues before this statement would be meaningful.
I said I use some of Ehrman's figures I didn't say his word was law on all subjects. There was a high illiteracy rate among much of rural Israel. However in high commerce areas and in international trade and advanced professions, literacy was very high. Many including some disciples could speak Hebrew, Greek, and Latin to some extent. Luke was a doctor and historian, Paul was one of Israel's greatest experts on the law and was taught by Gamiliel, Mathew (Levi) was a tax collector, and Peter and another apostle were fisherman who managed a buisness. It is almost certain that these men were very literate. What does literacy rate have to do with anything anyway? It practically gurantees that no large scale renegade versions of the books in the bible were being put together. No matter what you claim the greatest expert on evidence in human history (Simon Greenleaf) and many other of histories great experts on law and evidence state that the information contained in the Gospels exceed every requirement of modern Jurice Prudence and is far more than necessary for faith. That is pretty convincing and explains why 1/3 plus of the human race considers the bible reliable.
Of course he was ... :biglaugh:
