Reconstructing Q: Some Research Done

[Picaro]

The word Nah-chash doesn't mean serpent.
Next...

Satan was the shining one (Nachash). That was always my understanding.

Don't confuse Shah-Char (shining), as in the Shah-Char that provided light within Noach's ark with Nah-chash.
The creature, as all creatures, was named by Ah-dahm (dust) and it's inner essence was the ability to exude charm.
We can only surmise what this creature is today due to the descibed curse.

On the other hand, it's amazing how people can accept a Power that can create the universe we live in and yet have a breakdown because this Power created something other than a human with the ability to speak.

Even though atheists and agnostics with argue from today till forever that animals can speak to each other and will eventually master architecture.

Interesting. Is there a more accurate English translation of Genesis than the KJV?

The KJV is one of the worst translations ever written. Most of the newer ones are in fact based on better translations of older writings than the KJV was and closer to the originals written in Greek. The language usage in the KJV is not very good, at least to modern ears; the NASB itranslation much better and easier to read.

 

[alang1216]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

 

[Indeependent]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

 

[alang1216]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

 

[Indeependent]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

 

[alang1216]

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

So it may but the earliest dates I can find for the Torah are after 800 BCE. Much of the Bible takes place before that time.

If you believe God dictated the Torah why did he choose to plagiarize some of the stories?

The Mesopotamian work known as the Sargon Birth Legend offers the most striking parallels to the Exodus account of Moses’ birth. It relates the birth story of Sargon the Great, an Akkadian emperor who ruled a number of Sumerian city-states around 2300 BCE, around 800 years before Moses. The infant boy is born into great peril: His mother is a high priestess, and he is illegitimate. As a result of these circumstances, his mother decides to place him on a river in a reed basket. The boy is rescued and raised by a gardener named Akki. He lives as a modest gardener in Akki’s service until the goddess Ishtar takes an interest in him, and puts him on a path to kingship.​

 

[Indeependent]

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

So it may but the earliest dates I can find for the Torah are after 800 BCE. Much of the Bible takes place before that time.

If you believe God dictated the Torah why did he choose to plagiarize some of the stories?

The Mesopotamian work known as the Sargon Birth Legend offers the most striking parallels to the Exodus account of Moses’ birth. It relates the birth story of Sargon the Great, an Akkadian emperor who ruled a number of Sumerian city-states around 2300 BCE, around 800 years before Moses. The infant boy is born into great peril: His mother is a high priestess, and he is illegitimate. As a result of these circumstances, his mother decides to place him on a river in a reed basket. The boy is rescued and raised by a gardener named Akki. He lives as a modest gardener in Akki’s service until the goddess Ishtar takes an interest in him, and puts him on a path to kingship.​

Genesis Chapter 10.
They plagiarized the Torah.
I posteda dissertation on this last year.
I'll explain but I'm on the road at the moment.

 

[alang1216]

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

So it may but the earliest dates I can find for the Torah are after 800 BCE. Much of the Bible takes place before that time.

If you believe God dictated the Torah why did he choose to plagiarize some of the stories?

The Mesopotamian work known as the Sargon Birth Legend offers the most striking parallels to the Exodus account of Moses’ birth. It relates the birth story of Sargon the Great, an Akkadian emperor who ruled a number of Sumerian city-states around 2300 BCE, around 800 years before Moses. The infant boy is born into great peril: His mother is a high priestess, and he is illegitimate. As a result of these circumstances, his mother decides to place him on a river in a reed basket. The boy is rescued and raised by a gardener named Akki. He lives as a modest gardener in Akki’s service until the goddess Ishtar takes an interest in him, and puts him on a path to kingship.​

Genesis Chapter 10.
They plagiarized the Torah.
I posteda dissertation on this last year.
I'll explain but I'm on the road at the moment.

I hope to get a chance to see it.

 

[ChrisL]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

You mean a MAN told people that is what "God" said. There is no evidence of a God, never mind a talking one. All of these things were written by MEN and they are all ideas of MEN.

 

[ChrisL]

How would you react if a man came up to you and told you that a god told him to tell you to go study a book in the desert?

 

[Picaro]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

The fact is most of the 'books' were already accepted before 100 A.D.; they are closer to their origins than any other text surviving, outside of those that are currently found in caves and the like, and from Ireland to the Coptic countries, and east to India, they all pretty much overwhelmingly agree, outside of a few minor snivels, like the one over Hebrews, and Peter II, etc., which is a clear indication they weren't susceptible to fakes and forgeries, something that annoys the Gnostic faddists who follow the conspiracy theories, and the discredited Bauer school and Pagel's careerist nonsense. You can be confident you're getting accurate translations; the bad ones and the fake ones get caught pretty easily. They pass all the tests. Whether one is a believer or not is a separate and personal issue, not an historical one, nor is one going to find any major problems with the western NT's having 27 books versus the Eastern NT's having 22 for the most part either; the eastern churches had stricter standards, but still consider many of those they rejected as worthy of reading on their own, like the Shepherd Of Hermas, for instance; both 'sides' rejected it for its lack of historicity, but it remained popular reading, as did the Letter to the Laodecans and other writings.

 

[alang1216]

How would you react if a man came up to you and told you that a god told him to tell you to go study a book in the desert?

The list of messiahs is very impressive. Don't underestimate the gullibility of people who want to believe.

 

[Indeependent]

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

So it may but the earliest dates I can find for the Torah are after 800 BCE. Much of the Bible takes place before that time.

If you believe God dictated the Torah why did he choose to plagiarize some of the stories?

The Mesopotamian work known as the Sargon Birth Legend offers the most striking parallels to the Exodus account of Moses’ birth. It relates the birth story of Sargon the Great, an Akkadian emperor who ruled a number of Sumerian city-states around 2300 BCE, around 800 years before Moses. The infant boy is born into great peril: His mother is a high priestess, and he is illegitimate. As a result of these circumstances, his mother decides to place him on a river in a reed basket. The boy is rescued and raised by a gardener named Akki. He lives as a modest gardener in Akki’s service until the goddess Ishtar takes an interest in him, and puts him on a path to kingship.​

Genesis Chapter 10.
They plagiarized the Torah.
I posteda dissertation on this last year.
I'll explain but I'm on the road at the moment.

I hope to get a chance to see it.

I will take one of a multitude of paths.
God created man and, from that man, the perfect partner.
God gave the man a command (concerning the Tree).
God commanded both of them to have children and master existence.
The man gave his partner the command concerning the Tree but altered it.
The Nah-chash took advantage of this alteration and both the man and the woman breached this line item of the contract.
When confronted by God, Adam passes the buck by telling God that the perfect partner he was given is imperfect.

Imagine Adam telling this episode to Cain and Hevel.
Which version does Adam relate?
Adam's version which Adam told God?
Or the chain of actual facts?

I don't know...because Cain and Hevel eventually got into a fight, probably by fabricating their own versions of reality, and a murder was committed.

Noach's family leaves the Teh-vah and go their separate ways.
Everybody, including Noach, enjoys wine and sex.
So everybody starts their own media outlet.

Nothing is new under the sun.

 

[Indeependent]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

The fact is most of the 'books' were already accepted before 100 A.D.; they are closer to their origins than any other text surviving, outside of those that are currently found in caves and the like, and from Ireland to the Coptic countries, and east to India, they all pretty much overwhelmingly agree, outside of a few minor snivels, like the one over Hebrews, and Peter II, etc., which is a clear indication they weren't susceptible to fakes and forgeries, something that annoys the Gnostic faddists who follow the conspiracy theories, and the discredited Bauer school and Pagel's careerist nonsense. You can be confident you're getting accurate translations; the bad ones and the fake ones get caught pretty easily. They pass all the tests. Whether one is a believer or not is a separate and personal issue, not an historical one, nor is one going to find any major problems with the western NT's having 27 books versus the Eastern NT's having 22 for the most part either; the eastern churches had stricter standards, but still consider the five they rejected as worthy of reading on their own, like the Shepherd Of Hermas, for instance.

Nah!
They were not considered devine and nobody went out of their way to preserve them.
Preserving papyrus was a very expensive endeavor.

 

[Picaro]

How would you react if a man came up to you and told you that a god told him to tell you to go study a book in the desert?

The list of messiahs is very impressive. Don't underestimate the gullibility of people who want to believe.

The list of those who don't know what they're talking about is far longer.

 

[ChrisL]

The Jewish Bible/OT was most likely an oral tradition for millennia. I'd be very surprised if it didn't 'evolve' over that immense span of time. It certainly seems to have appropriated stories from other cultures.

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

So it may but the earliest dates I can find for the Torah are after 800 BCE. Much of the Bible takes place before that time.

If you believe God dictated the Torah why did he choose to plagiarize some of the stories?

The Mesopotamian work known as the Sargon Birth Legend offers the most striking parallels to the Exodus account of Moses’ birth. It relates the birth story of Sargon the Great, an Akkadian emperor who ruled a number of Sumerian city-states around 2300 BCE, around 800 years before Moses. The infant boy is born into great peril: His mother is a high priestess, and he is illegitimate. As a result of these circumstances, his mother decides to place him on a river in a reed basket. The boy is rescued and raised by a gardener named Akki. He lives as a modest gardener in Akki’s service until the goddess Ishtar takes an interest in him, and puts him on a path to kingship.​

Genesis Chapter 10.
They plagiarized the Torah.
I posteda dissertation on this last year.
I'll explain but I'm on the road at the moment.

I hope to get a chance to see it.

I will take one of a multitude of paths.
God created man and, from that man, the perfect partner.
God gave the man a command (concerning the Tree).
God commanded both of them to have children and master existence.
The man gave his partner the command concerning the Tree but altered it.
The Nah-chash took advantage of this alteration and both the man and the woman breached this line item of the contract.
When confronted by God, Adam passes the buck by telling God that the perfect partner he was given is imperfect.

Imagine Adam telling this episode to Cain and Hevel.
Which version does Adam relate?
Adam's version which Adam told God?
Or the chain of actual facts?

I don't know...because Cain and Hevel eventually got into a fight, probably by fabricating their own versions of reality, and a murder was committed.

Noach's family leaves the Teh-vah and go their separate ways.
Everybody, including Noach, enjoys wine and sex.
So everybody starts their own media outlet.

Nothing is new under the sun.

A "perfect" partner? Apparently not so perfect. Eve wanted knowledge, which made your god (s) very angry.

 

[ChrisL]

IOW, knowledge is bad. Believe what WE tell you to believe. IF not, you will go to hell with fire and brimstone. Suuuuurrrrrreeee.

 

[Indeependent]

The Torah itself disagrees with you. The Torah was written and studied in the desert by God's command.
It's all there for you to read and study.

So it may but the earliest dates I can find for the Torah are after 800 BCE. Much of the Bible takes place before that time.

If you believe God dictated the Torah why did he choose to plagiarize some of the stories?

The Mesopotamian work known as the Sargon Birth Legend offers the most striking parallels to the Exodus account of Moses’ birth. It relates the birth story of Sargon the Great, an Akkadian emperor who ruled a number of Sumerian city-states around 2300 BCE, around 800 years before Moses. The infant boy is born into great peril: His mother is a high priestess, and he is illegitimate. As a result of these circumstances, his mother decides to place him on a river in a reed basket. The boy is rescued and raised by a gardener named Akki. He lives as a modest gardener in Akki’s service until the goddess Ishtar takes an interest in him, and puts him on a path to kingship.​

Genesis Chapter 10.
They plagiarized the Torah.
I posteda dissertation on this last year.
I'll explain but I'm on the road at the moment.

I hope to get a chance to see it.

I will take one of a multitude of paths.
God created man and, from that man, the perfect partner.
God gave the man a command (concerning the Tree).
God commanded both of them to have children and master existence.
The man gave his partner the command concerning the Tree but altered it.
The Nah-chash took advantage of this alteration and both the man and the woman breached this line item of the contract.
When confronted by God, Adam passes the buck by telling God that the perfect partner he was given is imperfect.

Imagine Adam telling this episode to Cain and Hevel.
Which version does Adam relate?
Adam's version which Adam told God?
Or the chain of actual facts?

I don't know...because Cain and Hevel eventually got into a fight, probably by fabricating their own versions of reality, and a murder was committed.

Noach's family leaves the Teh-vah and go their separate ways.
Everybody, including Noach, enjoys wine and sex.
So everybody starts their own media outlet.

Nothing is new under the sun.

A "perfect" partner? Apparently not so perfect. Eve wanted knowledge, which made your god (s) very angry.

A rather poor observation.
God commands the first woman to master the universe.
God does not want humans to break the contract.
Instant Karma, so to speak, is never ever lasting.

 

[Picaro]

With so many copies of the NT available, much older than the newest Torah, why not a bunch of hair-brained idiotic conspiratard theories about it from Rosie and the other mental cases? They would have far more arguments from silence to work with there, obviously.

We have plenty of, mostly, fragments of the NT but none of them agree with any of the others. Mostly typos of course but also some serious changes and additions to tweak the theology. Another term for hair-brained idiotic conspiratard, in this case at least, is scholar.

The NT does not mandate studying the NT so accuracy is irrelevant.

The fact is most of the 'books' were already accepted before 100 A.D.; they are closer to their origins than any other text surviving, outside of those that are currently found in caves and the like, and from Ireland to the Coptic countries, and east to India, they all pretty much overwhelmingly agree, outside of a few minor snivels, like the one over Hebrews, and Peter II, etc., which is a clear indication they weren't susceptible to fakes and forgeries, something that annoys the Gnostic faddists who follow the conspiracy theories, and the discredited Bauer school and Pagel's careerist nonsense. You can be confident you're getting accurate translations; the bad ones and the fake ones get caught pretty easily. They pass all the tests. Whether one is a believer or not is a separate and personal issue, not an historical one, nor is one going to find any major problems with the western NT's having 27 books versus the Eastern NT's having 22 for the most part either; the eastern churches had stricter standards, but still consider the five they rejected as worthy of reading on their own, like the Shepherd Of Hermas, for instance.

Nah!
They were not considered devine and nobody went out of their way to preserve them.
Preserving papyrus was a very expensive endeavor.

They were preserved by recopying them as needed, yes; papyrus deteriorates rapidly by handling and traveling around. There are many methods historians use to establish provenances for texts. There was no 'canon', it wasn't thought necessary, until Marcion created his own, and they thought they needed to protect against his warped one, so they set about very early at the task, long before Nicea.

 

[Indeependent]

IOW, knowledge is bad. Believe what WE tell you to believe. IF not, you will go to hell with fire and brimstone. Suuuuurrrrrreeee.

Your feminism is constricting your thinking.
God didn't want either one of them to take the easy way out of any situation in life.

You can use a smartphone but I bet you can't design and build one.