God Recreated the Earth 6,000 Years Ago!

[BilliardsBall]

Again, no where in the New Testament, does it mention that there are 66 books.

And Jesus make no mention of which books were to be included in canon and which don't make the cut.

The early church fathers wrote about the books to include in the canon, from the 2nd century and onwards, but there were no final count until a lot later. And the list varied, depending on the fathers.

Revelation was nearly not included in the canonical book.

Matthew, Luke and Paul may quote from the OT, but not from the original Hebrew, but from Greek translation, the same translation that included the non-canonical apocrypha.

And Jude was clearly citing sources that were never in the Old Testament, like Enoch's prophecy and the dispute between Michael and devil over the body of Moses.

Why would Jude cite from non-canonical sources?

He did, because none of the NT authors knew of canonical books, and none of them have ever rejected them outright.

Why does everyone assume that the non-canonical sources were written BEFORE Jude? Because they read Jude quotes outside sources somewhere on Google, that's why.

Repeating the NT quotes OT passages many hundreds of times, and arguably a couple of verses MAY touch on apocrypha, yes. Of course, Paul quotes pagan prophets when he is illuminating the inferiority of the pagan, secular position!

And you are wrong about NT authors rejecting non-canonical writings. Paul wrote telling people "see the large letters with which I SIGN this work in my own hand" and the apostles warned people about all kinds of false teachings, false teachers, false Christs, etc.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

interesting how you so blatantly avoid answering.
No problem.
I was not really expecting any more of an answer from you than I am of URAVIP2ME

Haha.....what chutzpah.....your attack on me for asking those who claim life can come from non-life is simply extraordinarily irrational. Why would you even think of asking me to provide evidence for something I did not claim...get with it...

 

[McBell]

Haha.....what chutzpah.....yourr attack on me for asking those who challenged those who claim life can come from non-life is simply extraordinarily irrational. Why would you even think of asking me to provide evidence for something I did not claim...get with it...

Please explain how my asking two questions was an "attack" on you.
Or have you slipped so far over the deep end that you just lash out at everyone just in case?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Please explain how my asking two questions was an "attack" on you.
Or have you slipped so far over the deep end that you just lash out at everyone just in case?

Because instead of responding rationally to my posts, you are trying to turn everything around and instead insist I answer a question about something I have not raised on this thread...

So let me be clear where you stand..do you think life can come from non-life?

 

[metis]

Um, what? Their figures are often not based on their calculations. Do you agree or disagree that it takes six years of study to learn how to adjust mass spectrometry findings to account for variances in things like solar radiation?

The question remains, and making ad homs isn't answering the question. I'll take your silence for your assertion, if you prefer.

Solar radiation does not affect most forms of radioactive readings, mainly just C-14.

 

[McBell]

So let me be clear where you stand..do you think life can come from non-life?

I do not know.

 

[metis]

What might be the problem with allowing Hellenized sources as canon inside G_d's holy word? Double talk. Not canon means not G_d's holy writ.

First of all, I certainly do not accept your premise of the
Bible somehow being "God's word", as this is dangerously close to idolatry, namely making a physical object out as being divine.

Secondly, the Bible was written by people to people, so the sources used can have an effect on what basically gets believed by the readers. God did not write the Bible, and the question of divine inspiration is just that-- a question. Hellenization presented a problem to those that selected the canon since the Greek paradigm did not match the Hebrew one in various areas, and if you have any doubts about that, pick up a couple of them on-line and start reading.

The canon of the Tanakh was chosen from roughly 2000 sources, and your "N.T." from roughly 1000 sources. In both cases, selection of the canon was both painstaking and controversial with frequent disagreement.

 

[gnostic]

Why does everyone assume that the non-canonical sources were written BEFORE Jude? Because they read Jude quotes outside sources somewhere on Google, that's why.

Google? What do you mean by Google?

I didn't use Google as my sources for non-canonical texts.

With the (both) books of Enoch and Book of Jubilees, I have the older translations (as books) from R. H. Charles, and translations in Kindle format, with Enoch being translated by Dr A. Nyland.

I also have translations to the Dead Sea Scrolls (The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 7th edition), which include translations of 1 Enoch (as well as Book of Giants, which is part of 1 Enoch) from Aramaic (as well as smaller pieces found in Greek (cave 7, dated to 100 BCE) and Hebrew (cave 8, date unknown) in other caves). These are badly damaged scrolls, but the scrolls found in cave 4 of Qumran, has been dated to the 3rd century BCE, and were among the oldest scrolls found in this cave.

Fragments of Jubilees have been found in 5 different caves, all of them in Hebrew, though the one in cave 4, is also the oldest, and dated in the same (late 3rd) century as the Enoch/Book of Giants in that same cave.

So why in the 7 bleeding seas would I need Google?

These dates, clearly indicated that the Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew findings in the Qumran caves, that they were dated even before Jesus was born (very late 1st century BCE), let alone when the Book of Jude being composed in late 1st century CE.

Although complete texts to both Enoch and Jubilees can only be found in Ethiopic translations from the 15th and 16th century, the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls proved just how old these pseudepigrapha texts were. And they definitely predated Jesus and Jude's epistle.

Before the discovery of the Qumran, experts, scholars and historians have all assumed that the pseudepigrapha (including Enoch and Jubilees) were all originally written in Greek. Perhaps the Ethiopic translations did come from Greek translations. But evidences from Qumran showed that the Enoch was probably originally written in Aramaic, while Jubilees written in Hebrew, originally. The DSS have made many corrections to scholarly assumptions.

Your argument that I used Google, is just you attacking straw-man.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I do not know.

Fine.....then that's that...

 

[gnostic]

First of all, I certainly do not accept your premise of the
Bible somehow being "God's word", as this is dangerously close to idolatry, namely making a physical object out as being divine.

Secondly, the Bible was written by people to people, so the sources used can have an effect on what basically gets believed by the readers. God did not write the Bible, and the question of divine inspiration is just that-- a question. Hellenization presented a problem to those that selected the canon since the Greek paradigm did not match the Hebrew one in various areas, and if you have any doubts about that, pick up a couple of them on-line and start reading.

The canon of the Tanakh was chosen from roughly 2000 sources, and your "N.T." from roughly 1000 sources. In both cases, selection of the canon was both painstaking and controversial with frequent disagreement.

True, and even then, BilliardsBall is still ignoring the fact that despite these apocrypha as being called "non-canonical", the "official copy" of the bible from Roman Catholic (Vulgate) and Greek Orthodox (Septuagint), still haven't removed the selected non-canonical texts from their respective bibles.

Not all the apocrypha are found in the Vulgate and Septuagint, and none of the pseudepigrapha (Enoch and Jubilees) have been published with Vulgate and Septuagint, but there is no denying that Christian NT authors have quoted from both Enoch and Jubilees. That showed the authors to the NT weren't aware of any "non-canonical" issues.

And BilliardsBall have demonstrated, repeatedly, that his scholarship into the history of church literature is dismal. He thinks that by claiming and saying that the bible is "God's word" would solve the issue of authorship.

Only fanatics would make such claims.

I think it Jesus' fault, or at least the NT authors' faults, for bringing up the "Holy Spirit" in the first place. The whole Holy Spirit train have derailed some Christians' rationality. Once they believed that the Holy Spirit or God being the true author of the gospels and epistles, they think these works (gospels and epistles) are infallible.

No, metis. Some Christians, like BilliardsBall, have already fallen into the "idolatry" trap.

 

[outhouse]

Paul wrote telling people "see the large letters with which I SIGN this work in my own hand"

Funny since only 7 of that communities epistles are even attributed to Pauls community.

The others we know are not his.


You need to look up the definition of credibility, because the bible is not scientifically or historically credible.

 

[outhouse]

So let me be clear where you stand..do you think life can come from non-life?

Well god is not life, and you claim it came from him SO where does that leave you now ????



Life evolved from chemistry. And since the bible got every single aspect wrong on our origins, I leave abiogenesis to those who understand and accept knowledge.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Well god is not life, and you claim it came from him SO where does that leave you now ????

Life evolved from chemistry. And since the bible got every single aspect wrong on our origins, I leave abiogenesis to those who understand and accept knowledge.

First please quote the post you are referring to where I claimed it?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Life evolved from chemistry.

And while we wait for a response....concerning this part of your post to me.....where is your evidence that life can come from non-life in a chemical reaction?

 

[outhouse]

where is your evidence that life can come from non-life in a chemical reaction?

You are all the evidence I need. We evolved from the ocean.

You are a salt water bag that converts food energy into physical energy. All life is water based.

And it is in the ocean where life developed.

Its just nature, life has quite a bit of chemistry tied to it.


So either accept knowledge, OR you can just not progress past ancient mens mythology.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You are all the evidence I need. We evolved from the ocean.

You are a salt water bag that converts food energy into physical energy. All life is water based.

And it is in the ocean where life developed.

Its just nature, life has quite a bit of chemistry tied to it.


So either accept knowledge, OR you can just not progress past ancient mens mythology.

I know all the ingredients were there for life forms to arise...and they did....but that doesn't tell us where the life force itself comes from...what is it? Science has all the known ingredients and the technologies to simulate the conditions...but they can not bring inorganic matter to life...so what is the missing ingredient? And at what level does it come into play....the subatomic/quantum, the atomic, the simple molecular, the cell?

 

[outhouse]

but that doesn't tell us where the life force itself comes from

No such thing as life "force". Making things up?

There is only life and non life. What force does cyanobacteria have?

 

[BilliardsBall]

First of all, I certainly do not accept your premise of the
Bible somehow being "God's word", as this is dangerously close to idolatry, namely making a physical object out as being divine.

Secondly, the Bible was written by people to people, so the sources used can have an effect on what basically gets believed by the readers. God did not write the Bible, and the question of divine inspiration is just that-- a question. Hellenization presented a problem to those that selected the canon since the Greek paradigm did not match the Hebrew one in various areas, and if you have any doubts about that, pick up a couple of them on-line and start reading.

The canon of the Tanakh was chosen from roughly 2000 sources, and your "N.T." from roughly 1000 sources. In both cases, selection of the canon was both painstaking and controversial with frequent disagreement.

Again, you are way off the OP but no.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Google? What do you mean by Google?

I didn't use Google as my sources for non-canonical texts.

With the (both) books of Enoch and Book of Jubilees, I have the older translations (as books) from R. H. Charles, and translations in Kindle format, with Enoch being translated by Dr A. Nyland.

I also have translations to the Dead Sea Scrolls (The Complete Dead Sea Scrolls in English, 7th edition), which include translations of 1 Enoch (as well as Book of Giants, which is part of 1 Enoch) from Aramaic (as well as smaller pieces found in Greek (cave 7, dated to 100 BCE) and Hebrew (cave 8, date unknown) in other caves). These are badly damaged scrolls, but the scrolls found in cave 4 of Qumran, has been dated to the 3rd century BCE, and were among the oldest scrolls found in this cave.

Fragments of Jubilees have been found in 5 different caves, all of them in Hebrew, though the one in cave 4, is also the oldest, and dated in the same (late 3rd) century as the Enoch/Book of Giants in that same cave.

So why in the 7 bleeding seas would I need Google?

These dates, clearly indicated that the Aramaic, Greek and Hebrew findings in the Qumran caves, that they were dated even before Jesus was born (very late 1st century BCE), let alone when the Book of Jude being composed in late 1st century CE.

Although complete texts to both Enoch and Jubilees can only be found in Ethiopic translations from the 15th and 16th century, the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls proved just how old these pseudepigrapha texts were. And they definitely predated Jesus and Jude's epistle.

Before the discovery of the Qumran, experts, scholars and historians have all assumed that the pseudepigrapha (including Enoch and Jubilees) were all originally written in Greek. Perhaps the Ethiopic translations did come from Greek translations. But evidences from Qumran showed that the Enoch was probably originally written in Aramaic, while Jubilees written in Hebrew, originally. The DSS have made many corrections to scholarly assumptions.

Your argument that I used Google, is just you attacking straw-man.

...And... what is your evidence that the non-canon sources were written before Jude and not after?

 

[BilliardsBall]

You are all the evidence I need. We evolved from the ocean.

You are a salt water bag that converts food energy into physical energy. All life is water based.

And it is in the ocean where life developed.

Its just nature, life has quite a bit of chemistry tied to it.


So either accept knowledge, OR you can just not progress past ancient mens mythology.

It is this sort of depiction of mankind as salt water bags which causes theists to invoke terrible stereotypes of atheists. Do salt water bags compose poetry, worship Jesus Christ, sculpt great works of art, make love, raise children?

You would go from salt water bag to saint were you to convert. Trust in what Jesus Christ did for you on the cross, dying a terrible death than rising for you and for me, and you will have eternal life!