stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
There is 1 simple solution to that
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Updating the Genesis Creation Story
- Thread starter sealchan
- Start date
There is 1 simple solution to that
The Anointed
Well-Known Member
Whatever scripture that was relevant to that which Paul was preaching on at the time.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
so clearly something from the "Old Testament" at the very least. The New Testament Did not exist at that time.
Audie
Veteran Member
Just wondering, does that allow for some facts stated in
the bible to be only approximately true, or is all of it
held to be 100% correct?
Last edited:
Audie
Veteran Member
E
?
The Anointed
Well-Known Member
But not to the Jewish bible of those days, which bible was translated to Latin in the 4th century by Jerome and others of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine.
That bible states that Arpachshad was the father of Shelah, but the Septuagint, which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew bible as it was some two hundred years before Jesus and it reveals the truth, as revealed in Luke 3: 35-36, that Arpachshad was the Father of Cainam/Kainam, who was the father of Shelah. See the Septuagint Genesis 11: 12, and 1 chronicles 1: 18, the same two chapters in the Hebrew Bible and the Roman OT, which erroneously claim that Shelah is the son of Arpachshad.
Not only is Luke's statement that Shelah is in fact the son of Cainam, which is supported by the Greek Septuagint in Gen 11: 12, and 1Chron 1: 18, but also the Book of Jubilees, where it is written in Chapter 8: 1:
Last edited:
The Anointed
Well-Known Member
But not to the Jewish bible of those days, which bible was translated to Latin in the 4th century by Jerome and others of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine.
That bible states that Arpachshad was the father of Shelah, but the Septuagint, which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew bible as it was some two hundred years before Jesus and it reveals the truth, as revealed in Luke 3: 35-36, that Arpachshad was the Father of Cainam/Kainam, who was the father of Shelah. See the Septuagint Genesis 11: 12, and 1 chronicles 1: 18, the same two chapters in the Hebrew Bible and the Roman OT, which erroneously claim that Shelah is the son of Arpachshad.
Not only is Luke's statement that Shelah is in fact the son of Cainam, which is supported by the Greek Septuagint in Gen 11: 12, and 1Chron 1: 18, but also the Book of Jubilees, where it is written in Chapter 8: 1:
That bible states that Arpachshad was the father of Shelah, but the Septuagint, which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew bible as it was some two hundred years before Jesus and it reveals the truth, as revealed in Luke 3: 35-36, that Arpachshad was the Father of Cainam/Kainam, who was the father of Shelah. See the Septuagint Genesis 11: 12, and 1 chronicles 1: 18, the same two chapters in the Hebrew Bible and the Roman OT, which erroneously claim that Shelah is the son of Arpachshad.
Not only is Luke's statement that Shelah is in fact the son of Cainam, which is supported by the Greek Septuagint in Gen 11: 12, and 1Chron 1: 18, but also the Book of Jubilees, where it is written in Chapter 8: 1:
The Anointed
Well-Known Member
But not to the Jewish bible of those days, which bible was translated to Latin in the 4th century by Jerome and others of the Roman church of Emperor Constantine.
That bible states that Arpachshad was the father of Shelah, but the Septuagint, which was a Greek translation of the Hebrew bible as it was some two hundred years before Jesus and it reveals the truth, as revealed in Luke 3: 35-36, that Arpachshad was the Father of Cainam/Kainam, who was the father of Shelah. See the Septuagint Genesis 11: 12, and 1 chronicles 1: 18, the same two chapters in the Hebrew Bible and the Roman OT, which erroneously claim that Shelah is the son of Arpachshad.
Not only is Luke's statement that Shelah is in fact the son of Cainam, which is supported by the Greek Septuagint in Gen 11: 12, and 1Chron 1: 18, but also the Book of Jubilees, where it is written in Chapter 8: 1: In the twenty-ninth jubilee, in the first week, [1373 A.M.] in the beginning thereof Arpachshad took to himself a wife and her name was Rasu’eja, the daughter of Susan, the daughter of Elam, and she 2 bare him a son in the third year in this week, [1375 A.M.] and he called his name Kainam. And the son grew, and his father taught him writing, and he went to seek for himself a place where he might seize for 3 himself a city. And he found a writing which former (generations) had carved on the rock, and he read what was thereon, and he transcribed it and sinned owing to it; for it contained the teaching of the Watchers in accordance with which they used to observe the omens of the sun and moon and 4 stars in all the signs of heaven. And he wrote it down and said nothing regarding it; for he was 5 afraid to speak to Noah about it lest he should be angry with him on account of it. And in the
thirtieth jubilee, [1429 A.M.] in the second week, in the first year thereof, he took to himself a wife, and her name was Melka, the daughter of Madai, the son of Japheth, and in the fourth year [1432 A.M.] he begat a son, and 6 called his name Shelah; for he said: ’Truly I have been sent.’
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Since Genesis is a book of myths what hearing does this quibble have on the debate? Also the supposed lineages, two are given, of Jesus are almost certainly bogus.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
From my perspective I am thinking of the Jewish authors in exile in Babylonia in roughly 700 BC.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
I'm not a literalist. I think that people who wrote the Bible were human beings inspired by...
- Their understanding of God
- Their current culture's cosmology
- Their current culture's values
- Available mythic literature from their culture and neighboring cultures including Canaanite myth and other myths available to the conquering culture the Jews lived within
I do believe, however, that I have had an experience in which in my dialog with God I am being "led" to do this work of opening up the Bible (again) to its creative furtherance.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Que?
stvdv
Veteran Member: I Share (not Debate) my POV
Stop thinking will solve it. What Buddhist call "Vipassana" or "Witness the Mind". So "stop running after the mind and its fabrications".
sealchan
Well-Known Member
<bowing>
The Anointed
Well-Known Member
Sorry mate, I don't believe in myths, but I do believe the Bible.
The genealogy recorded in Matthew, is that of Joseph the son of Jacob, who married the already pregnant Mary, and did not consummate their union until she had given birth to her first born son, 'Jesus' the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli, as recorded in the genealogy of the man Jesus, which is found in Luke 3.
But you can be forgiven for not knowing that, as it is apparent that you know so very little of the truths that are found in the Holy Scriptures.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You just contradicted yourself. And no, the genealogies appear to be made up. There is no reason to assume that one was for Joseph and another for Mary. The contradictory nativity stories appear to have been concocted merely to get Jesus born in Jerusalem.