i have been watching evans videos for a while.
he keeps attacking the cult for following the bible.
women are to be subservient to men.
I agree with what Lloyd is doing but to be honest a theological outlook to the bible is damaging not only to one's sanity but to the bible itself. Sure Lloyd made a funny video on 1 Samuel 15 with his famous "Stab, Stab Stab, Death, Death Death." comments. The fact is that if you read the same story in the Iliad no one would complain, See how a theological view of the bible is damaging?
The best way to read the bible is open and ready for any arguments presented. (Which are often side by side)
from haaretz newspaper:.
what does a pig skeleton discovered in jerusalem say about first temple era jews?.
the argument here is that sanctions on eating pork were only introduced in the 2nd temple era.. so what does that tell you bout biblical accuracy.. .
There is an interesting issue here. Prof. Israel Finkelstein has noticed in his work the lack of pig bones in Israel.. (Northern Kingdom) But this article points down to Judah. I think you will find the Egyptians also didn't eat pigs. (I might be wrong about that I just remember reading it somewhere)
Judah in 700 BCE was actually a brand new kingdom after the fall of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Not only that they intermarried with the Assyrian rulers thus adapted their customs. (It is likely Hezekiah and Sennacherib were first cousins.)
As for the law against pork in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 13 I actually would date them to the second century BCE after the overthrow of the Seleucids whose diet rich in pork was offensive to the now reigning Hasmoneans. (According to 2 Maccabees chapter 6 a man was forced to eat pork by having it forced down his throat and being beaten to death.)
in genesis 18:27 it says:.
but abraham again responded: “please, here i have presumed to speak to jehovah, whereas i am dust and ashes.. but when referencing the interlinear translation of the old testament, it clearly uses the hebrew word “adonai” instead of “yahweh” in this verse.
was abraham referring to god as “lord” in this verse?.
viere
The Iliad was likely written in the 700s or 600s BCE however it deals with stories of a real war in the 1100s or 1200s BCE So the Iliad is based on earlier sources.
The same can be said for the book of Kings. The material in the acts of the kings of Judah or the acts of the kings of Israel are documents that possibly come from the exilic period and even those would be based on court records. (We know this because some of the Kings and events mentioned in those works line up with history)
Now coming to Ovid. You are right in that he wrote in the first century BCE. The story of Baucis and Philemon is contained in a large work called Metamorphoses. (Book VIII) https://david-drake.com/2013/metamorphoses-baucis-and-philemon/
The stories contained in Metamorphoses are far older than Ovid. Hesiod doesn't have the story in the 700s BCE so the original story could have spanned anywhere between 700-100BCE
I believe Genesis was written in the supplementary form in the 200s BCE however even ultra-conservative scholars that date the composition of Genesis in the Persian period are still well within that range, However minimalist dates like mine allow Greek influence.
in genesis 18:27 it says:.
but abraham again responded: “please, here i have presumed to speak to jehovah, whereas i am dust and ashes.. but when referencing the interlinear translation of the old testament, it clearly uses the hebrew word “adonai” instead of “yahweh” in this verse.
was abraham referring to god as “lord” in this verse?.
viere. I will explain that in detail in two days I'm on vacation until Tuesday lol..
in genesis 18:27 it says:.
but abraham again responded: “please, here i have presumed to speak to jehovah, whereas i am dust and ashes.. but when referencing the interlinear translation of the old testament, it clearly uses the hebrew word “adonai” instead of “yahweh” in this verse.
was abraham referring to god as “lord” in this verse?.
many jws (and others) are serious about their biblical studies, but don't ask the right questions.
in basic journalism one learns to ask the right questions which in my years here, i've never hear asked.. who, what, where, by what help, by whose help, why, how and when.
these are all basic questions when researching anything that you want to write an article or paper on what ever related subject.. who wrote/created the bible?.
Disillusioned JW
Read Plato's Laws:
1. Ideal society is 12 tribes
2. Set a foundation story of conquest or colonization
3. Gives laws as if they come from a divine being (Plato was a monotheist)
The creation story in Genesis 2 is paralleled in Symposium and Timaeus.
As for Iliad David's story is paralleled closely. Note the story in 1 Samuel 17 with Goliath.
The stories of Noah's drunkenness' and the three angels visiting abraham are taken right out of Baucis and Philemon.
As for Jephthah and his daughter and the closely related Abraham and Isaac binding story. These are taken from Agamemnon and Iphigeneia
many jws (and others) are serious about their biblical studies, but don't ask the right questions.
in basic journalism one learns to ask the right questions which in my years here, i've never hear asked.. who, what, where, by what help, by whose help, why, how and when.
these are all basic questions when researching anything that you want to write an article or paper on what ever related subject.. who wrote/created the bible?.
Overated I actually take offense at that as an atheist. I think the bible writers were using plato and other works etc and were learned priests not simple illiterate sheep herders. They weren't on drugs the stories they told are based on the same stories in Iliad etc. lol You wouldn't take offense at the bible if you saw the same material in greek or Babylonian works
many jws (and others) are serious about their biblical studies, but don't ask the right questions.
in basic journalism one learns to ask the right questions which in my years here, i've never hear asked.. who, what, where, by what help, by whose help, why, how and when.
these are all basic questions when researching anything that you want to write an article or paper on what ever related subject.. who wrote/created the bible?.
Let me answer some of these questions:
Who wrote/created the bible? Priests, rulers, philosophers with the OT being written in the 3rd and 2nd centuries BCE and the NT mostly in the second century CE
What is the bible? A vast collection of literature. whose canon is still undecided.
Why are there only 66 books in the bible (why not more or less)? The Catholics have more the Ethiopian Orthodox have alot more. The Jewish bibles have alot less.,
How were the scriptures used in Christ Jesus's time? I doubt he existed. However in the 30s most of the OT was written (I doubt Esther was until the 50s,60s) and according to Josephus there were four different Jewish religions ranging from the Pharisees who were Zoroastrian Jews, The Sadducees who were Hellenistic Jews and the Essenes who were Gnostic Jews. The fourth group was simply Jewish Terrorists attacking Romans on the streets (Zealots)
which english translations of the bible are you favorites, and why?
my favorites include the (english) revised version bible (of 1881-1885) and its apocrypha (of 1898), the american revised version bible (of 1898, it close to the american standard version), the american standard version bible (of 1901), the new american standard bible - updated edition, the new revised standard version bible with the apocrypha, the complete bible: an american translation (it includes the apocrypha), and the twentieth century new testament.
i also use others beside those.. they are my favorites because i consider them to be highly accurate, and also they are either very literal (but not so literal as to be hard to understand) or they use functional equivalence.
I have a few.
1. The NASB for literal reading.
2. The WEB for being copyright free, modern English, and using Yahweh.
3. The NWT 1984 with references for the references plus my familiarity with the text.
4. The JPS 1985 Study bible for the OT
5. The RSV often for the NT.
Edit: for the Apocrypha I use the Oxford Study Bible Revised English Edition.
And finally, I would hold the KJV for it's literary qualities.
first thing comes to mind is that this organization through its leaders are not witnessing the true and honest version of the gospel teachings of jesus christ .. they are subjectively teaching/preaching a tainted version made up by the top controlling men of the organization, which i'm sure is connected to the proliferation and distribution of literature which these men publish themselves.
.
when jesus said that no one knows of the time not even he, he didn't say a select few will know .. the other thing that bothers me is this organization promotes human ignorance on many levels, admonishing education or knowledge that mankind needs for its very survival... there are many other religious organizations that do this as well but the jws is just one of these organizations.
Childhood indoctrination (higher education too) Suppression of science, Shunning, Blolod etc.
Having watched all of Friday's convention I would add lies lies lies about science.
