bible says flood occurred approximately 4000 years ago.
that is about *200 generations of breeding to get to the population on earth now.
keep in mind that the population increase is geometric.
The Bible gives us the story of Noah as historical event,
Does it? Ever considered the story was meant as allegory? Teachers, even the Jesus of the Gospels used parables. The Rabbis have filled volumes with folk tales and colorful midrash. That there are two separate versions of the Noah story in Genesis would support that there were local adaptations of a popular story better than dismissing the evidence and insisting these stories are historical.
the bible is well known for its ellipsis* and its lack of explanatory statements of a term used.
there are exceptions in grammatical patterns, such as john exclusively using archon for ruler in his writings - which make the term self evident.sin - is defined"one" (unity) - is somewhat defined and also self evident from the context (no exceptions, every person part of that unity is listed in the context)an interesting thing to see would be how many terms are actually used and explained.
*the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues..
I have to apologize, whenever I post I sound like I'm doing a thesis. I hate typing so much, I rewrite a sentence multiple times and often the end product sound robotic or dogmatic. Not my intention.
the bible is well known for its ellipsis* and its lack of explanatory statements of a term used.
there are exceptions in grammatical patterns, such as john exclusively using archon for ruler in his writings - which make the term self evident.sin - is defined"one" (unity) - is somewhat defined and also self evident from the context (no exceptions, every person part of that unity is listed in the context)an interesting thing to see would be how many terms are actually used and explained.
*the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues..
Blotty... Sectarian usage of terminology forms part of the group identity. WT lingo has special sectarian nuances beyond the simple definition from a dictionary for example. Christianity as whole and divisions within had lingo that carried esoteric meaning unknown to a general audience. The Qumran sect, the Gnostics, the Cerinthians, the Paulinists, the Jamesians, each had colored usage. When the selection of writings, preserved to serve as a Cannon, was assimilated some of the language of the Paulinists for example became neutered and domesticated, stripped of sectarian meaning and catholicized.
while this topic might at first seem to come from left field, it has arisen in my mind when reading a number of recent threads.
this topic in full requires many hours of research to fully assimilate but i'm now only introducing the topic and encouraging further reading.
in short, by the end of the common era judaism included various heavenly figures that took on roles that, for all practical purposes, were those of god.
Riley...The question for me is, was this theological concept of two yhwhs intended? or the hapless result of pious editing and transmission? There is no doubt that this concept developed BCE and was fully formed in multiple expressions in late 2nd temple times, but did its first kernels found in texts that describe yhwh as speaking then switch to an angel, like Heiser features in his lectures, reveal a subtle dualism? I'm inclined to believe not. I suspect the repeated editing of these texts created, effectively, a new, unintended theology.
while this topic might at first seem to come from left field, it has arisen in my mind when reading a number of recent threads.
this topic in full requires many hours of research to fully assimilate but i'm now only introducing the topic and encouraging further reading.
in short, by the end of the common era judaism included various heavenly figures that took on roles that, for all practical purposes, were those of god.
OK. maybe in another thread we can discuss it.
while this topic might at first seem to come from left field, it has arisen in my mind when reading a number of recent threads.
this topic in full requires many hours of research to fully assimilate but i'm now only introducing the topic and encouraging further reading.
in short, by the end of the common era judaism included various heavenly figures that took on roles that, for all practical purposes, were those of god.
Well both Erhman and Carrier can get pretty excitable. What is a mute point to most people has become a passionate exchange akin to religious fervor. Well consider that Christianity presently holds both positions. Some texts elevate him to divinity while others depict him as incarnate from God's (right side as it were). This tension was a serious division in the early church. Eventually the Orthodoxy declared both as dogma and ignored the textual issues. If you want to understand the actual hypothesis and not that which Erhman likes to refute try : Amazon.com: The End of an Illusion: How Bart Ehrman's "Did Jesus Exist?" Has Laid the Case for an Historical Jesus to Rest eBook : Doherty, Earl: Books
while this topic might at first seem to come from left field, it has arisen in my mind when reading a number of recent threads.
this topic in full requires many hours of research to fully assimilate but i'm now only introducing the topic and encouraging further reading.
in short, by the end of the common era judaism included various heavenly figures that took on roles that, for all practical purposes, were those of god.
cofty...Erhman , while very willing to shed Christian dogma is still reluctant (to say the least) to consider the possibility that there was no Jesus. The question facing serious scholarship at this point is: Is the hypothesis that a man became deified really more probable than a theological concept, a purely visionary character becoming incarnated? Both have precedents/parallels. Effectively each proposed re-creation draws elements from the purely ethereal and tangible. In my mind the "historical Jesus" has become a secular dogma as unflaggable as a religious position.
while this topic might at first seem to come from left field, it has arisen in my mind when reading a number of recent threads.
this topic in full requires many hours of research to fully assimilate but i'm now only introducing the topic and encouraging further reading.
in short, by the end of the common era judaism included various heavenly figures that took on roles that, for all practical purposes, were those of god.
Sybylline oracles 345: And4 one shall come again from heaven, a man Preeminent, whose hands on fruitful tree By far the noblest of the Hebrews stretched, Who at one time did make the sun stand still 350 When he spoke with fair word and holy lips, No longer vex thy soul within thy breast By reason of the sword, rich child of God, Flower longed for by him only, goodly light And noble branch, a scion much beloved....
There are many expectations in the late 2nd temple period that contributed to the Jeus/Christ story. If this is of interest to you Phizzy. Or anyone else.
while this topic might at first seem to come from left field, it has arisen in my mind when reading a number of recent threads.
this topic in full requires many hours of research to fully assimilate but i'm now only introducing the topic and encouraging further reading.
in short, by the end of the common era judaism included various heavenly figures that took on roles that, for all practical purposes, were those of god.
2 Esdras 7:28 My Son Joshua[a] will be revealed along with those who are with him, and those who remain will rejoice for four hundred years.
29 “After these years, my Son the anointed one and all who have human breath will die. 30 The world will be turned back to primeval silence for seven days, as in the earliest beginnings so that no one is left alive.
early christian apocalyses
i thought it would be a good idea to put together into a single thread all the early 1st.
cent.
Recent posters may enjoy this thread. read carefully and enjoy.
