The oldest version of the translations into Geéz is dated sometime between 5th and 7th century…that is not older than Sinaticus.
recent radiocarbon analysis; samples from Garima 2 proposed a date of c. 390–570, while counterpart dating of samples from Garima 1 proposed a date of c. 530–660.[8] The Garima Gospels is also thought to be the oldest surviving Geʽez manuscript.[9][10]
What i would agree with however, is that the Ethiopian bible comes from similar manuscripts that were used to write Sinaiticus and Vaticanus…for example, both used the Septuagint for Old Testament writings.
what that tells us is that we have the original translations in our modern bibles and the interpretations using normal language when reading the writings has not changed other than one must suppliement the additional words we have in English language compared with Aramaic or Hebrew for example.
However, that is not a dilemma because everyone knows that Ancient Hebrew relied on context of surrounding verses and other writers statements (usually the more recent New Testament Authors too btw) in the Bible in order to ensure we have the correct reading in English…so that isnt an issue as St Roymond wrongly continues to claim…I have no problem stating he is 100% wrong on that.
the oldest Christian religion is not Ethipian…it came out of Jerusalem in the first century.
The Apostle Peter led the first Christian church and it was Paul who took it to the gentiles and it was during that period it went down into northern Africa via Alexandria…so given that information, what you claim is a theological and historical impossibility!
You are essentially trying to claim that Christianity evolved independently…I have never ever seen any support for such a claim.
Secondly, I am interested in the next part of your post…that is something i would enjoy discussing on these forums as it is well worth the debate and i would like to learn more about your position here
EDIT…
may i also concede that when i consider the fundamentals of intelligence, such as comparisons between us in our basic thinking with that of certain animals that display similar tendencies, and then also update my focus that that of the language of “0’s and 1’s”, yes certainly there is what could be a dilemma for YEC there, however, i choose to accept that life has some God designed absolutes and as we go from the animal kingdom to humanity, God built upon those absolutes (scientifically in this example) Please note that i am not anti-science…i am very pro science and i love technology immensely and immerse myself in it…I am not a tech expert, however, as someone who has assembled his own desktop PCS rather than buy off the shelf, run webhosting servers and websites, i am far from a tech tragic. That should come as no surprise given i was trained with a Design and Technology Minor/Major in Education.
Which is what I believe I said. Hint: Hebrew Bible = OT You are aware that the Hebrew Bible canon wasn’t closed until sometime in the 2nd century AD.
But you were incorrect when you said
That would be dependent on your dogma.
If you impose the dogma of univocality, which isn’t in the Bible. Jesus and the apostles both reinterpreted what was written in the OT.
If they are all using mostly the same translations then the only way you get different, sometimes vastly different, denominations (estimated to be 45,000 to 47,300) is if they have different interpretations.
I don’t remember anyone saying anything remotely like this so it is just one of your strawman arguments.
A New Testament author repeating a myth that they believed to be true (based on their criteria of what “truth” is) doesn’t make the OT a true history book.
My dogma has no impact on the age of Sinaiticus…its an accepted fact by all biblical scholars…Christian or otherwise (include atheist ones such as Bart Erhman)
I am sorry to offend in my “being right all the time” (which i dont claim to be btw) but i really do do a lot of research on most of these blanket statements i make before making them…here is another supporting reference for the above statement i have made
You people really need to stop parroting bullshit and start researching before challenging me on these things because im not mindlessly inputing my own ideas here. I am one of the dumbest of all the individuals on these forums and yet, on theological things it seems that my lack of ability exposes some highly intelligent minds rather poor theology and even worse research skills.
Different interpretations does not mean accuracy…all it means is “different interpretations”. The fact is, we are supposed to do as instructed in the New Testament
Oh BTW, guess what scriptures the Bereans were using? It was old Testament and more than likely, the Greek Septuagint. So this means we have New Testament members checking the Old Testament sciptures to confirm the Gospel was true! Given a lot here claim there is no gospel in the Old Testament, how can the Bereans possibly confirm Pauls statements about Christs ministry and the Redemption Christ offered? I know that because of this, cross referencing both Old and New Testament writings is paramount in Christianity…the New Testament is confirmed by the Old (and vice versa)…its not doing away with it!
“Can” doesn’t mean “did”. You all too happily invoke miracles where the scripture doesn’t assert one.
Just because you can’t understand something doesn’t make it illogical.
You’re inventing contradictions based on a misunderstanding of science.
Your demand is based on a logical fallacy. There’s a difference between not being able to explain something (e.g. resurrection) and explaining that something isn’t possible because there’s no evidence for it (e.g. global flood). It’s also based on a rejection of the types of literature the scriptures consist of – the Gospels are biography, the opening of Genesis is mytho-theological.
I didn’t leave that out – it’s what I was talking about!
Science can’t say that – all science can say is no one had ever reliably observed it happening and documented it objectively.
A lot of your misconceptions would be addressed if you’d take a philosophy of science course because those clearly delineate what science can and cannot do. You’ve made science into an idol and ascribed it power it doesn’t have.
I have no interest in debating about translations – I’m interested in the actual text.
What about “You can’t take modern rules of a language you are familiar with and impose them onto an ancient language” is a lie?
Answer: nothing – it’s a valid statement about linguistics. Just because it doesn’t help your case doesn’t make it a lie.
Then you haven’t been paying attention.
Like . . . .
Selective memory?
Here we get to the core of your problem. Please define “mistake”.
Where does the scripture say that?
Answer: it doesn’t. You’re relying on a tradition of men.
Funny, because Paul says if you follow the law you have abandoned Christ.
And nowhere does the Holy Spirit tell us to follow the law.
Sinaiticus is the oldest, complete manuscript of the Bible as in both OT and NT. The LXX is a older manuscript of the OT. Do also accept all of the books contained in Sinaiticus including those not in the current canon?
I love this question! I long ago conceded that the early definition of inspiration, wherein some books were judged to be less inspired, must be acknowleged, and thus there is a ‘quasi-canon’ that should be taken seriously.
Historically this concept was most heavily derailed by Rome elevating the deuterocanon to full and equal status.
Adam, STOP IT! Stop calling people idiots.
Stop accusing people of lying. If they are, then report them.
Otherwise, you’re braking the law here and in Exodus.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.”-Colossians 4:6
At BioLogos, “gracious dialogue” means demonstrating the grace of Christ as we dialogue together about the tough issues of science and faith. Whatever your stance on evolution and Christian faith, we welcome your gracious, thoughtful contribution. The Church desperately needs to learn how to discuss these important issues with charity and humility. We hope it can begin here.
Participate with an aim to gain deeper understanding about orthodox Christian faith and/or mainstream science, and constructively explore the relationship between them. Users whose participation in discussions seems primarily focused on promoting unorthodox religious beliefs, idiosyncratic ideas about faith and/or science, or anti-religious sentiments will be asked to take their proselytizing efforts elsewhere.
Focus on discussing other people’s ideas, not on evaluating their character, faith, communication style, or perceived “tone.” Please avoid attributing beliefs, motivations, or attitudes to others.
Contribute thoughts that are relevant to the topic at hand, and avoid intentionally steering a conversation off-topic.
Assume legitimate Christian faith on the part of other people, unless they identify otherwise. The purpose of discussions here is not to judge the legitimacy or efficacy of anyone’s faith or lack of faith.
Be willing to learn from the perspectives and expertise of others and respect the diversity of your conversation partners. This includes being sensitive to differences in educational backgrounds, faith traditions, cultural contexts, and levels of English language fluency.
State your case and then respect other people’s right to agree or disagree. Avoid repeating the same ideas over and over because you have failed to convince everyone to accept your viewpoint.
With how common the flood myth is in Ancient Near Eastern mythology and surrounding areas, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a very large, but local flood that flooded the Mesopotamian basin. I am increasingly more of the opinion that the authors of Genesis took a common flood story and reinterpreted it through the lens of their view of Yahweh. In other words, the Genesis flood story is more of a polemic responding to the other flood stories than the detailed account of a historical flood. That is not to say that flood didn’t happen in some way, simply the the details of the flood are less important than the big picture meaning behind the flood.
The flood waters will continue to drain and while a storm surge may last for days, it would certainly not be for several months. A massive sustained surge wouldn’t be consistent with normal weather patterns, but is possible as a miraculous event. Also, while a surge of 15 cubits (or 22 ft) may be possible, 800 ft would be something else. Question is why would God use a miracle here just to have the Arc land in Urartu rather than elsewhere?
As our oldest ancestor, Adam (the first Adam) began the path of mankind leading to humanity. Abraham was on that path and I believe is a true representation of humanity and also a real historical person. Jesus is the “Last Adam” and the Image of God. All our common descendants throughout time that were on the path are part of mankind. God chose them, and by the simple fact that we are human, we have all been put on the path to make a choice. He chose us by us choosing Him. All we have to do is receive the faith of Abraham as a free gift, and follow Christ on the path in being made in His image.
Being made in God’s image is what sets us apart from other living souls. Dogs, cats and every other animal diverged off the path of mankind at various points. Cain was initially chosen, “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?” but by his own choice became a wild branch. Eve’s seed, the seed of man which is the line of Christ was chosen out of every generation. The other seed of the serpent, which is a “beast” followed after his own fleshly desires, his natural instinct. So Seth was “appointed another seed” in place of Abel. Through Enosh, “men began to call on the name of the Lord”; Enoch “walked with God”; Noah “found grace in the eyes of the Lord”; The Lord is “the God of Shem”; and Abraham “believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.”
I think the flooding of the Persian Gulf would fit the bill. It wiped out a lush river valley, but over many years not in 40 days. But it would have been quite memorable.
Getting any precise timescale for the initial flooding after breach is rather difficult, between hostile local governments and oil companies wanting to keep details of local geology a secret. Having a giant monsoon-type storm come through soon after initial breach could fit with a faster flood involving a lot of rain.
I don’t think this would be memorable because it took about 12,000 years to flood. This would hardly be noticeable in individual lifetimes. The sea level increase was 130 meters (426 ft) which translates to 0.42 inches per year.
One thing I didn’t mention earlier is the ‘120 year warning’. One way of interpreting this verse is that it is a warning 120 years prior to the flood rather than limiting lifespans to 120 years.
Gen 6:3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.”
I suggested that the beginning of the flood was 154 mya and if we apply the same math (120 x 365 x 1000 = 44 million years), the warning takes us back to 198 mya which lines up with another major extinction event, the End Triassic Extinction where Pangaea began to break up with a lot of volcanic activity.
Gen 6:4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
There were dinosaurs at that time as well and this verse is a representation of “survival of the fittest” running amok. God controls this through extinction events, and if we have learned a lesson, we can’t “take wives of all whom we choose”. He has given us dominion over the Earth, and in making us in His image we are its caretakers.
Only if it was a uniform rise over that time period. There is a paper I have seen (but can’t find now but did find some others) that provided some details.
For the flood to ‘transgress’ a kilometer is in the horizontal direction, not a vertical rise. With the very flat ground, this newly flooded area would be a few inches deep at most. This is more like a swamp condition.
The terrain is such that the flooding would be fairly uniform. At different times there may be more or less melting of glaciers contributing to sea level rise, but we are still talking about inches or less than an inch yearly.
For rapid reflooding there would need to be a breach of high ground in the surrounding terrain. The Dead Sea may be a future candidate for something like this but would require eustatic sea levels to rise about 49 m (160 ft) based on the terrain map. If sea levels continue to increase by about 0.25 inches per year this could happen in about 7,680 years.
With the Dead Sea being 1,360 ft below sea level, plus the additional 160 ft, thats a vertical increase of 1,520 ft of flooding in the event of a breach!
Which would make it impossible to live in the area so you have to pack up and move.
Why is rapid reflooding needed? A inch of salt water would make it impossible to stay where you are. If nothing else, just the lack of fresh water to drink would be a problem. Much less the problem of your dirt floor hut turning to a mud floor hut.
And given the time period we are talking about, moving just 1 km away would be like having to leave “your world” behind.
Umm… for it to be memorable and people to have died in it?
That’s a big stretch. I used to walk a mile (more than a km) to school and back everyday. But they wouldn’t live that close to the sea anyway. They would at least live up on a bank away from the tides. And as you said they need to live near fresh water.
