Having hard time understanding

Discussion in 'Abrahamic Religions' started by FDRI, May 31, 2021.

  1. RJM Corbet

    RJM Corbet God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    6,112
    Likes Received:
    1,211
    The Isiaah scroll discovered at Qumran is identical to the Isiaah text in modern Bibles. Biblical scribes and monks were careful. It was a duty to God.
    I don't agree. It borrows a handful of Biblical names and incidents, mostly quite loosely, but ignores the vast bulk of it, especially the New Testament
     
  2. Cino

    Cino Big Love! (Atheist mystic) Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2018
    Messages:
    2,413
    Likes Received:
    1,092
    You are addressing a completely different point, which I'll be glad to have a conversation about.

    However, let's get this straightened out, first:

    If you trace back two posts, you will see that @FDRI accused the rabbis of changing the New Testament and the Quran. Do you agree with FDRI on this?
     
  3. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    442
    No .. of course not.
     
  4. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    442
    That's fine.

    The exact authors of 1QIsa [ Great Isaiah scroll ] are unknown, as is the exact date of writing. Pieces of the scroll have dated using both radiocarbon dating and palaeographic/scribal dating giving calibrated date ranges between 356 and 103 BCE and 150–100 BCE respectively. This seemingly fits with the theory that the scroll(s) was a product of the Essenes, a Jewish sect, first mentioned by Pliny the Elder in his Natural History, and later by Josephus and Philo Judaeus.
    - wiki -

    and..

    Isaiah was the 8th-century BC Israelite prophet after whom the Book of Isaiah is named.


    ..and that is just Isaiah..
     
  5. RJM Corbet

    RJM Corbet God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    6,112
    Likes Received:
    1,211
    Yes. I know that. But the book was unchanged in 2000 yrs until today. The scribes were faithful in what they copied. So too probably were the Qumran Essences faithful to the original material from which they copied. To deliberately alter the early writings would have been a great sin. Errors may have crept in. But it's not reasonable to take the parts of the Bible that suit my cause, and reject those that do not, on basis of scribal error or deliberate falsification. That's my point?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
  6. RJM Corbet

    RJM Corbet God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    6,112
    Likes Received:
    1,211
    The I Ching is 5000 years old. The Vedas are older. They are faithful to the original, to all practical purpose. Presumably also Zoroastrian writings, etc. Why should the Bible be different?

    The ancient accounts of Moses, Pharaoh, Noah, Lot, Job and Jonah etc, are accepted? What's good to take, and what to reject?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
  7. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    442
    You haven't addressed my objections in post #20

    ..which basically boils down to "we have no duty to the gentiles"..
    There are many passages in the OT that reinforce this point of view.

    I don't believe that Almighty God sent prophets just to Bani Israel and nobody else.
    I don't believe that we had to wait for Jesus [ or Muhammad ] until Almighty God cared about everybody.

    ..and we still have the issue about why the Jews even to this day reject the Messiah. [ apart from a few ]

    ..perhaps they didn't want one .. just like the Quraysh didn't want Muhammad, peace be with him.
    What is more important to most people, do you think?
    ..their prosperity, or their religion?

    When you have nothing to lose, the question no longer arises..
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
  8. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    419
    Do you hear G-d's still, small voice whispering love, or hate, when you read your religious text of choice?
     
  9. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    419
    I think you answered your own question.

    Prior to the 300-400 years of bondage in slavery building monuments in Egypt, one would be hard pressed to find instances of G-d ordering the Hebrews to kill anyone in the Bible. Abraham dug a string of water wells to avoid conflict with the indigenous people, he could have as easily dug in and defended any one of those wells (he might also have lost, if he was outnumbered). I seem to recall an instance where the ten brothers (sons of Jacob) tricked some tribe into getting circumcised because their leader wanted the sister of the ten brothers as a wife. While healing, the brothers snuck in and killed off that tribe - and G-d punished them for doing so, they did not act with His blessing.

    After the time in Egypt, they wandered in the desert for 40 years, and when that generation passed away (long story not germane to this specific discussion) G-d led the Hebrews into "the Promised Land." You, personally, could argue that G-d ordered the Hebrews to kill off all these people, but from the Hebrew perspective it was a war of survival - they were a people without a home returning to their ancestral home, the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to return the bones of Joseph to rest among his kin. Various arguments can be made for and against, just depends which side you are on. Done is done, G-d clearly had a hand in clearing the region for His Chosen People (Red Sea crossing, walls of Jericho as examples).

    Later, as the Hebrews got settled and established, they even made peace with some of the local tribes (who presented under false pretense, but the Hebrews were no stranger to this tactic either), something that G-d disapproved of, and later these peace compacts came back to haunt the Hebrews.

    By the time of the massacre of Bar Kochba and the dispersal of the remnant of Israel out of their homeland by the Romans, the Jews have not had the political power or force of themselves alone to wage offensive or Imperial war. They have through the centuries (generally speaking with exceptions) served instead to reinforce the militaries of their host Nations. And now, since 1948, Israel is limited to defensive wars.

    G-d did not order this, G-d ordered Cain banished for this, I think it is EASY to connect the dots, even on a surface level. Suggesting G-d told Cain to murder his half-brother is taking things WAY out of context.

    And if you look just 2-3 chapters later, Cain is NOT in Adam's geneology, Cain was not Adam's son. There is deeper teaching, not germane to this discussion. Bottom line is that "the people of the Book" are not related to Cain. After Jesus, "the Book" applies to any who seek and ask. But in the story that unfolds in Genesis and throughout the Old Testament, Cain only gets that brief, walk on appearance, he is not related to the people whose history is being told.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
  10. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,044
    Likes Received:
    2,060
    What do you mean by G!d's verses? What you (man) have copied, is data, accumulated by man, which was edited by man and translated by man, and compiled by man, and ordered by man, in words written by man....

    So if G!d had a hand (decisively controlling hand) in every step....would that not include your post AND our responses?
     
  11. wil

    wil UNeyeR1 Moderator

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    22,044
    Likes Received:
    2,060
    Ever had the opportunity to read Unity's Metaphysical Bible Dictionary?

    My bible study starts with who do we think wrote it, and why, and when and to whom, and with what agenda...

    These efforts often illumine the text.

    The other thing I like to work with is G!d is love, G!d =love and compassion and if I cant substitute those words in Scripture I need to look deeper.

    So now when love says thou shall not murder....eell DOH! That makes sense. But in Unity we say DOH! Of course we shouldn't, do we really need someone to tell us that? So we believe a lot of the bible has to do with thought. And in this case if your kid comes home with a picture from first grade and you complain that doesn't even look like a horse oh, you could do better than that and decide not to put it on the refrigerator I'll give them accolades you may have just committed the sin of murdering creativity, murdering the spirit to try things, murdering their artistic ability these are the sins we need to watch out for we are playing with delicate Minds, building a new human Thou shalt not murder that inspiration.

    So when it comes to that scripture above take a look at the metaphysical Bible dictionary, look up the traits of some of those tribes, what their names meant. And consider if there are traits in that tribe levels of consciousness that God wishes us to rid ourselves of.

    You may believe it or not believe it that is up to you. But I hope you enjoy the contemplation and maybe it'll help you understand the text.
     
  12. Cino

    Cino Big Love! (Atheist mystic) Admin

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2018
    Messages:
    2,413
    Likes Received:
    1,092
    Ok. I didn't expect you to, either, but thanks for spelling it out.

    I disagree. For one, lumping together these rather different offices is disingenuous: a hafiz is not a priest either, even if such a person is involved in preserving the Quran, right? A muezzin is not a priest, even if such a person reminds the faithful to pray (a duty which Christian priests also perform), right? A khatib is not a priest, even if such a person delivers a sermon. By your generalization, all of these functions in Islam would be priestly functions, but you would not use the term "priest" to describe them, I assume.

    Another aspect is a bit more sinister, namely that accusing "the Jews" of unfounded but no less than outrageous acts, has such a sordid history. Do you really want to be a part of perpetuating this?

    There are different manuscript traditions, variant readings, and so on. However, nothing like what @FDRI is propossing, namely the complete reversal of the meaning of entire passages, or the wanton interpolation of substantial passages of text, has been observed, as far as I know. I think what @RJM Corbet wrote about the attitude of a scribe (or student of an oral tradition) wanting to preserve sacred texts verbatim, is the more likely scenario than some cabal scheming to alter all extant copies of a text for sinister purposes.

    I have no Gods, and thus can't comment on their motivations.

    But doesn't that quest for the most recent revelation lead down a deep rabbit hole? There have been plenty of revelations after the Quran.

    Paraphrasing your words, why revert to the Quran, when you can have the much more current Sikh revelation, or the Baha'i or Mormon or Theosophical or Thelemite or Oomoto or Scientology or any number of recent revelations, which confirm the law and what is permissible and what is not?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
    Craz and juantoo3 like this.
  13. stranger

    stranger wolfwing, a feral angel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2013
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    308
    Don't worry about the misspelling, it seems many of us here are notorious misspillers (sorry, just a small pun to lighten the mood). Don't worry too much about being killed... I think I am actually killing myself (metaphorically speaking) and will likely need little or no help in doing so if current trends continue. I look at it as God ordering the killing, but my view is only of the allegorical. Actual historical evidence of how these commands might have been taken literally could exist, but that is above my pay grade and I'm afraid it would fall into the hands of actual scholars (which I am not, by a long shot). Whether or not history bears out atrocities committed in the name of the letter, I hold with the metaphorical interpretation.

    We've had some good scholars here at times. Thomas is one; we also once had Radarmark (Jane Q once requested educational information from him, and she was no dumb cookie herself). There was also the late great Miken, who filled his post here for only a short time (I suspect he accomplished his task, whatever it was, and has now receded into the background, but lives on in our memories -- not dead that I know of, just inactive : he "left"). What to do? We kiss the ring of the teacher and stumble forward as best we can.

    In my view we contain both Cain and Abel as the carnal and spiritual minds. Cain (the carnal) comes first but it is Abel (the spiritual) whose sacrifice is acceptable to God. Cain's sacrifice comes from the already accursed ground, Abel's sacrifice comes by way of symbolic death (shedding of blood). It's rather mind-bending. Abel himself becomes a sacrifice and Cain is the instrument of his death. His blood filters into the accursed earth, but a treasure is raised from that ground in the form of Seth. Who ordered the killing? All I have is that God sanctioned sacrifice and Cain was allowed to be the instrument of death in this case. So... I would have God "allowing" for a purpose (long game), while Satan (not aware of the bigger picture) playing the instrument of destruction (short game). I'm confusing myself a bit here, my mind has been awhirl with frenetic energy all morning.

    Enjoyed the video, very informative. Thanks for posting.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
    FDRI likes this.
  14. FDRI

    FDRI New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2021
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    2
  15. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    419
    Forgive me for intruding, but it is hard to pass the comment "the scroll(s) was a product of the Essenes" as presented, and the suggestion the Essenes "authored" it. The particular Isaiah scroll, having been found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, would rightly be attributed to having been *copied* by Essenic scribes, not that the Essenes *composed* the Book of Isaiah.
    dss.collections.imj.org.il/isaiah#7:11
    Isaiah Scroll - Wikipedia

    To wit: the Jewish Bible including Isaiah had already been translated into Koine Greek (Septuagint) at the same time or before the Essenic copy of Isaiah, from still earlier copies in Hebrew.
    Hebrew Old Testament versus the Greek Old Testament: Septuagint, explains the glossed over story! – The Muslim Times

    So Isaiah is older than Qumran. The value of the Qumran Isaiah Scroll is that it is the oldest mostly intact copy in Hebrew currently available to scholarship, and it does correspond closely with the Textus Receptus Isaiah copied at least 500 years later (100BC+/- vs 400AD+/-), and on which most modern Christian Bibles (Old + New Testaments) are based.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
    Cino and RJM Corbet like this.
  16. juantoo3

    juantoo3 ʎʇıɹoɥʇnɐ uoıʇsǝnb

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,120
    Likes Received:
    419
    OK, but not understanding traditional Jewish scribal attributions is no valid justification for presuming deliberate falsifications. Traditionally Moses is credited with having written Genesis, I doubt he was there to witness the event.

    For that matter, since Mohammed could not read or write, clearly he was incapable of scribing the Quran. Yet he is credited as having written it...no different than Moses "writing" the first 5 books of the Bible. Otherwise, if such justification is suitable, then the Quran is equally capable of having been altered, and considering the lack of corresponding ancient artifacts to validate...see where I'm going?
     
    Craz likes this.
  17. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    442
    Many people, or even most, might be sincere, but that doesn't mean they all are.
    Forget "the Jews" for a moment .. I'm not particularly picking on them.
    Imams in mosques in poor countries often have corrupt practices to secure their living.
    There is nothing unusual about it.

    It is very easy when revising a manuscript / scroll, for its meaning to change. Language is not static.
    The more ancient a script is, the more likely it is that it no longer has an identical meaning to the original revelation.

    That's simply not true. There is no new revelation like the Qur'an. The religions that you mention all have
    explanations about their origin .. such as Sikhism having roots in Hinduism and Islam, for example.

    I do not agree that one can claim that so-and-so is a new prophet, and we all follow different modern prophets.
    Islam is unique .. as is Christianity. That is because Jesus and Muhammad had a HUGE effect on the world.
    They really are "sons of G-d" :)
     
  18. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    442
    Nobody is saying that that the Great Isaiah scroll was composed by the Essenes..
     
  19. muhammad_isa

    muhammad_isa Save Our Souls

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2019
    Messages:
    2,511
    Likes Received:
    442
    One cannot compare the two.
    One needs to look at each case [ The possibility that the OT or Qur'an has changed ] separately.

    First and foremost, is the AGE of the scriptures. They are also of a different nature.
    One was revealed over a few years, and the other over 100's of years.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
  20. RJM Corbet

    RJM Corbet God Feeds the Ravens Admin

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2016
    Messages:
    6,112
    Likes Received:
    1,211
    But it is checked against other transcriptions. The people trusted with transcription were the worthiest of scholars. There wasn't just one source? The NT was transcribed by monks. A monk couldn't just write down what he wanted? It was his holy duty. Another monastery would catch the error. Nobody was taking liberties with divine revelation.

    Qumran shows that Isiaah remains true, almost to the dot, since it was transcribed by the Essenes from earlier documents, in spite of 2000 years of transmission since then. Why should other books differ?

    They could have just dropped out the awkward, inconvenient bits they didn't like?
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2021
    juantoo3 likes this.

Share This Page