Is the bible authoritive and truly inspired?

quote:

---

Of the forty men who wrote the bible, all of these were imperfect, subject to weaknesses and error. The 3 questions I would like to discuss is:

---

Before I address your questions, please list your 40 authors, the name of the people who compiled and redacted the writings, and which canon you are using in this discussion.Edited by purpledawn, : Extended request.

So you are going with traditional thought. Needless to say I lean towards the modern thought. See link for table. Old Testament Authors
New Testament Authors

quote:

---

the traditional view is that the canon of the Hebrew Scriptures was fixed by the end of the fifth century BCE by Nehamiah. There is also the word of Josephus in his work Against Apion where he referes to all of the above books as recognized by the Jewish religious body of his day. (note that none of the apocryphal books were accepted in jewish cannon)

---

So are you using the final Jewish canon for the OT or the Protestant canon for the OT?
If you are not accepting the Catholic canon for the OT, why not? Canons of the Hebrew BibleCan we agree that before the Jewish canon was finalized, Jesus and his followers used the Septuagint which included the following books?Pentateuch - Genesis; Exodus; Leviticus; Numbers; Deuteronomy
Histories - Joshua; Judges; Ruth; 1-4 Kingdoms; 1-2 Chronicles "things left over"; 1-2 Esdras; Esther (expanded); Judith; Tobit
Wisdom - Psalms (expanded); Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; Song of Songs; Job; Wisdom of Solomon; Sirach
Prophecies - The Twelve; Isaiah; Jeremiah; Baruch; Lamentations; Letter of Jeremiah; Ezekiel; Daniel (expanded); 1-2 Maccabees; 3 Maccabees (sometimes); 4 Maccabees (sometimes)

Well we are going to be at odds since you lean towards traditionally attributed authors and I lean towards the modern thought when it comes to authorship. When it comes to the OT I lean towards the documentary hypothesis as presented by Richard Elliott Friedman in his book entitled “Who Wrote The Bible?” When it comes to the NT, I lean towards the works of Edgar Goodspeed. This doesn’t mean that I won’t ever disagree with their position.It is interesting that Judaism and Christianity consider their canons closed. By whose authority do they decide that God will not provide anymore revelations? So far authority seems to be given my man to the books in the canon and not God.1. Was it possible for these imperfect men to produce a record that is actually Gods message?Whether man is perfect or imperfect is irrelevant. Do the writers in the Protestant Bible, known and unknown, present God’s message? (Since you started using the word message, please keep to the word message and don’t change to “word”.) One would have to understand what the writers were telling their respective audiences to even address this issue. Picking and choosing a line here and there isn’t fruitful.

quote:

---

The writer of Acts says that God used Angels to transmit his messages to humans. Acts 7:53. He never spoke personally to any man, but his Angels did.

---

That is not a true statement and not what the author of Acts said.God spoke to Moses: Exodus 3:14-E, 3:15-E, 4:4-E, 4:14-E, 4:19-J, 4:21-E, 4:30-E, 6:1-E, 6:2-P, 6:10-P, 6:26-R, 7:1-P, 7:8-P, 7:14-E, 7:19-P, 8:1-P, 8:5-E, 8:8-E, 8:16-E, 8:20-E, 9:1-E, 9:8-P, 9:13-E, 9:22-E, 10:1-E, 10:12-E, 10:21-E, 11:1-E, 11:9-R, 12:1-P, 12:43-P, 13:1-E, 14:1-P, 14:15-P, 14:26-P, 16:4-J, 16:11-P, 16:28-P, 17:14-E, 19:3-E, 19:9-E, 19:10-J, 20:22-E, 24:12-E, 25:1-P, 30:11-P, 30:17-P, 30:22-P, 30:34-P, 31:1-P, 31:12-P, 32:7-E, 32:9-E, 33:17-E, 34:1-E, 34:27-J, 40:1-P. More in Leviticus.God spoke to Aaron: Exodus 4:27-E, 6:26-R, 7:8-P, 8:8-E, 9:8-P, 12:1-P, 12:43-P.The author of Acts actually had Stephen say: . you who have received the law that was put into effect through angels but have not obeyed it. The reader should then look back at the story of Moses to see if the law was put into effect by angels. I don’t see that the story of Moses supports that statement. Does the unknown author of Acts have the authority to change the story?Please make sure you are quoting the Bible authors accurately.

quote:

---

David says that it Gods spirit was upon his tongue at 2Samuel 23:2. So the spirit of God was used to guide the writers.

---

That verse doesn’t support that God’s spirit guided all the writers of the Bible manuscripts. It only supports that the Spirit of the Lord spoke through David concerning what was recorded in 2 Samuel 23:3-4. Even the author of Samuel is unknown.

quote:

---

This is one reason why we can be sure that the bible writers were not merely writing for their own glory or prestige to obtain a following of disciples.

---

Your argument doesn’t support any such position.

quote:

---

Now while its true that some of the writings were written well after the events (gospels for example) Gods spirit was responsible for producing an accurate record. Jesus explained to his apostles that a helper would 'bring back to your minds all the things I told you" at John 14:26

​

So it certainly is possible that the messages God gave to imperfect men, were transmitted accurately through Gods own guidance.

---

Unfortunately, none of the authors in the NT were one of the 12 Disciples, which is who Jesus was talking to in John 14:26. It wasn’t an all encompassing statement. If you make it an all encompassing statement, you are changing the text.Nothing you’ve shown shows that the actual authors were being guided by God’s spirit, which is also not inspiration in the way that you are using it. You haven’t shown support that their messages were actually from God.2. How do we know they did not write of their own impulse, but were inspired by God as they claim?Where does Paul claim to be inspired by God? You aren’t supporting the idea that they didn’t write under their own impulse. They may have been inspired by the religious situation of their time, but did they actually speak for God? Inspiration is not dictation.

quote:

---

This is confirmed by the fact that the apostle Peter accepted Pauls writings as 'written in wisdom' and his letters were handed around to the congregations by Peter (see 2Pet 3:15-16)
If Peter had any doubts about Pauls inspiration, he would not have promoted those letters.

---

2 Peter (100-160CE) is not considered to be written by Peter. Peter supposedly died before the destruction of the temple. The unknown author promoted Paul’s letters. Not really the same as one of the original disciples giving Paul a stamp of approval.

quote:

---

A good example is the book of Job. large portions of that book deal with the wrong views expressed by Job and his 3 friends about God. When facts were misapplied, the bible writer (moses in this case) clearly points it out and shows that the words of the men were not from God.

---

Job is fiction or a parable and the writer is unknown. It wasn’t Moses. According to the introduction in my NIV study Bible it is dated somewhere between the reign of Solomon to the exile. A little late for Moses. The inspiration for this parable was supposedly the teaching that bad things only happened to people who sinned. The story was to show that bad things also happen to good people who don’t sin. It doesn’t show that the writing wasn’t by the writer’s own impulse.

quote:

---

Now to me, this is another evidence of divine inspiration because if this book was merely mans, and those men were trying to control people by their invention of a religion, then why leave such gaps that cannot be filled? This isnt something a human writer would deliberately do if they were trying to win converts because it would be defeating the purpose of drawing people and rather repel them. If you want evidence for how people are repelled from the bible just look at the discussion im having with DevilsAdvocate in the 'fundamentalist' thread lol.

---

You’re speculating and I’m not going to address generalities. Refer to a specific text concerning the issue. Don’t underestimate what a writer will do.

quote:

---

So Why would a divinely inspired book create these contentious accounts that seem more designed to repel people rather then draw them? Its how God tests our heart according to Hebrews 4:12

---

The writings were meant for us today. Maybe they didn’t repel people then. Please specify text.

quote:

---

So for these reasons, we can be sure that the writings were inspired by God and not merely written by men. Men would have buttered it up, and made themselves look like amazing holy vessels the same way the priest of today do. Yet they didnt. Even Moses was shown to be punished and refused entry to the promised land by God. If Moses was writing for himself there is no way in the world he would have humiliated himself in such a way. The evidence is that God moved/inspired what was recorded and this makes the bible authoritative in everything it says. And for this reason the laws and commands cannot be viewed as coming from men, but they should be viewed as coming from God just as the Mosaic law was. Even though moses was the one who wrote it and dictated it to the people, It was coming from God. The same with Jesus, the same with the Apostles and yes, even Paul.

---

You’re speculating again. No you can’t be sure. You have no idea what ancient writers would or wouldn’t do. Maybe these writings were buttered up for their time.You don’t seem to have anything substantial to support the idea that all the writers were guided by God directly and not their own initiative concerning the world around them.3. How do we know the writings we have today are the same as they were written by the original men who wrote it.

quote:

---

Thankfully, they still have many thousands of the original language manuscripts available today. (One of the oldest being the septuagaint from 300 BCE)

---

The Septuagint is a translation, not an original writing. We don’t know that the oldest versions available are originals. We have no idea what changes a manuscript went through before it became part of the canon. Also since many of the NT authors are unknown, we don’t know if it is by the original person who wrote it.The writings within the Bible have authority only because men have attached authority to the writings. You have shown that Christians are free to change the meanings and create new dogma and traditions. You’ve shown that man has the authority to change religion.

quote:

---

I go with the traditional Jewish books of their Torah cannon.

​

I do not agree with the catholic cannon because they included apocryphal books as part of their cannon. Those books contradict the bible on many counts which proves that they were not written under Gods direction.

---

What makes one canon more authoritative than the other?Since the Jews didn't accept Jesus as the Messiah, why accept their canon which was fixed about 200BCE (not closed)? It was closed about 200CE. That was over 150 years after the death of Jesus. I don't think Christians and Jews were best buds at that time.Since the Catholic Church is the origin of the Christian religion, why not accept their canon? It closed about 380CE. You accept their New Testament canon. They only got it half right? God wasn't paying attention?The Protestant Canon didn't come about until 1790CE. That's over 1400 years after the Catholic Canon and over 1500 years after the death of Jesus. Who gave them the authority to change a closed canon?What you're showing me is that the canon choices are not guided by God. If you can disagree with the choices for the canon and not consider yourself disagreeing with God, then the men determining the canons weren't guided by God.So if God didn't guide anyone to put these writings together in book form, then how can we trust that the writers were actually guided by God to write what they wrote?Don't you understand yet? When you pick and choose the pieces you want, change the meaning of sentences and make them contrary to what is plainly written, and change the point of a story you negate the idea that the words are from God.You an imperfect human have the audacity to change what you say the almighty God guided his followers to write. Who gave you the authority to pick and choose?

quote:

---

If no apocryphal books were written before 280bce then obviously none of them could have been on the original list of books selected for translation.

---

So we can't agree on what was in the Septuagint before the canon was closed. Bummer Canonical Books of the OT

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

How does that change what they wrote?

---

It doesn't change what was written.

quote:

---

that is a remarkable point that adds weight to the books being trully inspired.Think about it, if the books were created by men alone, there should be nothing stopping more men from adding new books? Yet the bible cannon seems to have a protective wall around it which has caused it to remain unchanged after thousands of years.

​

if God was able to inspire the books , then he's also able to protect them.

---

No it doosn't have a protective wall. The Protestants changed the canon in 1790.

quote:

---

what do you mean by the writers in the 'protestant bible'
Protestants use the same bible as everyone else...so excuse my ignorance here but im not sure what you mean???

---

Please remember our own comments. You don't accept the Catholic Canon. You accept the Protestant One or the Jewish OT.Your statement was untrue in Message 1. I showed scripture in Message 10 that supported my comment that your statement was untrue.

quote:

---

Paul wrote: 1 Timothy 3:16 " All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work."

---

Paul did not write 2 Timothy. I don't disagree that the writers were inspired. We assume religious writings are inspired by God or the religious situation of the time, but inspiration is not dictation. Even inspired works can be incorrect.Since the author is unknown, how do you know he is correct?

quote:

---

edgar goodspeed may not believe that Peter wrote Peter, but the writer says he is 'Simon Peter, a slave and apostle of Jesus Christ.(2Pet1:1) and says that this is 'the second letter I am writing you.' (2pet3:1) The christians who received the letter had no reason to doubt who it came from.

---

Pseudographia was common practice in those days. People wrote under the name of someone more important so the work would carry weight. Please don't tell me you don't understand why anyone would do that. Of course they believed it was from Paul. If they didn't the writer didn't do a good job and defeated the purpose of trying to write like Paul. The point was for people to believe it was from Paul.

quote:

---

Peter was an apostle of Christ.

---

But not the author of the letter. The author is unknown.

quote:

---

according to the oldest tradition, by both Jewish and early Christian scholars, Moses was the writer. Its written in almost identical style to the Pentateuch more then any other writing. Also, Moses came from the area where Job lived...i know you dont believe Job was a real person, but there is nothing in the story that makes Job an allegorical character.

---

What is your point???? I didn't say allegory, I said parable. You use Moses as an authority for what you're saying, but he wasn't the author. So what is your point concerning the topic?

quote:

---

although i havnt mentioned it here yet, but prophecies are another sure proof of Gods inspiration. Im not sure if you've studied the prophecies but i have and they provide outstanding evidence of inspiration.

---

The prophet should not be writing from inspiration. They should be writing from direct guidance from God. As I keep saying, inspiration is not dictation. They also don't cover all the writers in the Bible. I agree that prophets supposedly spoke for God.

quote:

---

I said original 'languages'

​

the Hebrew scriptures were translated by Jewish scholars into Greek for the Greek speaking Jews. That translation became known as the Septuagint and it is an original language because the Jews were Greek speaking. They translated the scriptures themselves to match a new mother tongue.

​

Jesus and his disciples were greek and hebrew speaking. This is why the Septuagint is a valuable translation because they could read and write in both languages so the Septuagint would have been accurately translated.

---

When I think of original language, I think of Hebrew for the OT.English is my "original language", but the Bibles I use are still translations.

quote:

---

the fact is, we have a bible that has been accurately preserved and we can compare any teaching that someone may want to introduce.

---

What does that have to do with the topic? We're talking about authority and inspiration.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

I really thought this discussion was about reality, not your own mythology.

quote:

---

Its a good question. A canon is merely a collection that is agreed to be inspired. Many books were written, but not all proved to be inspired and so the Jews did not include all books in their special collection of 'inspired' books.

---

I don't see that evidence of inspiration was part of the process. It was more about what the writings said.

quote:

---

The reason for that is because the basis for establishing the genuineness of the book related to the books fulfillment of prophecy and the consistency of its message with other inspired books.

​

How did the Pentateuch become accepted as an inspired book? the proclamations by God were witnessed by the people. They had supernatural phenomenon displayed to them to show that Moses had really come from God...the pronouncements of Moses came to be fulfilled for all to see. So the jews knew that the books written by Moses were authentic and they were accepted as such. To this day they are accepted as authentic.

​

Later writings also had to go thru the same process. They were not automatically accepted, but when the people saw how the fulfillments of what was written took place, then they accepted them as authentic and inspired.

​

Evidence of inspiration was the number one requirement for a book to be included in the cannon. The Jews were not silly, in fact they often berated and persecuted (& killed) their prophets because of their own skepticism to the proclamations. (Just look at what they did to Jesus) It wasnt until the words of the prophets were fulfilled without any doubt that they would accept their words.

---

Nothing I've read supports your explanation.

quote:

---

Jesus accepted the Jewish cannon, why shouldnt we?
Josesphus showed that the books that were accepted as inspired and holy were those written prior to 200 bce. The apocrypha came after adn they were not accepted.

---

Since you accept the Jewish Canon, then you accept the way the books are classified. Torah - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy
Prophets - Former Proophets: Joshua, Judges, 1-2 Samuel (1-2 Kings), 1-2 Kings (3-4 Kings)
Latter Prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Book of the Twelve
Writings - The Poetic Books: Psalms, Proverbs, Job
Five Megillot: Song of Songs, Ruth, Lamentations, Ecclesiastes, Esther
Other Books: Daniel, Ezra, Nehemiah, 1-2 ChroniclesSo you accept that Daniel is not a prophet.

quote:

---

I wouldnt call them the 'origin' of christianity, I would be more inclined to say that Christ was the origin of it. I know the Catholic Church claims to be the founder, but that is because they set 'a' canon at the Council of Carthage in 397 ce. But lets face it, christianity started much earlier with Jesus.
So its a bit of a rich claim to make that they are the founders of christianity.

---

Just stop. You didn't further the discussion at all. I didn't think I had to spell out every little detail for you. I assumed too much apparently.The followers of Jesus were considered members of a sect of Judaism, The Way. After the destruction of the temple in 70CE the Jewish leaders reorganized and expelled sects they deemed heretical. The religions then became separate. This new religion developed into the Catholic Religion. The Protestant Reformation didn't start until the 1500's.

quote:

---

its not that the protestants 'changed' the canon. its that they didnt accept the aprocrypha. Even Jerome, the translator of the roman catholic Latin Vulgate, didnt accept those books. He said all apocryphal books should be avoided because they contain much that is faulty and out of harmony with scripture.

​

So the protestants refused to accept books which appeared out of harmony with inspired writings. If the catholic church were being led by God, why couldnt they see the same thing?

---

But the Catholics are the ones who deemed the NT writings as inspired. If they got the deuterocanon wrong, why assume they got the NT right? God only inspired them half way?
It took over 1000 years for God to inspire someone to correct the error?
Should be consider Joseph Smith to have been inspired over 300 years later to change Christianity again?You've shown no consistent standard of acceptance other than whatever one wants to accept. Again, man decides what has authority and what doesn't.

quote:

---

no, man chose the canon but not all men were guided by God to do so. Just as Hitler was not being guided by God, even though he claimed to be.

---

But you can't clearly show why one is considered to be guided by God and another isn't.

quote:

---

the evidence is by the books fulfillment. If the things spoken of came to pass, then that was evidence that the book was inspired.

---

That might be your rationale for accepting what you do, but that doesn't seem to be the corporate criteria.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

I provide links for a reason. Please read them before you waste a post asking a question for which I've already provided the answer. Criteria for inclusion in the Jewish canon

quote:

---

Good point, why can't the the men who claim their canon is inspired be as wrong as Hitler. The only proof of inspiration is the claim in the canon itself.

---

Exactly!Peg has yet to explain why the Catholic Church was wrong about the OT books, but right about the NT books.God took a nap while they discussed the books in the deuterocanon? If a group of protestants can decide the deuterocanonicals are not inspired, why can't Biblical scholars today decide which authors are actually known and which ones aren't? The Protestants were inspired to dump the deuterocanonicals, but the scholars aren't inspired to discern authorship?Supposedly Luther also took out four New Testament books (Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation). He put them in an appendix. They were later returned to the NT by other Protestants.So Luther was partially inspired to take out the deuterocanon, but lost inspiration when it came to the four books of the NT. God then had to inspire later protestants to return the four books.The sacred books are chosen to fit the theology of the group making the decision. Man is the authority.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

My comment in Message 23 deals with the evidence the compilers of the Jewish Canon used to accept or reject books from their canon. Evidence of inspiration doesn't seem to be on the list of criteria I also provided in Message 23.

quote:

---

Jeremiah was not considered a truly inspired prophet until after the prophecies he wrote down had come true.

---

Your position that the prophetic books were only considered inspired or part of the canon because the prophecies had come true presents a problem for Christians since you said in Message 19 that Josesphus showed that the books that were accepted as inspired and holy were those written prior to 200 bce.That means that all prophecies were fulfilled by 200BCE. If they weren't fulfilled, then the writings would not have been accepted into the Jewish Canon according to you. So none of the prophecies in the Jewish Canon could have referred to Jesus.Any NT writers referring to the return of Jesus should not be included since those prophecies supposedly haven't been fulfilled and Luther was correct in removing Revelation, since Christians don't feel it has been fulfilled.You avoided addressing several things in Message 23.But the Catholics are the ones who deemed the NT writings as inspired. If they got the deuterocanon wrong, why assume they got the NT right? God only inspired them half way?
It took over 1000 years for God to inspire someone to correct the error?
Should be consider Joseph Smith to have been inspired over 300 years later to change Christianity again?You've shown no consistent standard of acceptance other than whatever one wants to accept. Again, man decides what has authority and what doesn't.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

In all these different branches, we have a general consensus about which books are inspired. One criterion was that it had to be written before AD 100 and by a generally recognized name, either an Apostle like Matthew, Peter, or John, someone writing at the dictation of an Apostle like Mark or possibly Luke, or an important Name like James the brother of Jesus or Paul. The other criterion was more practical. It had to be what worked.

---

Which means that evidence of inspiration wasn't part of the process. Who wrote the piece was important as well as what was written.If who wrote the book or letter was important for inclusion, then finding out that the author is unknown should exclude the book or letter.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

the traditional Jewish canon was accepted by Jesus and the early Christian congregation. It was only from those writings that the Jesus and the christians quoted thus confirming they accepted that cannon as inspired writings.

---

No it only shows they quoted from the religious writings of the time, not that they accepted them as inspired writings.

quote:

---

No. The writers wrote many prophecies. For instance Moses wrote about the messiah as the seed who would crush the serpents head. That prophecy has still not been fulfilled, yet the Pentateuch has been considered an inspired book for centuries.

---

Please provide information from outside of your own mind that the Pentateuch had been considered an inspired book for centuries. What time frame are you talking about?Concerning Moses, I assume you're talking about the A&E story. Please provide reference if not.That story wasn't written by Moses; and it wasn't a prophecy, Messianic or otherwise so it is irrelevant to your comments concerning prophecies.

quote:

---

So not all of the prophecies had to be fulfilled for the book to be considered inspired. In the case of Moses, the people had supernatural phenomenon which showed them Moses was being inspired.

---

You're backpedaling. In Message 19 you stated:

quote:

---

while thats true, at that time the prophecies regarding Jesus return had not come true, but it didnt matter because the christians had just seen Jesus raised from the dead. They saw many miracles which they themselves were performing as an evidence of Gods guarantee. This is why the congregations accepted the writings of the NT apostles and other writers...they had evidence of Gods backing. It wasnt just the words of men with no proof.

---

Again, you making up your own story. Please provide support for your theories.
The earliest Gospel writer had not just seen Jesus return from the dead. Paul didn't even see Jesus rise from the dead. Whoever supposedly saw the miracles probably didn't survive the destruction of Jerusalem in 70CE. The men who compiled the Catholic Canon were far removed from the original event.

quote:

---

firstly, the catholics did not need to create a new hebrew canon. The one used by the Jews and Jesus and the christians was well established and well used. If there was anything wrong with the Jewish hebrew canon, then they would not have used it.

​

the roman catholic church claims responsibility for cataloging the NT at their council late in 397ce, but thats not really true because there are a number of catalogs of the NT that date prior to that date and they agree exactly with our present canon, and some others omit only Revelation.
The four Gospels, Acts, and 12 of the apostle Pauls letters were universally accepted before the end of the 2nd century. The Muratorian Fragment is one of these early catalogs.

---

Please provide support. I've been courteous enough to provide links and verses so you don't have to find them yourself. I'd appreciate the same courtesy.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

Josephus clearly identified the writings of Moses as part of the canon in the 1st century, but before that time the 70 hebrew scholars from Alexandria who translated the Septuagint in the 2nd century BCE included Moses writings thus showing that in their time, the hebrew canon included the writings of Moses too.

---

What is the time frame? From when to when was the Pentateuch considered an inspired book? Again, please provide references that support your position. I have not disagreed that the Torah was part of the Jewish Canon.Keep on track please. You brought up fulfilled prophecies as a prerequisite for canonization. That is what you need to provide support for since according to Christians all prophecies had not been fulfilled by 200BCE. Stick to the writings deemed prophetic, not Moses.

quote:

---

Moses wrote in Genesis 3:15 " And I shall put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed. He will bruise you in the head and you will bruise him in the heel".

​

this is the bibles very first prophecy and its concerning the one who will come and destroy the serpant. The only one who can do that is the Messiah, so this is a messianic prophecy.
The book of Revelation identifies the original serpent as Satan the Devil, and we know that it is Satan who Jesus will fight and destroy.

---

No that is not a prophecy and no the snake is not Satan. The vision in Revelation does not support that position and before you get into that discussion, I suggest you read the thread "The Serpent of Genesis is not the Dragon of Revelations".The writer of Genesis 3 is the J writer and probably written before 722BCE.The author of Genesis referred to the city of Dan before it was the city of Dan. The writer of Judges doesn't support the idea that Moses was the author of Genesis. According to Judges 1, the Judges manuscript would have been written after the death of Joshua. This puts the writing after the death of Moses. This also demonstrates that Genesis was written after Laish became Dan, which is after the death of Moses. Moses is not the author.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

The pentateuch was accepted as an inspired word right from the time it was given to the nation after they left egypt. It was the foundation of the jewish religion. It provided the means of worship, set out the requirements, stipulated how the sacrifices were to be given and why ...Judaism itself rests on the books of the pentateuch

---

No they didn't or they wouldn't have lost them for them to be found later.

quote:

---

all other bible writers witness to the fact that the Pentateuch was Gods law given through the hand of Moses and all the requirments of Judaism was found in it. (Joshua 1:7 Judges 3:4 2Kings 18:6 Malachi 4:4)
Such men as David (1Ki 2:1-3), Daniel (9:11), Ezra (6:18), Nehemiah (8:1), Jesus (Mark 12:26 Luke 16:29 John 7:19), Luke 24:27), and John (1:17) make references to this work as that of Moses and handed to him by God himself. Jesus himself acknowledged that Moses was the writer (Mark 10:3-5 John 5:46-47)

---

These don't support the authorship of Genesis.

quote:

---

It was always accepted by the Jews as the inspired word of God. Genesis lists the events from the creation of man to the death of Jacob in Egypt in 1657 BCE

​

Exodus records the events to do with their deliverance and the inauguration of the Law Convenent and of the construction of the Tabernacle from 1657 to 1512 BCE

​

Leviticus give information about the Levitical priesthood and the requirements of worship

​

Numbers records the 40year wilderness trek down to 1473 BCE

​

and Deuteronomy provides Moses final instructions to the new generation of Isrealites where were about to cross over into the promised land.

​

The jews never questioned these books because they were with moses when he was writing them.

---

Show evidence that it was before Rabbinic Judaism became the norm. I've already given evidence that all Jews did not believe the laws of Moses were that old.

quote:

---

every book of the bible contains prophecy, not just some...they all do.

---

You're contradicting yourself again and your're stalling. In Message 42 you stated: So prophecies are sprinkled throughout the writings. Not everything is prophecy. .Please address your position concerning the Jewish Canon that fulfilled prophecies are a prerequisite for canonization. That is what you need to provide support for since according to Christians all prophecies had not been fulfilled by 200BCE.

quote:

---

What it does is show that the scribes who were making copies of the Pentacheut were keeping it up to date. Its similar today. As words in our language change, so do they change those words in newer translations.... im sure you've read a king james version of the bible for instance, The old english they used back then is not longer used by us so they make new versions in the language we understand.

---

Well that's absurd. Any scribe worth his weight in salt would annotate the change so that readers would know the original name of the town and the current name of the town.

quote:

---

I believe this is what the scribes may have been doing in the case of the city of Dan. Of course there are no original scriptures written by Moses own hand today, that would be impossible. But the scribes who made copies of Moses original did make these sorts of changes as the need arose.

---

Evidence please. I don't want your own brand of fiction.ABE: The authors of the first five books do not claim that Moses wrote those finished books not do they try to hide the fact that Moses didn't write the first five books. Later people attributed them to Moses and later people are the ones who do the gymnastics necessary to maintain Moses as the author.Another example: Deuteronomy 1:1. This perspective is from someone who had already crossed the Jordan, which Moses didn't.Edited by purpledawn, : ABE

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

You really don't want to address the issues you create with your fiction or show evidence to support your brand of fiction. Please show real world evidence that this statement is true. I've already shown that it isn't. Show evidence that the Jews never questioned these books before the common era. Stop being dense.Please address your position concerning the Jewish Canon that fulfilled prophecies are a prerequisite for canonization. That is what you need to provide support for since according to Christians all prophecies had not been fulfilled by 200BCE. Outlined in Message 43.

quote:

---

what makes you think they didnt make annotations?

​

While its true that the scribes or sopherim made changes in the text, their successors, the Masoretes, were able to restore the changes that the sopherim made, because the seraphim did make annotations.

---

Great, so the Masoretes corrected the updated text back to its original if there were changes. So it says Dan. That still means Moses is not the author of Genesis. Message 43

quote:

---

yes, and if you read his words carefully, then from his perspective Moses would have been beyond the Jordan and 'In The Wilderness'

​

'beyond the Jordon' obviously implying the area 'beyond' the jordon in the 'wilderness'

---

Repeating the words won't change the meaning. Beyond the Jordan means across the Jordan River. The perspective is from someone who had already crossed over the river. Moses had not crossed.You need to address the reality behind the making of the book.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

quote:

---

unless im missing something else???

---

Yes you are.Just like he didn't write the first verse in Deuteronomy, Moses didn't write Chapter 34. It's about his death. "To this day" means it was written at a later date just like the "beyond the Jordan". These were written after the people had crossed the river, after the people knew the new names of the territories.
Read the thread: Could Moses Have Written the First Five Books of the Bible?Read what the text is saying and not what tradition has told you. How can you claim a book is Holy and has authority when you don't even respect what it is actually saying? You follow the traditions of man, not what was written.You supposedly accept a canon as authoritative, but you don't know the criteria used to determine the manuscripts authenticity.You haven't shown that you even understand what the writers of the Bible are saying to their audiences, let alone who they were or whether they were truly inspired or had authority to write what they wrote.Pay attention to what we're saying and asking and find evidence from reality, not your imagination, that addresses those questions.Edited by purpledawn, : Added Link to old Moses thread.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz