Biblical Tall Tales

I have highlighted this several times at EvC. In general, I find that many people do not understand what history is, they seem to think that history is what happened in the past, and it isn't. History is the written account of what is said to have happened in the past and shouldn't be confused with the past. The past has gone, the written word about the past is a construct of the human mind and is thus subject to the authors' prejudices and intentions.Much of the Bible is history, the fact that almost all of the so called 'historical books' have been shown to be false history is niether here nor there, it is still history.Oppressive regimes have produced history books to give themselves a more acceptable past, and these are history books, even though most of the events never happened. It is the same with the Bible. From Genesis through to Kings, most events never happened, but it is still history.Brian.

HI, Regarding the Tanakh, which one of these is the true version?Masoretic text, Smamritan Pentateuch, or the Septuagint.Brian.

I am afraid they are, and not just becuase the LXX contains more books, but this is the first time I have heard of anyone using this argument. We must remember that there were different versions of the LXX doing the rounds, and the Greek translations differed greatly, IOW the LXX existed in
different translations. The translations of the books of the OT differ in style, accuracy, and substance, indicating that there was no single original translation into Greek. Manuscripts found at Qumran among the Dead Sea Scrolls and other early manuscripts and quotations from the Septuagint in ancient writings all indicate that revisions were constantly being made to the Septuagint. In addition, Hebrew manuscripts found at Qumran differ from the standard Hebrew text (the Masoretic Text) but agree with some of the Greek renderings in the Septuagint. Thus the Septuagint often witnesses to a Hebrew manuscript tradition different from and earlier than the Masoretic Text and so is valuable in solving textual difficulties. Indeed, and the MT isn’t even written in the same language that the texts the LXX would have been based on.The DSS demonstrate the point very well. Well, the Jews were so disappointed in the quality of the translations that they abandoned the LXX around the middle of the 2nd c CE. I disagree, but it would take a new thread to discuss this, and I’m happy to do so if you are willing.But, as an example, here are a few differences between the LXX and the MT in regard to post flood characters.The first figure is the age at which they begat their first child, second column is their remaining years of life, and third column is total lifespan. Stats taken from Jeremey Hughes The Secrets of the Times: Myth and History in Biblical Chronology JSOT 66 Sheffield 1990.LXX:Jared 62 + 785 = 847
Methuselah 67 + 653 = 720
Lamech 53 + 600 = 653MT:Jared 162 + 800 = 962
Methuselah 187 + 782 = 969
Lamech 182 + 595 = 777Most of the other characters are fine, so why the differences? As I said, I disagree, and would be happy to discuss it on another thread if you have time. But, let me know because I don’t want to drag out all my books if you don’t have the time or inclination to discuss this, thanks. So, IYO, which text is authoritative and why? I believe the complete opposite!! One of the greatest urban myths of the 20th century is that the DSS harmonise perfectly (or almost) with the Bible of today, it just isn’t so.Brian.

Hi, Where does it say this?We must be getting dumber I mean all those cures for illnesses that scientists have came up with, space exploration, sanitation, agricultural advances, sure makes me wish I lived 4000 years ago! Since Adam wasnt created until day 6, that would be a neat trick, Also, Eve wasn;t created unitl way after Adam, so maybe you need to read Genesis again. But Adam was so dumb that he couldn't control his wife Anyway, the arguments yo present here have been done a million times and are really boring now, for example when you mention a 'water canopy' what evidence do you have for this?Brian.