GIANTS
- Thread starter samuel23
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
S
well this is long and copy pasted from one of the links I provided
Masoretic Text (MT)
The earliest copies of the Hebrew Bible were written without vowels or accents, as written Hebrew did not represent vowels until the Middle Ages. To preserve traditional spoken readings, starting in the fifth century C.E., a group of Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes carefully selected, copied, and annotated biblical scrolls, adding vowels and accents to the ancient Hebrew consonants in the process. Though the Masoretic scribes added these vowels to the ancient text long after it had been written, they were likely preserving traditional vocalizations that dated to much earlier times. The Masoretes produced several different systems of vocalization (writing in vowels) between 500 and 700 C.E.
Until the last few decades, most biblical scholars believed that the Masoretic biblical texts were, with some exceptions, the best witnesses to the most ancient Hebrew text of the Hebrew Bible (what Christians sometimes call the Old Testament).
Recent discoveries from the Dead Sea Scrolls, however, suggest that there were several different versions of many biblical books in the Second Temple period. Some of these versions differed only slightly from each other, but some versions were very different. After the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by the Romans in 70 C.E., Jewish groups dispersed across the ancient world, preserving these versions of the Hebrew Scriptures in their communities. One of these groups preserved the texts that would later become the Masoretic Text. Others are preserved in versions such as the Septuagint, the earliest Greek translation.
In the 10th century C.E., the ben Asher scribal family of Tiberias produced a manuscript of the Hebrew Bible that Maimonides, a famous Jewish scholar, declared to be the best known version of the sacred text. Soon after, the Tiberian Masoretic text and its particular version of vowels and annotations became the standard, authoritative text of the Hebrew Bible for rabbinic Judaism. The most important Masoretic medieval manuscripts are the Aleppo Codex, which dates to the 10th century C.E., and the Leningrad Codex, which dates to 1009 C.E.
The Masoretic Text is the version held as authoritative and used liturgically in most synagogues today. The Catholic Church since the time of Jerome (fourth century C.E.) and most Protestant Christian churches use this version as their source text for modern translations.
and
Old Greek (OG) or Septuagint
The earliest translation of the Hebrew Bible is the Old Greek (OG), the translation made in Alexandria, Egypt, for the use of the Greek-speaking Jewish community there. At first, just the Torah was translated, in the third century B.C.E.; the rest of the biblical books were translated later. The whole Hebrew Bible was likely translated into ancient Greek by the middle of the second century B.C.E.
Scholars think that many OG translators worked from early Hebrew versions of biblical books that were quite different from those versions that became the MT. As a result, some biblical books, such as Daniel, Jeremiah, and Job, are longer or shorter in the OG version of the Bible than they are in the MT.
We now know from discoveries in the Dead Sea region that these alternate Hebrew versions were circulated alongside the versions that became the MT. It is not clear that one Hebrew version was preferred over the others. In any event, the OG translators sometimes chose versions very similar to those later chosen for the MT version, and other times the translators chose versions that were very different.
At the time the Bible was translated into Greek, there was no MT or any official or authorized Bible in existence. There were merely multiple editions of many scrolls of various perceived levels of sacredness. In fact, it seems that there wasn’t an official project to translate “the Bible” into ancient Greek; instead, many different Greek-speaking Jews in various times and places simply translated their favorite books into ancient Greek. Some of these books were later chosen to be included in the Bible, and some were not. It was only many centuries later that people began to choose the best of these Greek translations and to copy them all together as if they were one book. So, it can be said that the Bible was translated in its entirety before there even was a Bible!
Eventually, early Christians adopted the OG as their preferred version of the Hebrew Bible. Most Jews in Greek-speaking lands returned to using the Hebrew version that would later become the MT. Christians then added bits and pieces to what had already been added by Jewish editors and translators, and the resulting text used in early Christian liturgy (and still used by Eastern Orthodox Churches) is called the Septuagint.
Christians then translated the Greek version into many other languages, such as Latin (the Old Latin version, completed by the third century C.E.), African languages such as Coptic (third century C.E.), Asian languages such as Armenian (circa fifth century C.E.), and Arabic (ninth century C.E.).
Masoretic Text (MT)
The earliest copies of the Hebrew Bible were written without vowels or accents, as written Hebrew did not represent vowels until the Middle Ages. To preserve traditional spoken readings, starting in the fifth century C.E., a group of Jewish scribes known as the Masoretes carefully selected, copied, and annotated biblical scrolls, adding vowels and accents to the ancient Hebrew consonants in the process. Though the Masoretic scribes added these vowels to the ancient text long after it had been written, they were likely preserving traditional vocalizations that dated to much earlier times. The Masoretes produced several different systems of vocalization (writing in vowels) between 500 and 700 C.E.
Until the last few decades, most biblical scholars believed that the Masoretic biblical texts were, with some exceptions, the best witnesses to the most ancient Hebrew text of the Hebrew Bible (what Christians sometimes call the Old Testament).
Recent discoveries from the Dead Sea Scrolls, however, suggest that there were several different versions of many biblical books in the Second Temple period. Some of these versions differed only slightly from each other, but some versions were very different. After the destruction of Jerusalem and its temple by the Romans in 70 C.E., Jewish groups dispersed across the ancient world, preserving these versions of the Hebrew Scriptures in their communities. One of these groups preserved the texts that would later become the Masoretic Text. Others are preserved in versions such as the Septuagint, the earliest Greek translation.
In the 10th century C.E., the ben Asher scribal family of Tiberias produced a manuscript of the Hebrew Bible that Maimonides, a famous Jewish scholar, declared to be the best known version of the sacred text. Soon after, the Tiberian Masoretic text and its particular version of vowels and annotations became the standard, authoritative text of the Hebrew Bible for rabbinic Judaism. The most important Masoretic medieval manuscripts are the Aleppo Codex, which dates to the 10th century C.E., and the Leningrad Codex, which dates to 1009 C.E.
The Masoretic Text is the version held as authoritative and used liturgically in most synagogues today. The Catholic Church since the time of Jerome (fourth century C.E.) and most Protestant Christian churches use this version as their source text for modern translations.
and
Old Greek (OG) or Septuagint
The earliest translation of the Hebrew Bible is the Old Greek (OG), the translation made in Alexandria, Egypt, for the use of the Greek-speaking Jewish community there. At first, just the Torah was translated, in the third century B.C.E.; the rest of the biblical books were translated later. The whole Hebrew Bible was likely translated into ancient Greek by the middle of the second century B.C.E.
Scholars think that many OG translators worked from early Hebrew versions of biblical books that were quite different from those versions that became the MT. As a result, some biblical books, such as Daniel, Jeremiah, and Job, are longer or shorter in the OG version of the Bible than they are in the MT.
We now know from discoveries in the Dead Sea region that these alternate Hebrew versions were circulated alongside the versions that became the MT. It is not clear that one Hebrew version was preferred over the others. In any event, the OG translators sometimes chose versions very similar to those later chosen for the MT version, and other times the translators chose versions that were very different.
At the time the Bible was translated into Greek, there was no MT or any official or authorized Bible in existence. There were merely multiple editions of many scrolls of various perceived levels of sacredness. In fact, it seems that there wasn’t an official project to translate “the Bible” into ancient Greek; instead, many different Greek-speaking Jews in various times and places simply translated their favorite books into ancient Greek. Some of these books were later chosen to be included in the Bible, and some were not. It was only many centuries later that people began to choose the best of these Greek translations and to copy them all together as if they were one book. So, it can be said that the Bible was translated in its entirety before there even was a Bible!
Eventually, early Christians adopted the OG as their preferred version of the Hebrew Bible. Most Jews in Greek-speaking lands returned to using the Hebrew version that would later become the MT. Christians then added bits and pieces to what had already been added by Jewish editors and translators, and the resulting text used in early Christian liturgy (and still used by Eastern Orthodox Churches) is called the Septuagint.
Christians then translated the Greek version into many other languages, such as Latin (the Old Latin version, completed by the third century C.E.), African languages such as Coptic (third century C.E.), Asian languages such as Armenian (circa fifth century C.E.), and Arabic (ninth century C.E.).
What ever people believe the simpla fact is Jesus was a virgin birth... The spirit planted there seed in the body (mary woman flesh) and the spirit was born in mary,,,NO SEX ............
There for it is not wrong to assume that Evil spirits hacked Gods ways to do the same... sought of like people will always try to hack something untill they have success like sony play station or... hacking genetics and d.n.a coding to create life...
Then heres the question why cant evil spirits try to hack being able to plant there seed.. which came from God
There for it is not wrong to assume that Evil spirits hacked Gods ways to do the same... sought of like people will always try to hack something untill they have success like sony play station or... hacking genetics and d.n.a coding to create life...
Then heres the question why cant evil spirits try to hack being able to plant there seed.. which came from God
S
Really? How much do you know about Scientology? Do you know what thetans are without running to google?
again, you are exhibiting an attitude that seeks to direct a lower ability to comprehend on those you disagree with
why do that?
So do you believe every word Jesus ever spoke is recorded? That would have to be so to make your statement true.
So, consider that Jesus spoke of many things we are not privy to.
There are many disturbing things in the Bible. Killing children is one of them. Wiping out creation with a flood is another.
Something went very badly wrong. Far more wrong then we have yet seen.
S
This stood out to me Magenta so I will address it
I am hardly saying anything simple. You appear to be attempting to dismiss what you either do not care to believe, saying it is disturbing to believe it, or, you think you have a better understanding on the morality of God then the rest of us. I'm just a bystander. I don't have any control over what happened before the flood or why God allowed whatever.
Why does He allow demonic people to attack children and rape and molest them? We could go on and on with the why's and just be chasing ourselves. It is what it is and apparently we don't have much say in the matter except for what we do with our own lives. And sometimes not even then.
You are being dismissive and I see that as a failing on your part, not my part and a six year old sees more with regards to demonic cartoons then you or I ever saw growing up.
I am hardly saying anything simple. You appear to be attempting to dismiss what you either do not care to believe, saying it is disturbing to believe it, or, you think you have a better understanding on the morality of God then the rest of us. I'm just a bystander. I don't have any control over what happened before the flood or why God allowed whatever.
Why does He allow demonic people to attack children and rape and molest them? We could go on and on with the why's and just be chasing ourselves. It is what it is and apparently we don't have much say in the matter except for what we do with our own lives. And sometimes not even then.
You are being dismissive and I see that as a failing on your part, not my part and a six year old sees more with regards to demonic cartoons then you or I ever saw growing up.
S
Another thing here Magenta
How can someone come away from reading that story and believe that no focus is on the sheer size of Goliath?
It seems no one in Saul's army would fight him because he was a giant. We'll just overlook that though because some may find it disturbing to think about.
Honestly!
How can someone come away from reading that story and believe that no focus is on the sheer size of Goliath?
It seems no one in Saul's army would fight him because he was a giant. We'll just overlook that though because some may find it disturbing to think about.
Honestly!
I think a five foot person could very well feel like a grasshopper compared to an almost seven foot person. I am five foot four, and a person one foot taller than me seems gigantic, even when a person only eight inches taller does not. Also, do not forget that it was ten of the twelve spies sent out who gave that report of them being like grasshoppers, and they could not therefore prevail against the giants, when they were sent to suss out the situation. All ten of them were struck dead with a plague for their slander, and all else were subjected to another forty years in the desert until all but the children (except for the two faithful scouts) were dead.
But the men who had gone up with him said, "We can't attack those people; they are stronger than we are." And they spread a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, "The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there were of great size. We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
— Numbers, 13:31-33
But the men who had gone up with him said, "We can't attack those people; they are stronger than we are." And they spread a bad report about the land they had explored. They said, "The land we explored devours those living in it. All the people we saw there were of great size. We saw the Nephilim there (the descendants of Anak come from the Nephilim). We seemed like grasshoppers in our own eyes, and we looked the same to them."
— Numbers, 13:31-33
samuel hi great op btw.. Its total sence to me thaat when God breathed life into adam he also breathed his seed of life.. spirit..The mind...How beautiful man..
Its also sence to me that he breathed his angels into life,, an endless flowing fountain of life... and d.n.a...
The angels in spirit are no difffrent to our spirits (souls) except maybe we might be slightly diffrent in appearance.. but just maybe there is some parts of our spiritual d.n.a that is the same as Gods angels....
There must be right because how else would Gods spirit be able to be born in mary..
The fact that mary can house Gods seed of spirit is key to understanding that SPIRIT CAN GIVE BIRTH TO SPIRIT...
Its also sence to me that he breathed his angels into life,, an endless flowing fountain of life... and d.n.a...
The angels in spirit are no difffrent to our spirits (souls) except maybe we might be slightly diffrent in appearance.. but just maybe there is some parts of our spiritual d.n.a that is the same as Gods angels....
There must be right because how else would Gods spirit be able to be born in mary..
The fact that mary can house Gods seed of spirit is key to understanding that SPIRIT CAN GIVE BIRTH TO SPIRIT...
Ther is talk that some fallen angels are not all bad they just rebelled against God because they wanted to help mankind out...
Ie they where told not to intervene and they did... what about theese angels are they bound over too ? and have they produced off spring that fight the dark forces... that we dont see...
Ie they where told not to intervene and they did... what about theese angels are they bound over too ? and have they produced off spring that fight the dark forces... that we dont see...
You are not just a bystander, you are participating in this conversation pretending your point of view is superior to others and then claiming other people have a problem simply because we disagree with some of the points you want to make, and attempt to explain why. I see you allow yourself to dismiss my point of view no problem, and the point of view of more learned outside sources as well, then claim it as failing of mine, while you give yourself full rein to dismiss anything I say that you disagree with, and not only that, but to assume you know what I saw growing up! Your attitude is less than stellar.
I have given alternate points of view that you reject, which you are free to do, just as you are free to reject the plain teaching of Scripture that each reproduces after its own kind, and that angels and humans are of different kinds.
Now you change to talking about fallen people and the evil they perpetrate on others??? Is there really no difference in your view between fallen angels and fallen people? The whole of the human race is fallen. It is a very basic premise of Scripture, and carried throughout the whole of Scripture, but I do not see that as equating us with fallen angels as if we were one and the same.
I have given alternate points of view that you reject, which you are free to do, just as you are free to reject the plain teaching of Scripture that each reproduces after its own kind, and that angels and humans are of different kinds.
Now you change to talking about fallen people and the evil they perpetrate on others??? Is there really no difference in your view between fallen angels and fallen people? The whole of the human race is fallen. It is a very basic premise of Scripture, and carried throughout the whole of Scripture, but I do not see that as equating us with fallen angels as if we were one and the same.
S
It seems the Septuagint is not the only thing that got translated into Greek form the originals lol!
Nice work deconstructing what I posted and building it in your version
You have a habit of throwing back at people what you said yourself
Your apparent indignation far exceeds anything I may have said.
Again, that is yours to deal with and I will leave you to it.
Nice work deconstructing what I posted and building it in your version
You have a habit of throwing back at people what you said yourself
Your apparent indignation far exceeds anything I may have said.
Again, that is yours to deal with and I will leave you to it.
S
Ther is talk that some fallen angels are not all bad they just rebelled against God because they wanted to help mankind out...
Ie they where told not to intervene and they did... what about theese angels are they bound over too ? and have they produced off spring that fight the dark forces... that we dont see...
Ie they where told not to intervene and they did... what about theese angels are they bound over too ? and have they produced off spring that fight the dark forces... that we dont see...
The Bible says nothing about that. Where have you come across this talk you speak of?
You keep adding to the mix and frankly, it gets more and more incredulous.
I think my time on this thread is probably done.
One wants to argue with everyone for no reason and as if the disagreement was not already well documented, things like the above are thrown in.
Last edited:
How could any say? We are not told how angels were created, but Scripture plainly says we are different. Jesus also says we will be like the angels following the resurrection, so we are not like them now, is certainly one legitimate way to interpret that.
As to our souls, man became a living soul when God breathed the breath of life into the physical earthly elements that comprised him, as per God's fashioning. You seem to be of the opinion that angels have a physicality as we do, but I do not see where that is articulated in Scripture. It seems more that angels are able to take human form at the command of God to fulfill some specific purpose for Him among specific human beings at a specific time.
Satan was not allowed to touch Job, and Job is considered the oldest Biblical text, which also makes plain that fallen angels cannot do anything without God's permission. I do not see it as a personal failing of mine to believe that fallen angels would need God's permission to rape women, nor do I see it as me believing I have a better understanding than others of the morality of God, as I was recently accused by another member. God is pretty clear on His standard of morality, and if others cannot see it, it it is their failing, not mine.
Nor can I equate such a thought as angels raping women with how fallen human beings treat each other. Even if angels raping humans was allowed, there is the problem of progeny being each after their own kind. So we are back to angels and humans being of different kinds, and not being able to procreate that way.
Once a person is born again and enters into a process of sanctification, such gross horrors as rape and murder etc, should be left behind. But that does illuminate the point that our souls can be redeemed and reconciled back to God through the propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ, despite our sins and trespasses, while the fallen angels are doomed to the lake of fire. There is a decided difference
As to our souls, man became a living soul when God breathed the breath of life into the physical earthly elements that comprised him, as per God's fashioning. You seem to be of the opinion that angels have a physicality as we do, but I do not see where that is articulated in Scripture. It seems more that angels are able to take human form at the command of God to fulfill some specific purpose for Him among specific human beings at a specific time.
Satan was not allowed to touch Job, and Job is considered the oldest Biblical text, which also makes plain that fallen angels cannot do anything without God's permission. I do not see it as a personal failing of mine to believe that fallen angels would need God's permission to rape women, nor do I see it as me believing I have a better understanding than others of the morality of God, as I was recently accused by another member. God is pretty clear on His standard of morality, and if others cannot see it, it it is their failing, not mine.
Nor can I equate such a thought as angels raping women with how fallen human beings treat each other. Even if angels raping humans was allowed, there is the problem of progeny being each after their own kind. So we are back to angels and humans being of different kinds, and not being able to procreate that way.
Once a person is born again and enters into a process of sanctification, such gross horrors as rape and murder etc, should be left behind. But that does illuminate the point that our souls can be redeemed and reconciled back to God through the propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ, despite our sins and trespasses, while the fallen angels are doomed to the lake of fire. There is a decided difference
man does not have a soul, man[ is] a “living soul”
The word nephesh literally means “life of animals,”
referring to physical life and not spirit
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground;
for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return
The word nephesh literally means “life of animals,”
referring to physical life and not spirit
In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground;
for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return