In your opinion do you believe world is about 6000 years old

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

cv5 said:

Post #2

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Council of Jamnia

A very important article, that impinges on the question of the best manuscript to use for dating, was written by Siegfried H. Horn, Professor Emeritus of Archaeology at Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan. It appeared in 'Ministry' for November 1987, pages 4-8, and was entitled 'The Old Testament Text in Antiquity.' He pointed out that the biblical Dead Sea scroll material can be clearly divided into two groups. In the first group, there are 170 manuscripts from the 11 Qumran caves and fragments from Masada. Professor Horn states that 'Paleographical studies show that the earliest Qumran scrolls were produced in the third century BC, and that the latest was in the first half of the first century AD The biblical text material from Masada predates the capture of that mountain fortress in AD 73, so all of the Qumran and Masada manuscripts were produced before the end of the first century AD'' The second group of manuscripts comprise scrolls from the desert caves in the Wadi Murabba'at, the Nahal Hever, and the Nahal Se'elim. The records show that this group were hidden there shortly after 100 AD.

Importantly, these two groups of scrolls show two distinct text types. Those pre-dating 70 AD have a text that agrees with both the LXX and the OT quotations used by Josephus, Christ and the Apostles in the New Testament (NT). In fact, as Professor Horn states, 'I am quite sure that Matthew quoted from a Hebrew text that agreed with the Vorlage that the Greek translators [of the LXX] used.' These Hebrew and Greek texts existed and were quoted prior to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 AD. As Professor Horn also points out, that the first group of scrolls 'can be considered to represent the text type for the Hebrew Bible that was circulating during the ministry of Jesus and the apostles.' Indeed, in 1953, in the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 132, pp.15-26, Frank Cross showed that this first group of manuscripts agreed more with the LXX than with the MT.

By contrast, that second group of scrolls which post-date 100 AD unquestioningly have a text virtually identical with the Masoretic Text (MT) in our present OT. What happened to change the text type? Remember, the original Hebrew (Vorlage) version existed from the days of Ezra and Nehemiah and was extant down to at least 70 AD. By contrast, the Masoretic Hebrew can be traced directly to 100 AD. The dividing line between text types in the Dead Sea scrolls also occurs about 100 AD. What happened at that time?

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

cv5 said:

Post #3

The Action Taken By The Council of Jamnia

As Professor Horn points out, the answer is the Council of Jamnia that convened around 100 AD. He states that 'A unified text suddenly became the standard at the end of the first century and [the fact] that not one copy of a divergent text survived (except the Dead Sea scrolls that had already been hidden when Jamnia convened), indicate clearly that the Council of Jamnia must have taken actions in this matter.'

Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph was this Council's undisputed leader, though its Chairman was Yohannan ben Zakkai. In his later years, Akiba endorsed the rebellion of Bar Kokba against Rome, and supported him with his wealth, even endorsing him as the Messiah. Akiba was eventually captured and taken to Rome where he was executed in 137 AD at the age of 82.

The Council of Jamnia rejected the original Hebrew versions and the LXX based upon them. Professor Horn stated that '...the Jews rejected it (the pre-70 AD Hebrew version) and LXX since... it had become the Bible of the Christians.' Indeed, as textual expert Sir Frederick Kenyon writes (op. cit. p.56): 'In the second century of our Era, this repudiation took form in the production of a rival version.' Professor Horn, Sir Frederick Kenyon and other textual scholars all agree that this 'rival version' was the Masoretic Text (MT) which, with some variations, has been used as the basis of most OT translations since the end of the fourth century AD.

The Masoretic Text And The New Greek Versions

The Council of Jamnia therefore produced this unified text of the Old Testament and ensured that all divergent texts were destroyed. This unified version, the MT, underwent a two-fold process. First, a change from paleo-Hebrew script of the Vorlage to square 'modern' characters. Second, the vowels were added to the text about 900 AD on the basis of the traditions held by the Masoretes school. For this latter reason it became known as the Masoretic text. As stated above, Sir Frederick Kenyon (op. cit., p.49) concluded that this dual process was ''one considerable source of corruption.'

Sir Frederick then went on to point out that the standardised Masoretic Text spawned 3 Greek versions, namely that of Aquila, Theodotion and Symmachus. In this regard, Professor Horn also makes an interesting comment about events immediately following the Council of Jamnia. He states: Moreover, the fact that Aquila, one of Akiba's pupils, soon thereafter produced a new Greek translation that slavishly translated the Hebrew unified text for the use of the Diaspora Jews, gives credence to the idea that Akiba must have been a key influence in the standardization of the Hebrew text.'

The next act in the drama occurred around 200 AD when Origen produced his Hexapla or sixfold version of the Old Testament. This version contained the above 3 Greek versions in parallel, plus the MT in Hebrew, the MT in Greek, and then the LXX as revised by Origen. Note that, except for the LXX, all 5 other versions in Origen's Hexapla were simply variations on the Masoretic text. Furthermore, as Sir Frederick noted on p. 58, '...Origen's efforts were not directed towards the recovery of the original form of the Septuagint LXX, but at bringing it into harmony with the Masoretic Hebrew Text then current, and to do this he introduced alterations into it with utmost freedom.' This indeed is a serious matter, particularly as all the other versions were simply variations on the MT. Fortunately, in the year 617 AD, Bishop Paulus of Tella in Mesopotamia made a Syriac translation that detailed all Origen's alterations. As a consequence, the form of the original LXX has been preserved for us, and is today still in existence.

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

The Septuagint Greek (LXX)Translation

The second recension was the Septuagint Greek (LXX) which was translated from the Vorlage Text about 250 BC by 72 Jewish scholars in Alexandria (also known as the Alexandrian Septuagint, by way of distinction from other later translations also bearing the title of Septuagint, or LXX). This version became necessary because of the number of Greek-speaking Jews that were resident in Egypt under the favourable Ptolemaic Dynasty. It has been noted by most authorities that the LXX translation of the Vorlage Hexateuch (Genesis to Joshua) was particularly carefully done because of its revered position in the canon. The Eastern Christian Church still considers the LXX to be the authoritative OT text today.

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

Importantly, these two groups of scrolls show two distinct text types. Those pre-dating 70 AD have a text that agrees with both the LXX and the OT quotations used by Josephus, Christ and the Apostles in the New Testament (NT). In fact, as Professor Horn states, 'I am quite sure that Matthew quoted from a Hebrew text that agreed with the Vorlage that the Greek translators [of the LXX] used.' These Hebrew and Greek texts existed and were quoted prior to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 AD. As Professor Horn also points out, that the first group of scrolls 'can be considered to represent the text type for the Hebrew Bible that was circulating during the ministry of Jesus and the apostles.' Indeed, in 1953, in the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 132, pp.15-26, Frank Cross showed that this first group of manuscripts agreed more with the LXX than with the MT.

MichaelZ · Jun 21, 2023

I am convinced, from a purely scientific viewpoint, that life on earth as we see it all around us in human, plant, and animal form, could only come about by a creator. The science of dna is far too complicated to come about by chance! So in my mind there is a creator God! See a paper I wrote at https://www.drywallinfo.com/TheCreationPaper/thecreationpaper.html
From that point on, one needs to turn to the scriptures and their own faith. Over 300 prophesies concerning Jesus fulfilled. The miracles of Jesus. For me, if I believe these things, then why would I discount God speaking our world into existence?

Fundaamental · Jun 21, 2023

MichaelZ said:

I thought this thread was about this to.

But it's about the earth is close to 6000 years old and where nearing a 7th millennium,

Which some people believe that to be the return of the lord based on certain scriptures that don't absolutely say this will mark a date of a rapture.

In one passage we see a day is like a thousand to the lord.

And in another we see When a thousand years has passed it feals the same as a day.

But people choose to make that fit into there belief it only means one day a 24 hour period when actualy it could mean more to it than that. then proceed to say the rapture date must be soon.

So what your actually witnessing is no more than someone's longing for the return of the lord in one reguard but an opinion in another.

But The phrase speaking something into existence can also imply something else too.

JohnRH · Jun 21, 2023

MichaelZ said:

I am convinced, from a purely scientific viewpoint, that life on earth as we see it all around us in human, plant, and animal form, could only come about by a creator. The science of dna is far too complicated to come about by chance! So in my mind there is a creator God! See a paper I wrote at https://www.drywallinfo.com/TheCreationPaper/thecreationpaper.html
From that point on, one needs to turn to the scriptures and their own faith. Over 300 prophesies concerning Jesus fulfilled. The miracles of Jesus. For me, if I believe these things, then why would I discount God speaking our world into existence?

Amen. Us Bible believers have a one-word trump card - "miracle".

KJVMan · Jun 21, 2023

cv5 said:

Importantly, these two groups of scrolls show two distinct text types. Those pre-dating 70 AD have a text that agrees with both the LXX and the OT quotations used by Josephus, Christ and the Apostles in the New Testament (NT). In fact, as Professor Horn states, 'I am quite sure that Matthew quoted from a Hebrew text that agreed with the Vorlage that the Greek translators [of the LXX] used.' These Hebrew and Greek texts existed and were quoted prior to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus in 70 AD. As Professor Horn also points out, that the first group of scrolls 'can be considered to represent the text type for the Hebrew Bible that was circulating during the ministry of Jesus and the apostles.' Indeed, in 1953, in the Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research, No. 132, pp.15-26, Frank Cross showed that this first group of manuscripts agreed more with the LXX than with the MT.

I have questions about old texts, like codex Sinaiticus, Alexandrius and Vaticanus, but I will make a new post about it somewhere else on this forum.

KJVMan · Jun 21, 2023

cv5 said:

Can you please tell me your message in a simple way? I am a simple soul from a simple country. Still - I understand that you try to convey that there cannot be something the Father knows, and not the son. If that might be - how should my bibleverse be interpreted?

And what is the difference between your "Harpazo" and "The Second Coming"? I am sure the Judgement will come right after we can see Jesus in the sky?

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

KJVMan said:

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

KJVMan said:

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

KJVMan said:

The 70th week of Daniel = the time of Tribulation.
You need to understand that the 70th week pertains to Israel.....never the Church.

The Church has already been raptured by Revelation 4:1. So noted in 23 of 24 available manuscripts.

You also need to comprehend Jesus' statements (Matt 26:27,28, John 14:2 etc), and Paul's revelation as it relates to the Jewish wedding ritual. The Bride and Groom are enjoying a seven day aka seven-year honeymoon in heaven, (the Bride having been raptured) before the70th week of Daniel begins.

This seven-year honeymoon lasts from Revelation 6 through 18. The Church is not found anywhere in those chapters. Jesus next returns WITH His Bride in Rev 19.

Omegatime · Jun 21, 2023

KJVMan said:

I am one who believes what the Father knows the Son knows also, how could not the Word of God not know? IMO the Lord was teaching us where to look.

I see 3 ages and ministry of God.

Father--Old Testament
Son------33 years
Spirit-----Age we live in since Pentecost

So if I want to know what the Father knows I am going to look at the prophets in OT

cv5 · Jun 21, 2023

KJVMan said:

The New Covenant marriage contract. "Sealed" on Pentecost aka Feast of Weeks.
Which was the EXACT TIME (Feast of Weeks) that YHVH sealed the Old Covenant marriage contract on Mt. Sinai.

Mat 26:26
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.
Mat 26:27
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
Mat 26:28
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
Mat 26:29
But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Omegatime · Jun 21, 2023

Fundaamental said:

I like to share one of Irenaeus's important writings that answers a lot of questions for me.

2. Thus, then, in the day that they ate, in the same did they die, and became death's debtors, since it was one day of the creation. For it is said, There was made in the evening, and there was made in the morning, one day. Now in this same day that they ate, in that also did they die. But according to the cycle and progress of the days, after which one is termed first, another second, and another third, if anybody seeks diligently to learn upon what day out of the seven it was that Adam died, he will find it by examining the dispensation of the Lord. For by summing up in Himself the whole human race from the beginning to the end, He has also summed up its death. From this it is clear that the Lord suffered death, in obedience to His Father, upon that day on which Adam died while he disobeyed God. Now he died on the same day in which he ate. For God said, In that day on which you shall eat of it, you shall die by death. The Lord, therefore, recapitulating in Himself this day, underwent His sufferings upon the day preceding the Sabbath, that is, the sixth day of the creation, on which day man was created; thus granting him a second creation by means of His passion, which is that [creation] out of death. And there are some, again, who relegate the death of Adam to the thousandth year; for since a day of the Lord is as a thousand years, 2 Peter 3:8 he did not overstep the thousand years, but died within them, thus bearing out the sentence of his sin. Whether, therefore, with respect to disobedience, which is death; whether [we consider] that, on account of that, they were delivered over to death, and made debtors to it; whether with respect to [the fact that on] one and the same day on which they ate they also died (for it is one day of the creation); whether [we regard this point], that, with respect to this cycle of days, they died on the day in which they did also eat, that is, the day of the preparation, which is termed the pure supper, that is, the sixth day of the feast, which the Lord also exhibited when He suffered on that day; or whether [we reflect] that he (Adam) did not overstep the thousand years, but died within their limit — it follows that, in regard to all these significations, God is indeed true. For they died who tasted of the tree; and the serpent is proved a liar and a murderer, as the Lord said of him: For he is a murderer from the beginning, and the truth is not in him. John 8:44

The_Watchers_2017 · Jun 21, 2023

Fundaamental said:

TLV?
i love that Version but it isn't the Greek. It's the Greek, but trying to us the original Aramaic word the Greek would have translated from. it's a great concept and i like it, just not sure how accurate it is. i mean, we have words in the Gospels like [[Talitha, Eli Eli Sabachthani]] that are 100% Aramaic words the Greek had no words for so left the Aramaic.

The thinking is, if we have Aramaic words in Matthew, Mark, John, it's possible they wrote in Aramaic and translated into Greek later.

the great late Jerome SWEARS the original Gospel of Matthew was written 100% Hebrew. Even the Apostle John's Disciples, Papias, said this: they tried to translate Matthew's Hebrew, but was not very successful at all. That shows us the KJV and other GREEK Godpel of Matthews, are not 100% accurate and legit.

but indeed, the TLV is a great read!

but we do have the 3rd Century Greek, which no one was able to bastardize. and that's what I used.

The_Watchers_2017 · Jun 21, 2023

cv5,

to the information you have provided, very well done!

also, it's why i stick with the current version of the Torah/Tanakh.

Tradition shows us, that even when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD and all in it stolen [Ark of the Covenant with the Torah/Tanakh sitting in the Holy of Hollies]...the Rabbi's had no worries because in EVERY JEWISH SYNAGOGUE sits a perfectly preserved copy of the Torah/Tanakh.

so we know the Torah/Tanakh we, at least that I am using, can be traced back to the Synagogues and Temple of 70 AD + all the way back to when Moses penned them.

Fundaamental · Jun 21, 2023

The_Watchers_2017 said:

the copy you posted me of 2 peter 3.10 stated the the foundations would disintegrate.

The tlv states they will be destroyed

The Hebrew states they will melt

If the foundation are destroyed how will they consume the earth.

Makes no sence friend

Unless destroyed also means the foundations will turn to lava
Which as you know lava can reform a shape after its cooled.

So it's not permanently destroyed
But destroyed at first.

The_Watchers_2017 · Jun 21, 2023

Fundaamental said:

the Foundations are the Laws of Physics, only the ELEMENTS, are destroyed.
why do you continue to keep thinking Element and Laws of Physics are one and the same?

Elements = water-fire-wind-dust

Laws of Physics = magnetic's, inertia, speed, electromagnetic, gravity, mathematics, energy, quantum mechanics

Fundaamental · Jun 21, 2023

The_Watchers_2017 said:

I've allready shown you the law of physics can change when the lord is present.

Thats a different reasoning all together.

And still doesn't answer the question at hand

In your opinion do you believe world is about 6000 years old

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Junior Member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Banned

Banned

Well-known member

Banned

Well-known member