My bad. I was referring to the whole Bible, including NT. But you are  right
( see my e-mail to Chris ), yes, indeed, the Dead Sea Scrolls are a lot  
older.
Various dates are proposed but ca 100 BC to ca 50 AD catches most of  them.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
 
 
In a message dated 4/22/2011 6:25:21 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
[email protected] writes:

I Thought that the Dead Sea Scrolls were older than  that. 

David

  _   
 
"There  is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no 
virtue in  advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as "caring" and 
"sensitive"  because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is 
merely  saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's 
money. Well,  who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in supporting such 
programs 
is telling  us that he'll do good with his own money -- if a gun is held to 
his  head."--P. J.  O'Rourke


On 4/22/2011 5:48 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  wrote:  
Chris :
I will have to look this up when I get the chance.  Valid observation. Who 
wrote the
first known manuscripts which are available to us ?  Best I am  aware, the 
earliest
that are still extant date to maybe the 300s AD.
 
Billy
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
 
 
In a message dated 4/22/2011 2:11:05 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])  writes:

 
Billy, 
I am wondering how  many of the copyists who made errors were actually 
using editorial  license?  I guess the biggest concern is the copyists who 
predated  the oldest verifiable scroll or text available. 
Chris 
 
 
From: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
[_mailto:[email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) ]  On Behalf Of [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
Sent: Friday,  April 22, 2011 2:41 PM
To: [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
Cc:  [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Subject: Re:  Discrepancy Re: [RC] Reflections on the  Bible

 
Ernie:
 
Point  well taken. Actually you could fine tune the vocabulary even  
further.
 
But I  was commenting on Beal's essay and he used the term  "contradiction"
 
throughout,  and my objective was to find another term that might  include
 
contradiction  but which made it clear that, while there are some of  those,
 
the  far more typical problem consists of incongruities, simple  mistakes
 
of  record ( odd references to historical people of the same or similar  
names
 
but  not exactly who was intended by the context ), questionable  
after-the-fact
 
interpretations  intrinsic to the text, etc. 
 

 
I  don't see all that many contradictions, but I do see a good  number of  
"inconsistencies."
 
OK,  some are discrepancies, some are dubious equivalences even if they  
make a 
 
valid  point, some are simple mistakes that really should not be made an 
issue  of,
 
and  so forth. Heck, I now have a fairly new book about copyist errors in  
the
 
earliest  known versions of the Bible. Yeah, a whole book about copyist  
boo-boos.
 

 
Well,  all right. But none of this gets me all bent out of shape. For some  
Atheists,
 
of  course, "hey, look here, a scribe did not dot an "i" or cross a "t" and 
 therefore
 
the  whole Bible is corrupt. Gimmie a break. There IS such a thing as  
substance.
 

 
My  humble opinion.
 

 
Anyway,  for all my enthusiasm for Mesopotamian religious antecedents of 
the  Bible
 
( maybe  more than you ever wanted to know ),  the scribes who wrote on  
cuneiform 
 
tablets  were just as prone to mistakes and "inconsistencies" and the whole 
nine  yards.
 

 
Human  nature is what it is. A human being may be spiritually  inspired
 
but  he or she remains a "frail reed."  We would be well advised  to
 
make  reasonable allowances is how I look at  it.
 

 
Final  note :   How, many creation accounts are there in the Bible  ?
 
Was  just thinking that the 3 already mentioned need to be added  to.
 
Wisdom  of Solomon is part of the Apocrypha, but it is in many  Bibles,
 
and  it has its own take on The Beginning. And Genesis, not  counting
 
chapter  # 1, has additional stories about the Origins of  Everything.
 
I'll  guess that there are other allusions to Creation  that
 
escape  me for now.
 

 
Billy
 

 

 
=================================================
 

 

 

 
message  dated 4/22/2011 11:12:00 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])   writes:
 
Hi  Billy,  
 
 
 
On  Apr 21, 2011, at 12:47 PM, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])   
wrote:

 
Yes,  there are inconsistencies throughout the Bible. You see them from  
start to finish,
 
from  Genesis to Revelation. Two creation stories in Genesis, four versions 
 of the life
 
of  Christ in the Gospels, and all sorts of "mysteries" in Revelation that  
just don't
 
seem  to add up no matter how much "math" you do to try and understand it  
all.

 

 
I  mostly agree, but I would use the term "discrepancies" rather than  
"inconsistencies".  Discrepancy is an observable fact, but  inconsistency is a 
matter of interpretation.  I fully concede that  the Biblical texts are full 
of discrepancies, but I wouldn't say that  makes it "inconsistent" in the 
usual connotations of the term.  Some discrepancies are undoubtedly 
inconsistent, but not all of  them are, and sometimes the difference is just a 
lack of 
imagination on  our part.
 

 
--  Ernie P.






--  
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >
Google  Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist  Community 
<[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >
Google  Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 
--  
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
_<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Google  Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 


--  
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
_<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Google  Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to