Reading 2 - Genesis 6-11:9

[Bio-logical]

I feel it is appropriate to post the next reading assignment. Remember that the discussion on the previous one may continue but our goal is to read the bible so I am going to keep moving. I have started a new thread for organizational purposes and will continue to do so for the remainder of the study barring any suggestions.

The reading is Genesis 6- 11:9

Flood
The Daughters of Men: Gen 6:1-8
Building the Ark: Gen 6:9-8:22
Noah Commences the Human race again: Gen 9:1-28
The progeny of Noah: Gen 10:1-32
Babel/Nations
Mans pride forms separatism and the nations while loosing a unifying language: Gen 11:1-9

One addition I would like to make is that I found this site that has several questions about each chapter you may want to keep in mind while reading.

[Cathar1950]

There is nothing except your interpretation of some passage (Timothy?) in the Bible that says it is inspired and guess what most scholars think it is a forgery written after the time of Paul.

It's not my interpretation. That's what it says.

There is always you interpretation and I hardly think you are qualified(capable) to give us an unbiased plain reading of the text.

All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (II Timothy 3:16)

In plain English, what does that verse say, Cathar1950?
_______________
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."

Happy Birthday Martin! You were one brave man.

It doesn't say there are no errors or that everything is correct and there are no contradictions nor does it imply it.
How are your reading all that into what the passage actually says?
"Profitable" doesn't mean any of those doctrines or dogma.
It seems to mean it is helpful not magical words from God.

[Heterodoxus]

God is the original source of the scriptures -- not men.

Give credit where credit is due.

I do. Those men, whose involvement in the evolution of the Bible is adamantly denied by Catholics and Fundie Christians, are known in the writing profession as "ghost writers". Throughout the field of theology, they're known as redactors, editors, or revisionists who inserted their preferred--and often adapted--doctrinal biases into purportedly "inspired, inerrant, and infallible" Bible scripture. And it's the "Church Fathers" (the men of the very early Catholic Church) at which all professing "Christians" should waggle a finger of shame for imposing their pro-Judaism/Messianic beliefs upon the pre-Reformation masses of illiterate and uninformed worshipers that Church preferred to keep ignorant.

If you believe Hitler wrote his own book, would you be interested in buying a famous bridge in Brooklyn, NY?

[center][/center]

[Heterodoxus]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

[Cathar1950]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

I thought we were moving on to the next part of Genesis.
We have hardly covered any of it.

[Heterodoxus]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

I thought we were moving on to the next part of Genesis.
We have hardly covered any of it.

I saw post #1 of new thread the other day? Has the assignment changed since last Thursday?

[myth-one.com]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

So we're no longer studying the Bible?
________________
Christian Filicide?: All The Dead Innocent Children
Short Article: The Blame Game
Short Article: America's Heroes

[Bio-logical]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

I thought we were moving on to the next part of Genesis.
We have hardly covered any of it.

We are following the Scholar's plan, or a narrative chronology of the bible. To do so, we read the book of Job before we read the remainder of Genesis because according to the story, Job lived before Abram. After Job, we will return to Genesis.

[Cathar1950]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

I thought we were moving on to the next part of Genesis.
We have hardly covered any of it.

We are following the Scholar's plan, or a narrative chronology of the bible. To do so, we read the book of Job before we read the remainder of Genesis because according to the story, Job lived before Abram. After Job, we will return to Genesis.

I suppose although I see problems as it seems to assume the Bible as historical narrative shaped by ideology much later when the writings were being produced.
If you notice the Jewish arrangements of the Hebrew writings are different then the Christian OT because the Christians are trying to present a chronology all leading up to Christ.
We are reading Job which is believed to be a 5 th century writing as if it was a 1800 th century artifact.

[Bio-logical]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

I thought we were moving on to the next part of Genesis.
We have hardly covered any of it.

We are following the Scholar's plan, or a narrative chronology of the bible. To do so, we read the book of Job before we read the remainder of Genesis because according to the story, Job lived before Abram. After Job, we will return to Genesis.

I suppose although I see problems as it seems to assume the Bible as historical narrative shaped by ideology much later when the writings were being produced.
If you notice the Jewish arrangements of the Hebrew writings are different then the Christian OT because the Christians are trying to present a chronology all leading up to Christ.
We are reading Job which is believed to be a 5 th century writing as if it was a 1800 th century artifact.

Can you give an example of an 18th century artifact? As far as I am aware the dead sea scrolls and the numbers amulets are the only accounts of the actual books of he bible the rest of the older artifacts just corroborate the stories in the bible. The two former are no older than the book of Job is considered to be and Job is contained within the dead sea scrolls. The stories of Job have been placed by biblical scholars to occur between the flood and Abraham due to many factors.

Also, I do not assume the bible to be a historical narrative, but I do assume it to have a narrative within it which contains a chronology that I fel it is most appropriate to follow so that we continue to read within context of the narrative.

[Cathar1950]

The book being studied is the Bible.

Nope, wrong again! The book of the Bible we were studying was Genesis. Now we're moving on to the book of Job with or without you.

I thought we were moving on to the next part of Genesis.
We have hardly covered any of it.

We are following the Scholar's plan, or a narrative chronology of the bible. To do so, we read the book of Job before we read the remainder of Genesis because according to the story, Job lived before Abram. After Job, we will return to Genesis.

I suppose although I see problems as it seems to assume the Bible as historical narrative shaped by ideology much later when the writings were being produced.
If you notice the Jewish arrangements of the Hebrew writings are different then the Christian OT because the Christians are trying to present a chronology all leading up to Christ.
We are reading Job which is believed to be a 5 th century writing as if it was a 1800 th century artifact.

Can you give an example of an 18th century artifact? As far as I am aware the dead sea scrolls and the numbers amulets are the only accounts of the actual books of he bible the rest of the older artifacts just corroborate the stories in the bible. The two former are no older than the book of Job is considered to be and Job is contained within the dead sea scrolls. The stories of Job have been placed by biblical scholars to occur between the flood and Abraham due to many factors.

Also, I do not assume the bible to be a historical narrative, but I do assume it to have a narrative within it which contains a chronology that I fel it is most appropriate to follow so that we continue to read within context of the narrative.

If I remember correctly the only thing that actually corroborates the Bible dates to the 9th or 8th century.
What we have in the Bible is later edited ideologized history at best.