Read following:
"It is true that during the Second Temple Period the texts of the OT were not yet canonized as it is available today in the Hebrew Bible, but the priests or scribes who used the texts, applied and interpreted them as authoritative texts." (Clements, Old Testament Prophecy: From Oracles to Canon, 178)
"they added some of their own thoughts as well to make the oral prophet’s words or the older written record clearer. In this act the editor becomes an evaluator of the oral prophet and older written records."
(Donald B. Redford, “Scribe and Speaker,� in Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy)
"As we have seen, even though scribes associated the oracles of a book with a name, they were willing to include oracles that originated with others."
(Ronald L. Troxel, Prophetic Literature: From Oracles to Books, 100)
Interpolation in Bible by Scribes
Moderator: Moderators
- Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Interpolation in Bible by Scribes
Post #2[Replying to post 1 by Talmid]
What is more true is that the ruling party of the first temple were Seleucid. That Pompey the Great replaced these Ba'el worshipers with pagan Sadducee.
For some reason a great deal of effort was made to remove the beliefs of the Sadducee from history.
Because, they not only were the peoples allegedly heirs to the Torah, but because nothing they believed could possibly be considered 'Jewish.'
A religion of the Jews could not possibly said to be in its infant stage until second century CE. Long after the tribes had allegedly been lost.
Ah well.
All those dead people, over nothing.
What is more true is that the ruling party of the first temple were Seleucid. That Pompey the Great replaced these Ba'el worshipers with pagan Sadducee.
For some reason a great deal of effort was made to remove the beliefs of the Sadducee from history.
Because, they not only were the peoples allegedly heirs to the Torah, but because nothing they believed could possibly be considered 'Jewish.'
A religion of the Jews could not possibly said to be in its infant stage until second century CE. Long after the tribes had allegedly been lost.
Ah well.
All those dead people, over nothing.
Post #3
Jews acknowledge alterations in the Hebrew Bible.
Check this link:
http://booksnthoughts.com/ezra-changed- ... /#_ftnref9
Check this link:
http://booksnthoughts.com/ezra-changed- ... /#_ftnref9
- dianaiad
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 10220
- Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
- Location: Southern California
Post #5
Moderator CommentTalmid wrote: Read following:
"It is true that during the Second Temple Period the texts of the OT were not yet canonized as it is available today in the Hebrew Bible, but the priests or scribes who used the texts, applied and interpreted them as authoritative texts." (Clements, Old Testament Prophecy: From Oracles to Canon, 178)
"they added some of their own thoughts as well to make the oral prophet’s words or the older written record clearer. In this act the editor becomes an evaluator of the oral prophet and older written records."
(Donald B. Redford, “Scribe and Speaker,� in Writings and Speech in Israelite and Ancient Near Eastern Prophecy)
"As we have seen, even though scribes associated the oracles of a book with a name, they were willing to include oracles that originated with others."
(Ronald L. Troxel, Prophetic Literature: From Oracles to Books, 100)
There is no question for discussion in this OP. Please let us know what it is you wish to discuss. If you can't do that, this thread will have to be moved to 'Random Rambling."
Please review the Rules.
______________
Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.
Post #6
[Replying to post 5 by dianaiad]
The purpose of showing references was that Bible is NOT a pure word of God.
The purpose of showing references was that Bible is NOT a pure word of God.