https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genizah They were recopied and then hidden at Qumran...
New Biblical manuscript evidence since 2000?
- Thread starter acts5_29
- 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.
When they first discovered the cave at Qumran they thought this but then after discovering the other caves and their contents and rationalizing it's location(downstream of the Temple),down the Kidron R.(blood and water from the temple flowed into the Kidron out of the temple) and down to the Dead sea and the Qumran river. Then after the discoveries in the other caves and their age differences they concluded it was an Genizah occupied by Essenes or Zadokite. www.netours.com/content/view/123/26/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qumran My original comment is in address to the OP "your looking for an Genizah",,,
You seem to "know" these things as facts, when scholars who study these scrolls say they guess at this but do not know. There is a possibility that many of the scrolls are simply worn out scrolls they they do not believe in destroying.
When you make statements of fact, you need to tell what you base your opinion on.
There is a theory that John the Baptist was an Essene. Would you consider John the member of a cult? You say that they did not believe in animal sacrifice was a factor that made them a cult. Do you believe in animal sacrifice?
When you make statements of fact, you need to tell what you base your opinion on.
There is a theory that John the Baptist was an Essene. Would you consider John the member of a cult? You say that they did not believe in animal sacrifice was a factor that made them a cult. Do you believe in animal sacrifice?
Exactly the verse I had in mind! Not only that but it seems that translations are becoming less literal and more agenda driven.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
-
1
- Show all
Exactly the verse I had in mind! Not only that but it seems that translations are becoming less literal and more agenda driven.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
The NIV was handled by a Homosexual Lesbian Activist, (Virginia Mollenkott) the English stylist
This is why homosexuality in this book has all but been removed.
All new bible versions NIV, NASB, ESV, etc follow the Greek Text Novum Testamentum Graece
This was created by five individuals behind closed doors, Kurt Aland, Barbara Aland, Carlo Maria Martini, Bruce Metzger, Johannes Karavidopoulos
Kurt Aland the leader on the Greek Text, divorced his wife Ingeborg Aland, and ran off with the college girl in his classroom and married her Barbara Aland, 22 years younger, (Adultery)
Carlo Maria Martini was a Roman Catholic Jesuit Cardinal, he supported homosexuality and same sex marriage.
Do you believe God used Adulterers and HomoSexual Supporters to preserve his Holy Words?
Hardly!
-
1
- Show all
Exactly the verse I had in mind! Not only that but it seems that translations are becoming less literal and more agenda driven.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
This is the reasoning that demons gave Jesus when he was tested in the wilderness. They said if it is so that God bears you up, then jump off this high place. Or is it is so that God supplies our bread, then turn this stone into bread. Same type of reasoning applied to many doctrines accepted by today's church.
Your reasoning follows this same pattern. You say if there is evil men in the last days, then all men who work with scripture now are evil. It is evil to add to scripture.
So much time has passed since the last prophets gave us scripture that today's man cannot understand the thoughts and feelings of the people God chose to put His principles into words. That means it is hard for us to understand those words.
God is in control of our world, and our God controlled that there should be information about those thoughts and feelings that had been lost after over 2,000 years brought to light.
2,000 years ago God acted in our world and gave us Christ, even a lot more wonderful than giving us the dead sea scrolls. But Pharisee type people are acting about the scrolls in much the same way now as they did then.
To all the men who listen and study what God has given us I send blessings and thank you.
God is in control of our world, and our God controlled that there should be information about those thoughts and feelings that had been lost after over 2,000 years brought to light.
2,000 years ago God acted in our world and gave us Christ, even a lot more wonderful than giving us the dead sea scrolls. But Pharisee type people are acting about the scrolls in much the same way now as they did then.
To all the men who listen and study what God has given us I send blessings and thank you.
God hasn't used Adulterers or Homosexual supporters to preserve his words, as seen in the Greek Text Novum Testamentum Graece
Exactly the verse I had in mind! Not only that but it seems that translations are becoming less literal and more agenda driven.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
Son of man is translated as "son of human" or "human son" or something ridicilous like that in some Bible translations.
In their agenda they do not see, the word man is still in the word "human"
Looking at the evangelical church today, I find it highly unlikely that people in those churches and especially their clergy could provide us a good translation.
Not that I am defending the Essene's or their beliefs but term's such as "son of man" would have been written in what is referred to as Nomina sacra a Latin term denoting sacred names. The just of what it means is that they thought it sinful to say the name of God aloud(example G-d) and so they treated terms/titles such as "son of man" that way by abbreviating it. An example is "ANOY"(with a line above it to denote an abbreviation). Scroll down to ANOY which means human being/man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nomina_sacra and then compare it to the second line in this fragment, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_115 . Then again YY is treated in the same manner as "son".