2. Right and Wrong

Originally posted by RatX
This is a referance to an earlier post:
Certain parts of Genesis in particular, were probably written before the flood (and taken on the ark as tablets, which was the parchment of the day) - as you probably know, there were several authors to Genesis and these writings were compiled by Moses, who completed the record from where they left off... Jewish Historia ...[text shortened]... l, Jacob, Jacob's sons - then Moses. Jesus accepted Mosaical authorship as well (John 5:46-47).

Keep working on it. little ratz, you cannot shake the truth out of it though. The 5th tablet covers where Moses or whoever got the Six days from.
The flood , if there was one, hit Sumer and the Sumerian named Ziusudra rode the boat , that is , if indeed it was a boat.
I don't give a your-ass what some authors write in their efforts to try to rectify their religion to data we have found 19 centuries after Christ that comes from a time that predates there ever being an Israelite, either.

Originally posted by frogstomp
Keep working on it. little ratz, you cannot shake the truth out of it though. The 5th tablet covers where Moses or whoever got the Six days from.
The flood , if there was one, hit Sumer and the Sumerian named Ziusudra rode the boat , that is , if indeed it was a boat.
I don't give a your-ass what some authors ...[text shortened]... Christ that comes from a time that predates there ever being an Israelite, either.

The 5th tablet covers where Moses or whoever got the Six days from.

No, it doesn't. Refer to my arguments above, which you still haven't refuted. You're a very closed-minded silly little man.

The flood , if there was one, hit Sumer and the Sumerian named Ziusudra rode the boat , that is , if indeed it was a boat.

As I mentioned, there are many more flood legends, which include different names for the consistent characters (one man, married, with three sons) and maintains a massive flood. There's no connection between your Sumerian writings and Genesis. You're still not giving me anything more than the redneck-type "that's just the way it is!" argument to substantiate your absurdly small mind.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
I remember. You can back up the "were probably" part of course.

RatX: About your claim that the book of Genesis was probably taken on the Ark. If you can't back it up your claim is less substantial than frogstomp's, in which case please hush. At least he has some tablets, whatever inferences may be drawn from them. What do you say? Hmmm?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
RatX: About your claim that the book of Genesis was probably taken on the Ark. If you can't back it up your claim is less substantial than frogstomp's, in which case please hush. At least he has some tablets, whatever inferences may be drawn from them. What do you say? Hmmm?

By study of Jewish history and tradition, the consistency of the scripture (throughout thousands of copies without typo's), the Torah, including Genesis, was authored by Moses. However, certain parts of Genesis (seperated by the generations of...) are accounts from others (by study of different writing styles and ancient tablets were titled in this way - these are the generations of), the authors include Adam, Noah, Noah's sons, etc - who would be pre-flood.

The way Genesis is edited and put together (including the obvious differences in writing style) points very distinctly to several authors' input to the Genesis account. Ancient tablets were marked by "these are the generations of..." and thus the assertion of authorship is made. While you can gladly question it, I see the lack of contradictions, error and inconsistency as evidence that the book is not a fabrication, but a historical account.

Evidence for Mosaical authorship - 1. The author was obviously an eyewitness of the exodus from Egypt, familiar with the geography, flora and fauna and the region and refers to various Egyptian words and customs that go back to the second millenium bc. (if you want, I can cite these)

When discussing archeological, a lot is left to assumption and not empirical proof. When it comes to froggy's tablets, I don't question their authorship or where they got their tales from (although they do seem to point to real events as multiple cultures carry similar records/stories). I do question the magical link he makes between Genesis and the tablets. The link between two books written by two seperate authors about an event in history is limited to the actual event, unless the authors shared notes.

Originally posted by frogstomp
1#
The Fifth Tablet ( in part )
1. He made the stations for the great gods;
2. The stars, their images, as the stars of the Zodiac, he fixed.
3. He ordained the year and into sections he divided it;
4. For the twelve months he fixed three stars.
5. After he had [...] the days of the year [...] images,
6. He founded the station of Nibir 1to determ ...[text shortened]... shalt stand opposite, the half [...].
19. "When the Sun-god on the foundation of heaven [...]

I'm afraid I'll have to side with RatX (his opinion, not his language) here - this looks nothing like Genesis except for the seven days reference (and it isn't even clear what it was was the seventh day from) - and even there it goes on to 14 days.

Originally posted by RatX
By study of Jewish history and tradition, the consistency of the scripture (throughout thousands of copies without typo's), the Torah, including Genesis, was authored by Moses. However, certain parts of Genesis (seperated by the generations of...) are accounts from others (by study of different writing styles and ancient tablets were titled in this way - these ...[text shortened]... thors about an event in history is limited to the actual event, unless the authors shared notes.

How does the consistency of the Torah imply that the author was Moses?

Sidebar:

http://www.cresourcei.org/langcaan.html

(being an account--perhaps a bit long-winded--by a Christian scholar of how the Israelites may have appropriated "the language of Canaan"--drawing from a pre-existing cultural matrix to articulate their own unique understanding of God).

Originally posted by lucifershammer
How does the consistency of the Torah imply that the author was Moses?

Writing consistency is usually indisputable proof for a single author - the authorship of Moses is commonly accepted by Jewish historians, the Pentateuch claims in many places that Moses was the writer (Exodus 17:4; 24:4; 34:27, Numbers 33:2, Deutoronomy 31:9; 22, 24).

Many other times, other authors and leaders (including Jesus) refer to the Torah as "the writings of Moses".

Originally posted by RatX
Writing consistency is usually indisputable proof for a single author - the authorship of Moses is commonly accepted by Jewish historians, the Pentateuch claims in many places that Moses was the writer (Exodus 17:4; 24:4; 34:27, Numbers 33:2, Deutoronomy 31:9; 22, 24).

In other words, Moses is traditionally said to be the author. However, the scholars disagree among themselves. This link states the various cases simply enough:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora.htm

(I haven't made up my mind.)b

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
In other words, Moses is traditionally said to be the author. However, the scholars disagree among themselves. This link states the various cases simply enough:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora.htm

(I haven't made up my mind.)b

Taking a look-see...

Originally posted by RatX
Taking a look-see...

I'd also be interested to know what you think of the other link I posted on the language of Canaan.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
In other words, Moses is traditionally said to be the author. However, the scholars disagree among themselves. This link states the various cases simply enough:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora.htm

(I haven't made up my mind.)b

However, the scholars disagree among themselves.

Do you think scholars should have a democratic vote?

Originally posted by dj2becker
Do you think scholars should have a democratic vote?

If they want one, I don't see any reason to stop them.

What are you really asking / saying?

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
If they want one, I don't see any reason to stop them.

What are you really asking / saying?

My point is this: If they decide by means of a democratic vote that Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible, would that help you in making up your mind?

Originally posted by dj2becker
My point is this: If they decide by means of a democratic vote that Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible, would that help you in making up your mind?

No.