The christian Bible...

I recognize some of the places and names, kind of, but I can't tie any of it to places precisely. Nimrod was a mighty hunter. Nice for him.

On a side note: I have heard that some chinese family trees go all the way to Japheth. I'll try to find a non-christian link for you for this, but I may fail.
 
I like the NKJV much better, but couldn't find a net source for it. I would like to learn latin to check out the latin vulgate. My father did a master's paper on it when I was a kid.
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
1 Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: The difficulty in learning names, titles and places, is that they may change periodically, even within the same story, and it would appear they are talking about somebody else when they're not. Names of places change over time, and that's confusing, too. I'm assuming the names of places change when different peoples pass through the areas. Take Moses for instance, his given name at birth was Aminadab. When he was taken from the river, his title was Moses which means taken from the water. However, conveniently, the pharaoh, Tuthmosis III, was his adoptive mother's father (or even could have been her brother-husband, as it was those days). When Tuthmosis III's son grew up and became pharaoh, he acquired the title of Amhenhotep IV. When he developed monotheistic sun worship, he called himself Akhanaten. His brother's name was Semenkhare, but we know him by the name of Aaron. Ergo, the confusion is repeated everywhere in the bible.
 
Um. Did you misspeak? I thought tuthmosis III had a son AND a daughter. The daughter was Moses' adoptive mother. The son was the Pharoah Akhenaten. If not, where was the dynastic interruption that should have occurred?
 
M*W said:
The idea for the KJV was conceived in 1604 and published in 1611.
Click to expand...
Which was after a period we call "the Middle Ages"?
So the KJV of the bible, which was a Protestant version, like the Lutheran one, was based on a collection of writings that survived this period, then?

Pedantry is a sign of a lack of imagination (but you knew that, right?)
 
The basic christian rote is that the bible has survived repeated translation and hand-copying and is now in the same state as it has always been. The Bible, however, is a collection of writings put together in one book around 450 or so AD. The chance that the messages got muddied between 2000bc and that point even are pretty good. My personal belief is that God's hand was in it, encouraging the copiers and translators to be as accurate as possible. I'm no linguist, but I'll bet that a copy of the Torah and a copy of the old testament laid side by side would be very different reads, but with a similar message. I will be asking CheskiChips in particular to comment some on Micah and other prophets. I wish more muslims were taking an interest, perhaps providing a corollary of an accepted version of the Koran (Qu'ran?).
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
The chance that the messages got muddied between 2000bc and that point even are pretty good. My personal belief is that God's hand was in it, encouraging the copiers and translators to be as accurate as possible.
Click to expand...

Uh, if gods hand was in it, wouldn't it be dead on accurate? Would god allow his message to be muddled if he was revealing his word to all mankind? Not likely.
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
I don't know the mind of God, and you certainly don't, Q. You should stop pretending that you do.
Click to expand...

No pretending is required, the words are there for all to see, Ham. To dismiss the bible is to dismiss gods word, and ultimately god himself. And if you were to call yourself any kind of Christian, you would cherish, study and obey each word with every fiber of your being. Anything else is just blowing smoke out your ass.

2 Timothy 3:15-17 - “. . .from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Your god is commanding you, Hammy. Where do you stand with obeying his commands?
 
Q-way to misinterpret an excellent verse. If you want to discuss your ideas of the lierality of the Bible or any other religious text, please do so outside of this thread. If you have some thoughts on Genesis chapter 10, let's hear them. 2 timothy is quite aways down the road, at my current pace of about 1.7 chapters a day. Drop back by in March and see if we're there yet, would you?
 
Mr. Hamtastic said:
Um. Did you misspeak? I thought tuthmosis III had a son AND a daughter. The daughter was Moses' adoptive mother. The son was the Pharoah Akhenaten. If not, where was the dynastic interruption that should have occurred?
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Maybe I did misspeak. What else is new? You seem to have the family tree correctly. Aknenaten was Moses. His natural mother was allegedly Miryam and his adoptive mother was called Tiye, the pharaoh's daughter. I don't see a dynastic interruption, but here's Gardiner's chronology:

CHRONOLOGY OF THE EIGHTEENTH DYNASTY (Conjectural dates BC)

Ahmosis 1575-1550
Amenhotep I 1550-1528
Tuthmosis I 1528-1510
Tuthmosis II 1510-1490
Hatsheput 1490-1468 (woman)
Tuthmosis III 1490-1436 (David)
Amenhotep II 1436-1413
Tuthmosis IV 1413-1405
Amenhotep III 1405-1367 (Shlomo)

Moses born c.1393 BC

Amenhotep IV 1367-1350 (Moses)
(aka Aknenaten)

Semenkhkare 1350-1347 (Aaron)
Aye 1339-1335
Horemheb 1335-1308

CHRONOLOGY OF THE NINETHEENTH DYNASTY

Ramses I 1308-1307
Seti I 1307-1291
Ramses II 1290-1224
Merenptah 1224-1214

Queen Tiye was the adoptive mother of Moses and the natural daughter of Yuyu or Joseph the Patriarch. Joseph the Patriarch was also known as Khufu and Cheops (from memory).

Semenkhkare was the son of Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye and a brother of Aknenaten. Osman states that, "at the same time he could also have been the son of Akhenaten, who was a descendant of both Amenhotep III and Queen Tiye."

Maybe this is where the confusion comes in.

References:

Gardiner, Alan H.: Egypt of the Pharaohs, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1961.

Osman, Ahmed.: Moses and Akhenaten: The Secret History of Egypt at the Time of the Exodus, Bear & Company, Vermont, 2002.
 
Vkothii said:
Which was after a period we call "the Middle Ages"?
So the KJV of the bible, which was a Protestant version, like the Lutheran one, was based on a collection of writings that survived this period, then?

Pedantry is a sign of a lack of imagination (but you knew that, right?)
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Yes, I must have missed the word "after." It's late, and I'm tired, and my foot is tired of being in my mouth.
 
MW-I appreciate you typing that all up for me, but we need to move this discussion elsewhere. Do you have any thoughts on Genesis chapter 10 we can discuss here? I'll try to find some suitable refutation of your theory on Moses being an egyptian pharoah so that we can continue to discuss it in a seperate thread. :)
 
Medicine*Woman said:
. Aknenaten was Moses.
Click to expand...
That's an interesting speculation and an hypothesis that's fun to entertain, but there's hardly enough evidence to connect the mythical character Moses to the historical one of Ahkenaten in such a matter of fact manner.
 
Skinwalker-Any thoughts on Japheth? Nimrod? Can you place any of the places mentioned in ch. 10 of Genesis?
 
MW tend to base her ideas on controversial figures such as
Osman, Ahmed.: Moses and Akhenaten: The Secret History of Egypt at the Time of the Exodus, Bear & Company, Vermont, 2002.
Click to expand...
whose ideas go against mainstream egyptology and chronology. This does not mean he is wrong, of course, but MW tends to confuse fringe theorists ideas with accepted facts, a trait she would no doubt dislike in a theist.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top