It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I didn't just come up with this idea myself. I got it from reading part of a book by a scholar who reviewed all the evidence and theories earlier scholars came up with on the origins of the Torah.
No, that's not what most likely happened. There is no basis in reality of the OT being first written in Greek, at all. It is only in your imagination that it's possible.
The NT doesn't care when the Torah was written or by whom.
If the OT wasn't written when it's said to have been written, it undermines the entire NT and all of the gospels, books you seem to believe are the word of god.
Tradition plays an important role but is not necessarily accurate.
If church tradition named the author of Mark as Bartholomew, we would be calling it the Gospel of Bartholomew to this day and we wouldn't know any better, because we have absolutely nothing else to compare the author's work to to verify the author's identity.
that is news to me... where did you get this theory from?
Already did in my earlier posts.
ye know im not gonna read that...
how about a summarization?
jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon
Already did in my earlier posts.
ye know im not gonna read that...
how about a summarization?
Basically, the "Hebrew" version of the Torah appeared at exactly the same time as the Septuagint.
It appears that the Genesis and Exodus stories were plagiarized from Greek language writings of Egyptian history.edit on 15-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon
Already did in my earlier posts.
ye know im not gonna read that...
how about a summarization?
Basically, the "Hebrew" version of the Torah appeared at exactly the same time as the Septuagint.
It appears that the Genesis and Exodus stories were plagiarized from Greek language writings of Egyptian history.edit on 15-9-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)
The scholar said this showed the current position held by scholars, that the Bible could not have been written before around 600 B.C., was wrong, The current view is that Hebrew writing was first invented in the sixth century BC. The newly deciphered potsherd is believed to be from the time of King David, around 970 BC.
See the links I put into my post right before that one.
You will not find a Biblical Scholar of integrity anywhere to back up such a wild claim; source please...
I don't believe that you can demonstrate how that is a "fact".
To ignore that fact is to ignore reality.
I already conceded that generally we don't know, and specifically in one case at least, we know the traditional view is wrong.
. . . you believe church tradition that John, Mark, Matthew, and Luke wrote their gospels . . .
No. There were the Prophets, that are not the same thing as the Torah. "The Law and the Prophets" as a term recognizes the separateness between the two.
So you're telling me the NT authors were purposely connecting Jesus to something they knew was a fraud?
God exists and is an influence on the world, including things that come out in prophecy regardless of how it is handed down.
Why would they try to connect him to a lie if he was the truth? You're not making any sense here.
You have a similar situation with the Prophets as we do with the Gospels and some other books of the New Testament, where no one knows who wrote most of them.
But according to you, the prophets of the OT never existed because the OT history is entirely fabricated.