• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single

There is no reference to Lucifer in Genesis. Lucifer is found Isaiah 14 where it refers to the King of Babylon, not Satan (who also is not mentioned in Genesis.)
[/QUOTE]
 
Reactions: Jane_the_Bane
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
I completely disagree with your 2nd century dating of Jude and I believe it is a fringe view and is not mainstream as you attempt to assert that it is.

Sorry, it is standard academic scholarship which holds this. But since you don't accept standard research in the field of science, we can hardly expect you to accept it in biblical scholarship. However, I do think that Enoch proved more formative in Christian thinking about the demonic than Via Crucis seems willing to give it credit for.


Just how do you think the Bible was compiled? Do you think God did it Himself?


You realize the Torah is just the first five books of the Bible?

You can try and twist the word becoming flesh all you want but at the end of the day the author's of the Gospels were JEWS, speaking about a Jewish culture with Jewish customs writing about a JEWISH MESSIAH to a JEWISH audience.

Luke wasn't a Jew.

G-d is either in control or he is not. If he is in control then no matter how messed up, how flawed how politically motivated the council of Nica was G-D's perfect will decreed the outcome regarding scripture.

And you know this how? Contrary to the common myth it was not the Council of Nicaea that decided on the books of the Bible, although it happened around the same time. Constantine's mother St. Helena had commissioned the building of fifty cathedrals throughout the Empire and wanted a Bible for each one. So Constantine ordered the publication of fifty Bibles. Christians were still arguing about which books to include or exclude but if the Emperor wants fifty bibles, he gets fifty bibles. So they gave him the best they could agree on at the time. If you make fifty copies of anything in antiquity, let alone a text as mammoth as the Bible, it will automatically become the standard text.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
The fact is that both man and animal DNA became utterly corrupted I believe as a result of mankind manipulating DNA.

Funny, I can't recall the Bible saying anything about DNA.


My, you have a wild imagination! Where are you getting this from? It certainly isn't in the Bible.

Satan from the beginning wanted to corrupt mankind's DNA as a means to prevent the coming of Messiah.

A good story, but again not Biblical.


Okay, now I get this is some end of the world scenario. If Jesus was referring to DNA manipulation he wouldn't have said 'eating, drinking and marrying' instead.

What was the tower of Bable really about? Do you really think that Adonai was ticked about a building?

That's what the Bible says.

They wanted to recreate the science they lost in the flood.

That's what the Bible doesn't say.

When you see Genesis in this light

Why would I read the Bible in light of a fantasy for there is neither scientific support nor does it even agree with scripture?
 
Reactions: Jane_the_Bane
Upvote 0

BukiRob

Newbie
Dec 14, 2012
2,809
1,006
Columbus, Ohio
✟68,065.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Utterly untrue. I cited 3 sources for the dates I suggest. All three are the more widely held view it is YOU who dont want to accept standard research. Ive seen both of you yapping about these later dates yet no sourcing. https://bible.org/seriespage/26-jude-introduction-argument-and-outline Dr Wallace dates the book 66-67. Dr Charles Swindoll( Phd Theology) dates it between 65-80 Theopedia dates it 65AD. Catholic encyclopidia dates the book of Jude at 64/65 AD. Biblehub.com (Jay Smith) Dates Jude at 75AD. Asbury bible commentary doesnt give a specific date but states "The opponents of Jude, however, are similar to the incipient gnostics Paul addressed in the a.d. 50s in 1 Corinthians, as Thompson and Rose acknowledge. Jude can be dated early enough to allow authorship by the brother of James and Jesus."

Without question the most damaging evidence to a later date argument is its inclusion in the Muratorian Canon (170AD) Clementin of Rome (96 AD) alluded to its authenticity as well as Clement of Alexandria (200 A.D.)

Again the very late dates suggested by you and other are simply NOT in keeping with mainstrem biblical researchers and completely avoids obvious clues to its apostolic age dating.
Just how do you think the Bible was compiled? Do you think God did it Himself?



You realize the Torah is just the first five books of the Bible?

So, you are going to now tell a messianic Jew what is and is not Torah?! Yes literately it is the first 5 books. Jews use the term Torah to describe most of the Tanakh
Luke wasn't a Jew.
There is legitimate debate that Luke was a Jew. Luke traditionally has been thought as a gentile but there are serious problems with this position. First Gentiles and Jews did not mix. A Jew would have become "ceremonially unclean" just by being in the home of a goyim. Thomas McCall (ThM Old Testament Studies, ThD Semitic Languages and Old Testament Studies) correctly points out that there really is no evidence to support the tradition that Luke is a gentile. His gospel shows a close relationship with Mary Yeshua's mother. The idea that a gentile would have a close relationship with a Jew at that time is preposterously absurd. It simply would not have happened at least not in Israel.


Muratorian Fragment is dated between 150-200 and lists virtually all the new testament (missing only James, 1 John and Matthew.) It also includes letters/books that are not inspired



There is no reference to Lucifer in Genesis. Lucifer is found Isaiah 14 where it refers to the King of Babylon, not Satan (who also is not mentioned in Genesis.)

I never said SCRIPTURE called the Serpent Lucifer or Satan but they are all the same entity.
 
Upvote 0

Cassiopeia

Otherwise Occupied
Feb 5, 2005
5,347
378
Wasatch Mountains
✟23,183.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Come now fatboys, what of mercy? What did our Savior die for if not to temper justice?
 
Reactions: drstevej
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single
Utterly untrue. I cited 3 sources for the dates I suggest. All three are the more widely held view it is YOU who dont want to accept standard research.

I did specific standard academic research.

Ive seen both of you yapping about these later dates yet no sourcing.

All you had to do was ask:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/jude.html


Really? And which Christian gnostics were around 50 A.D.? All the ones I know of lived towards the very end of the first century and the beginning of the second. All of your sources appear to be Christian apologists more rather than recognized scholars in academia.

Again the very late dates suggested by you and other are simply NOT in keeping with mainstrem biblical researchers and completely avoids obvious clues to its apostolic age dating.

You seem to think that mainstream biblical scholarship is what comes out of Dallas Theological Seminary. It is not.

So, you are going to now tell a messianic Jew what is and is not Torah?! Yes literately it is the first 5 books. Jews use the term Torah to describe most of the Tanakh

Jews usually know the difference.

There is legitimate debate that Luke was a Jew.

You are the first person I've ever heard suggest he was not, however, there is apparently at least one member of the Jesus Seminar who believes Luke was a Hellenized Jew.


Uh, we are talking about Christians after all. Luke is not that early in any case. The estimated dates for its composition are between 80-130 A.D.

I never said SCRIPTURE called the Serpent Lucifer or Satan but they are all the same entity.

Really, and how exactly did the King of Babylon become the devil?
 
Upvote 0

fatboys

Senior Veteran
Nov 18, 2003
9,231
280
72
✟68,575.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Come now fatboys, what of mercy? What did our Savior die for if not to temper justice?
That is the perfection of the plan. When we disobey we would be utterly lost from any chance to progress towards perfection if it were not for the atonement. This was the plan before the earth was even created. Before we came here we told that in order to continue to progress we needed mortality. We needed a physical body that would be subject to death. Death is just another part of the process we go through to gain perfection. None of this would be possible if it were not for the atonement
 
Upvote 0

Niblo

Muslim
Site Supporter
Dec 23, 2014
1,052
279
79
Wales.
✟248,811.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Muslim
Marital Status
Married
Hello Susan,

‘Jude who calls himself ‘brother of James’, v. 1, is also, it appears, one of the ‘brothers of the Lord’, Mt 13:55 and par. There is no reason to identify him with the apostle of the same name, Lk 6:16; Ac 1:13; cf. Jn 14:22, especially as he refers to himself as being outside the apostolic body, v. 17. Nor is it likely that an anonymous author would have adopted the name, since Jude was not sufficiently prominent to lend authority to a letter. The letter was accepted as canonical by many of the Churches as early as 200, though its use of two apocryphal sources, the ‘Book of Enoch’ in vv. 6,14seq., and the ‘Assumption of Moses’ in v.19, had prompted certain hesitations; but to quote contemporary Jewish writings is hardly equivalent to recognising their inspiration.

‘The letter must be dated fairly late in the first century: the apostles are quoted as belonging the past, vv 17seq.: the faith is now something fixed and ‘handed on once for all’, v.3; and the author appears to be acquainted with Paul’s letters. It can be firmly dated to the last years of the apostolic age.’

This is quote from the Jerusalem Bible, produced by the renowned Dominican biblical scholars of L'École Biblique in Jerusalem.

Have a good day,

Paul
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single

Thanks. I think the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia which was being quoted earlier was written in the early part of the 20th century as I recall. It reflects very dated scholarship.
 
Upvote 0

Niblo

Muslim
Site Supporter
Dec 23, 2014
1,052
279
79
Wales.
✟248,811.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Muslim
Marital Status
Married
Thanks. I think the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia which was being quoted earlier was written in the early part of the 20th century as I recall. It reflects very dated scholarship.

You're very welcome! As for the New Advent Catholic Encyclopaedia: The Dominicans have the better argument!

Bart D. Ehrman writes of this Epistle:

‘Five persons are named Jude (or Judas - same Greek word) in the New Testament, the most infamous of whom, of course, is Judas Iscariot. One of the others is Jude, the son of Mary and Joseph the carpenter, one of the four brothers of Jesus mentioned in Mark 6:4. The author of this short letter is almost certainly claiming to be that particular Jude, because he identifies himself as “Jude, the brother of James.” Since most ancient people did not have last names, an author with a common name would typically identify himself (so that you would know which Jude he was) by mentioning a known relative, almost always his father. But here the author names not his father, but his brother, James. This must mean that James is the member of the family who is particularly well known.

‘And what James in the early church was especially well known? The most famous James was the head of the first church, the church in Jerusalem. This James was the brother of Jesus, mentioned throughout the New Testament, for example, by the apostle Paul on several occasions (see Gal. 1:19). If this Jude is identifying himself as the brother of that James, then he is, by implication, obviously the brother of Jesus. But it is almost certain that the historical Jude did not write this book. Its author is living during a later period in the history of the church, when the churches are already well established, and when false teachers have infiltrated them and need to be rooted out. In fact, the author speaks of “remembering the predictions of the apostles” (v. 17) as if they, the apostles, lived a long time before. In contrast to them, he is living in “the last days” that they predicted (v. 18). This is someone living after the apostolic age.

‘There is another reason for being relatively certain that Jude did not write the book (referred to earlier, in Chapter 2). Like the lower-class Galilean peasant Peter, the lower-class Galilean peasant Jude could almost certainly not write. Let alone write in Greek. Let alone compose a rhetorically effective letter evidencing detailed knowledge of ancient Jewish texts in Greek. This is an author claiming to be Jude in order to get Christians to read his book and to stand opposed to false teachers who hold a different view of the faith.

(From the book: ‘Forged; Writing in the Name of God - Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are’).
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single

Well, if he was Jesus' brother he would presumably been an artisan like his father and brother, not a peasant. And there is at least some evidence that Jesus could read, but probably not in Greek. Of course, Peter wasn't a peasant either. He was a fisherman.

Sorry, can't help myself. I was born persnickety.
 
Reactions: Niblo
Upvote 0

Niblo

Muslim
Site Supporter
Dec 23, 2014
1,052
279
79
Wales.
✟248,811.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Muslim
Marital Status
Married

Hi. No need to be sorry. I agree with you. These were artisans and fishermen, and not peasants. That being said, it is highly likely that Ehrman is correct in everything else that he says; and we ought not to allow his use of the word 'peasant' to distract us from that!
 
Upvote 0

outsidethecamp

Heb 13:10-15
Apr 19, 2014
989
506
✟3,811.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

I don't think God created Adam with a toddler mentality. After all, he named the animals, and wouldn't it be unjust and unfair of God to tell him something if he did not have the capacity to obey it? Adam chose not to obey and he was given full disclosure of the consequences.

Man has not and will never be in a position to accuse God of unrighteousness.

Psalms 145:17
The Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works.
 
Upvote 0

fatboys

Senior Veteran
Nov 18, 2003
9,231
280
72
✟68,575.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
We never said that they had a toddler mentality but that they did not have the experience or knowledge of good or evil. If they were to judge whether or not something is good then how would they know unless they experienced the difference? They were smart but innocent to know whether or not satan was lying to them.
 
Upvote 0

outsidethecamp

Heb 13:10-15
Apr 19, 2014
989
506
✟3,811.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
They are supposed to obey.

You don't learn about evil by experiencing it. You learn by believing God's Word. My wife became a Christian at 12 years old and knows the difference between good and evil and obeying the Lord or disobeying Him. She did not learn about it by giving up her innocence and experiencing evil. You judge whether something is good or not by believing what God says about it.

How do you know if Satan is lying to you? Do you try it before you believe God?
 
Upvote 0

smaneck

Baha'i
Sep 29, 2010
21,182
2,948
Jackson, MS
✟63,144.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Baha'i
Marital Status
Single

Ehrman is simply using the term peasant rather loosely, I agree. The consensus of academic scholarship is clearly behind him. We have to expect that Dallas Theological Seminary with its Chancellor Charles Swindall would not agree. But they don't form the consensus.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Mar 21, 2013
1,454
148
✟25,605.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
This misunderstanding primarily comes as a result of a deeply flawed assumption concerning both the intelligence and technology of the Antediluvian civilizations or more correctly the pre flood world.

How come the glaciers left behind geological evidence of their presence thousands of years ago, but there is no evidence of a global, worldwide flood?
 
Upvote 0

fatboys

Senior Veteran
Nov 18, 2003
9,231
280
72
✟68,575.00
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
They did what God planned them to do. The God I have faith in foes not make mistakes and then have to make a different.
 
Upvote 0