Israeli archeologists discover new Dead Sea Scrolls for first time in 60 years

[Bouncing Bill 74]

I found this a very interesting article. Go to the link. The article is longer than what I posted here. 

TEL AVIV — Israeli archeologists on Tuesday revealed dozens of recently-discovered fragments of biblical texts, known as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which build on a collection of ancient Jewish religious manuscripts that was first discovered 60 years ago.

 

Israel’s Antiquities Authorities said that the pieces of parchment feature lines of Greek text from the books of Zechariah and Nahum which have been radiocarbon dated to the 2nd century A.D.

The discovery is the result of a years-long Israeli excavation in the Judean Desert and are believed to belong to a set known as “The Cave of Horror,” named for the 40 human skeletons found during excavations in the 1960s. They bear a Greek rendition of the Twelve Minor Prophets.

The finding also included a cache of millenia-old rare coins, a 6,000 year-old skeleton of a child — likely female, mummified in a piece of cloth — and a large basket dating back 10,500 years, which specialists believe could be the oldest in the world.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/deadsea-scrolls-israel-archeology/2021/03/16/b74bf654-862f-11eb-be4a-24b89f616f2c_story.html

[SureWord 233]

Probably more gnostic and Jewish fables that were buried for a reason. 

[Bouncing Bill 74]

3 hours ago, SureWord said:

Probably more gnostic and Jewish fables that were buried for a reason. 

I'm curious. Did you read the article?

[Ukulelemike 3,829]

12 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I found this a very interesting article. Go to the link. The article is longer than what I posted here. 

TEL AVIV — Israeli archeologists on Tuesday revealed dozens of recently-discovered fragments of biblical texts, known as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which build on a collection of ancient Jewish religious manuscripts that was first discovered 60 years ago.

 

Israel’s Antiquities Authorities said that the pieces of parchment feature lines of Greek text from the books of Zechariah and Nahum which have been radiocarbon dated to the 2nd century A.D.

The discovery is the result of a years-long Israeli excavation in the Judean Desert and are believed to belong to a set known as “The Cave of Horror,” named for the 40 human skeletons found during excavations in the 1960s. They bear a Greek rendition of the Twelve Minor Prophets.

The finding also included a cache of millenia-old rare coins, a 6,000 year-old skeleton of a child — likely female, mummified in a piece of cloth — and a large basket dating back 10,500 years, which specialists believe could be the oldest in the world.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/deadsea-scrolls-israel-archeology/2021/03/16/b74bf654-862f-11eb-be4a-24b89f616f2c_story.html

Funny how it all dates to around the 2nd century AD, yet included is a 10,500 year old basket??? Funny how that lasted from even before the creation of the universe. And a 1000 year of cache of coins? AND a 6000 year old skeleton?So people were storing things in this cave from 10,500 years ago, to 1000 years back? The numbers aren't adding up.

[Bouncing Bill 74]

10 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Funny how it all dates to around the 2nd century AD, yet included is a 10,500 year old basket??? Funny how that lasted from even before the creation of the universe. And a 1000 year of cache of coins? AND a 6000 year old skeleton?So people were storing things in this cave from 10,500 years ago, to 1000 years back? The numbers aren't adding up.

Obviously they used the cave for a long-long-long time. So, yes, it does add up IMHO.

[Ukulelemike 3,829]

5 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Obviously they used the cave for a long-long-long time. So, yes, it does add up IMHO.

Well of course, the dating doesn't match biblical timelines, so no, a 10, 500 year old basket cannot exist, and doubtful there's a 6000 year old skeleton, as this area wouldn't have been excepted from the flood. I suspect they're all from roughly the same time period, probably around the 2nd century AD, though the only items they could actually definitely date would be the coins, since coins are datable due to either an actual date on them, or the imagery on them.  

[Bouncing Bill 74]

3 hours ago, Ukulelemike said:

Well of course, the dating doesn't match biblical timelines, so no, a 10, 500 year old basket cannot exist, and doubtful there's a 6000 year old skeleton, as this area wouldn't have been excepted from the flood. I suspect they're all from roughly the same time period, probably around the 2nd century AD, though the only items they could actually definitely date would be the coins, since coins are datable due to either an actual date on them, or the imagery on them.  

I respectfully disagree. I do not believe the writer's of Genesis, first chapter, meant for their words to be taken literally. If you take them literally, they you have a huge problem fitting in Genesis 2. Chapter 1 has God create man last, whereas Chapter 2 has God create man first. Genesis was never meant to be a chronological account of creation. It was meant to explain the creation story in a manner that could be understood by folk living back then. 

Carbon dating is accurate enough.

[Hugh_Flower 34]

16 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I respectfully disagree. I do not believe the writer's of Genesis, first chapter, meant for their words to be taken literally. If you take them literally, they you have a huge problem fitting in Genesis 2. Chapter 1 has God create man last, whereas Chapter 2 has God create man first. Genesis was never meant to be a chronological account of creation. It was meant to explain the creation story in a manner that could be understood by folk living back then. 

Carbon dating is accurate enough.

No. Chapter 2 is about the creation of Eden, which does not contradict Chapter 1. Please re-read a KJ Bible. 

[1Timothy115 923]

The numbers don't add up. No I don't have time for the article.

[Alan 3,520]

Here is a good video from Answers in Genesis, called, "Science Confirms a Young Earth - The Radioactive Dating Methods are Flawed," given by Dr. Andrew Snelling from Australia.

Dr. Snelling examines the science, and assumptions, used in the Carbon Dating method. Dr. Snelling proves that the carbon dating method is flawed with three major assumptions. Therefore, proving that the carbon dating method is not accurate but flawed.  

Edited March 17 by Alan
spelling

[Bouncing Bill 74]

17 hours ago, Hugh_Flower said:

No. Chapter 2 is about the creation of Eden, which does not contradict Chapter 1. Please re-read a KJ Bible. 

I respectfully disagree. It is about the creation of earth. Genesis 2:4 proves this. Regardless, chapter 2 shows God creating mankind before the animals. 

[Hugh_Flower 34]

5 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I respectfully disagree. It is about the creation of earth. Genesis 2:4 proves this. Regardless, chapter 2 shows God creating mankind before the animals. 

There is no way the bible can have contradiction. 

In the Garden of Eden, God specifically made every creature ( already existing on the earth, chapter 1 ) for Adam to see and name. If God did not do this Adam would have had to travel the globe to find, see and name them all, but in Eden they all ( every kind ) lived in there, it's an imagery of Noah's ark and Christ's salvation. 

You are really off right here, I really really hope you can look upon your self and see your error.

If you do not understand what I'm saying, I'm happy to help you out. 

Blessings Hugh

 

Edited March 18 by Hugh_Flower

[Bouncing Bill 74]

1 hour ago, Hugh_Flower said:

There is no way the bible can have contradiction. 

In the Garden of Eden, God specifically made every creature ( already existing on the earth, chapter 1 ) for Adam to see and name. If God did not do this Adam would have had to travel the globe to find, see and name them all, but in Eden they all ( every kind ) lived in there, it's an imagery of Noah's ark and Christ's salvation. 

You are really off right here, I really really hope you can look upon your self and see your error.

If you do not understand what I'm saying, I'm happy to help you out. 

Blessings Hugh

 

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation. You are not taking the Bible literally if you insist on your interpretation of Genesis 2. 

[Ukulelemike 3,829]

On 3/17/2021 at 11:58 AM, Bouncing Bill said:

I respectfully disagree. I do not believe the writer's of Genesis, first chapter, meant for their words to be taken literally. If you take them literally, they you have a huge problem fitting in Genesis 2. Chapter 1 has God create man last, whereas Chapter 2 has God create man first. Genesis was never meant to be a chronological account of creation. It was meant to explain the creation story in a manner that could be understood by folk living back then. 

Carbon dating is accurate enough.

Chapter 1 is an overview of creation, while chapter 2 concerns the creation of man and what occurred on, primarily, day six in relation to man. Genesis 1 is absolutely literal, and there is no reason to believe otherwise. Even the terminology used, "Day" "Evening," and "Morning" make it clear it is meant to be literal, the earth is about 6000 years old.

Notice, as well, in Gen 1, God created the birds from the sea, while in chapter 2, from the ground. A contradiction? Not at all. God created one of each kind of animals in the garden specifically so that, 1: Adam could name them, 2, so Adam could see none of them would make an appropriate mate, and 3, so that there was never any doubt that could be made in his mind that God created them all.  #3 is subjective, I agree, but we know that Satan will use anything to bring doubt to someone's mind, but #1 & #2 are both biblical.

Carbon dating is only accurate if they already have a pretty good idea of a date, otherwise it is very flawed. There are reports of different parts of the same animal being carbon dated with variances of over 20,000-30,000 years. 

[Hugh_Flower 34]

4 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I respectfully disagree with your interpretation. You are not taking the Bible literally if you insist on your interpretation of Genesis 2. 

I'm using the correct interpretation, it's the only clear and obvious one.

Edited March 19 by Hugh_Flower

[Bouncing Bill 74]

I respectfully disagree.

8 hours ago, Hugh_Flower said:

I'm using the correct interpretation, it's the only clear and obvious one.

I respectfully disagree. 

[SureWord 233]

On 3/16/2021 at 4:41 PM, Bouncing Bill said:

I'm curious. Did you read the article?

Sort of. I scanned the article, but I watched a few videos concerning it. 

Almost half of the "Dead Sea Scrolls" were based on Jewish fables one of which I'm reading now, The Book of Enoch. If this is related to that group of manuscripts or related to the Essenes than it is Jewish rubbish regardless if they found some Hellenistic Greek translation that matches the bible. 

The Book of the Twelve Prophets or the twelve minor prophets? The Book of the Twelve Minor Prophets sounds like an apocryphal term.

The Dead Sea Scrolls were used to support the mythological LXX theory that itself was based on a Jewish fable in the Letter to Aristeas 

"Not giving heed to Jewish fables..."- Titus 1:14

All the material in the cave probably dates from 200 BC to 200 AD. Radio Carbon Dating is suspect because it depends on all climate factors remaining the same without any variation. 

[1Timothy115 923]

10 hours ago, SureWord said:

All the material in the cave probably dates from 200 BC to 200 AD. Radio Carbon Dating is suspect because it depends on all climate factors remaining the same without any variation. 

Climate! Yes and the world wide catastrophic flood changed the climate and which is still returning to its pre-flood state even today. So carbon dating is not a reliable source.