Slashdot Mirror


Computers Decipher Burnt Scroll Found In Ancient Holy Ark (nationalgeographic.com)

bsharma writes: Scientists have formally announced their reconstruction of the Ein Gedi Scroll, the most ancient Hebrew scroll since the Dead Sea Scrolls. This was done by CAT scanning the burnt scrolls and virtually reconstructing the layers of scrolls with ink blobs on them. National Geographic reports: "For decades, the Israel Antiquities Authority guarded the document, known as the Ein Gedi Scroll, careful not to open it for fear that the brittle text would shatter to pieces. But last year, scientists announced that they had scanned, virtually unrolled, and translated the scroll's hidden verses -- a feat now formally described in the scientific literature. Based on preliminary scans, [Brent Seales of the University of Kentucky, who specialized in digitally reconstructing damaged texts,] and his colleagues announced in 2015 that the Ein Gedi Scroll was a biblical text from the sixth century A.D. containing a column of text from the book of Leviticus. But the full CT scan results, published on Wednesday in Science Advances, tell a deeper story. Further analysis revealed an extra column of text, ultimately fleshing out the first two chapters of Leviticus -- ironically, a book that begins with God's instructions for burnt offerings. What's more, radiocarbon dating of the scroll suggests that it may be between 1,700 and 1,800 years old, at least 200 years older than previously thought. In fact, the scroll's distinctive handwriting hearkens back to the first or second century A.D., some five centuries earlier than the date ascribed to the scroll last year." University of Cambridge lecturer James Aitken told Smithsonian's Devin Powell in 2015: "There's little of surprise in finding a Leviticus scroll. We probably have many more copies of it than any other book, as its Hebrew style is so simple and repetitive that it was used for children's writing exercises."

144 of 235 comments (clear)

  1. Obligatory.. by Monoman · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Be sure to drink your Ovaltine."

    --
    Keep the Classic Slashdot.
    1. Re: Obligatory.. by tysonedwards · · Score: 5, Funny

      Archaeologists near Mount Sinai have discovered what is believed to be a missing page from the Bible. The page is presently being carbon dated in Bonn. If genuine it belongs at the beginning of the Bible and is believed to read "To my darling Candy. All characters portrayed within this book are fictitious and any resemblance to persons living or dead is purely coincidental." The page has been universally condemned by church leaders.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    2. Re: Obligatory.. by sciengin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As if todays church leaders would give a damn about what is written in the bible...

      In one of his letters, Paul explicitly warns the congregation in one city against the teachings of "people who forbid to marry" and linkens this to demon-inspired utterings.
      Did not stop the church to forbid its priests to marry until this day, all for the sake of money (well inheritance really).

      And lets not forget Jesus saying, on the night of hist arrest, "Those who take up the sword will die by the sword". Now preventing the arresting of Jesus (as Peter had just tried to do) was certainly THE most noble cause to take up the sword. So if even for this it was forbidden, how much more for the inter-human wars.
      And yet today hardly an army marches out without having its weapons blessed by the priests or clerics.

    3. Re: Obligatory.. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Right footed vicars have been allowed to marry since Elizabethan times. And I don't mean Frau Battenburg Von Schleswig-Holsten Pilsner.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:Obligatory.. by s122604 · · Score: 2

      sonofabitch!

    5. Re: Obligatory.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, he was suggesting exactly the opposite: that any sort of tolerance (let alone support) for war is anti-Christian, so priests etc. should be condemning armies instead of blessing them.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    6. Re: Obligatory.. by Dread_ed · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not to be pedantic, just precise, the wording of the passage you mention about "taking up the sword" refers specifically to criminality and not to war.

      --
      When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
    7. Re: Obligatory.. by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 2

      Well, now you're forcing me to post a Monty Python link:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xOrgLj9lOwk

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    8. Re: Obligatory.. by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      For clarity;

      At least in my church our pastors preach FROM THE BIBLE. They give more than a damn about what is written in the Bible.

      My church, and indeed virtually all of Protestant/Reformed Christianity does not forbid pastors, priests, whatever you call them to marry. The Catholic Church still does. Calling the Catholic Church "the church" is imprecise, lazy, or deliberately misleading. Or you don't really care, which is unfortunate.

      Jesus did indeed correct Peter when He was arrested. There may be righteous justifications for war, which is a longstanding debate of which there is much commentary you could find and consider. I will not repeat or paraphrase those more learned than I in this matter.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    9. Re: Obligatory.. by brasselv · · Score: 1

      "At least in my church our pastors preach FROM THE BIBLE. They give more than a damn about what is written in the Bible"

      I don't know how to say this as nicely as possible, but..
      are we sure we are talking about the same book? I would be surprised if your pastors advocate the stoning of undisciplined pupils.

      --
      "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
    10. Re: Obligatory.. by Jzanu · · Score: 1

      You're entirely wrong on that. 5th commandment is accurately translated as "Do not slay the innocent and the righteous" - this means war against evil is justified as a last resort. See http://www.vatican.va/archive/...

    11. Re: Obligatory.. by rickb928 · · Score: 2

      More clarity :
      As you should know, the Mosaic covenant is superceded, overridden, by the new covenant in Christ. Those who continue to obey the Law at bound by it, but those who believe in Christ not only need not, but are given a new covenant, fulfilled in Him.

      This is a central point of Christianity, one you cannot be ignorant of. Unless you've done no study, in which case I encourage your attention. There is much literature, many essays, much discussion, going back to Christ Himself.

      Your complaint is noted, and has been answered for centuries.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    12. Re: Obligatory.. by brasselv · · Score: 1

      thanks for your answer, I mean it!
      one thing I don't understand is the following - maybe you can help (no irony)

      the new testament is not getting into details on topics that many Christians seem to care about. topics like human sexuality, origins of the cosmos, laws of nature, and more.
      when many Christians are looking for answers on such topics, they tend to refer to the old testament. however, when such answers appear unpalatable in the old testament (see e. g. stoning), they use the argument that the new testament has supeseded those things.

      is it a fair reading? how do you know when something is superseded and when?

      --
      "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
    13. Re: Obligatory.. by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      I am a Christian, and have attended (and continue to) churches that preach from the Bible, and endeavor to study it and to rightly interpret it.

      Also, just in case you aren't familiar with the abbreviations, OT = Old Testament and NT = New Testament :)

      Referring to out-of-context passages in the Old Testament (e.g., Leviticus for things about homosexuality) seems pretty common... unfortunately. It is not treated very well, and, as you have noted, pretty much just cherry-picked to "prove" one's point. It's often referred to as proof-texting.

      I don't know exactly what you meant, but if you were asking whether that is a good thing - I do not think it is. Israel was a specific nation, with a specific covenant by God; some of the laws appear to coincide with, shall we say, a more universal standard of right and wrong that God has. Others were clearly designed to simply set Israel, as a nation, apart from other nations (e.g., not wearing clothing with mixed fabrics, or many of the dietary restrictions).

      In general, I side with non-Christians who criticize Christians for pulling out random OT passages when it suits them and not other ones. Those who criticize Christians for that do, in fact, have a valid point. Christians should not simply pick the parts they like from a law given specifically to Israel and pretend they apply universally to humanity.

      Now, that said... I am also of the opinion that there are pretty clear statements in the NT on things like homosexuality (and other sexual sins). And, to be fair, there are parts of the OT that are *not* specific to Israel, even if they were written TO Israel. A lot of stuff in the prophecy books (Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, etc.) has not been fulfilled. A lot of the Psalms, which are just songs, were written by Israelites (primarily David) but often talk about God in generic terms, not Israel-covenant-specific terms... though again, one has to be careful when trying to bring out an application for a New Testament Christian.

      .

    14. Re: Obligatory.. by dbreeze · · Score: 2

      Chuck Missler is simply one of the best teachers of the Bible I've come across in 35+ years of faith in Jesus. He comes from an extensive technical background, focused on information technologies. I highly recommend anyone with honest questions to look into his work.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.khouse.org/ http://www.youtube.com/user/ko...

        Above all else, read for yourself. It takes a decent overall perspective to make sense of much of the specifics, but it's really not that hard of a read. Certainly the most remarkable book I've ever encountered...

      --
      When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
    15. Re: Obligatory.. by dbreeze · · Score: 1

      https://www.bible.com/bible/1/...

      35Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying,
      36Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
      37Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
      38 This is the first and great commandment.
      39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
      40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

      Note that this general theme concerning law is expounded and detailed throughout the epistles, along with the necessity of salvation, and the sufficiency of Christ's blood to secure our salvation.
      "The old testament is the new testament concealed, and the new testament is the old testament revealed." -Chuck Missler

      --
      When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
    16. Re: Obligatory.. by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Excellent comments all, thank you.

      In the NT, Hebrews 13 is an excellent passage, not only because it was written to Jewish converts, but because it is a brief, limited, but clear recommendation of how to live the Christian life.

      The Letter of Paul to the Romans is, to me, the best handbook of the Gospel, living a Christian life, and how to evangelize in the NT. Our church just finished a 2+ year study of it, punctuated with other bits and such. A total of 60+ messages in all. We took months to go through Romans 8. And scripture is so full of meaning you need to examine every word...

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    17. Re: Obligatory.. by brasselv · · Score: 1

      God is quite an elusive idea - but I do like very much the idea of loving your neighbor!

      But if really boils down to that, why carrying forward all the baggage that can be summarized in that one wise and precious sentence?
      Why loading yourself with the need to explain away everything else, when you could just choose any modern philosopher (say, Peter Singer) that says essentially the same thing, but without the references to goats, stoning and the like? It appears on the face of it an enormous effort and rather a waste of energy. What am I missing?

      --
      "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
    18. Re: Obligatory.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I was explaining what the grandparent poster said because the parent poster misunderstood.

      Also, for Christians (as opposed to Jews or Muslims), stuff Jesus said should be considered to supersede stuff Moses said.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    19. Re: Obligatory.. by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Because Monty Python is a great historian and not a troupe of anti Carholic commedians at all

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    20. Re: Obligatory.. by mcswell · · Score: 1

      For the record, most Protestant churches I've attended (which tend towards the evangelical end, not sure about "mainstream" Protestant churches) use the term "Satan", not "Lucifer." That said, I hardly think it matters; both are transliterations, not translations, and obviously refer to the same "person".

    21. Re: Obligatory.. by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Most unfortunate coincidence ever, that Jesus's cross can be modelled by a sword hilt.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    22. Re: Obligatory.. by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Numbers 5:11-31 describes a way that a priest can terminate a pregnancy. It's a magical method that only works if the woman was unfaithful, of course, but it's all there.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    23. Re: Obligatory.. by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      don't know how to say this as nicely as possible, but..
      are we sure we are talking about the same book?

      I'm not the person you're replying to (obviously), but yes, you're almost certainly referring to the book with Acts 15 in it. Wikipedia has more on the Noachide laws if you're curious; this is absolutely settled.

      Oh, it's also the same book which gives a method for terminating a pregnancy via magic. Hopefully it's not the same book that cynical politicians have subtly rewritten to suit their agenda...

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    24. Re: Obligatory.. by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      You think? I think it's pretty clear that the reference in Isaiah 14:12 is to Nebuchadnezzar II, king of Babylon.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  2. Older = Better by rainmouse · · Score: 1

    Because the older something is, the better it is.

    1. Re:Older = Better by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well, the closer it is to the original. You know the old joke where the curator of the monastery came up from the vault with the original texts and cried "Dammit, in the original it read 'celebRate'!"

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Older = Better by rainmouse · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But when the original is culturally dependent, word-of-mouth stories that vary more dramatically the 'closer' you get. Surely the culture built up over millennia becomes more important. I suspect the main value of this is just understanding historical cultural ideals 'at the time' rather than any positive or negative religious insights.

    3. Re:Older = Better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes you DO get positive or negative insights, based on stuff like "Further analysis revealed an extra column of text". Meaning some religious "governing body", at some point decided to remove (and/or add) bits that were not (or were) benefiting/increasing their power and so on...

    4. Re:Older = Better by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      History tends to be distorted over the generations. Where each historian will add their own personal spin on their interpretation. Where some people become savage villains while others become glorious generals. Where they both did what they did with the good and bad.
      The older documents are not necessarily more accurate. But offers perspective with less layers of interpretation. Also offer insight of the culture of the time of the writing.

      Now I disagree with the notion that the ancients were somehow closer to "God" or had a better understanding of the Universe. But the more about the ancients we discover, the less primitive the people seem.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    5. Re:Older = Better by MrTester · · Score: 1

      Wow....
      You realize that your just kinda... making that up, right?

    6. Re:Older = Better by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, the closer it is to the original

      Actually, something left out of the summary is the textual significance of this find. Some of the researchers involved have noted that this is the earliest text found so far that is identical to the Masoretic text, a medieval version which is the standard Hebrew edition often used today (not only in the original but as the basis of many modern translations, etc.).

      Previous finds have shown that a set of "proto-Masoretic" variants begins to emerge as a standard around 2000 years ago (before that, there were wider textual variants). But previous fragments actually identical to the Masoretic were only known to date to centuries after this one. Depending on whose dating you believe, this scroll places the origin of this standard text version perhaps back to 1700-2000 years ago.

      It's also significant because it's a biblical fragment recovered from an ark in a synagogue, where it may have actually been used, as opposed to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were preserved in desert caves and might represent a less 'standard" source tradition.

      Again, a lot of this is speculative, but in this case the find is actually significant in pushing back the date when a "standard" Hebrew text may have begun to emerge.

    7. Re:Older = Better by avgjoe62 · · Score: 2

      But the more about the ancients we discover, the less primitive the people seem

      The older I get, the more I learn about the other people sharing this planet and those that preceded us, the more I believe that we are all the same, for the most part. We all have the same basic wants and needs, the same basic drives. What separates me from a Roman living under Augustus or an Egyptian living in the time of Ramses is more a matter of the trappings of technology than the core of our beings.

      As a kid I was always struck by this quote from Khan in the Star trek episode Space Seed

      Nothing ever changes, except man. Your technical accomplishments? Improve a mechanical device and you may double productivity, but improve man and you gain a thousandfold. I am such a man.

      There's no Khans running around yet. So we are pretty much as we have always been, except for some immunity to some diseases that our ancestors paid for.

      --

      How come Slashdot never gets Slashdotted?

    8. Re:Older = Better by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I think the whole point of the bible was summed up nicely in the Battlestar Galactica remake: "All of this has happened before, and shall happen again."

      The older the text is, the more it drives that point home.

    9. Re:Older = Better by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      You know the old joke where the curator of the monastery came up from the vault with the original texts and cried "Dammit, in the original it read 'celebRate'!"

      Or the first line of the Bible, saying "The story, all names, characters, and incidents portrayed in this production are fictitious. No identification with actual persons, places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred."

    10. Re:Older = Better by darkain · · Score: 2

      If you had bothered to read the rest of that statement right here in the summary on slashdot, you'd realize that the "second column of text" is the second chapter. This isn't a case of adding/removing/doctoring text, it is a case of initially they had a single column (chapter) of text visible and through more work managed to reveal the second column (chapter) of text.

    11. Re:Older = Better by rickb928 · · Score: 1

      Or they didn't happen to find this specific manuscript, relying on several others that were available.

      In other words, they used what they actually had.

      Seriously, this is not that hard.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    12. Re: Older = Better by brasselv · · Score: 1

      if you tried living in a cave, fighting bears with bare hands, surviving the decimation of your tribe by a neighbor tribe, to then die at age 25 of a small infection, all the while believing that the god of blood and thunder rules the forest, and moves the sun, his slave and concubine through the sky... ... you would have a different opinion.

      --
      "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
    13. Re:Older = Better by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Indeed... on seeing the phrase "holy ark" my brain immediately jumped to the the item of focus in the first Indiana Jones film. If that relic were to ever actually be found, it would be of huge significance to many people with a religious affiliation worldwide... with the significance of any texts within being of only secondary importance.

    14. Re:Older = Better by dbreeze · · Score: 1

      Here's an interesting read on the "accuracy" of the Bible...
      http://www.icr.org/article/pre...

      --
      When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
    15. Re:Older = Better by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Isn't the Ark filed under Nevada?

    16. Re:Older = Better by martinfb · · Score: 1

      The older, the better the chance to interpret incorrectly - or out of context!

      --


      Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
  3. "it was used for children's writing exercises" by Viol8 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Which frankly is all the faction and outright fairy tales in all religious tomes are really any use for.

    1. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Tell that to all the Star Wars misfits around here. Grown men still obsessed with a plaything of their youth.

    2. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by FudRucker · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "The income of the priest class is totally dependent on their continued ability to sell invisible goods to suckers, they praise and glorify faith to the skies, complimenting people on how much of it they have. If it weren't for faith, they'd be out of business, and they know it."

      " They have no merchandise to buy, no commissions to pay, and no refunds to make for unsatisfactory service and results....

      "Their commodity is fear. They blackmail their parishioners with threats of hell and damnation. These poor deluded people give them their hard earned money to save them from a hell that does not exist, and from eternal torment that was invented by the corrupt minds of priests to rob the living and in addition, they are exempt from taxation! Insult to injury!

      Let me tell you that religion is the cruelest fraud ever perpetrated upon the human race. It is the last of the great scheme of thievery that man must legally prohibit so as to protect himself from the charlatans who prey upon the ignorance and fears of the people.The penalty for this type of extortion should be as severe as it is of other forms of fraud and theft."

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    3. Re: "it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All the factions make up an interesting tale. I'm surprised that they haven't made a biblical drama focusing on all the sex, violence and politics.

      Call it "A Game of Tribes", and with all the source material free and already published, you could have a hit show.

    4. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Disgustingly shallow and childish understanding of reality. If this was 2030 I would assume this is an automatic post written by an AI. You're just another one of those philosophical zombies.

    5. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tell that to all the Star Wars misfits around here. Grown men still obsessed with a plaything of their youth.

      And how is that any more weird than grown people believing they must modify their behaviour according to the whims of some guy who's set himself up as a priest/prophet/grand-poobah and who says that if they don't obey his imaginary friend (whom only he can see and hear) will destroy them in a rain of fire and brimstone and then send them to spend eternity in an inferno for whose existence there isn't a shred of proof? Say what you will about Lucas hounds, making Jediism the fourth largest 'religion' in the UK was sheer genius and one of the best demonstrations of how nonsensical religion really is other than Pastafarianism which is also pretty cool. In the UK they've actually got prisoners suing the prison system for failing to recognise Jediism as a religion. Some 2.6% of the city of Bristol claimed to be Jedi in a census. In Germany a guy actually got his local council to allow him to hang out an official road sign directing people to his Pastafarian church. The sign also contains information about when Pastafarian services are held. The thing looks awesome next to the church signs: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/f...

    6. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by FudRucker · · Score: 1, Insightful

      you're a snakeoil salesman, a schemer that sells bullshit to idiots, you belong in prison, and not giving advice to the naive

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    7. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      According to all religions, almost all religious texts are fairy tales. What's your problem?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by geantvert · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More generally, "name calling" should be the expected behavior when asking almost any complex question to any large group of persons.

      However, in that specific case, Richard Dawkins has the expected default position of any atheist (including me): The existence of an invisible unproven magic being cannot be the answer to any complex phenomena observed in the real world (in that case, that would be the origin of life). That position implies that there are things that we cannot explain with our current understanding of nature (you know, that thing called science).

      Improving science by looking for more clues in the real world is the right way to handle those mysteries. Claiming "Magic", "God", "Taboo" or "Holy Book" is not.

    9. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      this guy may have figured it out

      https://www.quantamagazine.org...

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    10. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by sky_khan72 · · Score: 1

      Which god are you referring to? If its our holy lord [F]lying [S]paghetti [M]onster, god bless you! Otherwise I have to remind that you will be at the bottom of boiling cauldron. Even then there's still hope for you. You just have to hug FSM.

    11. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ""The income of the priest class is totally dependent on their continued ability to sell invisible goods to suckers"

      I think I understand why software nerds get so triggered.

    12. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Coisiche · · Score: 1

      Some will have a problem. It's all other religious texts that are fairy tales. The religious texts for the religion that their parents indoctrinated them into are most definitely not fairy tales. To them anyway. And they can get quite irate over the suggestion that all religious texts are just the same.

    13. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by jellomizer · · Score: 2

      The problem is the old lame argument of trying to prove your point by changing the wording to a negative context.

      Calling a Religion a FairyTale implies it is a set of overly simplistic stories meant for children.

      While most religious text are a combination of written history philosophy of the time, mixed with rules for often a nomadic society to function in a world which is often against them.

      The 10 commandments (where they are more than 10, and different religions count them differently and group them in different ways) were less about how to be good. But dealing with property and inheritance rights.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    14. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by DrXym · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's called abiogenisis and there are various plausible hypotheses. But even if someone were to demonstrate a self assembling and self replicating molecule through one of these processes it doesn't say that's how they occured on Earth over 3.5 billion years ago. But just because something is unknowable does it become god-did-it.

    15. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by I75BJC · · Score: 1

      I take it that you have never actually read the book of Leviticus. In any English version, or any Hebrew version, or any other language version. Had you read the book of Leviticus, you would have realize the utter silliness/rubbish of your "comment". Leviticus is a book of Hebrew Law. It contains statutes and not stories. "Look at the stupid [commenter], s/he bitches bout things s/he don't even know" --Mick Jagger and Keith Richards

    16. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 5, Informative

      Atheism is a religion for most who 'believe' in it.

      Every Sunday, atheists gather in their athiest churches (tax exempt by the way) and pray to (no one) to show theiir lack of faith in no one.

      Then at night, before they go to bed, they pray to (no one) to keep themselves and their family safe and healthy.

      Likewise, in times of stress, they also pray to (no one) petitioning (no one) for an outcome they desire.

      Then after a hopefully long life lived according to their belief in (no one), when they shift this mortal coil, the eternal soul that they don't have will forever be in teh presence of (no one)

      I think you are mistaking the fact that atheists, like all humans, can be assholes, just like the people of faith in a deity can be assholes at time.

      Finally, the faithful tend to think about their particular deity all the time. I know I only think about a deity when we have these discussions and people try to tell me I have a religion. As a recovering Catholic, I know the difference well. But otherwise nope, sorry, no religion here.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    17. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      Improving science by looking for more clues in the real world is the right way to handle those mysteries. Claiming "Magic", "God", "Taboo" or "Holy Book" is not.

      Which ties into the "God of the gaps" argument, which over time, has been used to explain everything we do not know. Once upon a time, psychosis, birth defects, seemingly spontaneous biogenisis, the entire external universe and so much else were attributed to divinity because we just didn't know.

      Then over time more and more was learned that fit the once mysterious things into the natural world, and the God of the gaps became popular.

      Now the God of the Gaps has become quite small indeed. People who would claim that every word of the King James Bible is the exact word of God as revealed to man believe and take for granted, things that would have them burnt at the stake for heresy in an earlier time.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    18. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      That's basically the joke. Atheism is just rejecting one more holy story as a fairy tale than every believer does.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    19. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by rfengr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How did the first self-replicating molecule originate? Know one knows, but "I don't know" is a lot better answer than "God did it".

    20. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Which god are you referring to? If its our holy lord [F]lying [S]paghetti [M]onster, god bless you! Otherwise I have to remind that you will be at the bottom of boiling cauldron. Even then there's still hope for you. You just have to hug FSM.

      Let us all say a prayer that we shall all be touched by his noodley appendage!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    21. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      When I take a look down the average fairy tale, from Grimm's tales to Andersen, they are not that much different from many parables and allegories in the Bible. In many of either you find a good and a bad person, the good one facing hardship, overcoming it (in the fairy tale usually by his own feats, in the Bible it's usually divine intervention that helps him) and in the end being the winner because he was the (morally) superior being.

      The difference isn't that big, you know...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    22. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by SecurityGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Atheism is no more a religion than an empty glass contains a kind of beer.

      What I detest is asshole, self described 'atheists' who have the need to inform religious people that they are stupid for believing in fairy tales and having faith.

      I tend to leave religious people strictly alone, so long as they aren't harming or advocating harming anyone else. I think the notion of believing in a religion, and especially an afterlife, would be very comforting. Certainly, a lot of my extended family find it so. Really, the only time I ever want to argue against religion is when people use it as a weapon against others.

    23. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      "Except that many of the "winners" in the Bible are not the superior being"

      "It was God's providence, rather than anything good about Jacob, that made him the "winner"."

      So helped by fictious superior being who came along just in time instead. Yes, big difference.

      You should read Beowolf sometime.

    24. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Bible has many WTF moments when you read it, but for some reason back then it must've seemed ok to the people back then. I mean, if god supports Jacob's trick and doesn't punish him for being an asshole and swindling his brother out of his firstborn rights, does god condone such behaviour?

      Then again, when you look at Job, God can be quite the asshole himself.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    25. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by GrabbaTheButt · · Score: 1

      May His Sauce be upon you. Ramen

    26. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Bitztream, the autism-hating Slashdot troll, just got schooled!

    27. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by physicsphairy · · Score: 1

      The quantity of self-described religious adherents who don't go to church, don't pray, and don't think much about the afterlife (until the due date visibly approaches) is frankly quite large. Belief != fervor. And, proportionally, there's quite a few places dedicated to bringing atheists together and promulgating their beliefs (tax exempt by the way).

      As humans, we seek explanations, stake our identity in our beliefs, and pursue fellowship with those who share them. I know of at least one secular group in my city that explicitly claims to be a church ("The Church of Beethoven"). There are definitely distinctions between believing in historically established religion and believing in some form of modern secularism. But atheists like to phrase it as "We don't have any of the pitfalls of religion because we don't have religion" and it sounds an awful lot like monotheists claiming they don't have any of the pitfalls of being pagan.

    28. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That depends on what we mean by "religion" though.

      Obviously, atheists don't go to churches, pray or anything like that. But there is a culturally significant subset that hold the same positive beliefs: all religions are false (n.b. most will agree with the agnostics that we have no evidence, but I've yet to meet one that doesn't make positive claims that many things from holy books did not and could not have happened), religion is harmful, science is the only valid method for acquiring knowledge, and that atheist beliefs need to be promoted.

      This doesn't make atheists a religion in the ordinary sense of the word, but there's a certain linguistic gap here for describing a large group of people with positive beliefs about religion that they're trying to promote and some people try to fill that gap with "religion." So that's what they mean, even though I understand why you disagree with that terminology.

    29. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by gtall · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "And He who made kittens put snakes in the grass"

    30. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by cmdr_klarg · · Score: 2

      How did the first self-replicating molecule originate? Know one knows, but "I don't know" is a lot better answer than "God did it".

      Unfortunately many induhviduals have an almost pathological aversion to the words "I don't know". "God did it" is a nice comfortable catch-all to explain away the unknown, because the unknown is frightening to them.

      --
      THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
    31. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Enigma2175 · · Score: 1

      In a thousand years we will be still serving God, and you will be at the bottom of the lake of fire. This is of course of your own choosing. There's still hope for you, you just have to repent.

      Why would an omnipotent being need somebody to "serve" him or "glorify" him? Can't he serve himself?

      --

      Enigma

    32. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      The quantity of self-described religious adherents who don't go to church, don't pray, and don't think much about the afterlife (until the due date visibly approaches) is frankly quite large. Belief != fervor. And, proportionally, there's quite a few places dedicated to bringing atheists together and promulgating their beliefs (tax exempt by the way).

      Fascinatinating. Given that you mention Tax exempt status, it has become most clear that you define a 501(c) 3 coprporation as a religion. Allow me to show this from the first group, and th emajor group that comes up when I clicky clicky on the google search link you thoughtfully provided.

      The American Atheists

      This organization, which you declare as a religion, has this organizational note:

      American Atheists, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. As such, all donations and gifts to American Atheists are tax-deductible to the full extent allowed by law. The Federal Tax Identification Number of American Atheists, Inc. is 74-2466507.

      Membership gifts, gifts to our general fund, and gifts to the American Atheists Legal Fund, Billboard Fund, and other specific funds are fully tax deductible.

      Your subscription to American Atheist magazine is not tax deductible as a charitable donation.

      For questions about your contributions, members status, or for a copy of your giving record, please contact us.

      Now you will also note that their magazine is >not tax deductible. How odd when most churches pay no taxes whatsoever on anything, this 501(c)(3) "Church" is not totally tax deductible. Odd indeed!

      Since 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations are religions, I apparently have been a Priest of a church of youth Ice Hockey, a priest of an Amateur Radio religion, and a priest and founding member of an amateur astronomy religion. Who knew? I sure didn't!

      As humans, we seek explanations, stake our identity in our beliefs, and pursue fellowship with those who share them.

      And some of us actively seek to discriminate against those who do not share our beliefs. And some of us become very upset when we decide that elimination of our discrimination is discrimination aginst us.

      I know of at least one secular group in my city that explicitly claims to be a church ("The Church of Beethoven").

      Yeah, here they are: http://churchofbeethoven.org/

      Seriously man, are you actually saying that the Church of Beethovan is a separate religion? They say nothing about their personal beliefs.

      Good day sir, Hard to argue with a person that claims 501(c)(3) organizations are religions, and that the Church of Beethoven is likewise religion. Other than you are wrong, yet do not take telling. Such faith is commendable.

      I said, Good Day!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    33. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Finally, the faithful tend to think about their particular deity all the time.

      In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him; all his thoughts are, "There is no God."

      Yeay verily, who among us has not had the good fortune of being born in the place chosen by god to expound the one true belief?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    34. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Cut it any way you want it but atheism is just as much a BELIEF as theism is.

      Nope - you are just not capable of seeing it any other way.

      People who have a belief in say, the exact word of god as given to man in the form of the King James Bible cannot have any other belief.

      On th eother hand, I have confidence in matters. That means that if I say, have confidence that we cannot harness zero point energy, I'm pretty darn sure that we can't.

      But if someone comes along, and proves that we can, I'll abandon my confidence that we cannot in the face of evidence.

      That is something that can be easily seen in the Theory of Evolution, where despite all evidence to the contrary, despite the entire field od biology and modern medicine validating Evolution, and despite physics validating it, there are still peopple who have great faith theat th world is some 6000 years old.

      You just cannot understand the difference in mindset of people who need absolute unshakable belief, and people who have confidence in things, yet are able to change their minds as new evidence comes forth.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    35. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Jacob did not get let off the hook for his behavior. He spent most of his early adult life in exile away from his father Isaac's house due to his deception. If you care, read Genesis 27.

    36. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 1

      In a thousand years we will be still serving God, and you will be at the bottom of the lake of fire. This is of course of your own choosing. There's still hope for you, you just have to repent.

      By repent here you really mean take on the meme-complex...

      Don't you see you have fallen for the equivalent of a chain letter? Same exact outline:

      Promise rich rewards for spreading the meme-complex.
      Threaten dire consequences for ignoring.

      It is obvious if you spend a moment in honest self-reflection

    37. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Camel+Pilot · · Score: 2

      It is no accident that the alleged god takes on attributes of megalomaniac warlord/monarch.

    38. Re: "it was used for children's writing exercises" by brasselv · · Score: 1

      atheism does not require believing anything of the sort. why you say that?

      --
      "Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong." (Oscar Wilde)
    39. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by khallow · · Score: 1

      That's an strongly worded and woefully misdirected effort. If something is unknowable, then it's not worth the brain cells to talk about it. All this talk of hypocrisy is pointless since you haven't shown the earlier poster was inconsistent in any way.

    40. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      Also, Leviticus is not just Hebrew law, its Christian law too. Jesus said so many times himself. Unless, of course, you don't take everything Jesus said seriously.

      [Citation needed]

      Seriously, though... this is a very, very simplistic interpretation of what Jesus "said." For example, what exactly did Jesus mean when He said that He didn't "come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it." And, of course, if you take the NT to also be accurate, then you have to deal with all of Paul's writings on the law, which are ... voluminous. And enlightening, as Paul often wrote to non-Jews, whereas Jesus was talking to Jews. Rightly interpreting what Jesus said, and why, requires knowing who He was talking to, why He came... well, and more, heh. He didn't just randomly show up and start speaking nice morals to a global human audience.

    41. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      What we've really found is that we need to reject the God of the Gaps to make progress in science and engineering. If we call something a miracle, we can't learn anything about the world from it, since a miracle by definition is an exception to the laws of the Universe. If we reject the idea of a miracle and try to figure out what physically happened to create that effect, we might learn something. Over time, those "might learn something"s add up, while the "cant learn anything"s keep summing to zero.

      There's still a great many things we don't understand, and undoubtedly a greater number of things we don't know well enough to realize we don't understand them. There's still lots of room for a God of the Gaps. What causes the Universe to expand? We figure what's going on, and make up a label "dark energy" to define what we mean by it if we ever learn anything significant about it. No physicist says that it's just that God wants the Universe to expand for some ineffable purpose, because every physicist realizes, perhaps not consciously, that that sort of reasoning goes nowhere.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    42. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      For all you or I know, God did do it. It won't stop us from assuming it was a perfectly natural phenomenon and trying to figure what it was.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    43. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      A lot of people also seem to reject the idea that the Universe is basically more complicated than they can imagine (typically without trying to understand it), and God is a nice convenient three-letter placeholder to prevent the necessity of trying to learn something or appreciate the wonder of the Universe.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    44. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      A lot of religious people focus on the joy and love rather than the fear. Religion can be very good for your emotional health and ability to cope. I often think wistfully that it would be very nice to have a church with a theology I could actually believe in. However, I am the person that a possibly existing God hypothetically made, and I'm not going to find such a church.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    45. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      So what are females of your religion good for? Isn't keeping them out of the priesthood at least a little cruel?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    46. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      "And He who made kittens put snakes in the grass"

      Something had to eat all those kittens, or we'd be overrun.

    47. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Stinky+Cheese+Man · · Score: 1

      An atheist is his own deity.

    48. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      An atheist is his own deity.

      Since when?

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    49. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      Which frankly is all the faction and outright fairy tales in all religious tomes are really any use for.

      I assume you refer to Episodes 1-3. Or did you mean Voyager?

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    50. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      I'm an omnist, you insensitive clod.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    51. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      All that is required for being an atheist is a lack of belief in a god. That doesn't keep you from believing in any other bullshit story (there's plenty of atheists that believe in aliens).

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    52. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by mcswell · · Score: 1

      I suppose an actor on a stage doesn't _need_ an audience, either; he could applaud himself. Now there are certainly actors who act for the income (many of them are in Hollywood), and there are actors who act out of a desire to have others applaud them (Nero is said to have been one such). But I've seen plenty of people on stage who were there because they genuinely liked to entertain people, and receive the applause graciously; and for many of them, it doesn't go to build up their egos, rather they get enjoyment out of making other people happy.

      I'm not saying God is an entertainer, but I also don't think he has an ego maniacal need for someone to glorify him, and he certainly doesn't do it for the money (since he owns everything he created already). But that leaves plenty of other possibilities. For instance, there are some things in the world that many people from across the religious-to-atheist spectrum would agree are admirable (in some sense): the universe, the Grand Canyon, Mt Rainier, a flower... And admiring them does us some good, like getting our mind off ourselves. At least from a Christian (and Jewish, and I think Islamic) perspective, admiring God is admiring the one who created such beauty. And I see nothing wrong with it.

    53. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      "Scare quotes" were because simply saying what they said (the words) and leaving it at that doesn't necessarily indicate what they meant by those words.

      Paul said "that stinks." Paul "said" it, but Paul actually meant "that is an unfortunate turn of events," not "that is unpleasant to my olfactory nerves" (or whatever it is that transfers smells in the nose, I'm not actually sure if their nerves now that I think about it, heh).

    54. Re:"it was used for children's writing exercises" by CannonballHead · · Score: 1

      This is a very ... complicated matter. Hopefully I speak somewhat clearly. Errr... type.

      Not one will pass away "until all is accomplished." And to be honest, I'm not sure what exactly Jesus is referring to there, but it "accomplish" sounds rather similar to "fulfill." Perhaps Jesus is talking about what He came to accomplish? But at this point, He is still giving the Jews a chance to *not* reject Him. He's talking as if He is not going to die, as if He actually will be accepted as the Jewish Messiah by the Jews.

      Also, it is important to see who He is talking to. In Luke, He's talking to the pharisees. Justifying their own faults (REAL faults, according to the actual law) while simultaneously trying to make sure everyone else kept not just the Law, but the traditions.

      This is why the rest of the NT is important, understanding why Jesus came (super short version, He came to Israel as their Messiah under/in the Old Covenant; but He was rejected, and a New Covenant was made that was not specific to Israel... hence the rest of the NT). Under the old covenant with Israel, what Jesus said totally makes sense. You can't say you don't have to follow parts of the Law. Furthermore, you can't wiggle around it like the pharisees (hey, I didn't sin! I mean I was angry enough to WANT to kill my brother, but I didn't, so I'm innocent of the law!).

      But, yes, that changed. Jesus was rejected. Jesus still fulfilled the law. Paul, in Romans, goes through great lengths to discuss this, going back to what the law was even there for to begin with. The author of Hebrews does, as well. Paul even mentions that the Jews rejected Jesus so that salvation would be extended to the gentiles. In other words, since the Jews rejected Jesus as Messiah, a new covenant was made that was NOT with Israel specifically, and thus all can come, and without going through the Old Covenant (hence the lack of circumcision being necessary, as Paul makes pretty clear in ... now I forget which epistle).

      For a Jew living in the Old Covenant, to say that one of God's covenant laws was not necessary? Blasphemy, pretty much.

      "Unchanging" does not refer to God's methods or actions, it refers to His character. Unchanging, faithful, true, those would all be very related words. It doesn't mean that how God acts or deals with men doesn't change. Clearly, that has changed, since Israel was not around since the beginning of time.

  4. Irony, you keep using that word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ironically, a book that begins with God's instructions for burnt offerings.

    It would have been irony if the burnt book contained instructions on fire prevention.
    Now it's just coincidence.

    1. Re:Irony, you keep using that word by BlackHawk-666 · · Score: 1

      It's Leviticus, so it actually does contain paragraphs on giving burnt offerings to God.

      --
      All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
  5. Give them a place to be ... by evanh · · Score: 1

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ... and they'll just fill the space. That's life for ya.

  6. A shopping list by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Pound pastrami
    can kraut
    six bagels - brig home for Emma

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  7. Separating the message from the story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At least among many American Buddhist secular writers, there is Buddha's teachings - mindfulness, Four Noble Truths, Eight Fold Path, things like that.

    Then there are the myths - the stories how he met people and taught them, teaching gods lessons, etc .... And quite a few do get that.

    At least among the loudest of the religions of Abraham, they have failed to distinguish between the teachings of their religion and the myths and stories that are supposed to illustrate those teachings through metaphor and analogy. And many times with disastrous consequences. The fault of that lies squarely with their clergy - many of whom are using their religion as a method of attaining power over the masses.

    1. Re:Separating the message from the story by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      These religions also tend to pick up temporary or local beliefs and practices and fossilize them in made-up dogma. I know a Muslim who says he didn't realize what Islam was until he came to the US and found it without all the tribal superstitions.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. How much do they vary? by Khomar · · Score: 4, Informative

    You make an assertion that there are "dramatic" changes in the text, but is that true?

    Here is an example of analysis of the Great Isaiah Scroll from the Dead Sea scroll find. It dates to 200 B.C., only 500 years after Isaiah wrote the original and over one thousand years older than the previously used manuscript (used in the King James Version of the Bible).

    Is that a "dramatic" change the closer you get?

    --

    I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!

    1. Re:How much do they vary? by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      If you want dramatic change, you have to translate it to a different language.

      The joke is that the Old Testament we have today is probably closer to the original text than the New one.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:How much do they vary? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You make an assertion that there are "dramatic" changes in the text, but is that true?

      This is a good point. The Hebrew text of the Bible is remarkably stable in copies dating back almost 2000 years. Anyone who has spent time tracing families of manuscript sources in, for example, medieval Europe will realize how unstable many sources are compared to the Hebrew text. Copyists in most medieval treatises frequently made errors or omissions or even inserted their own variations, corrections, or commentary.

      That said, rabbis are pretty aware of the variations in ancient sources --- perhaps most notably, the differences between the Masoretic text (the standard Hebrew edition dating to medieval times) and the Septuagint (an ancient translation of the Hebrew text into Greek), as well as the Samaritan Pentateuch (a rendering in the Samaritan alphabet of the first books of the Bible, which has lots of mostly minor variants). These variants are important to rabbinical commentary and exegesis.

    3. Re:How much do they vary? by hackertourist · · Score: 2

      One of the reasons the Hebrew text was stable was because they used checksums when copying. Each letter in the Hebrew alphabet is also used as a number. That made it easy to calculate checksums for each line of text.

    4. Re:How much do they vary? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 5, Informative

      One of the reasons the Hebrew text was stable was because they used checksums when copying. Each letter in the Hebrew alphabet is also used as a number. That made it easy to calculate checksums for each line of text.

      Actually, there were a number of reasons for the stability. The "checksums," as you put it, were more associated with medieval Kabbalistic practices that date from probably more than a millennium after the "stable" version had basically been established. (And I'm not sure any scribes actually did this sort of "checksumming" in this way on any scale; only the "Bible code" wackos today seem to think so.)

      Instead, you had a confluence of a number of factors:

      (1) A tremendous set of ritualistic requirements for copying came about at a very early stage, which made copying the Torah distinct from any other scribal task. Scribes were required to take extra care with everything from ink quality to page layout. And they were to make verbal checks when copying every word, as well as other various checks (but mostly involved counting words and letters, not "summing" them).

      (2) A rabbinical tradition was already in place nearly 2000 years ago which created a giant commentary on top of the actual text. Rabbis emphasized that even a single error in a single letter could create problems in accurate commentary, and the commentary itself often depended on tiny details of wording. (Remember all those stories of Jesus where he criticizes the "elders" and such for paying too much attention to details of the text so they forgot the broader meaning... that's what he was talking about. It was a new fad at that time, which caught on.) Hence, even if an error in copying occurred in the text, you could spot it by the fact that it disagreed with the commentaries by learned rabbis. (It's sort of like if you had documentation for code that explained every single operation in detail. Even if the original code became corrupted, you could reconstruct it from the documentation.)

      (3) Finally, you had the fact that a lot of Jews were slaughtered by the Romans and other folks in the early centuries of the first millennium, around the time many of these exacting traditions had developed. Thus, any competing editions/variants were likely to be lost (burned down with synagogues, etc.), with only a few official copies preserved. Those few copies -- whatever their source -- then became the dominant text once the others had been lost.

      So yeah, scribes could check the text in many ways, but there were various events and ideologies that helped that process along.

    5. Re:How much do they vary? by mcswell · · Score: 1

      Wow, that's a new definition of "easy" :-).

      (I'm not disagreeing about whether they did it, I'm just amazed that they succeeded!)

    6. Re:How much do they vary? by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      The joke is that the Old Testament we have today is probably closer to the original text than the New one.

      That isn't true, for any reasonable definition of "original". The majority of the New Testament (i.e. everything which isn't the gospels) seems reasonably intact, given the history of its transmission. Sure, in most cases we don't know who wrote it, when, or why, but that's beside the point.

      Having said that, it's hard to say what you mean by "original". Job and Jonah are a case in point. The Jonah story is almost certainly fairly close to what the original author intended, given the lack of alternative readings. The epic poem of Job, however, shows a lot of evidence of editing. We're missing half of one of the dialogues, and at least one of the monologues, the prologue, and the epilogue, were added later, possibly at different points. Oh, and then there's the Documentary Hypothesis.

      So you do need to be clear on what you mean by "original". When it comes to very ancient texts, there probably is no such thing.

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    7. Re:How much do they vary? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      One that comes to my mind without looking stuff up would probably be the "end of an age" - "end of the world" translation error in the KJV. Maybe that's why people in the US fear the second coming while everyone else is waiting anxiously for it. It was corrected in the NKJV in 79, but apparently it was too late.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  9. Google "God of the gaps" by Viol8 · · Score: 1

    Says it all really.

  10. Who's reviewing the scrolls? by rlp · · Score: 4, Funny

    Who's reviewing the scrolls? Top men ...

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
  11. The Book of Armaments, Chapter 4, Verses 16 to 20 by Mr+Foobar · · Score: 4, Funny

    Then did he raise on high the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, saying, "Bless this, O Lord, that with it thou mayst blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy." And the people did rejoice and did feast upon the lambs and toads and tree-sloths and fruit-bats and orangutans and breakfast cereals ... Now did the Lord say, "First thou pullest the Holy Pin. Then thou must count to three. Three shall be the number of the counting and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither shalt thou count two, excepting that thou then proceedeth to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the number of the counting, be reached, then lobbest thou the Holy Hand Grenade in the direction of thine foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it."

    --
    -> I dislike sigs...
  12. And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to Hell by davmoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This thread is a perfect example of what's becoming of Slashdot. Instead of comments and insights on the awesome science and tech it took to read an up-to-now unreadable ancient document, almost every comment here is a comment about whether religion is fact or fiction and is *completely* off topic. The science behind this is pretty amazing, and could lead to being able to read other ancient burned documents like those found at Herculaneum from the time of its destruction by Vesuvius. But you people are apparently more interested in bashing religion than celebrating actual science and technical advances.

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
  13. I'd be far more interested in what comes next by DrXym · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seales says he's working on hundreds of scorched scrolls uncovered from Herculaneum. To me that would be a FAR more interesting project. They might discover lost Greek texts or other works of antiquity. Even if its just tax returns, local ordinances or mundane records related to daily life it would still be interesting.

    1. Re:I'd be far more interested in what comes next by jandersen · · Score: 2

      They might discover lost Greek texts or other works of antiquity

      Or much more interesting: Etruscan texts, of which there woefully few. The Estruscan language appears to be unrelated to any other known language, from the very few inscriptions we do have.

    2. Re:I'd be far more interested in what comes next by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      They might discover lost Greek texts or other works of antiquity

      Or much more interesting: Etruscan texts, of which there woefully few. The Estruscan language appears to be unrelated to any other known language, from the very few inscriptions we do have.

      If only we could find Caludius' lost works of the Estruscan history and Dictionary.

  14. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The obvious conclusion is that we need to get rid of the reddit atheist kiddies who feel the need to shit up every decent discussion with their euphoric fedoras.

  15. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Informative

    The science behind this is pretty amazing, and could lead to being able to read other ancient burned documents like those found at Herculaneum from the time of its destruction by Vesuvius.

    Just to note -- the computer techniques for reconstructing text from scrolls here were actually developed within a project for analyzing the scrolls from the Villa of the Papyri at Herculaneum. This biblical scroll application was just another use of this computer analysis technique, showing its power to deal with even very badly burned and less intact fragments.

  16. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And you can't even blame it on the un-numbered masses, most of the dogma-trolling is coming from registered users who are doing it to farm karma from other registered dogma-trolls.

  17. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

    This thread is a perfect example of what's becoming of Slashdot.

    So, start a subthread on the technology. Seems like a way to get people talking about technology.

    Slashdot has a seriously diverse readership. In any given topic, you'll get the usual suspects

    The clueless noobs who are still learning.

    The trolls

    The "Get off my lawn" crowd, who probably are suffering from testosterone deprivation.

    People who are actually interested.

    Since this tech was introduced in reference to an ancient burnt Middle Eastern scroll, and it turned out to be Leviticus, of all things, its simply going to attract a diverse audience.

    Now if we wanted to deal with a less flamebaity version of the same, since the NatGeo article is pretty devoid of the technology, try this: http://www.livescience.com/560...

    We can't control others, only ourselves. There in that link is the start of a technology discussion.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  18. Maybe ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... I can use this technology to read my collection of Playboy magazines. Where the pages are stuck together.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  19. Terrific breakthrough by OneHundredAndTen · · Score: 1

    This technology can be used to read truly interesting documents, like e.g. charred scrolls in Pompey. This document in particular, as it turns out to be the case, is of relatively low interest.

  20. 'Holy' arc? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    There's no such thing in archeology or any other science.

  21. The body of Christ by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

    America has a nuclear attack submarine named the USS Corpus Christi, which means "body of Christ". What would Jesus think about that?

    1. Re:The body of Christ by MachineShedFred · · Score: 1

      He may think that it's named after Corpus Christi, Texas.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    2. Re:The body of Christ by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      He'd be right to think so. City names have been used for nuclear attack subs since Los Angeles (which is not named after Angels).

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  22. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by KBentley57 · · Score: 1

    I'd like to offer a counter point to your argument. The tech used here to reveal the text locked into the burnt scroll is amazing, but not necessarily new. MRI decoding of documents has been demonstrated before, and while painstakingly tedious no doubt, doesn't represent a "new" breakthrough. The difference in this case, is that we aren't recovering an 8 year old tax return of Joe the Plummer, we're recovering a document that is of historical significance to a significant portion of the population of the world. Since there is no new technology to debate, we're left discussing the significance of the findings, which is pretty much null since we already have the book of Leviticus. Since there's no new tech, and no new findings, I guess we're left with a discussion of "why is it significant to have these writings at all", ie the debate of whether or not religion is necessary or factual in the first place. So while it's easy to classify all things not related to the discovery of room temperature superconductors as redditt fodder, I think you're missing the point of what /. is in the first place, a place for discussion among tech-minded people, about things that more or less relate to tech.

  23. To put it another way... by Viol8 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... Atheism is a religion in the same way that NOT playing football is a sport.

    1. Re:To put it another way... by painandgreed · · Score: 2

      ... Atheism is a religion in the same way that NOT playing football is a sport.

      Yes, yes, but we're pretty much just as sick of people telling how superior they are by not liking football as we are as by the people who constantly rant how they love football. Same goes for not stamp collecting and other hobbies.

    2. Re:To put it another way... by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      ... Atheism is a religion in the same way that NOT playing football is a sport.

      Yes, yes, but we're pretty much just as sick of people telling how superior they are by not liking football as we are as by the people who constantly rant how they love football. Same goes for not stamp collecting and other hobbies.

      I grew up in a town where religion had a stranglhold on us. No Sunday stores open, No legally required sex education, Anything that showed the earth might be older than 6000 years removed form the curriculum, priests who liked to fuck little boys, And even without getting sexually abused, daily reminders of how you were going to hell if you didn't toe the line, I'd like to apologize for your inconvenience of people who are sick and tired of your shit.

      The religious can dish it out, but they cannot take it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  24. Summary Misses Crucial Detail of Discovery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The contents of the scrolls, a few chapters of Leviticus, date from the end of the Dead Sea Scroll period, maybe a one or two hundred years after the Dead Sea Scroll, and so are ancient. What's amazing, and no one in the comments really mentions, is that the text exactly matches the same chapters in the modern day leviticus text used by Jews - similar to the Leviticus text in the Dead Sea Scrolls. What this means is that as far as we now know, the modern Torah as used by Jews has not substantially changed in over 2000 years. We'll know more when the rest of the Ein Gedi scrolls are subject to the process.

    Because so much of human history revolves around religion until modern times, discovery of proof that the hebrew bible has not changed significantly in the past 2000 years would be immensely important, and not just because Christianity and Islam were founded on the basis of ancient Judaism and wouldn't exist without it. If it's discovered that the modern hebrew bible was the same as in the time of the formation of early Christianity it would be a significant boon to understanding and analyzing early Christianity, not too mention discussion of how the fundamental religious document was preserved almost perfectly over 2000 years, and also may shed new light on the early origins of the hebrew bible as well.

    Incidentally, there are alternative viewpoints to the idea that the Dead Sea Scroll and Ein Gedi documents were from a minority sect (Essenes). Some academics believe instead that the Dead Sea Scroll trove in particular was a refuge for documents collected from all over Judea for protection of the books in the wake of the Jewish-Roman wars.

    Quoting from http://arstechnica.com/science/2016/09/scholars-use-x-rays-to-read-ancient-biblical-text-for-the-first-time/:

    Once Seales and his team had this visualization, they still weren't sure what they had. None of them read Hebrew, so they waited with some excitement while Shor and her colleagues analyzed the text. It turned out that the scroll contained the first two chapters of Leviticus, which coincidentally deal with burnt offerings. What's incredible about these chapters, according to archaeologist Emanuel Tov, is that they are virtually identical to medieval Masoretic Text, written hundreds of years later. The En-Gedi scroll even duplicates the exact paragraph breaks seen later in the medieval Hebrew. The only difference between the two is that ancient Hebrew had no vowels, so these were added in the Middle Ages.

    Tov called it "100 percent identical with the medieval texts, both in its consonants and in its paragraph divisions." He added, "The same central stream of Judaism that used this Levitical scroll in one of the early centuries of our era was to continue using it until the late Middle Ages when printing was invented... the scroll brings the good news that the ancient source of the medieval text did not change for 2,000 years." In other words, the Jewish community managed to retain some of the exact wording in passages from their biblical texts over centuries, despite massive cultural upheavals and changes to their languages.

    Archaeologist Michael Segal said the En-Gedi scroll "teaches us that the [biblical] text that we have that is used today as the traditional text is a very ancient text in all of its details." He cautioned that of course only the consonants are the same, and we have yet to read the rest of the En-Gedi scrolls. Still, this scroll provides strong evidence that today's Tanakh "already existed in a standardized form in the first century C.E."

    Also, see: http://www.timesofisrael.com/3d-tech-proves-hebrew-bible-unchanged-for-2000-years/

  25. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    TBH the media leads with this. When Mother Theresa was sainted recently, the lead NPR story mentioned it then a few sentences later launched into the "raging controversy going on in her town" over her, which consisted of an ancient bitchfest by Christopher Hitchens, and a guy who wrote a book six years ago.

    You are all cogs instantiating the distribution of memeplexes.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  26. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    There was an article not too long ago about this technique.

    In the Neal Stephenson book Reamde, they use a technique where a shredded sprays a book up into the air, where high speed cameras digitize each piece of confetti and then computers reassemble the pieces jigsaw-wise and OCR it.

    This technique is even more advanced.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  27. Re:And they discovered that Slashdot has gone to H by approachingZero+ · · Score: 1

    I hadn't noticed how crappy it's really got, you're right.

    --
    'I don't know what it's called. I just know the sound it makes, when it takes a man's life.' ~ Four Leaf Tayback
  28. Fun facts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1) There are two words for Hell in the greek language (Hades, Tartarus). Jesus never once said either one of them. He sometimes used the valley of Gehenna (which was right on the edge of the city of Jerusalem, and used as the city dump) in his metaphors, but the translators decided to change that to "hell." This isn't a translation..."Gehenna" does not and never did mean "hell" in any language. This is a changing of what he said, which has become codified as the standard in nearly all English translations of the Bible. When you stay true to the text, it is obvious that Jesus is not establishing a doctrine of literal everlasting torture, but is just using the city dump in a metaphor to say something about morality.

    2) The greek word used to refer to God's dwelling place means "sky." Just "sky." It has been translated to "heaven" to make it sound more spiritual.

    3) The greek word translated as "spirit" and sometimes "ghost" just means "breath." It is a simple word, common use, nothing technical or mysterious about it. It just means breath. Also, it is gender-neutral, and the pronouns used to refer to it are gender neutral. In English the holy breath (rendered "holy spirit") is referred to as "he", but in greek it really says "it." These changes make it sound like a person, but the greek text absolutely does not.

    4) The greek word translated as "savior" (and "save") really just means "heal." Every time you see phrases like "Jesus the savior" or "Jesus saves us all" it would be more accurately translated "Jesus the healer" and "Jesus heals us all." But, in order to better fit the doctrines of the roman church, the rendering is slanted.

    5) The greek word translated as "believe" really means "trust." It is a very emotional word, and not an intellectual word. All these passages about "those who believe in him" make it sound like one must take a strict intellectual position in order to be part of the kingdom of heaven, but an honest rendering of the text gives one a whole lot more elbow room to interpret what they are talking about.

    6) Jesus said, in the Gospel of Luke, that the Kingom of heaven is not here or there, but is within you. Many translations have twisted this verse to say "among" or other variants, to try and obscure the fact that Jesus simply came clean about the fact that the "kingdom of heaven" is just a metaphor for a state of mind.

    Christianity is not based on the Bible. The Bible is full of misleading translations to twist it to fit Christian doctrines, most of which were cooked up by utterly corrupt politicians, centuries after Jerusalem was sacked.

    1. Re: Fun facts by Marxist+Hacker+42 · · Score: 1

      Aka syriac. The same language all of those refugees that Donald Trump wants to keep out of the country speak.

      --
      SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
    2. Re: Fun facts by mcswell · · Score: 1

      "All of the Gospels were, of course, written decades after the fact." We don't know that, although it is a common supposition. The twin books of the Gospel of Luke and Acts (of the Apostles) ends rather abruptly with Paul imprisoned in Rome. That would indeed have been a couple-three decades after the fact. The gospel of Mark was probably written well before Luke, although how much earlier is unclear. It's hard to imagine the early church being founded around Jesus, and not bothering to write down the story of who this Jesus guy was.

      It's not clear when the gospel of Matthew was written; probably after Mark, and given that its audience seems to have been more Jewish than Gentile (unlike Luke), and that the Jewish church was probably on the wane by the time of Luke/ Acts, I'd at least guess that Matthew preceded Luke. The gospel according to John was almost certainly later, perhaps as late as AD 90.

      "So the degree to which Jesus is quoted with any accuracy is extremely questionable." That assumes that there were no precursors to the gospels. Unknown, although there was a tradition dating to ~AD 130 from Papias, that "Matthew compiled the sayings in the Aramaic language, and everyone translated them as well as he could." If that is true, then my guess is that this would have been done when the church was largely Aramaic-speaking, i.e. Jewish. That could have been quite early. Of course "the sayings" (of Jesus) might have been only a part of the later gospel of Matthew. (There is also a theory that most of the New Testament was written in Aramaic, although that appears to be a minority opinion.)

      "...most of Christiandom mistakenly believes that their doctrines come from the Bible, and further mistakenly believe that their English translation is very accurate..." Most of Christendom doesn't read the Bible in English, and most translations into other languages are not done from English translations (although I suppose you consider your criticism would apply to those other translations as well). And it is common to hear English-speaking pastors refer to what the Greek text "really means," although not always accurately. At any rate, anyone who wants to know what the Greek says can learn Greek and make use of the abundant tools to understand it better (including glossed interlinear text for those who don't know Greek).

    3. Re: Fun facts by mcswell · · Score: 1

      No, ancient Syriac =/= (Levantine) Arabic. Syriac is a variety of Aramaic, which is classified as a northwestern Semitic language; Arabic is classified as a central Semitic language, and largely replaced Aramaic via conquest. It is however said that there is a "substratum" of Levantine Arabic from Syriac.

    4. Re: Fun facts by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Also, even if it had not been replaced by conquest, the GP's argument makes about as much sense as claiming Americans speak German because the Angles were speaking a northwest Germanic language 1500 years ago.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  29. Re:gerontophile by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    I can spell. I just can't type today.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  30. Re:Ah, yes, the sins of the father rationalization by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    So, in other words, if someone is a dipshit and still has a good life, it doesn't mean that God is an asshole that favors dipshits, it means that somewhere down the line of his descendants, one of them will get punished for it.

    Yeah.

    Right.

    In other words, we just have to wait long enough until some random act happens to his son, grandson or whoever, then we can say "see, god is just".

    I'd call that bullshit, but I've called stuff that was less harebrained bullshit and hence wouldn't do it justice.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  31. Re:um by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    Have you ever heard of Martin Luther (the German monk, not the MLK of civil rights), and PROTESTANTS????

    I get the impression in discussions like these that most Americans haven't heard of the Eastern Orthodox churches.

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});