Kevin Deegan wrote:
DAVEH: Whether or not the author is a JW (or whether
the site is JW related), is the material he offered correct, Kevin? IF
it is correct, would that not suggest the Bible is not as inerrant as
some TTers have professed? IF his information is not correct, how do
you explain it?
Dave below find my previous post,
DAVEH: Thank you, Kevin. I vaguely remember seeing it, but apparently
skipped through it due to a shortage of time.
So.....even though it comes from an older manuscript, you have
rejected it simply because it reflects a lot of changes in subsequent
manuscripts? Unless I'm missing something on this Kevin, that seems a
dangerous position to adopt. What if the scribe of the second set of
manuscripts decided to change things, or had bad eyesight....or
whatever? Then.....any subsequent manuscripts to his would have all
shared his common errors, would they not? (I know I am simplifying
this a bit, but I do so for the sake of illustration.)
If scholars point such out, are they automatically labeled liberals
because of your preconceived biases? Or.....is there any room for
scholarly thought in your theological realm? I guess my question to
you, Kevin, is why do you feel the Bible has to be so inerrant? Does
it destroy your belief in Jesus if it is not inerrant?
with ONE CORRECTION BELOW "Now TWO Mormons"
HOLY BIBLE says Study to show thyself approved unto God a
workman that needeth not to be ashamed rightly diving the Word of truth
Where can I find this word?
DAVEH: As always, God reveals his word to his servants, the prophets.
It is obvious that the original manuscripts have long since
disappeared, and what exists now in the various translations of the
Bible may or may not contain errors.
BTW......Your below explanation could have been a bit clearer and
addressed Raymond Bothom's comments a bit more succinctly, but I think
it is sufficient for me to make the above comments. I assume you not
agree with his comment.....
The Sinaitic Manuscript is perfect and
complete and is the oldest known [complete] copy of the Scriptures,
having been written (it is believed) in the year 331 A.D
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ROTFL
The two manuscripts are TRASH it is obvious to everyone but some
liberal intellectuals and at least 1 mormon.
Blaine would you accept a check with 10 different handwritings
on it? that is the quality of these mss, they have been tampered with.
They were found in Roman Catholic Monasteries. One was found in a trash
bin. They both belong there.
They were tampered with by heretics that excised the diety of
Christ and other doctrines they did not like.
I will give you a example. The ending of the book of mark is
extant in 620 copies or mss.
There are some people that believe there is evidence for a
shorter reading on the last chapter of Mark. What is the basis for
that? These 2 corrupt mss
Now of 620 mss 618 have the exact wording and end at the same
verse as what we hold in our hands today.
Suppose you were a judge.
618 testify "guilty"
2 testify "not guilty"
But the testimony they give contradicts one another.
The author of this paper wants you to excise all these passages
when there are Thousands of mss from every corner of the globe that
testify to the same exact words. based on 2 corrupt mss with words
crossed out & different handwritings.
I think we should throw both these "Oldest & best" mss Back
in the Trash where they were found, since they disagree with one
another over 2000 times in the gospels alone!
This is a logical fallicy. If I can find 1 professed christian
who is a phony, would that make christianity not true. Here we have 2
corrupted mss, they belong to what is called the minority text. Because
there are a very small minority of mss that are like them. The vast
majority of mss are majority text or recieved text. This is what the
KJV is based on.
Quit kidding yourself, you know which books have been tampered
with.
If you can show me an error in my KJV I will eat a Beach ball.
Kevin Deegan wrote:
I already answered this see other post
Dave
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DAVEH: Really??? Is your below comment the post you are referring
to......
Perhaps you should take a second look. take your own advice.
or have you converted to the Jehovah's Witnesses?
Do you visit Jehovah Witness sites regularly?
Do you follow their other teachings also?
.......If that isn't your answer, then perhaps I failed to see
it.....or recognize it if I did see it. Would you be so kind as to
explain it again, Kevin. (Copy/paste if you would, please.)
This info is in error.
DAVEH: Does your other post explain why/how it is in error, Kevin?
Your above/below comment certainly doesn't explain it. You seem to
take great delight in attacking LDS theology. Now, how about devoting
as much enthusiasm explaining your own beliefs......
Maybe you two groups (LDS & JW) should combine forces
and cast dispersion on God's word.
You could call it the "Yea hath God said society"
DAVEH: Nobody is questioning what God said, Kevin. What is in
question is whether what is in the Bible today is the same as what God
said several thousand years ago. You have already acknowledged that
some (the headings) is not inerrant or from God. And we have seen
before that some translations (viz the NIV) do not include all the
material that the KJV offers. So it seems apparent that God has not
specifically protected each translation we have today. At some point,
problem material has been allowed (by God) to enter into what we
consider the Bible today. My question to you is where you safely draw
the line.....the line (time) that says before this we can trust
everything that is printed in the Bible, and after this time (line)
errant material may have been introduced or inerrant material may have
been deleted. Is there a time you can say such, Kevin? If not, then
it seems one has to conclude that the Bible is not necessarily inerrant.
Kevin
Deegan wrote:
Raymond Bothoms & hence; you
Got your information from a Jehovah Witness site
DAVEH: Whether or not the author is a JW (or whether the site is JW
related), is the material he offered correct, Kevin? IF it is correct,
would that not suggest the Bible is not as inerrant as some TTers have
professed? IF his information is not correct, how do you explain it?
Are you joining?
Raymond Bothoms is just
another one of us good old boys from Utah. By the way, Kevin, where
do you live? Georgia? Alabama? Mexico? LOL
Blaine: The Bible seems to have some
problems, at least according to what I
read below. Perhaps those whose religion is founded on the assumption
that
the Bible is inerrant should take a second look.
Pehaps you should take a second look. take your own
advice.
or have you converted to the Jehovah's Witnesses?
Do you visit Jehovah Witness sites regularly?
Do you follow their other teachings also?
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Raymond Bothoms
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2004 15:13:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Jewish-Roots-BoM] Suspected Interpolations in the New
Testament
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
These suspected interpolations are found at
http://www.bibletoday.com/htstb/spurious.htm
(See also
http://www.friktech....com/rel/canon/nttexts.htm)
SPURIOUS PASSAGES OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
On Authority of Professor C. Tischendorf's notes on the readings of the
two oldest Greek manuscripts: The Sinaitic and the Vatican #1209
The following words, found in our Common Version (King James Version)
are
not found in the Oldest Manuscripts, and are evidently no part of the
Divine Word. Let each Berean go through his Bible, pencil in hand, and
mark out these words: the! n read the passages affected and note the
improvement. This list comprises all the important interpolations
discovered to date.
The compiler has condensed this list. From the compiler's point of view
there exist very good reasons why everything in this list should be
crossed out of our Bibles. Thus, when the interpolations are eliminated
from Mark 14:30, 68, 72, the account agrees exactly with that given by
the other evangelists. Or, take Luke 23:34: history shows that the Jews
have been obliged as a race to expiate their crime. Or take John 4:9: it
does not agree at all with Luke 9:52, which shows that even the Lord
himself did have such dealings. Omitted from this list are the dozens of
interpolations made by early copyists with the aim of making all the
narratives uniform, and the hundreds of non-essential words, the
addition
of which does not affect the purity of the message. (Some of these
passages have already been omitted by more mo! dern translations such as
the New American Standard or the New International Version, since they
were translated from the more reliable, ancient manuscripts.)
Matt. 5:22 without a cause
Matt. 6:13 For thine is the Kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for
ever. Amen.
Matt. 6:25 or what ye shall drink*
Matt. 16:2 When it is evening, ye say, it will be fair weather: for the
sky is red.
Matt. 16:3 This entire verse
Matt.17:21 and fasting
Matt.18:12 into the mountains
Matt. 20:7 and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive
Matt. 22:13 and take him away
Matt. 23:35 son of Barachias*
Matt. 24:10 and shall hate one another*
Matt. 24:31 sound of a*
Matt. 24:41 women shall be
Matt. 25:6 cometh
Matt. 27:52 and the graves were opened*
Matt. 27: 53 and went*
Matt. 28:19 therefore
Mark 4:37 so that it was now full*
Mark 6:51 beyond measure and wondered
Mark 7:8 For as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like
things as ye do
Mark 7:14 unto me every one of you
Mark 9:24 with tears
Mark 9:29 and fasting
Mark 9:44 This entire verse
Mark 9:45 into the fire that shall never be quenched
Mark 9:46 This entire verse
Mark 9:47 fire
Mark 9:49 and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt
Mark 10:24 for them that trust in riches
Mark 10:30 houses and brethren and sisters and mothers and children and
lands with persecutions*
Mark 14:30 twice*
Mark 14:68 and the cock crew
Mark 14:72 the second time* twice*
Mark 16:9-20 All these verses
Luke 2: 40 in spirit
Luke 8:45 and sayest thou, Who touched me?
Luke 16:16 and every man presseth into it
Luke 17:12 which stood afar off*
Luke17:35 women
Luke 18:11 with himself*
Luke 22:43 This entire verse
Luke 22:! 44 This entire verse
Luke 22:68 me, nor let me go
Luke 23:5 teaching*
Luke 23:34 Then said Jesus, Father forgive them; for they know not what
they do
Luke 24:42 and of an honeycomb
John 1:25 asked him, and*
John 3:13 which is in heaven
John 4:9 for the Jews have no dealings with the Samaritans
John 5:3 waiting for the moving of the water
John 5:4 This entire verse
John 5:25 and now is*
John 8:1-11 all these verses
John 8:59 going through the midst of them and so passed by
John 16:16 because I go to the Father
John 19:23 and also his coat*
John 21:25 This entire verse
Acts 6:3 Holy Ghost and (should read "spirit of")
Acts 6:8 faith (should read "grace")
Acts 8:37 This entire verse
Acts 9:31 churches (should read "church") were (should read "was")
Acts 15:32 and confirmed them*
Acts 18:5 pressed in the spirit (should read "earnestly occ! upied with
the
Word")
Acts 18:21 I must by all means keep this feast that cometh in Jerusalem:
but
Rom. 3:22 and upon all
Rom. 6:12 it in
Rom. 7:6 that being dead (should read "being dead to that")
Rom. 8:26 for us
Rom. 11:6 But if it be of works, then it is no more grace; otherwise
work
is no more work
Rom. 14:6 and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not
regard it
1 Cor. 2:1 testimony (should read "mystery")
1 Cor. 6:20 and in your spirit, which are God's
1 Cor. 7:5 fasting and
1 Cor. 10:28 for the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof
1 Cor. 15:24 cometh
2 Cor. 4:14 by (should read "with")
Gal. 3:1 that ye should not obey the truth
Gal. 3:17 in Christ
Gal. 5:19 adultery
Gal. 5:21 murders
Eph. 5:9 Spirit (should read "light")
Eph. 5:30 of his flesh, and of his bones
2 Thess. 2:9 Even him
1 Tim. 3:16 G! od (should read "who")*
1 Tim. 4:12 in spirit*
1 Tim. 6:5 from such withdraw thyself*
2 Tim. 3:3 without natural affection*
Heb. 12:18 mount that might be touched and that burned with fire (should
read "fire that might be touched and burned")*
Heb. 12:20 or thrust through with a dart*
James 5:16 Confess your faults (should read "Therefore confess your
sins")*
1 Pet. 2:5 spiritual (before the word "sacrifices")
1 Pet. 3:8 courteous (should read "humble")
2 Pet. 1:1 God and our (should read "our Lord and")*
1 John 3:16 of God
1 John 5:7 in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost: and these
three are one
1 John 5:8 And there are three that bear witness in earth
1 John 5:13 and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God
Rev. 1:17 unto me, Fear not*
Rev. 2:22 their (should read "her")*
Rev. 5:3 neither under the earth*
Rev. 5:9 us (omitted b! y the Alexandrian Ms., one of the three oldest
Mss.
known)
Rev. 5:10 us (should read "them") we (should read "they")
Rev. 5:13 and under the earth*
Rev. 6:2 to conquer (should read "he conquered")*
Rev. 9:4 neither any green thing*
Rev. 9:13 the four horns of*
Rev. 10:6 and the sea, and the things which are therein*
Rev. 11:17 and art to come*
Rev. 12:12 inhabiters of* of (before the words "the sea")
Rev. 14:5 before the throne of God*
Rev.... 14:12 here are they*
Rev. 16:5 and shalt be (should read "the holy")*
Rev. 16:7 another out of*
Rev. 16:11 and their sores* of their deeds*
Rev. 16:17 from the throne*
Rev. 18:22 of whatsoever craft he be* and the stone of a millstone shall
be heard no more at all in thee*
Rev. 20:5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand
years were finished*
Rev. 21:24 of them which are saved* and honor*
R! ev. 21:26 and honor*
Rev. 22:3 more*
* Omitted by the Sinaitic Manuscript. These not thus marked are omitted
by both the Sinaitic and Vatican Manuscripts. The Epistles to Timothy,
the latter part of Hebrews, and all of Revelation, are missing from the
Vatican Manuscript, No. 1209, having been lost during the fifteen or
more
centuries since it was written. The Sinaitic Manuscript is perfect and
complete and is the oldest known [complete] copy of the Scriptures,
having been written (it is believed) in the year 331 A.D.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
|
