[TruthTalk] Perverting the words of the living God

[Judy Taylor]

I wouldn't get my hopes too high.  Older doesn't necessarily mean better and the Essenes were a cult like group.  The major intact texts from caves 1 and 11 were published by the late 1950's and didn't make any big waves.  judyt   From: "Lance Muir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FYI-The Dead Sea Scrolls Bible (The oldest known Bible translated for the first time into English) Harper More than 1000 years older than any previously discovered biblical manuscripts with material never before published or translated. Lance   From: Wm. Taylor Oh please. When new manuscript evidence is discovered, a new edition is released with notes in the lower margin explaining the nature of the discovery. It's only when the evidence contains a very high degree of probability concerning authenticity that the actual text is changed, reflecting the updated evidence. The variant is then placed in the margin, with explanatory details as to why the change. You guys should be journalists for CNN; you can make anything sound seedy.  Bill   From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 8:00 PM Subject: [TruthTalk] Perverting the words of the living God Please do, I will be looking fwd to that. I don't know a whole lot about German theologians other than things began to change for the worse when their textual criticism began to permeate the Seminaries in this country. I had heard of Westcott & Hort but not this Nestle/Aland pair.  jt     From: Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> I have a lot of problems with the NA text. When they finally get it right I will give you a critique. Right now we are at revision 26 - revised corrected new improved edition and counting, right? [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You should avoid like the plague, the Wescott & Hort text - Nest/Aland any edition     [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin.   A true scholar is one who can separate his personal views from the task he is qualified to perform.  The guy who cannot do that is just a well  educated sectarian.  All you have proven is the former.   So you don't agree with Aland in theory.  That does not change the fact that he and others did a monumental work in this most recent text (and the others).   Do you have some textual criticism.  I was quoting the text with no reference to Aland's theology. Aren't you the guy who thinks the KJ is the inspired version?   John