Re: [TruthTalk] Perverting the words of the living God

[Kevin Deegan]

The Dead sea scrolls were individual finds of individual manuscripts. There were multiple finds.

A manuscript is not a "Bible" or codex

Lance Muir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

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

----- Original Message -----

From: Wm. Taylor

To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Sent: March 31, 2004 22:23

Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Perverting the words of the living God

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

 

----- Original Message -----

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

 

 

---

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today