Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Rikk Watts on Genesis 1

Wed, 11 May 2005 18:46:01 -0700

Seems you are in error again.
 
(1) First JN 5:7-8 could not be created by Erasmus in 15xx since, 1 Jn 5:7-8 is found in the majority of the early Latin manuscripts which date from the second, third, and forth centuries. Further, it is found in many editions of the Vulgate (forth century). It is also found in later Old Latin manuscripts, such as m (ninth century) and r (seventh/eighth century). It is in a minority of greek ms also.
(2) The grammar of the comma testifies to the correctness of the KJV
1 John 5:8, there are three nouns which, in Greek, stand in the neuter (Spirit, water, and blood). However, they are followed by a participle that is masculine. The Greek phrase here is oi marturountes (who bare witness). Those who know the Greek language understand this to be poor grammar if left to stand on its own. Even more noticeably, verse six has the same participle but stands in the neuter (Gk.: to marturoun). Why are three neuter nouns supported with a masculine participle? The answer is found if we include verse seven. There we have two masculine nouns (Father and Son) followed by a neuter noun (Spirit). The verse also has the Greek masculine participle oi marturountes. With this clause introducing verse eight, it is very proper for the participle in verse eight to be masculine, because of the masculine nouns in verse seven. But if verse seven were not there it would become improper Greek grammar. Dr. Thomas Holland's Crowned With Glory
 
(3) Church fathers quote it
Cyprian (258 AD)
The Varimadum (380 AD)
Cassian (435 AD)
Cassiodorus (580 AD)
Speculum (or m of 450 AD)
Victor of Vita (489 AD)
Victor Vitensis (485 AD)
Codex Freisingensis (of 500 AD)
Fulgentius (533 AD)
Isidore of Seville (636 AD)
Codex Pal Legionensis (650 AD)
Jaqub of Edessa (700 AD)
Interestingly, it is also found in the edition of the Apostle's Creed used by the Waldenses and Albigensians of the twelfth century.
For you math wizards out there these all predate Erasmus

Kevin Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If the Johanine Commatext (1 Jn 5:7-8)  did not exist before Erasmus. Please explain how a good number of Church fathers quoted it all the way back to 300AD. Magic? ESP? Or you are in error?

Caroline Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I thought about posting a long post explaining textural variants in the Hebrew texts, the making of the Septuagint, what is considered the most reliable version of the Septuagint today, the Hebrew texts KJV translators used and the differences between them, Jewish criticism of the translations, but then I thought, oh why bother?
 
I (and many others) are fully convinced that no translation is error free but the modern ones are very good. We've looked into the matter and decided the KJV is inferior.
 
I'll throw in a paragraph by Daniel B. Wallace, PhD. for free (because I don't have to type it out :-) Read it or not, I don't care.
 

Second, the Greek text which stands behind the King James Bible is demonstrably inferior in certain places. The man who edited the text was a Roman Catholic priest and humanist named Erasmus.[1] He was under pressure to get it to the press as soon as possible since (a) no edition of the Greek New Testament had yet been published, and (b) he had heard that Cardinal Ximenes and his associates were just about to publish an edition of the Greek New Testament and he was in a race to beat them. Consequently, his edition has been called the most poorly edited volume in all of literature! It is filled with hundreds of typographical errors which even Erasmus would acknowledge. Two places deserve special mention. In the last six verses of Revelation, Erasmus had no Greek manuscript (=MS) (he only used half a dozen, very late MSS for the whole New Testament any way). He was therefore forced to �back-translate� the Latin into Greek and by so doing he created seventeen variants which have never been found in any other Greek MS of Revelation! He merely guessed at what the Greek might have been. Secondly, for 1 John 5:7-8, Erasmus followed the majority of MSS in reading �there are three witnesses in heaven, the Spirit and the water and the blood.� However, there was an uproar in some Roman Catholic circles because his text did not read �there are three witnesses in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit.� Erasmus said that he did not put that in the text because he found no Greek MSS which had that reading. This implicit challenge�viz., that if he found such a reading in any Greek MS, he would put it in his text�did not go unnoticed. In 1520, a scribe at Oxford named Roy made such a Greek MS (codex 61, now in Dublin). Erasmus� third edition had the second reading because such a Greek MS was �made to order� to fill the challenge! To date, only a handful of Greek MSS have been discovered which have the Trinitarian formula in 1 John 5:7-8, though none of them is demonstrably earlier than the sixteenth century.


[1] Now a humanist in the sixteenth century is not the same as a humanist today. Erasmus was generally tolerant of other viewpoints, and was particularly interested in the humanities. Although he was a friend of Melanchthon, Luther�s right-hand man, Luther did not care for him.

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 10:41 PM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Rikk Watts on Genesis 1

There is a mountain of evidence that the KJV is not the best English translation
 
Like the mythological Septuagint, we are still looking for?
 
"Mountain of evidence" of which by the way you have provided only three very questionable examples! What was that one about cattle that was a classic, could you resend that?

Caroline Wong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Terry and Izzy;
 
It boils down to faith. I know a little of philosophy, a little theology, a little church history and I know how trends in thinking and beliefs change over time and in different cultures. Faith is what keeps me going when things are dark and uncertain and I've just learned something that I wished I never knew. Faith assures me this is not the end even when others abandon the journey at the very way station I'm at. Faith can blithely park anomalous data for decades just in the off chance that some day it will make sense. Faith keeps my eyes on Christ as I shift around jigsaw pieces of hell, election, freewill, suffering, joy, grace, works etc.
 
Most people operate the same way. There is a mountain of evidence that the KJV is not the best English translation but by faith many say it is. There is evidence all over that God has abandoned some children to hideous suffering but by faith we say He has not. Logically, no one can be both 100% God and 100% man at the same time but by faith, we declare Jesus Christ is exactly that. Rationally, three Gods in one is nonsensical but by faith we relate to all three distinctively and as one.
 
I've know the stories of Christians who persevered despite all odds, even to a martyr's death. I know some who met up with evidence that was beyond reasonable doubt and they walked away from Christianity. (ex. Charles Templeton). My pastor is fond of saying to me "Fides quarens intellectum" which is Latin for "faith seeking understanding". That is what theology is. It is not to explain Christianity so that we can believe. As Augustine said, "I believe in order that I may understand."
 
So in summary, my main objection to your assertion that if someone proved Jesus is false, then it would be logical to stop believing is this: there is no room in my faith for such a thought. It is like asking me "is yellow circular?" or "are circles cold?" or "are my cats pious?" :-)
 
I know this is kind of long and I hope it makes sense. I hope this will also show why the Mormon people and the Canadians are so resistant to your arguments.
 
Love,
 
Caroline
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 7:24 AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Fw: Rikk Watts on Genesis 1

Caroline Wong wrote:
I consider myself Christian. There are tons of definitions of Evangelical. The simplest is a person who belongs to an Evangelical denomination. I define it as a person who tells another the good news.
 
BTW, was it you who said that if someone proved to you Jesus was false, you would stop believing? (I think it was in relation to the LDS people and Joseph Smith) I was completely stunned by that post and not sure if I read it right.
 
Love,
 
Caroline
================================================================
If you had absolute proof that Jesus was not the Savior, you would be out of your mind to continue to believe.  I am a realist.  I have examined the evidence.  Jesus is real!!!
Terry

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!

Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page

Reply via email to