by Perry 105 Replies latest watchtower bible
My question was not: What was the "Majority Text" in the first century?
It was "What was the "Majority Text" in the first Millennium?" Sometime in the 9th century, a minuscule text became the majority. How do you think that happenned?
Deputy,
Oversight on "millennium". Can you elaborate on "a minuscule text became the majority". I'm having trouble determining your point.
Of course, the texts grew in number over the years.
Narkissos,
After nearly 24 hours I guess you are not going to answer my question about your level of education and which biblical languages you have a degree in. This of course is your perrogative. Although, I can't understand why, since any level of recognized acheivement in that area is admirable.
I would like to address some of your comments on this thread so far. Before, I do. I'd like for you to correct me if you think that the term atheist is a mischaracterization of your views on God. Your posts would certainly be indistingishable from those of an atheist. I know that others are proud of their atheism. I am proud of my fundamentalism.
Judging from your posts, I will believe that you are a somewhat learned (degree unknown) Atheist Bible Critic. I will direct my comments to you with that understanding until you claim otherwise.
Your first contribution to this thread was:
Apparently no fundy trash ... is beneath Perry...
Of course anyone who believes the bible differently than the way, in yours and other like opinions, you would like them to... is "trash". You are an atheist for heavens sake. The only way for an atheist to assume his position is true, is for him to assume that he knows all things, "knowing" that there is no God. The atheist places himself in the position of the very thing that he claims doesn't exist. May I suggest that your disdain for others not like you, is predicated upon your basic assumption about God? Something to consider.
Oh my [God], Perry, haven't you realised yet that Westcott & Hort produced a New Testament critical edition only? All OT references are therefore irrelevant to this thread (and Satanus' question). .... you don't understand what you are pasting about
Narkissos,
This is a straw man and your accessment is arrogant and insulting. Nowhere did I claim that list of scriptures in their entirety related to W/H. If fact, as you know I claimed the opposite:
First Post:
I know that a lot of people are very surprised to learn that God took one heck of a whoopin' for each one of us that allow Him to take our punishment due us;
The list of scriptures I originally posted supported the meaning of 1 John 5:7, about Jesus being God. The list contained both Hebrew and Greek references for that purpose.
Re-post for Satanus for slightly different reasons:
I posted many instances in the beginning of this thread that are shocking to the JW mind, from right out of the bible. Why don't you look these scriptures up and see which ones are in the modern translations and which ones aren't.
Obviously, he would need to see which ones were relevant, as I suggested. The vast majority of the scriptures I re-posted were from the Greek and as JW's we ALL know the difference. Why?
I know from your previous posts that you were a former elder. As such, you were, and still are acutely aware that as Jehovah's Witnesses none of us were even allowed to use the terms "old testament" or "new testament". WE ALL used the terms Greek Scriptures and Hebrew Scriptures to refer to the bible divisions.
Yet, here you employ a premise that you KNOW TO BE FALSE to insultingly characterize someone that you disagree with. Who are you fooling? This kind of balderdash of course is allowable with your belief system, where there are NO MORAL IMPERATIVES.
For the atheist, the ends justify the means. The atheist goal of a humanistic utopia justifies whatever he deems necessary to bring this about...because he KNOWS what it is that everyone else needs. This makes sense because if someone could somehow convince himself that he knows all things and can thus declare, "there is no god"; then certainly it is no leap at all to assume that he knows what is best for everyone else, and then use whatever means he wishes to get them there. This kind of worldview is un-thinkable as a template for happy living, in my view.
Many of your NT references have nothing to do with a different Greek text (so again W&H are innocent) but with translation (e.g. Matthew 20:20; Acts 20:28, Philippians 2:6; Hebrews 1:5f, 8).
This is another straw man. I never claimed that each of the scriptures in that list related to a different Greek text. See above. The title of this thread is "Modern Bibles". Our modern bibles as you know come to us through a variety of processes. The Wescott/Hort foundation is but one (albeit a major one) of those processes. For a variety of reasons, those scriptures are perverted in one or more (mostly more) of the MB's. Most of us read the bible in our respective language...where it matters.
I also see that you didn't take into account the refutation (see my previous link) of the list of pseudo-evidences for 1 Jean 5:7.
Why should I ? You already characterize the ancient testimony relating to the veracity of this scripture as "pseudo".
Anyway the main thing you failed to learn, imo, is the lesson of your JW experience: you have again picked up a "cause" hastily and try to "serve" it by regurgitating
Ten years is hasty? I've been on this board since 2001 and certainly didn't start out as a believer. This is just more arrogance.
Tell me Narkissos, do you consider yourself a secular humanist?I know that one of our mutual friends considers himself such. Do you? Have you ever advocated humanist principles on this board? If you have that's Ok by me. Eventually, each of us must come to some conclusions about things....each for themselves. Do you consider yourself free from a cause? How can you criticize others if you have a cause?
Christian fundamentals are my cause because it was never an option growing up as a JW. The cards were all stacked against the fundamental doctrines of the bible. They were UNKNOWABLE. We were ALL shamed, lied to, deceived, and threatened with the loss of our families if we so much as even spoke of the fundamental doctrines of the bible.
Now that I enjoy the benefits of freedom in God, I can see why the enemy tries so hard to keep it from the folks.
After nearly 24 hours I guess you are not going to answer my question about your level of education and which biblical languages you have a degree in. This of course is your perrogative.
I'm certainly glad I have not come back to this thread in the past 24 hours because I might have been deceived by the "friendly" tone of your former post into answering your personal question. What I chose to tell about myself on this board is on my profile (and perhaps a few scattered posts I have forgotten about) and has nothing to do with the topic under discussion. Arguments are to be assessed on their own merits and not by the author's credentials. Unless the discussion is so over your head that the best you can do is count the PhDs on each side, of course.
Of course anyone who believes the bible differently than the way, in yours and other like opinions, you would like them to... is "trash".
You are greatly mistaken. Most Evangelical and conservative Christian scholars, such as the ones who have contributed to the UBS Committee on textual criticism and have produced the "modern Bibles" you are ignorantly talking about (even 100% Evangelical versions like the NIV) would view your pasted presentation of textual criticism as trash.
Oh my [God], Perry, haven't you realised yet that Westcott & Hort produced a New Testament critical edition only? All OT references are therefore irrelevant to this thread (and Satanus' question). .... you don't understand what you are pasting aboutNarkissos,
This is a straw man and your accessment is arrogant and insulting. Nowhere did I claim that list of scriptures in their entirety related to W/H. If fact, as you know I claimed the opposite:
First Post:
I know that a lot of people are very surprised to learn that God took one heck of a whoopin' for each one of us that allow Him to take our punishment due us;The list of scriptures I originally posted supported the meaning of 1 John 5:7, about Jesus being God. The list contained both Hebrew and Greek references for that purpose.
Re-post for Satanus for slightly different reasons:
I posted many instances in the beginning of this thread that are shocking to the JW mind, from right out of the bible. Why don't you look these scriptures up and see which ones are in the modern translations and which ones aren't.Obviously, he would need to see which ones were relevant, as I suggested. The vast majority of the scriptures I re-posted were from the Greek and as JW's we ALL know the difference. Why?
I know from your previous posts that you were a former elder. As such, you were, and still are acutely aware that as Jehovah's Witnesses none of us were even allowed to use the terms "old testament" or "new testament". WE ALL used the terms Greek Scriptures and Hebrew Scriptures to refer to the bible divisions.
Yet, here you employ a premise that you KNOW TO BE FALSE to insultingly characterize someone that you disagree with. Who are you fooling? This kind of balderdash of course is allowable with your belief system, where there are NO MORAL IMPERATIVES.
For the atheist, the ends justify the means. The atheist goal of a humanistic utopia justifies whatever he deems necessary to bring this about...because he KNOWS what it is that everyone else needs. This makes sense because if someone could somehow convince himself that he knows all things and can thus declare, "there is no god"; then certainly it is no leap at all to assume that he knows what is best for everyone else, and then use whatever means he wishes to get them there. This kind of worldview is un-thinkable as a template for happy living, in my view.
I'm sorry but even at third reading the above doesn't make any sense to me. Re-read the full title of your thread and Satanus' question which you claimed to answer by re-posting irrelevant material. I can see that since then you haven't fared better with DD's question (although DD was probably more sympathetic to your stance).
Btw, I don't think I have ever introduced myself as a former elder.
Many of your NT references have nothing to do with a different Greek text (so again W&H are innocent) but with translation (e.g. Matthew 20:20; Acts 20:28, Philippians 2:6; Hebrews 1:5f, 8).This is another straw man. I never claimed that each of the scriptures in that list related to a different Greek text. See above. The title of this thread is "Modern Bibles". Our modern bibles as you know come to us through a variety of processes. The Wescott/Hort foundation is but one (albeit a major one) of those processes. For a variety of reasons, those scriptures are perverted in one or more (mostly more) of the MB's. Most of us read the bible in our respective language...where it matters.
So you again admit that you cannot stick to the topic of your own thread nor answer a specific question.
I also see that you didn't take into account the refutation (see my previous link) of the list of pseudo-evidences for 1 Jean 5:7.Why should I ? You already characterize the ancient testimony relating to the veracity of this scripture as "pseudo".
Because the list of "ancient evidence" pasted (by sacolton on the thread I linked to and by you on this one) has been shown to be phony.
Anyway the main thing you failed to learn, imo, is the lesson of your JW experience: you have again picked up a "cause" hastily and try to "serve" it by regurgitatingTen years is hasty? I've been on this board since 2001 and certainly didn't start out as a believer. This is just more arrogance.
Too bad you left out the rest of my sentence... probably it was just too fitting.
Tell me Narkissos, do you consider yourself a secular humanist?
I don't think I have ever claimed that label.
I'm certainly glad I have not come back to this thread in the past 24 hours because I might have been deceived by the "friendly" tone of your former post into answering your personal question.
Narkissos. Do you want someone to believe that you haven't checked this thread in 24 hours? You only happened to check it right after I responded? Then you talk about deception? You're living in a dream world.
Nowhere have I denegrated your alleged scholastic accomplishments; a quick check will only reveal praise. Are you comfortable with that? A bit of paranoia go on here?
I did certainly point out one of the inferiorities of your atheist worldview compared with Christianity, but this had nothing to do with clarifying your claim of biblical scholarship. That is quite admirable.
Of course anyone who believes the bible differently than the way, in yours and other like opinions, you would like them to... is "trash".You are greatly mistaken. Most Evangelical and conservative Christian scholars, such as the ones who have contributed to the UBS Committee on textual criticism and have produced the "modern Bibles" you are ignorantly talking about (even 100% Evangelical versions like the NIV) would view your pasted presentation of textual criticism as trash.
What on earth are you talking about? Please re-read the two posts above slowly. My comments had nothing whatsoever to do with Evangelical and Conservative scholars. I never mentioned them....you did. My comments have to do with your characterization of "of those who disagree with YOU, and those who have opinions like you .You called it trash. Nice. If you want to appeal to a particular religious sector to bolster your invective, go ahead. But, whose counting Phd's now? Some of your comments are utterly void of substance.
I'm sorry but even at third reading the above doesn't make any sense to me. Re-read the full title of your thread and Satanus' question which you claimed to answer by re-posting irrelevant material. I can see that since then you haven't fared better with DD 's question (although DD was probably more sympathetic to your stance).
How about we just let Satanus or DD ask me directly if they need clarification on my response. I they want me to elaborate, I'd be happy to do it.
Many of your NT references have nothing to do with a different Greek text (so again W&H are innocent) but with translation (e.g. Matthew 20:20; Acts 20:28, Philippians 2:6; Hebrews 1:5f, 8).This is another straw man. I never claimed that each of the scriptures in that list related to a different Greek text. See above. The title of this thread is "Modern Bibles". Our modern bibles as you know come to us through a variety of processes. The Wescott/Hort foundation is but one (albeit a major one) of those processes. For a variety of reasons, those scriptures are perverted in one or more (mostly more) of the MB's. Most of us read the bible in our respective language...where it matters.
So you again admit that you cannot stick to the topic of your own thread nor answer a specific question.
No, of course not. I did answer. As I explained, the list was a paste from my earlier post. Satanus knows the difference between the NT and the OT and which one is Greek and which one is Hebrew....because we were all forced to call the divisions by their language names. It is impossible for you not to know this. Still playing word games?
Because the list of "ancient evidence" pasted (by sacolton on the thread I linked to and by you on this one) has been shown to be phony.
Then why didn't you just come out and plainly say, hey that list of ancient evidence for 1 John 5: 7 is phony, and here's why? You could have even presented a specific point or two, instead of muddying the water with fake outrages and posturing regarding Greek and Hebrew scriptures, and the outlandish insinuation that EX-JW's would not be able to tell the difference between the two.
As I pointed out, this is a DEMONSTRABLE example of deception on your part; unlike the example of probable dishonesty at the top of this post which is only demonstratable through it's appeal to credulity.
Narkissos, I'm sure that you are a nice guy. But, your world-view from an atheist lens just allows you too much latitude to play fast and loose with the truth..... all for a good purpose of course, in your opinion. What's that secular saying I hear from time to time? All that matters is that you are true to yourself?
'I they want me to elaborate, I'd be happy to do it.'
Blaborate on;).
S
But, your world-view from an atheist lens just allows you too much latitude to play fast and loose with the truth.....
You're hilarious, dude!
Perry
Are you rex reincarnated, by any chance? He was good @ throwing crap around.
S
Perry, you are on crack dude. The info on this thread has crushed your argument. You have betrayed a basic misunderstanding of the subject.
BTS
Burn the Ships,
Please show where. This thread is about Modern Bibles and secondarily about Wescott and Hort. No one has contradicted the basic information I presented concerning their character.
Perry,
How about Genesis 7:4?
How should that read?
What is the most accurate interpretation for that very important verse?
