by SwedishChef 116 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
We are fairly confident, for example that the scribes who made copies of the New Testament (the gospels in particular) tended to modify the Greek text to match the orthodox views that were emerging.
"We are fairly confident..." That's evidence? Um...ok. How confident can we be in the accuracy of these opinions?
The book I quote from is written by Robert W. Funk, the founder of the Jesus seminar. Their object was to objectively collect and analyze all the words and deeds ascribed to Jesus in all the ancient sources up to about 300 C.E. About 200 scholars formed the Jesus Seminar. How confident can we believe these were they exact words of the New Testament writers when no manuscripts have survived since before about 160 C.E. ?
More substantial pieces of papyrus manuscripts have survived from the end of the second century, but the earliest surviving copies of complete gospels come from the third century. And we have no copies of the complete Christian Bible that can be dated earlier than the fourth century
Also it is known that the early church fathers edited out or added to the scriptures that would support their ideaoligies.
MarcionMarcion, a wealthy ship owner who organized his own Christian sect, gathered into his Bible only those scriptures that supported his theological position. After coming to Rome from Pontus in Asia Minor (ca. 140-150), Marcion promulgated a collection of "scriptures" consisting of the Gospel of Luke and ten letters of Paul, all heavily edited. The lesson was not lost on the later church. Both Marcion and the church excluded books if they were deemed to deviate from desirable doctrine or practice. The Puritans and Presbyterians adopted this strategy in forcing the publishers of the King James Version in the seventeenth century to drop the Old Testament apocrypha from their editions. The British and Foreign Bible Society added its weight to exclusion in the nineteenth century by refusing to print and circulate Bibles with the Old Testament apocrypha in them.
Marcion is also known to have taken scissors and paste to the documents he chose. He cut out parts of Luke and the Pauline letters that he didn't like. We do not know how often that same approach was used prior to the fixing of the text in the fourth and fifth centuries. Many scholars now believe canonical Mark is an edited text in its own right. Mark was certainly edited by Matthew and Luke in the process of creating their own gospels; they also edited Q, to judge by the results. And there is good reason to believe that Thomas went through more than one edition.
Will
Edited by - william penwell on 12 December 2002 15:35:12
William,
Could you provide a reference to where the Jesus Seminar offers proof that edits or additions were made to the original texts?
How confident can we believe these were they exact words of the New Testament writers when no manuscripts have survived since before about 160 C.E. ?
We are not discussing the Qur'an here. Christians do not base their theology on whether or not scripture was passed verbatim.
Also it is known that the early church fathers edited out or added to the scriptures that would support their ideaoligies.
Known by whom?
We do not know how often that same approach was used prior to the fixing of the text in the fourth and fifth centuries.
You cannot assume that changes were made based on this statement. Being unaware of revision does not qualify that it has been made.
ExpatBrit, that fundie bingo thing cracked me up for quite a few minutes! EXCELLENT!
Hehehehe, you guys are really pulling old Swedish Chef over the coals. But then, if you can't defend your beliefs, what's the point of having them in the first place?
The Jesus Seminar is a project of the Westar Institute. I think their qualifications speak for themselves and I don't have to defend what they say. As per their own web site, to become a Westar Fellow you must have the following qualifications:
Become a Westar Fellow
Westar Institute welcomes the participation of qualified scholars in its Seminars and projects. Interested scholars must have:
- A Ph.D. or its equivalent, from an accredited university, in biblical studies or a cognate discipline
- The ability to work in the original biblical languages
If you are interested in becoming a Westar Fellow, please send your inquiry along with current CV to Westar Institute, P.O. Box 6144, Santa Rosa, California 95406.
I quoted from his book and he has ample proof references in the back of the book. He is quoting from scriptures and historical references. Personally I would prefer to take an objective look at something than basing my beliefs strictly on faith. If you are genuinely interested in more information, you can contacted the Jesus Seminar at
[email protected]You stated;
You cannot assume that changes were made based on this statement. Being unaware of revision does not qualify that it has been made.
I think the Jesus Seminar qualifications speak for themselves. By examining the scrolls and manuscripts that are available the Jesus Seminar has come to that conclusion. I quoted about how "To add to the problem, no two copies of any of the books of the New Testament are exactly alike, since they were all handmade."
Will
I think their qualifications speak for themselves and I don't have to defend what they say.
If you intend to quote the Jesus Seminar as a reliable source, then you most certainly do have to defend what they say. If you are not prepared to defend your quotes, then you shouldn't use them. Further, the Jesus Seminar represents a very small percentage of the belief's of theologians. Hardly notable in the realm of scholars. Finally, prerequisites of a Ph.D. and linguistic skill do not constitute authority on a subject. Anyone can tape a list of requirements to their door.
Personally I would prefer to take an objective look at something than basing my beliefs strictly on faith.
The Jesus Seminar is far from objective. They begin their "research" with the premise that the bible is flawed due to containing such things as supernatural occurrences (miracles). They then build on this presumption to conclude that the bible cannot be trusted because no two copies are exactly alike, or simply because the earliest copies of the scriptures supposedly date back to the 2nd or 3rd century. That's certainly not objective and doesn't even border on conclusive (primarily by the standards of renowned historians).
The fact is, neither you nor the Jesus Seminar can offer any proof that the original texts were altered to suit ideology. No thanks. Take your 200 "scholars" and go back to the left (I mean west) coast.
Sunstarr,
The Jesus Seminar is far from objective. They begin their "research" with the premise that the bible is flawed due to containing such things as supernatural occurrences (miracles). They then build on this presumption to conclude that the bible cannot be trusted because no two copies are exactly alike, or simply because the earliest copies of the scriptures supposedly date back to the 2nd or 3rd century. That's certainly not objective and doesn't even border on conclusive (primarily by the standards of renowned historians).
Looks like you are guilty of the special pleading logical fallacy. Why is this method of critical analysis valid for every other ancient text, but not the Bible?
rem
rem,
I'm not familiar with what "special pleading logical fallacy" means. Can you elaborate?
sunstarr,
I agree and you can find as much proof to support the authenticity of the bible as there is against the authenticity of the bible. Like rem stated, "Why is this method of critical analysis valid for every other ancient text, but not the Bible?" Seems like as soon as anyone dares challenge the bible's accuracy, they are labeled as been "the Devil" himself. I prefer to take an objective look at things and not take the word of a few "right wing" fanatical fundamentalist Christians.
Will
Sunstarr,
Here is a decent explanation of the Special Pleading logical fallacy:
Basically it means you use a different standard for your subject than you would use for any other subject. Here is an example of how it applies in your case:
This is classic special pleading because you have not really provided any real reason why a different set of standards should be used for your book over any other ancient text. Any other religion could use the same fallacious argument to request that their ancient text be immune to critical analysis.
rem
