Posts by Earnest

408

Is Jesus the Creator?

by Sea Breeze in

that's what the word says.

.

colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..

Earnest

aqwsed12345 : Differences in manuscript traditions are normal, but they do not imply deliberate falsification.

Rufinus, who I quoted, was writing about deliberate falsification. It happened all the time, but especially in the fourth century when the consequences of "heresy" were imprisonment or exile. When Origen complained it was happening to his own writings in his lifetime, do you think he was talking about different manuscript traditions?

aqwsed12345 : Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John and a contemporary of Ignatius of Antioch, whose writings unambiguously affirm Jesus' divinity (e.g., Ignatius’ letter to the Ephesians: "our God, Jesus Christ").

I would have thought you would have known that the writings of Ignatius are completely corrupted. I will happily write similar details about the textual history of Ignatius, but it is sufficient for now to say that there are three different recensions of his letters, the shorter, the medium and the longer recension. Several scholars think they are all forgeries, and all scholars accept some are forgeries and the rest have interpolations.

aqwsed12345 : Other scholars, such as J.B. Lightfoot, have defended the phrase ["our Lord and God Jesus Christ" in Polycarp's Letter to the Philippians].

J.B. Lightfoot wrote in the nineteenth century and textual criticism has moved on since then. At that time, Lightfoot edited "The Apostolic Fathers". The current editor is Michael Holmes, and it was from his latest edition of "The Apostolic Fathers" that I got my information.

113

Luke 23:43 the NWT

by Ade in

luke 23:43 - and jesus said to him, "positively i say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.

nwt places comma here , giving a totally different meaning to the verse.

now the average jw uses this to back their doctrine and it seems in itself virtually impossible to reason with them on it.

Earnest

aqwsed12345: The Sahidic and Bohairic Coptic translations also support the traditional placement of the comma before "today."

In Bentley Layton's "A Coptic Grammar", Third Edition, 2011, he translates Luke 23:43 in section 509, on the nature of recorded discourse in Coptic :

"Truly, I say to you today, You will be with Me in Paradise."

408

Is Jesus the Creator?

by Sea Breeze in

that's what the word says.

.

colossians 1:16. for by him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things have been created through him and for him..

Earnest

@ Sea Breeze :

I didn't give a full reponse to your posts here and here which reflected the article Nine Early Church Fathers Who Taught Jesus is God by Tim Barnett on the Stand to Reason website. Of course that doesn't negate the quotations made, and so I should expand on my comment that "scholarship on the Apostolic Fathers shows most evidence we have of what they wrote is very late and has been subject to revision".

First, regarding the evidence we have of their writings being very late, I refer to the third edition of The Apostolic Fathers, 2007, edited by Michael Holmes. Holmes says, regarding the letter of Polycarp to the Philippians (p.277) :

The text of the letter has been poorly preserved. Nine late Greek manuscripts are extant, all incomplete and all derived from the same defective source, [which only go up as far as 9.2. The oldest Greek witness is Vaticanus Graecus 859 from the 11th–13th centuries, but most are from the 15th–16th centuries]. For the rest of the letter we are dependent upon a Latin translation, preserved in nine manuscripts, [the earliest from the 11th century].

So the quotation that you provide from chapter 12 of Polycarp's Letter to the Philippians referring to "our Lord and God Jesus Christ" has no manuscript support in the Greek at all, but relies on a Latin translation no earlier than the eleventh century. The nine Latin manuscripts have different readings. Four of the Latin manuscripts (r,p,m,f) read "dominum nostrum et deum Iesum Christum" (= "our Lord and God Jesus Christ") while five of the Latin manuscripts (o,v,b,c,t) read "dominum nostrum Iesum Christum" (= "our Lord Jesus Christ"), omitting "et deum".

Now I would like to show that it was common practice to interpolate and/or alter the writings of early Christians so they reflected later dogma. Rufinus (344-411 AD) translated Origen into Latin and he discusses interpolations in On the Adulteration of the Works of Origen (late fourth century). Indeed, Rufinus himself "altered many things which had a heterodox meaning as found in the ordinary mss. of Origen, so as to make the work consistent with itself and with the orthodox views expressed in other parts of Origen’s writings" (p.736).

He lists several examples of interpolation in the writings of other Church Fathers. Eunomian arguments interjected into Clement's Recognitions, subordinationist views into the writings of Clement of Alexandria, Sabellian and Arian positions into those of Dionysius of Alexandria (p.737). Latin writers like Hilary of Poitiers (p.741), Cyprian (p.742), and Jerome were also victims of interpolation. If this was going on while the writers were still alive (as Origen asserted in his own case), it can hardly be a surprise that it happened after they died. Especially when so much was at stake (banishment, imprisonment or death) once the emperor got involved.

So let me go back to the expression "God Jesus Christ" which was allegedly written in Polycarp's Letter to the Philippians. Interestingly, in the CCEL Apostolic Fathers it only reads "Lord Jesus Christ". In the Apostolic Fathers, edited by Michael Holmes, it does read "God Jesus Christ" but has a footnote saying "Many ancient authorities omit 'and God' [in the expression "our Lord and God Jesus Christ"]". I wrote to Michael Holmes regarding this, and he replied :

I consulted an unfinished commentary on the Letter of Polycarp that I have been working on since publishing the latest edition of the translation. It turns out that I had forgotten that I had in fact, after working on this passage in more detail, concluded by disagreeing with Lightfoot at this point; I argue the phrase et deum is more likely a later addition. So, if and when I publish the commentary, I will need to revise the published translation to match it.

113

Luke 23:43 the NWT

by Ade in

luke 23:43 - and jesus said to him, "positively i say to you, today you will be with me in paradise.

nwt places comma here , giving a totally different meaning to the verse.

now the average jw uses this to back their doctrine and it seems in itself virtually impossible to reason with them on it.

Earnest

Does not the Coptic and the Curetonian Syriac translate the Greek as "Truly, I tell you today, ..." ?

8

1922 Cedar Point Ohio Convention

by Nambo in

i recall reading that daniel 12 verse 12 ( 12 blessed is he who waits, and comes to the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days.

), was claimed to have been fulfilled by the cedar point ohio convention in 1922.. can anybody recall which publications this claim was published in please?.

or even better, a screen shot.

Earnest

More recently, Pay Attention to Daniel's Prophecy, 2006, p.303 para.24 said :

Jehovah’s angel concludes his prophecy regarding the holy ones with these words: “Happy is the one who is keeping in expectation and who arrives at the one thousand three hundred and thirty-five days!” (Daniel 12:12) The angel gives no clues as to when this period begins or ends. History suggests that it simply follows on the heels of the preceding period. In that case it would run from the autumn of 1922 to the late spring of 1926 (Northern Hemisphere). Did the holy ones come to a state of happiness by the end of that period? Yes, in important spiritual ways.

9

Jolene Chu and Ollimatti Peltonen publication

by careful in

just published in cambridge university press's elements in new religious movements series, a short book or oversized pamphlet is now available by two witnesses, jolene chu from warwick and ollimatti peltonen from the selters branch.

https://www.amazon.com/jehovahs-witnesses-elements-religious-movements/dp/1009509764.

it's small, just 84 pages, including the bibliography.

Earnest

It is available for download here free of charge for two weeks after the publication date, which was 18 December 2024.

51

Theocratic Warfare and Taqiyya

by aqwsed12345 in

the concept of strategic deception exists in several religious and ideological contexts.

in this article, we will explore and compare the theocratic warfare doctrine of the watchtower society and taqiyya in islam.

both concepts have parallels in their mechanisms of permitting deception for religious purposes but differ significantly in their application and historical roots.. 1. theocratic warfare: the "rahab method".

Earnest

aqwsed12345 : For example in his "Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research," Tov argues that the use of ΙΑΩ or the Tetragrammaton in Paleo-Hebrew within Greek manuscripts reflects textual diversity, not uniformity. This diversity suggests localized practices, and Tov states that such forms represent variant traditions, rather than the original text of the LXX.

I managed to access a copy of Tov's "Text-Critical Use of the Septuagint in Biblical Research" here but could not find him stating that ΙΑΩ represents variant traditions rather than the original text of the LXX. In fact, I could not find him discussing ΙΑΩ at all. Perhaps you could kindly direct me to the relevant pages?

aqwsed12345 : [4Q120] is a single fragmentary manuscript reflecting one regional practice, and its use of ΙΑΩ aligns with Egyptian Jewish scribal customs rather than a universal LXX tradition. If you believe otherwise, you need to cite where Tov explicitly equates ΙΑΩ with a universal and original stage of the LXX translation.

I did cite this in a previous post, but I will quote again from Tov's Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, Third Edition, 2012, p.132 :

In [4Q120] Lev 3:12, 4:27, Iaw ... probably reflects the original, pre-Christian rendering of the Tetragrammaton, preceding kurios of the Septuagint translation.

It makes sense, really. If all other Hebrew names are transliterated into Greek then to do so with God's name is just following the scribal practice.

Incidentally, you quote Hurtado as saying "Kyrios was used without the definite article to function as if it were a name" and you add that it shows the LXX translators and users treated Κύριος as a theological equivalent of YHWH. Interestingly, Tov says (The Greek Biblical Texts from the Judean Desert, p.20) :

All the irregularities pertaining to the anarthrous use of kurios can also be explained as having been created by a mechanical replacement of Iaw with kurios by Christian scribes.

8

Interesting bit of Watch Tower history

by vienne in

two images of allegheny city and a challenge.

see https://truthhistory.blogspot.com/ the newest post.

.

Earnest

There was quite a lengthy discussion of the book "Angels and Women" here and here, but nothing much from Leolaia.

51

Theocratic Warfare and Taqiyya

by aqwsed12345 in

the concept of strategic deception exists in several religious and ideological contexts.

in this article, we will explore and compare the theocratic warfare doctrine of the watchtower society and taqiyya in islam.

both concepts have parallels in their mechanisms of permitting deception for religious purposes but differ significantly in their application and historical roots.. 1. theocratic warfare: the "rahab method".

Earnest

@ aqwsed12345 :

I am inclined to concur with slimboyfat that while you make an appearance of responding to posts, you ultimately ignore them and repeat the assertions which they have addressed.

For example, I quoted and provided a link to Emanuel Tov agreeing to the conclusion of Skehan and Stegemann that "Iaw reflects the earliest attested stage in the history of the LXX translation".

And yet you respond to my post that "Tov and others point out, later revisions or corrections inserted ΙΑΩ or the Paleo-Hebrew Tetragrammaton into Greek texts for liturgical or theological reasons".

You also say "Tov notes that while ΙΑΩ may appear in some fragmental early manuscripts, its usage is localized and sporadic, not indicative of the broader Alexandrian Jewish tradition that gave us the Septuagint".

Can you provide a reference, preferably a link, which shows that Tov said either of these things regarding the use of ΙΑΩ ?

In the same post I showed that Tov upholds that "4Q120 reflects the Old Greek, and not a later revision/translation".

And yet you respond by saying that "the presence of ΙΑΩ in 4Q120 reflects a localized or sectarian variant".

The same goes for my discussion of the nomina sacra and of Philo, but instead of repeating my reasoning in what would become a rather circular discussion, perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify whether I have misunderstood you on the points above.

51

Theocratic Warfare and Taqiyya

by aqwsed12345 in

the concept of strategic deception exists in several religious and ideological contexts.

in this article, we will explore and compare the theocratic warfare doctrine of the watchtower society and taqiyya in islam.

both concepts have parallels in their mechanisms of permitting deception for religious purposes but differ significantly in their application and historical roots.. 1. theocratic warfare: the "rahab method".

Earnest

aqwsed12345 : The presence of ΙΑΩ or the paleo-Hebrew Tetragrammaton in these manuscripts must be understood as variants or later revisions, not as evidence that they were the original translation practice of the LXX.

While Emanuel Tov does say that the writing of the tetragrammaton in Hebrew characters in Greek revisional texts is a relatively late phenomenon, he concurs with Stegemann and Skehan that Iaw reflects the earliest attested stage in the history of the LXX translation, when the name of God was represented by its transliteration, just like any other personal name in the LXX. Tov says (Greek Biblical Texts from the Judean Desert, pp.20,21) :

In the absence of convincing evidence in favor of any one explanation, the view of Skehan and Stegemann seems more plausible in light of the parallels provided. This argument serves as support for the view that 4Q120 reflects the Old Greek, and not a later revision/translation.

Whether, in fact, it was a revision or the earliest attested stage of the LXX translation, we know that the LXX in the first century contained God's name in one form or another.

aqwsed12345 : If the NT authors originally used the Tetragrammaton (e.g., ΙΑΩ or YHWH), we would expect to see transitional evidence—manuscripts or fragments showing a gradual replacement of the name with κύριος. However, no such transitional manuscripts exist.

It's interesting that the background to the use of kyrios as a sacred name (KY) is completely unknown to us. There is no transitional evidence - manuscripts or fragments showing a gradual use of KY - but all the copies we have of the NT contain this shortened form. There is no record of any discussion about it, or any objections to it, it just happened...universally. There are lots of theories but there is no concrete evidence of when this was introduced. It must have been in the first century, either by the original writers or by copyists. But there is not a murmur about it (that we know of). This does not require a conspiracy. It would be perfectly natural, especially after the destruction of the temple, for the largely gentile church to distance itself from Judaism. But if the original authors did use some form of God's name, the record of the nomina sacra (specifically KY) shows that any transitional evidence has been lost.