AI didn’t realize that a woman’s maiden name indicates her husband’s ancestry
And this has what to do with the mountains of evidence that Jesus is God? If you cannot accept the bible where it says that Jesus raised himself from the dead, what makes you think that any evidence would convince you that Jesus is God?
it claimed there are no variants in this text
One of the hallmarks of Aqweds' posts is how he thoroughly deals with textual variants.
Textual variants are quickly dispelled by looking at how the first Christians quoted or referred to said verse in question. You would never run your own life based on this kind of credulity.
In contrast, the NWT renders the verse as: "to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own Son." The insertion of "Son" (υἱοῦ, huiou) is not supported by any extant Greek manuscript. Textual criticism confirms that the phrase "διὰ τοῦ αἵματος τοῦ ἰδίου" is consistent across all known manuscripts, with no evidence for the inclusion of "Son." Variants exist for the phrase "the church of God" (τοῦ θεοῦ) versus "the church of the Lord" (τοῦ κυρίου), as noted in the Nestle-Aland critical apparatus, but these do not affect the phrase in question. Early translations, such as the Sahidic Coptic and the Peshitta, further corroborate the reading "his own blood," reinforcing the textual integrity of the traditional rendering (Stack Exchange: Acts 20:28 variants).
He deals with variants in the clauses above in the Acts 20: 28 thread. The main point is this: The insertion of "Son" (υἱοῦ, huiou) is not supported by any extant Greek manuscript.
Please falsify this statement.
Your mind is broken SlimBoyFat.