Originally posted by Tassman
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Archeology 201 Guidelines
If Indiana Jones happened to be a member of Tweb, this is where he'd hang out.
Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?
Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.
Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.
Forum Rules: Here
Welcome to the Archeology forum. Were you out doing some gardening and dug up a relic from the distant past? would you like to know more about Ancient Egypt? Did you think Memphis was actually a city in Tennessee?
Well, for the answers to those and other burning questions you've found the right digs.
Our forum rules apply here too, if you haven't read them now is the time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Confirmations of the New Testament
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostDo you have the 1995 edition at hand or something...
So they can speak of a distance from the original text here, showing that we have a good idea what the original text would be.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostWithin a hundred years meets YOUR EXPRESS CRITERIA. Further, YOUR CRITERIA throws out almost all ancient documentation. No cherry picking allowed.
STILL WAITING . . .Last edited by shunyadragon; 09-06-2019, 08:42 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe historians nor I are not biased on any one ancient historical document. All ancient documents are open to skepticism as I referenced when rogue brought up Julius Caesar's commentaries, which are NOT considered authoritative in any way, and contain conflicts with archaeological evidence. There is no standard of selectivity. Can you name one ancient document that historians selectively endorse over another? Within a hundred years even whether it is so or not does not make the documentation solid in anyway, as referenced by Tassman and I referenced by academic historians.
STILL WAITING . . ."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostPoint not made, only a baseless assertion."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostI have the book, and both quotes are in there, as well as what I quoted saying the editions of the NT are substantially in agreement. Continuing on p. 95, we read:
So they can speak of a distance from the original text here, showing that we have a good idea what the original text would be.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostThe textual similarity does not refer to the closeness to an 'original' text because that is unknown. No such letter-perfect manuscript is known to have ever existed or what books comprised it if it did, especially given that some texts moved between canonical and non-canonical status. Books such as Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostYou'll have to reword this a bit, because as it's written it's like you're claiming that it's not even certain if the original autographs of the writings making up the NT ever existed, which is a thesis I find hard to believe many scholars would be willing to defend.
Comment
-
Letter perfect?!?! I do not believe this is a realistic standard in the history of Hebrew nor Christian scriptures. They both show the distinct characteristics of evolved, edited and redacted scriptures. It is true that Hebrew scriptures became relatively evolved at some time between ~1100 and 500 BCE, but these scriptures are the result of a process of evolution up until the Dead Sea scrolls. The oldest known Torah as we know it today is from the 11-12th century.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostThe textual similarity does not refer to the closeness to an 'original' text because that is unknown.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
And yet in II Peter 3:15-18 we have Peter describing Paul's letters as Scripture and in I Timothy 5:18 Paul quotes Scripture citing Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostLetter perfect?!?! I do not believe this is a realistic standard in the history of Hebrew nor Christian scriptures. They both show the distinct characteristics of evolved, edited and redacted scriptures. It is true that Hebrew scriptures became relatively evolved at some time between ~1100 and 500 BCE, but these scriptures are the result of a process of evolution up until the Dead Sea scrolls. The oldest known Torah as we know it today is from the 11-12th century.
Comment
Comment