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
See more
See less

Confirmations of the New Testament

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    The answer is that there are significantly more than you are prepared to acknowledge. The extant texts of the New Testament contain literally thousands of variations, or variants, from each other.

    http://www.textexcavation.com/textualvariants.html
    There's a huge amount of variations and variants. The number of significant/meaningful variations, are miniscule however, when compared to the total number of manuscripts we have. Or another way to put it, the amount of meaningful variants relative to the total amount of variants that we have are hardly even worth mentioning.
    Last edited by JonathanL; 08-23-2019, 07:50 AM.
    ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
      Shuny, when someone claims to be an eyewitness, we count that as a reference to being an eyewitness.

      Bob claims to be an eyewitness and Mary records the account - we have an eyewitness account.
      There are no claims of eyewitnesses in the references so far.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
        There's a huge amount of variations and variants. The number of significant/meaningful variations, are miniscule however, when compared to the total number of manuscripts we have. Or another way to put it, the amount of meaningful variants relative to the total amount of variants that we have are hardly even worth mentioning.
        Not based on the references provided from the historians and academic references.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          Not based on the references provided from the historians and academic references.
          I was responding to Tassman's claim about "the extant texts of the New Testament contain[ing] literally thousands of variations, or variants, from each other." I was not saying anything about Christian interpolations in texts from other ancient authors like Tacitus or Josephus.
          ~Formerly known as Chrawnus~

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            There are no claims of eyewitnesses in the references so far.
            Repeating your claim requires me to repeat my response:

            Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." (Lk 1:1–4)

            "For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2 Pet. 1:16)

            "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us." (1 Jn 1:1–3)

            And people claiming to be eyewitnesses, when their claim could be verified, is evidence that indeed they testified of what they had seen and heard.

            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


            • #51
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              There are no claims of eyewitnesses in the references so far.
              Source material ALWAYS trumps historian assumption/interpretation.

              Isn't it hard to eat with your fingers in your ears?

              "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)

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                I was responding to Tassman's claim about "the extant texts of the New Testament contain[ing] literally thousands of variations, or variants, from each other." I was not saying anything about Christian interpolations in texts from other ancient authors like Tacitus or Josephus.
                The problem is that there is no original text or autograph. The original copies of the NT books have long since disappeared. After all they were written on papyrus, a very fragile and perishable material. More to the point, the original copies of the NT books were not looked upon as scripture by those of the early Christian communities.

                Leading Biblical scholars Kurt and Barbara Aland say in the ‘The Text of The New Testament, 1995’:

                “Until the beginning of the fourth century the text of the New Testament developed freely. It was the "living text" in the Greek literary tradition, unlike the text of the Hebrew Old Testament, which was subject to strict controls because (in the oriental tradition) the consonantal text was holy. And the New Testament text continued to be a "living text" as long as it remained a manuscript tradition, even when the Byzantine church molded it to the procrustean bed of the standard and officially prescribed text. Even for later scribes, for example, the parallel passages of the Gospels were so familiar that they would adapt the text of one Gospel to that of another. They also felt themselves free to make corrections in the text, improving it by their own standard of correctness, whether grammatically, stylistically, or more substantively. This was all the more true of the early period, when the text had not been attained canonical status, especially in the earliest period when Christians considered themselves to be filled with the Spirit. As a consequence the text of the early period was many-faceted, and each manuscript had its own peculiar character”.
                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                  Repeating your claim requires me to repeat my response:

                  Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught." (Lk 1:1–4)

                  "For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2 Pet. 1:16) [/q

                  "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us." (1 Jn 1:1–3)

                  And people claiming to be eyewitnesses, when their claim could be verified, is evidence that indeed they testified of what they had seen and heard.

                  Blessings,
                  Lee
                  Abain, again, and again . . . absolutely none of these references claim to refer to eye witness to the life of Christ. What they witnessed in their life is another matter. Yes, there were likely many writings before Luke including Mark, Mathew, and possibly Q, and also other writings not accepted by
                  christians, but none of this reflects claims of eye witnesses.

                  Tassman's post is accurate with an accurate academic citation. It need not be repeated.
                  Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-24-2019, 03:23 PM.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                    Source material ALWAYS trumps historian assumption/interpretation.

                    Isn't it hard to eat with your fingers in your ears?
                    There are no claims of eyewitnesses in the references so far.

                    Isn't it hard to eat with your fingers in your ears?

                    Tassman's post is accurate with an accurate academic citation. It need not be repeated, unless you have a reading deficiency problem.
                    Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-24-2019, 03:24 PM.
                    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                    go with the flow the river knows . . .

                    Frank

                    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                      Leading Biblical scholars Kurt and Barbara Aland say in the ‘The Text of The New Testament, 1995’:

                      “Until the beginning of the fourth century the text of the New Testament developed freely. It was the "living text" in the Greek literary tradition, unlike the text of the Hebrew Old Testament, which was subject to strict controls because (in the oriental tradition) the consonantal text was holy. And the New Testament text continued to be a "living text" as long as it remained a manuscript tradition, even when the Byzantine church molded it to the procrustean bed of the standard and officially prescribed text. Even for later scribes, for example, the parallel passages of the Gospels were so familiar that they would adapt the text of one Gospel to that of another. They also felt themselves free to make corrections in the text, improving it by their own standard of correctness, whether grammatically, stylistically, or more substantively. This was all the more true of the early period, when the text had not been attained canonical status, especially in the earliest period when Christians considered themselves to be filled with the Spirit. As a consequence the text of the early period was many-faceted, and each manuscript had its own peculiar character”.
                      That's strange, I've been reading the Nestle-Aland critical edition of the Greek NT, and the variants I've checked have not been significant. There are some well-known variants such as the longer ending of Mark, but they seem to be implying extensive variation here, beyond what is typically mentioned. Could you point me to some variants they refer to here?

                      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


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Abain, again, and again . . . absolutely none of these references claim to refer to eye witness to the life of Christ.
                        They most certainly do, Peter goes on to talk about the transfiguration, John is talking about "what we have seen and heard and touched we proclaim to you."

                        "He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice came to him from the Majestic Glory, saying, 'This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.' We ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with him on the sacred mountain." (2 Pe 1:17–18)

                        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


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Abain, again, and again . . . absolutely none of these references claim to refer to eye witness to the life of Christ. What they witnessed in their life is another matter. Yes, there were likely many writings before Luke including Mark, Mathew, and possibly Q, and also other writings not accepted by
                          christians, but none of this reflects claims of eye witnesses.

                          Tassman's post is accurate with an accurate academic citation. It need not be repeated.
                          Learn to read:

                          "For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2 Pet. 1:16)


                          Stop talking like a moron - they are claiming to BE eyewitnesses - an actual eyewitness account trumps an account about an eyewitness.



                          "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)

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                            Learn to read:

                            "For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." (2 Pet. 1:16)


                            Stop talking like a moron - they are claiming to BE eyewitnesses - an actual eyewitness account trumps an account about an eyewitness.


                            Absolutely NO.

                            Stop talking like a moron - they are claiming to be the eyewitnesses of his majesty (?), ie testimony of personal experiences. No, mention of being a witness to the life of JEsus Christ.
                            Last edited by shunyadragon; 08-24-2019, 10:04 PM.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                              Absolutely NO.

                              Stop talking like a moron - they are claiming to be the eyewitnesses of his majesty (?), ie testimony of personal experiences. No, mention of being a witness to the life of JEsus Christ.
                              And repeating moronic drivel doesn't make it any the less moronic.

                              That's not even pedantic - it's literally insane. Being an eyewitness to the Person doing anything at all is more than sufficient to establish that Person's existence.

                              Oh, and repeating the same exact barb makes you sound even more moronic. Impressive, really - I didn't think anything that can type could be that moronic.

                              For the sane people in the room, the point is established.

                              "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)

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                                That's strange, I've been reading the Nestle-Aland critical edition of the Greek NT, and the variants I've checked have not been significant. There are some well-known variants such as the longer ending of Mark, but they seem to be implying extensive variation here, beyond what is typically mentioned. Could you point me to some variants they refer to here?
                                What we have from Kurt and Barbara Aland, and generally accepted by biblical scholars, is that the concept of 'original text' is non-existent. The New Testament text that we have today is the work of scholarly committees which decided on the readings it thought were most likely closest to the earliest versions of the New Testament.
                                Last edited by Tassman; 08-25-2019, 01:19 AM.
                                “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X