I'm looking forward to viewing this lecture. I am one that believes that the new testament (and old testament for that matter, actually all religious texts) are fully synthetic. I hope Dr. White can convince me that the gospels were more than just clever jews with an agenda to make their leader look like a god.
Much like how a certain 7th century document is totally false.
I dunno if Dr. White is watching the postings, but I do sure love to know:
The early manuscripts (codex) are indeed valuable, but how did it was preserved thru many wars, (much like Europe WW2 with air-bombings), scripture burning (islamic occupations during Ottoman period), everything ugly in the past?
Is there somekind of secret society that goal is specifically preserving the early manuscripts?
I love his series and continue watching it again and again.
D335 - In short, God's word was preserved sovereignly by God Himself, and the mechanism He employed was through the wide and rapid distribution of the texts themselves.
There was never any central governing authority that controlled the entirety of the manuscript tradition.
As such, if any corruption were to have taken place as the Muslims allege, it should be evident through the pollution of a particular stream.
Despite obvious changes that did creep in to certain streams, the text as a whole presents a uniform message, consistent in its theology.
There is no manuscript evidence that supports the Muslim position.
Fascinating presentation. The fact that the manuscripts were dispersed, yet highly consistent with each other, does seem to demonstrate that we have the original texts.
Wonderful to see the uncial and how a slight change of two lines can change the meaning.
I'd like to know more about this. Did he say there were 12 Greek manuscripts in the first century or so after Christ's death? Where did those manuscripts geographically originate from. Which books did they contain. How clear or foggy is the dating of the various books.
Added later according to whom, that's the question. The codex vaticanus has lots of omissions compared with 'younger manuscripts', but does this prove it to be more accurate? Codex Alexandrinus which together with Codex Vaticanus is one of the oldest manuscripts, differs a lot from the latter. How can that be? Logically thinking there should less difference. Why are most manuscripts copies of the Codex Byzantine?
9 comments:
White is at his best when he discusses textual issues and the text of scripture.
I'm looking forward to viewing this lecture. I am one that believes that the new testament (and old testament for that matter, actually all religious texts) are fully synthetic. I hope Dr. White can convince me that the gospels were more than just clever jews with an agenda to make their leader look like a god.
Much like how a certain 7th century document is totally false.
I dunno if Dr. White is watching the postings, but I do sure love to know:
The early manuscripts (codex) are indeed valuable, but how did it was preserved thru many wars, (much like Europe WW2 with air-bombings), scripture burning (islamic occupations during Ottoman period), everything ugly in the past?
Is there somekind of secret society that goal is specifically preserving the early manuscripts?
I love his series and continue watching it again and again.
D335
D335 - In short, God's word was preserved sovereignly by God Himself, and the mechanism He employed was through the wide and rapid distribution of the texts themselves.
There was never any central governing authority that controlled the entirety of the manuscript tradition.
As such, if any corruption were to have taken place as the Muslims allege, it should be evident through the pollution of a particular stream.
Despite obvious changes that did creep in to certain streams, the text as a whole presents a uniform message, consistent in its theology.
There is no manuscript evidence that supports the Muslim position.
Fascinating presentation. The fact that the manuscripts were dispersed, yet highly consistent with each other, does seem to demonstrate that we have the original texts.
Wonderful to see the uncial and how a slight change of two lines can change the meaning.
I'd like to know more about this. Did he say there were 12 Greek manuscripts in the first century or so after Christ's death? Where did those manuscripts geographically originate from. Which books did they contain. How clear or foggy is the dating of the various books.
Fascinating to hear about this.
Awesome, Dr. White!
I have listened and read some information on this before; but, now I will listen to this again and do some more research.
I would like to hear James White discuss John 8:1-11. I have heard that was added later.
That was a great lecture.
Added later according to whom, that's the question.
The codex vaticanus has lots of omissions compared with 'younger manuscripts', but does this prove it to be more accurate?
Codex Alexandrinus which together with Codex Vaticanus is one of the oldest manuscripts, differs a lot from the latter. How can that be? Logically thinking there should less difference.
Why are most manuscripts copies of the Codex Byzantine?
Just a few questions
Yeah, this was not what I expected. Premise being that the new testaments are divine scriptures. Not proving that they are divine scriptures.
Post a Comment