-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Byzantine Majority Text vs Byzantine Priority Text
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
37818
Well-Known Member
@Silverhair,
What is your difficulty with the Byzantine evidence?
What is your difficulty with the Byzantine evidence?
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
What is your obsession with it?
37818
Well-Known Member
The identity of the original text handed down from the original autographs.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
But not all the scholars agree do they?
You and Conan have ran down this same road more than once.
But I am sure you will bring out the same arguments as before and come to the same result.
Why are you against the spreading of knowledge? Of learning? Does it harm your faith? It should not. 37818 is sharing facts about the Greek Text of the Bible. You are not obligated to learn, or agree. But please pardon, you seem to dislike something? You don't want us to discuss the Greek/English Text of the New Testament? Want us to stay dumb about it? You want us to agree with about something? All Greek Bibles are good. But they vary in accuracy.
37818
Well-Known Member
Not all Bible scholars are defenders of Biblical inerrancy.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Not against the spreading of knowledge. But what I see coming from you and 37 is that the only correct understanding is from the F35/Byzantine text form.
As I have said many times scholars have varying opinions.
Your arrogance is showing in your post. You seem to think I have to learn from you because I do not hold the F35/Byzantine text form to the lofty position that you and 37 have done.
Personally I do not think any of them got it all correct but we do have the main parts in agreement.
Sorry if that upsets you or 37 but I just do not get as invested in either line.
I trust the bibles that I have in my hand, which means that I have bibles the give me the truths that God wants us to have.
Last edited:
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
True, are you suggesting that only those scholars that you agree with defend inerrancy?
Hope that is not the case.
37818
Well-Known Member
Of course, npt all critical text Bible scholars deny Biblical inerrancy.
37818
Well-Known Member
@Silverhair,
When I saw the 11 minute video I thought of you.
When I saw the 11 minute video I thought of you.
The TRUTH about the Preservation of the Bible.
8 minute video. by A Christian Guy Ministries.
www.baptistboard.com
No. I just think both Texts, Family 35 and the slightly different Byzantine Text are extremely accurate.
yes. As many times as you say it, it is still a true fact. I think we all know this. But you are definitely correct here.
I do not think that way at all Silverhair. We know your position. Scholarship disagrees about which Texts are closest to the Original. You are under no obligation to learn from me, or agree with me. True We once tried to share Family 35 with you. But we were just trying to help you. You appear to say over and over, Scholarship disagrees. I understand, so what. Are we not allowed to share what we have found out on this board. We have learned a thing or 2, and want to discuss and share. You have never been obligated to agree. We know you disagree. I'm good with that. Feel free to disagree. We know you disagree. Thats your right as a Human Being. Feel free to not believe as I do. Sorry if in the past you felt we were ramming family 35 down your throat. I didn't mean to. But i can discuss it with others on this board if I want to.
Well, we agree on that. Thanks.
Cool. That's your opinion and I respect it. I like all lines. But some are better than others. I think Westcott and Hort are the most inaccurate. But your welcome to whatever view is yours. You may think it the most accurate. More power to you.
Good. So you should not mind us sharing Bibles and Texts on this board then.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Where we differ is that you and 37 seem to be really invested in one line of transmission. That is fine and you can do as you please. From what I have read they all have they challenges or we would not see the disagreements.
Will it make any real difference in the bibles we have in our hands, NO don't think it will.
Will it cause someone to loose their faith because they no longer trust the word of God they have now, I doubt it.
Actually I do not really get concerned about what the scholars are doing. When they have done their work then I should imagine that we will have an updated text released to the public.
But as I have the NASB, the NKJV, the BSB plus at least a dozen more bibles on my system I do not think that any minor corrections that are made will have any effect on how I view the word of God.
But if you and 37 want to run that horse around some more, have at it.
Your posts are usually fun to read but I do take your pronouncements with a grain of salt. No offense intended.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
Why would that be 37?
Just because I do not dance to the same tune as you and conan does not mean I do not trust what the various scholars have done.
You seem to have put all your eggs in one basket, your choice, me I really do not see where they have settled the case and thus the disagreements.
Does that alter my trust in the word of God that I have in my hand, NO. Will minor corrections alter it, NO.
So you can carry on but for me I do not see the benefit of stirring up the pot so to speak.
Perhaps if you saw our "pronouncements" as opinions you would be less offended. I am sure all the Bibles in your system are all good. The NASB and NKJV certainly are. But I was taught certain texts were the most accurate and I have found otherwise to be the case. The once thought Byzantine additions turn out mostly to be cases of errors of eye skip in the earlier dated Manuscripts. I am not KJVOnly, or any version only. Same with Greek Texts. But some are more accurate than others. I see no harm in discussing textual variants. Case by case perhaps. Not condemning any tradition. But trying to be as accurate as possible.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
@Conan I am not offended by your comments. I just see them as coming across as rather judgemental by times.
I understand what you are saying re discussing variants but I have seen to much heat by times.
I am not a scholar and the various views are just that various views.
Perhaps the various scholars will come to a consensus on the text.
37818
Well-Known Member
@Silverhair,
We both agree on inerrancy of God and His word.
We are at odds on a number of particular cases. Agreement on which it seems we don't have, specific reasons have not been addressed.
We both agree on inerrancy of God and His word.
We are at odds on a number of particular cases. Agreement on which it seems we don't have, specific reasons have not been addressed.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
37 you may think you need to wrestle all the disagreements to the ground, I do not.
The bible I have in my hand has served me well for over 65 years. Any "errors" that you may think are in the text do not have any impact on my trusting in the God that I see revealed in the bible.
I have read through many of the posts you and Conan have done in regard to this subject.
It seems you feel it is necessary for you to address specific questions so that you can trust your bible.
37818
Well-Known Member
Yes. I believe what is and what is not the actual word of God should be acknowledged.