Featured A better English Bible.

I taught myself enough Greek to know that "it's Greek to me".
I've never taken a college-level course in Greek...and never will.
The little knowledge I've picked up in books provides me with just enough Greek to follow scholarly arguments and not much more,

I've enjoyed reading quite a variety of books on the topic and have gathered a few texts.
I've developed an opinion but it is based upon what I have read, not upon my own research, therefore my opinions are really second-hand opinions.

There are people here on the BB that I disagree with but I still consider them friends.
And I have close friends that hold opinions that differ quite a bit from mine.
We fellowship together and even study the Scriptures together.
We value each others insights into the texts we study.
There are times when I hold my tongue when a doctrinal difference pops up - it's never a big thing.
I would NEVER tell them that their version is not God's Word simply because it differs from mine; that would be egotistical!

God has given us what we need.
He chose to have imperfect people to preserve his word as best as they could.

Most of the text of Scripture that we hold in our hands is established.
Those portions that might be in dispute are few and of little concern.
It's hard enough to follow those portions of Scripture that we are certain of, (just make sure that it's done genomenou supper and not ginomenou supper).

The highly educated scholars will continue to form theories and debate these things among themselves

but I believe their conclusions will be much like what we've seen this thread,

questionable, indecisive and indeterminate quarreling.
​

Rob

 

You are really trying to stretch reality now. You are to invested in Pickering and his F35. You can not see the forest for the trees.

 

Robinson, The case for Byzantine priority

New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority
Maurice A. Robinson

 

I agree we are in disagreement over what scholars have said. Some will hold to the Byzantine text others will hold to the Alexandrian text. But at the end of the day we all trust the bible we hold in our hands. As you said scholars will debate these manuscripts etc. for years to come.

 

Yes he is a scholar and he has one opinion and other scholars have other opinions. So what we have is scholars that do not agree with each other. But that still does not make the younger text better that the older text.

As I said before none of the doctrines are in question so what all this back and forth on BB does is prove nothing. We are not scholars so all we can do is copy paste what scholars have concluded.

You think John 13:2 should read "supper being ended" but the context does not support your view. Your understanding is at odds with the context whereas what I have said "during supper" aligns with the context.

If you want to argue over what in reality is inconsequential for a persons salvation then go ahead but I do believe time could be better spent on more important matters.

So I will leave you and Conan to pursue the elusive ideal text.

 

What you call error various scholars do not. You want to believe one scholar as is your choice. I read my bible and the context disagrees with what you have put forward thus I conclude that your understanding is wrong. I will trust the bible that I have in my hands.

Having said that I agree with this comment by Gordon Fee:

For the New Testament this means that the “best text” has already been determined by scholars who are experts in this field. Gordon D. Fee & Douglas Stuart How to read the bible for all it’s worth 2ed PDF pg 36

Neither you nor I or Conan are textural scholars so the best we do is quote scholars. And as you know they do not all agree.

 

I trust the bible I have in my hands and the context does not comport with your view. With that said the only conclusion I can come to is that those that think the correct reading is the supper was ended are wrong. It is either that or the Holy Spirit is wrong, you choose.

 

Perhaps because an early text got it wrong and the later texts just went along with it, your guess is a good as any other. Now if they had just looked at the context then they would have known they had made a mistake.

 

Wrong. You are using your lack of knowledge on the subject. I know for a fact Fee is wrong. Look at how he writes propaganda for his employer Zondervan and the NIV. I have nothing against the NIV, but it has never been the best Bible around. Look at how he promotes it against the NASB, the NIV main competition (way back then). Look at how he promoted silly goose versions like the Jerusalem Bible and New English Bible (but not the NASB). Of course they were not competitors of his employer. See through the propaganda.

 

Please speak for yourself only. I have a working knowledge of Textual Criticism. I practice it. I come to my own conclusions. When I quote scholars I am trying to introduce evidence. No I have no degree and Not a qualified Textual Scholar, but I am true Student of Textual Criticism. I know the theories. I know what's wrong with Fee's methods. One day perhaps you will also.

 

I just gave you a logical reason that you even agree with, the Holy Spirit is not wrong. The biblical context does not support your view. But I am sure you will continue to hold to your view and I will just trust what the bible says.

 

Now you are just being silly. If none had "During supper", "The evening meal was underway" etc you would not be in disagreement with the Holy Spirit and context would you.

You can say it all you want but context does not support your view. The scribes made an error, just admit it or say the Holy Spirit is wrong. Those are your only two options. If .5% have "The evening meal was underway" then I will stick with God.

 

if you're that backslidden, have at it, I guess