Featured A better English Bible.

If you hear people talk about textual criticism, you'll walk away thinking that we can't believe anything. Well, number one, there's about 5600 Greek New Testament manuscripts, which for an ancient body of literature is a phenomenal amount of information. So we have a lot of texts to look at. Second of all, 99% of the variations are inconsequential. They simply don't really matter. Or we can easily see why one morphed into the other. And thirdly, this is the most important thing that remaining 1%, it’s actually less than 1%, do not contain any biblical doctrine. There is no belief either core or frankly incidental that you believe that is brought into question by variations among the Greek manuscripts. Bill Mounce

 

Am I missing something?
What is the doctrine/ teaching that is effected?
How does the notion that Jesus finished eating or was still eating when the devil worked his magic on Judas, change your actions today?
And Luke mentions the drink after the eating of the bread.

You are making mountains out of mole hills.

Rob

 

And around and round we go. You do not like anything other than Pickering and his F35. So you dismiss everything else.

You dismiss the early manuscripts out of hand. Strange that you will hold to latter manuscripts that add words to the text.

 

One day it will be good for you to form your own opinion, instead of just depending on who you read.

I am glad you are not bothered by variants.

Ok. Good.

The better quality ones. The ones that have the most accurate texts are the best ones.

That the earliest manuscripts are the most accurate? Yes. I think everyone has a right to know the truth.

Agreed.

To only give him a chance instead of dismissing everything he says. I do not agree with everything he says, but that he is highly accurate about things makes him worth listening to.

I understand just fine that most disagree with him. I was saying don't just dismiss him out of hand. But even all of those who disagree with him will appreciate what he has done to collate all of those manuscripts of Family 35. Even those who think F35 to be the least accurate will appreciate his work.

Who cares whether any agree with him or not? What does your mind say is what is important. Of course you would have to read him for yourself to have a real one. No one is asking you to agree with him. But to read him. Form your own opinion.

Then why try to cancel discussions on textual criticism?

Ok. We will never go over the need to discuss Pickering again.

No. A person can learn for themselves. Form their own opinions, and see the flaws in theories.

 

You seem to have missed what I have been saying. You have been arguing for your F35 for a long time now and what I have been saying is that while you champion it it has not been accepted by other scholars.

I use bibles from both main lines of transmission and quite frankly what you get all up about is really just a tempest in a teapot. If you wanted to point out a "variant" that actually affected a doctrine then it would be understandable but you are spending way to much time on points that do not influence whether a person will trust in God or not.

It seems you are majoring in the minors.

 

So you are a Greek text scholar are you? You comment shows that you are being a bit disingenuous.

Point out the ones that actually bring a doctrine into question.

And who judges what are the most accurate ones, you?

So you admit that you do not trust the earliest manuscripts but trust those from the 5th century that have added text to the original scriptures. So the reason you trust the later manuscripts is not because you actually read them yourself but you are trusting what some scholar, in this case Pickering, has told you. Just as I have put more weight on what other scholars, Mounce, have said.

When other scholars disagree with his view and I trust those other scholars then I am not dismissing Pickering out of hand, I am trusting what other scholars have said.

The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical? Daniel B. Wallace
The Majority Text and the Original Text: Are They Identical? | Bible.org


[QUOTE="Conan, post: 2887955, member: 15211]"Who cares whether any agree with him or not? What does your mind say is what is important. Of course you would have to read him for yourself to have a real one. No one is asking you to agree with him. But to read him. Form your own opinion.[/QUOTE]

You have just pointed out your bias "Who cares whether any agree with him or not?" You should care as he could be leading to tho a false understanding of scripture.

But more to the point how could I a non-scholar actually judge what he is saying. That is why we trust other bible scholars that have the ability to evaluate his work.

[QUOTE="Conan, post: 2887955, member: 15211]Then why try to cancel discussions on textual criticism?

Ok. We will never go over the need to discuss Pickering again.


No. A person can learn for themselves. Form their own opinions, and see the flaws in theories.[/QUOTE]

Have I stopped you from making any comments, NO. You could even start another thread in you so wished.

How does one learn for themselves, they read various scholars on the subject do they not. From what I have read on this and it is limited as I do not see why the fight over words {37818 and John 13:2}. If the variants cause a problem with a critical doctrine then we would see the scholars dealing with that problem but the problem does not exist. If you know of such a variant then please point it out.

This is actually more an attempt to have people agree that one particular view is correct, one particular transmission line is correct. While you and 37818 think that F35 is that line not all people do. Plus for most non-scholars we trust the text we have in our hands. You must remember that people were saved even when all we had was the flawed KJV or TR. So as I said, it is just a tempest in a teapot.

 

I do not think Family 35 is perfect or "the one". I was saying that it is highly accurate. Not to be dismissed.

The TR and KJV are also highly accurate. Not to be dismissed.

 

The bibles we have in our hands are good and that is why you can trust ones from either line of transmission. And that is why I use them form both lines of transmission.

Over a number of threads you and 37818 have continued to promote the F35 as the best version, since you like it so much use it.

Others disagree so they do not use that version, do you have a problem with that?

I have both on my system but rarely use them. Why use them when we have better translations available to us.

 

No why would I. But you have a problem with it, by speaking against it as if you knew what you were talking about.

 

Why would I use a version that other scholars say is actually not the best. He used late manuscripts and ignored the earliest ones. He used manuscripts that added to the earliest texts so while I my not be a textural scholar I can trust those that are.

By speaking for it you speak as if you actually knew what you were talking about.

 

So this 80% is it Byzantine text.

 

Well, good for you.

I believe that I do. I have studied textual criticism for a long time. As a hobby. I used to be critical text like you. But I have seen flaws in the CT and have seen where at times the Byzantine Text is superior. I like to promote the more accurate texts. But I understand you are not interested. Thats cool. I am glade that you have excellent Bibles! That is good!

 

What you see as flaws others do not. The added text of the byzantine type is considered to be a flaw and thus brings into question the value of such.