100% or 95-98%?

This acceptance of facts is the same humanistic thought process that is destroying modern day families, public school's education, and the Word of God. Your "truth" has no grounds. Just a secular humanist's point of view.

You continue to believe what you will and I the same. But in the meantime, when you realize that the book (little "b") is being changing on a daily basis and you have no more authority to preach/teach from, don't go crying.

As for me, I will stay true to the Word of God, the one that teaches a gender non-neutral view, one that stays true to the texts used by the early church, one that believes in the blood of Christ, one that has been used so many times to see boys, girls, men and women come to know Christ as their Savior!

 

I think if you turned around, you'd realize, you're awfully lonely. No one would side with that comment.

I am not a proponent to lies, but to historical accuracy as presented in many documents/books. You believe one source, a humanist museum. I trust that the Book that I preach/teach out of is, in fact, inspired and preserved as God promised. You can't fight that!

 

What are you talking about, you've called me a KJVO guy, now you're saying I hate the KJV. Wow, such contradiction.

And, until you can prove my theories a lie/myth, your attacks only make you to be the ignorant one.

And if you believe that humanism has no effect on education etc. you've got your head in the sand. History is being re-written as we speak!

 

Can someone please tell me what is going on here? This exchange between Cassidy and loving2daysyouth is getting very ugly. I would like some clarification as to what this whole dispute is about.

BTW Cassidy, I was mistaken is the discovery of the Codex Sin. As this was not discovered by Tischendorf until a later visit, some 10 years later.

 

loving2daysyouth

Cassidy is right here. The Codex Sin. was not the leaves that were found ready to be burned my the monks. This Mss was discovered by Tischendorf during a later visit, where a monk brought out the Codex from a safe place which was wrapped in a red cloth. There is no point in arguing here with Cassidy on something that he is right on.

 

I can tell you from experience that arguing with Doc is a challenge when the facts are in legitimate dispute... it is an act of insanity when they are not.

 

I feel sorry for his church, if he, in fact, is a Pastor in CA!

 

Let's see....TCassidy pointed out to you that your facts were wrong, and now you feel sorry for his church?

I always thought pastors were supposed to value the truth. No?

 

Again, this is the last time that I will post a reply to ignorance.

TC proved nothing. It is a he said, she said discussion with no proof. I would definitely trust those men who have studied this out and have an appreciation for the Word of God over a secular museum who has no interested but to preserve an artifact!

Just as I would rather have a Christian involved in Bible translation over someone who is unsaved. Your final product is only as good as it's source!

And yes, I would pity a church who's leader "knows it all." His methods of discussion are poor and probably so is other areas of ministry.

 

Oh, by the way, I have been using other issues not to change a subject and to duck and run, but to prove a point. I have given you at least two reference points to go back and to do the research yourself. I could give you more if you so desire, however, my guess is your mind is made up.

Therefore, I choose to disagree with your secular, humanistic source of Bible knowledge and choose to agree with those men who have studied this out for decades.

 

Hardly. Tischendorf's own words that disprove what you were saying were posted as proof.

So, because he knows more than you do on this issue, he's a "know-it-all"?

Tischendorf's own words are a secular, humanistic source of Bible knowledge?

 

loving2daysyouth said, on whether or not Codex Sinaiticus was found in a wastebasket:

Second of all, you are accepting a secular view from a museum over a study of Textual history.

This isn't rocket science, is it? It's a question of the facts of history. It's no more "secular" to claim it was not found in a wastebasket than to say it was. It either was, or it wasn't.

The man who found the codex says he got it from a monk who was obviously trying to protect it. I can believe him, or you. I know which one you would prefer, but so far you haven't shown yourself to be as credible as a direct witness.

This acceptance of facts is the same humanistic thought process

So what's the "Christian" thought process? Believing fantasies?

 

Correct. But it is two different sources. The one's that I refer you to are from a Christian historian's point of view which would quote Tischendorf totally different than that of a secular museum.

There are no fantasies, I believe, as fact, the proof that is found in the books which I listed.

You cannot call a documented source a myth. You yourself then are promoting lies/myths, not I. Read the books for yourself!

A know-it-all only attacks others as liars or soothsayers, instead of debating the issue. Why you can't discuss the subject without dragging your opponent through the mud is both unBiblical and unethical. I've done my best to attack the problem, not the person.

Again, follow the logic. Even if what you say is true, some guy was protecting "originals" that were left over. Why were they there? Because they were not used! We only possess copies of the TR, because it was used and worn out!

 

Amen! And the closest thing to a conservative, evangelical, fundamental, Bible believing translation committee ever assembled would have to be Lockman's... who created the NASB.

They were required to sign a statement of faith before working on the translation that affirmed among other things that salvation is by faith in Jesus Christ alone and that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God.

You and your beliefs line up much closer to these men than those of the Anglo-catholics who created the KJV.

... said the mouse to the elephant.

"Methods of discussion" are less of an indictment than a failure to grasp the facts. Doc has proven you wrong on several occasions. Rather than taking an honest route such as admitting you are wrong or countering his opinion with a factual rebuttal, you are attempting to evade by complaining about his "methods".

"know it all"? I don't think he has made that claim... but what is clearly apparent throughout this discussion is that he bases opinions on the facts while you profess your "know it all" opinion in spite of the facts.

I have disagreed with Doc and yes it isn't fun to be on the end of some of his barbs... but integrity demands that one either counter with a viable alternative or admit defeat and bow out gracefully. It is wholly inconsistent with Christian character to resort to cowardly and dishonest tactics rather than simply admitting that you can't give an answer with merit.