Thank you.
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!
Thank you.
Oh, come on now. In the first place, it's not a "translation." That's ignorant. It's a Greek New Testament. In the second place, why should I ask anything of Dr. Robinson when you are accusing him of an "attack on the Authority and infallibility of the Holy Bible." Since you start out prejudiced against his monumental work, you prejudice me against your opinions.Can you please ask Dr Robinson, why some VERY IMPORTANT doctrinal texts have been "corrupted" in his Greek version. I shall give 3 such examples.
1. Luke 1:35, "εκ σου" (out of you) is missing. This, like Matthew 1:16, teaches very clearly, that the Human Nature of Jesus Christ was derived from that of Mary (sin excepting). Some of the early heretics, as do some even today, denied this very Important teaching, and taught that Jesus simply "passed through" Mary, as water does a tube, without actually parttaking of the tube! On what textual authority is this omission, seening that the KJV (Beza) have it? Justin in the 2nd century quotes it!
2. The whole verse of the Eunich's confession on Jesus Christ as SON OF GOD, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God", has been OMITTED!!! Ireneaus also in the second century quotes it!
3. The clearest single text for the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, 1 John 5:7, has been EXPUNGED!!! Tertullian, Cyprian, among others knew of this in their GREEK and LATIN NT!
These are SERIOUS CORRUPTIONS to the Word of God, and makes this "translation" a modern day attack on the Authority and Infallibility of the Holy Bible!!! SHAME on Dr Robinson!
If it is true that these omissions make a translation (not a Greek NT) "a modern day attack on the Authority and Infallibility of the Holy Bible," then poor Japan. Japanese cannot buy a translation that is not "an attack on the Bible."Can you please ask Dr Robinson, why some VERY IMPORTANT doctrinal texts have been "corrupted" in his Greek version. I shall give 3 such examples.
1. Luke 1:35, "εκ σου" (out of you) is missing. This, like Matthew 1:16, teaches very clearly, that the Human Nature of Jesus Christ was derived from that of Mary (sin excepting). Some of the early heretics, as do some even today, denied this very Important teaching, and taught that Jesus simply "passed through" Mary, as water does a tube, without actually parttaking of the tube! On what textual authority is this omission, seening that the KJV (Beza) have it? Justin in the 2nd century quotes it!
2. The whole verse of the Eunich's confession on Jesus Christ as SON OF GOD, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God", has been OMITTED!!! Ireneaus also in the second century quotes it!
3. The clearest single text for the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, 1 John 5:7, has been EXPUNGED!!! Tertullian, Cyprian, among others knew of this in their GREEK and LATIN NT!
These are SERIOUS CORRUPTIONS to the Word of God, and makes this "translation" a modern day attack on the Authority and Infallibility of the Holy Bible!!! SHAME on Dr Robinson!
First thank you for pointing this variant out.1. Luke 1:35, "εκ σου" (out of you) is missing. This, like Matthew 1:16, teaches very clearly, that the Human Nature of Jesus Christ was derived from that of Mary (sin excepting). Some of the early heretics, as do some even today, denied this very Important teaching, and taught that Jesus simply "passed through" Mary, as water does a tube, without actually parttaking of the tube! On what textual authority is this omission, seening that the KJV (Beza) have it? Justin in the 2nd century quotes it!
How about AT Robinson?ah, James White and his so called "evidences", what a JOKE!
there is no textual scholar that I know of, who can produce a work on 1 Timothy 3:16, for the reading "theos", that is better than what Burgon has done. Burgon is A+++ as a textual scholar, neither White, Wallace, Metzger, etc can be placed in the same!
So in the same family as the TR, but a better text?Different methodology, but still a Byzantine text. "Majority" is a synonym for "Byzantine" in textual criticism.
The Bzt text is better then in those areas? And is it true that it does not handle Revelation translation that well?I know that. It doesn't change the Byzantine character of the TR.
Are there really any real major changes though between the MT and the CT in regards to doctrines?Do you have a list? I really don't think this is true. I've compared the TR and Byz for most or all of the NT. There are whole chapters that are exactly the same, and the vast majority of the differences do not change the meaning in translation.
Is that considered to be the "best" TR text then?Conversing with Dr. Robinson about this, he shared his phraseology about the TR being a Byz. text with me. I think this is important.
"The TR Scrivener edition is a *general* representative of the Byzantine text, but it is still only a sub-representative, just as are many "Byzantine" MSS themselves to varying degrees."
Also, make sure to ask why the Kjv calls the Holy Spirit an It, why we have Easter, and why they had Peter and Paul calling Jesus Savior, but not as the great God?Can you please ask Dr Robinson, why some VERY IMPORTANT doctrinal texts have been "corrupted" in his Greek version. I shall give 3 such examples.
1. Luke 1:35, "εκ σου" (out of you) is missing. This, like Matthew 1:16, teaches very clearly, that the Human Nature of Jesus Christ was derived from that of Mary (sin excepting). Some of the early heretics, as do some even today, denied this very Important teaching, and taught that Jesus simply "passed through" Mary, as water does a tube, without actually parttaking of the tube! On what textual authority is this omission, seening that the KJV (Beza) have it? Justin in the 2nd century quotes it!
2. The whole verse of the Eunich's confession on Jesus Christ as SON OF GOD, "And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God", has been OMITTED!!! Ireneaus also in the second century quotes it!
3. The clearest single text for the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, 1 John 5:7, has been EXPUNGED!!! Tertullian, Cyprian, among others knew of this in their GREEK and LATIN NT!
These are SERIOUS CORRUPTIONS to the Word of God, and makes this "translation" a modern day attack on the Authority and Infallibility of the Holy Bible!!! SHAME on Dr Robinson!
What is his mistake on the Greek Verb?The TR is "more restricted and limited" in the sense that Erasmus only had six mss, as I recall. On the other hand, Robinson/Pierpont used at least 100's of Byz. mss out of a possible 1000s. I do know that Dr. Robinson has collated every single mss with the Pericope Adulterae. So to that extent (I hate to say) I agree with Dr. Porter (who goes to seed on Greek verbal aspect).
The problem for some was that he had a work that at times disagreed with the TR!Oh, come on now. In the first place, it's not a "translation." That's ignorant. It's a Greek New Testament. In the second place, why should I ask anything of Dr. Robinson when you are accusing him of an "attack on the Authority and infallibility of the Holy Bible." Since you start out prejudiced against his monumental work, you prejudice me against your opinions.
Oh, and by the way, he's the one who told me where to get free TR Greek NTs for my Greek 102 class. He's not your enemy.
Dr. Robinson is a good man. He loves the Lord and stands up for the Word of God, conservative theology, other things that please the Lord. Your attack is unwarranted.
To quote my son: "Yes, in my humble but correct opinion."So in the same family as the TR, but a better text?
Verbal aspect is "the view of the action that the speaker chooses to present to the hearer" (David Alan Black, Learn to Read New Testament Greek). A similar term is aktionsart, which is the kind of action portrayed by the verb. Porter takes this too far, completely minimizing the time function of the Greek verbs, even in the present tense.What is his mistake on the Greek Verb?
To quote my son: "Yes, in my humble but correct opinion."
It handles Revelation translation fine. It's just that the Byzantine family of Revelation mss has more variation than one would think. It's complicated.The Bzt text is better then in those areas? And is it true that it does not handle Revelation translation that well?
Sure, use it!Outstanding quote! Do I have your sons permission to quote him?
Salty
ps - I also think its a great quote even if you are inside sitting down!
Oh, come on now. In the first place, it's not a "translation." That's ignorant. It's a Greek New Testament. In the second place, why should I ask anything of Dr. Robinson when you are accusing him of an "attack on the Authority and infallibility of the Holy Bible." Since you start out prejudiced against his monumental work, you prejudice me against your opinions.
Oh, and by the way, he's the one who told me where to get free TR Greek NTs for my Greek 102 class. He's not your enemy.
Dr. Robinson is a good man. He loves the Lord and stands up for the Word of God, conservative theology, other things that please the Lord. Your attack is unwarranted.