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!
Actually, it isn't. Your choices are between "God manifested in flesh" and "He manifested in flesh."Originally posted by Deacon:
The NAS reading ("he", in 1 Timothy) is supported by both internal contextual formation (grammar) and external witnesses.
The Greek texts of:Originally posted by TCassidy:
Additionally, nobody has ever suggested the reading should be "Theos."
Pastor, you are far more educated than myself to evaluate what Metzger writes regarding the internal evidence.What the vast majority of the manuscript evidence shows is that the original reading was "THS" (which looks exactly like OS except for the tiny lines) that is, theta sigma with a line over the sigma doing essentially the same thing our apostrophe does, indicate the missing letter or letters in a contraction. Theta sigma was an acceptable abbreviation for the word "Theos" often used by the scribes.
You seem confused regarding the difference between a manuscript and a text. Texts are edited, set in type, and printed on printing presses. Manuscripts were the hand copied apographs copied by the scribes. Texts can say anything the editor wants them to say. Manuscripts were treated much differently and there were 5 accepted abbreviations used by the scribes in copying the New Testament manuscripts.Originally posted by Deacon:
The Greek texts of:
Elzevir Textus Receptus (1624)
Stephen's Textus Receptus (1550)
Scrivener's Textus Receptus (1894)
and
The Greek New Testament according to the Byzantine text form, (2000 Revision)
all testify to theos (not to the abbreviation).
Once again you are confused. It is the reading of Aleph that is in contention in the Burgon quote.The external evidence for “He” (“os) is seen in Unicals Aleph, A (vid), C, G (gr), as well as 33,365,442,2127, syr (hmg, pal) goth eth (pp), Origen (lat), Epiphanius, Jerome, Theodore, Eutherius (acc to Theodoret), Cyril, Cyril (acc to Ps-Oecumenius), and Liberatus
Read Burgon's treatise on the verse, and look at the Byzantine textform. Also look at the Western textform. It dates to as early as the 3rd century and reads "THS."Manuscripts with the reading “THS” are not seen until the eighth or ninth century.
Uh, it does. Yom is translated time 64 times, daily 44 times, ever 18 times, year 14 times, continually 10 times, when 10 times, as 10 times, while 8 times, full 8 times, always 8 times, whole 4 times - well, you get the idea. </font>[/QUOTE]Two different translations cannot be right. It is possible all are wrong but not all can be right when they differ.Originally posted by TCassidy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by gb93433:
If that is true then why does Amos 4:4 in the KJV not agree with the LXX and MT texts and the NAS does?
Suffice to say that there is documentary evidence for both positions taken in 1 Timothy 3:16 and choosing one over the other does not constitute an attack on the deity of of our Lord Jesus Christ.And openly it is a great sacrament of piety, that thing that was showed in flesh, it is justified in Spirit [And openly it is a great sacrament of piety, that that is showed in flesh, is justified in Spirit], it appeared to angels, it is preached to heathen men, it is believed in the world, it is taken up into glory. 1 Timothy 3:16