Greek New Testament text

Since: Aug 10

Blairgowrie, UK

#21 Nov 29, 2012
Stanley Walker wrote:
The question is, given that there are competing editions of the Greek New Testament text, with some substantial differences, how can we be sure which is the most accurate?
What are your opinions?
I have a copy of "The New Testament in the Original Greek" by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont. I use it to help me decide on disputed passages such as 1 Timothy 3:16 - which I am convinced reads:

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory."

Since: Aug 10

Blairgowrie, UK

#22 Nov 29, 2012
little lamb wrote:
What is going on here is satanic,,an attempt to disarm the soldier of Christ of his only offensive weapon by throwing doubt on the WORD of God...which is our SWORD.
Can't follow your rants at the best of times, but you are not making sense here at all.

The Word of God, as translated by some wishy-washy translators, is not so much a sword as a butter knife.

Having a reliable literal translation is essential for spiritual warfare.

“By grace you have been saved”

Since: May 09

Belfast, UK

#23 Nov 29, 2012
Aneirin wrote:
This is not entirely accurate.
It would be more accurate to say that Westcott & Hort's theory differed from the theory that produced Textus Receptus.
I believe what I said was accurate.

Firstly, I have made no mention at all of the Textus Receptus (Received Text) in my 3,600 word blog research into the subject of the Greek New Testament text. I am not an advocate or supporter of the Textus Receptus.

What I do advocate and support is the traditional New Testament text of the Greek speaking churches in circulation in Asia Minor and Greece, called the Greek Vulgate, as distinct from the texts found in Rome and Alexandria.

It is an irrefutable fact of history that the Greek Vulgate was the dominant text throughout all of Europe in the fourth century.

Even F J A Hort (of Westcott & Hort) admits: "The fundamental text of late extant mss generally is beyond all question identical with the dominant Antiochan or Graeco-Syrian text of the second half of the 4th century" (by which he means the traditional text of the Greek speaking churches, the Greek Vulgate.
little lamb

Park Orchards, Australia

#24 Nov 29, 2012
Mary MacLellan wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't follow your rants at the best of times, but you are not making sense here at all.
The Word of God, as translated by some wishy-washy translators, is not so much a sword as a butter knife.
Having a reliable literal translation is essential for spiritual warfare.
I suspect you don't understand THE WORD of God is personified in Jesus Christ..and scripture tells us the WORD of GOD is alive and exerts more power then a two edged sword.

Thats where you and Stanley make your error..in thinking the Word of GOD is a dead letter..its not...its alive..

And no translator has authority over the living word..in fact by your proposition, Jesus is servant to the language..whereas scripture says the languages serve him..Its called lack of discernment as you try to shake unsteady people to start doubting the word of God...

“By grace you have been saved”

Since: May 09

Belfast, UK

#25 Nov 29, 2012
little lamb wrote:
Thats where you and Stanley make your error..in thinking the Word of GOD is a dead letter
I have serious doubts about your mental health. Why do you constantly misrepresent people? Where do you get these crazy ideas from?

I believe:

"The word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." -- Hebrews 4:12

I believe this Scripture applies in this context primarily to the written word of God in any translation and in any context of being either read or spoken by anyone.

I speak from personal experience. I was born again by the word of God burning into my heart and mind.

So away with your nonsense! Get behind me Satan!
little lamb wrote:
And no translator has authority over the living word
Do you mean no one has authority to translate the Bible from one language to another?

“I luv Jesus ”

Since: Oct 12

Blessed city

#26 Nov 29, 2012
The first human author to write down the biblical record was Moses. He was commanded by God to take on this task, for Exodus 34:27 records God's words to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance with these words I have made a covenant with you and with Israel." And what language did he use? He wrote in his native language, called Hebrew.

Hebrew is one of a group of languages known as the Semitic languages which were spoken throughout that part of the world, then called Mesopotamia, located today mainly in Iraq. Their alphabet consisted of 22 letters, all consonants.(Imagine having an alphabet with no vowels! Much later they did add vowels.)

Almost the entire Old Testament was written in Hebrew during the thousand years of its composition. But a few chapters in the prophecies of Ezra and Daniel and one verse in Jeremiah were written in a language called Aramaic. This language became very popular in the ancient world and actually displaced many other languages. Aramaic even became the common language spoken in Israel in Jesus' time, and it was likely the language He spoke day by day. Some Aramaic words were even used by the Gospel writers in the New Testament.

The New Testament, however, was written in Greek. This seems strange, since you might think it would be either Hebrew or Aramaic. However, Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 100 AD. The fact is that many Jews could not even read Hebrew anymore, and this disturbed the Jewish leaders a lot! So, around 300 BC a translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew into Greek was undertaken, and it was completed around 200 BC. Gradually this Greek translation of the Old Testament, called the Septuagint, was widely accepted and was even used in many synagogues. It also became a wonderful missionary tool for the early Christians, for now the Greeks could read God's Word in their own tongue.

So the New Testament authors wrote in Greek. They did not, however, use really high-class or classical Greek, but a very common and everyday type of Greek. For many years some scholars ridiculed the Greek of the New Testament because many of its words were strange to those who read the writings of the great Greek classical authors such as Plato and Aristotle. But later many records were uncovered of ordinary people, and amazingly there were the same common terms used in everyday speech! The ridicule dried up accordingly.

The earliest copies of parts of the Hebrew Old Testament were discovered in 1947. They are part of the famous Dead Sea Scrolls and actually date back to the first century BC. Even though they are at least 900 years older than any parts of the Bible we had before this, they are not the originals. They are copies. The originals have all been lost or destroyed. But we are not at all doubtful that we may not have the original text. Copying by scribes was done with great care in those days and because the text was regarded as sacred, the copyists were extremely painstaking. Today some 5000 hand-copied documents exist of all or part of the Bible, and they agree in 98% of the text! No other ancient writing has this amount of underlying support with such amazing agreement as to the text.

Yes, we do have what God wanted us to have! By way of translation, we now have His revelation in our own language and in 2300 other languages, too. Today we have the very Bible that comes to us from the three languages used in the original. Truly we can say, "God speaks my language, too!"

“By grace you have been saved”

Since: May 09

Sheffield, UK

#27 Dec 4, 2012
little lamb wrote:
I suspect you don't understand THE WORD of God is personified in Jesus Christ

Thats where you and Stanley make your error..in thinking the Word of GOD is a dead letter
If you profess Christianity, and the Word of God is not a dead letter to you, an apology for your slander would be in order.

"Brothers, do not slander one another." -- James 4:11

Since: Aug 10

Blairgowrie, UK

#28 Dec 5, 2012
little lamb wrote:
we are told in scripture " not to go beyond what is written " What is written is " all scripture is inspired of God.."
Why do you refuse to unequivocally say whether or not you believe all translations are inspired of God?

For example, would you say that the Bible translation by occultist Johannes Greber, recommended for decades by the Watchtower Society, was inspired of God?

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#29 Dec 10, 2012
Stanley Walker wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe what I said was accurate.
Firstly, I have made no mention at all of the Textus Receptus (Received Text) in my 3,600 word blog research into the subject of the Greek New Testament text. I am not an advocate or supporter of the Textus Receptus.
What I do advocate and support is the traditional New Testament text of the Greek speaking churches in circulation in Asia Minor and Greece, called the Greek Vulgate, as distinct from the texts found in Rome and Alexandria.
It is an irrefutable fact of history that the Greek Vulgate was the dominant text throughout all of Europe in the fourth century.
Even F J A Hort (of Westcott & Hort) admits: "The fundamental text of late extant mss generally is beyond all question identical with the dominant Antiochan or Graeco-Syrian text of the second half of the 4th century" (by which he means the traditional text of the Greek speaking churches, the Greek Vulgate.
Hi Stanley

I see there has not been much traffic on this subject. For my part I will contribute as time permits during the holidays. I suggest we try to find one or two issues to start with that can be debated. Below I have made a suggestion.

I see from your posts and Blog that you support the Majority Text over Westcott & Hort, Nestle Aland and others that form the basis of modern Bibles. I see that you wrote your article in 2005---- have you updated your position since?

I suggest starting with some disputed scriptures such as the following:

(1) You cited Mark 16 9-20 .
(2) Mary MacLelland cited 1 Timothy 3:16.
(3) I will take the easy one 1 John 5:7.

If you have some other ideas put them down and we can go from there.

I see at the beginning Doug Mason had mentioned what many consider the Elephant in the room --- how, who, what, why and when were the 27 books of the New Testament decided.

Anyway Stanley let us know how you want to proceed as it is your thread.

All the Best

Dave

Since: Jan 12

United States

#30 Dec 10, 2012
little lamb wrote:
Stanley is trying to get men to believe that Jesus hasn't been given all authority in heaven and on earth
and he is trying to deceive people into believing Satan has more power over Jesus WORDS then Jesus has been given
Once you are born of spirit you can see what is going on..an insidious attack on THE WORD of God,.
see folks, there is a beast opperating in little lamb.... thats why when you engage her on certain subjects, she starts doing tricky talk, instead of reasoning.....she can't tell its in her, thats why it continues to live in her.

Since: Aug 10

Blairgowrie, UK

#31 Dec 11, 2012
Dave47 wrote:
(2) Mary MacLelland cited 1 Timothy 3:16.
I have examined the evidence on 1 Timothy 3:16

I have studied enough to convince me that the correct reading is:

"And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:
God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory."
Remnant143999

Albuquerque, NM

#32 Dec 11, 2012
Why did Paul write in 1st.Thesalonians 1:14-15 that the Jews killed Jesus?

;

“By grace you have been saved”

Since: May 09

UK

#33 Dec 11, 2012
Dave47 wrote:
Hi Stanley
I see there has not been much traffic on this subject. For my part I will contribute as time permits during the holidays. I suggest we try to find one or two issues to start with that can be debated. Below I have made a suggestion.
I see from your posts and Blog that you support the Majority Text over Westcott & Hort, Nestle Aland and others that form the basis of modern Bibles. I see that you wrote your article in 2005---- have you updated your position since?
I suggest starting with some disputed scriptures such as the following:
(1) You cited Mark 16 9-20 .
(2) Mary MacLelland cited 1 Timothy 3:16.
(3) I will take the easy one 1 John 5:7.
If you have some other ideas put them down and we can go from there.
I see at the beginning Doug Mason had mentioned what many consider the Elephant in the room --- how, who, what, why and when were the 27 books of the New Testament decided.
Anyway Stanley let us know how you want to proceed as it is your thread.
All the Best
Dave
Hi Dave

Thanks for this.

My position on the Greek New Testament is a continuing critical analysis of the Majority Text. I have a lot of respect for the research and opinions of Wilbur N Pickering.
http://bit.ly/Zbt6NZ

Doug Mason is free to pursue the New Testament canon if he so desires.

If you are wishing to lead on 1 John 5:7, and I do have my own opinion, then please start the discussion.

Mary has kicked off with 1 Timothy 3:16

So I will prepare something on Mark 16:9-20
Unknown

Seacliff, Australia

#34 Dec 11, 2012
Stanley Walker wrote:
Can we get back on topic folks, and avoid distractions designed to get us off this serious question? Please?
The question is, given that there are competing editions of the Greek New Testament text, with some substantial differences, how can we be sure which is the most accurate?
What are your opinions?
I personally haven't done a lot of research into this subject but based upon reason itself I don't think it's possible to know which texts are the most accurate. Since we no longer have the originals and we cannot prove that the oldest copies are exactly like the originals we will be left wondering which is the most accurate.

Since: Aug 10

Blairgowrie, UK

#35 Dec 12, 2012
There are two competing readings of 1 Timothy 3:16 in the Greek texts

“theos phaneroo en sarx” which translates as “God was manifest in the flesh”

and

“os phaneroo en sarx” which translates as “Who was manifest in the flesh”

The dispute is to whether the original Greek text had “theos”(God) or “os”(who).

In some loose translations you will find the Greek “os” wrongly translated as “He” but the proper translation of the Greek pronoun “os” is “who,”“which,”“what,” or “that.”

Although the difference between “theos” and “os” in the English alphabet is quite considerable it is not so in the original Greek because they used shorthand.

In the original Greek, the difference is only two horizontal lines.

“Paradise Earth”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#36 Dec 12, 2012
Unknown wrote:
<quoted text>
I personally haven't done a lot of research into this subject but based upon reason itself I don't think it's possible to know which texts are the most accurate. Since we no longer have the originals and we cannot prove that the oldest copies are exactly like the originals we will be left wondering which is the most accurate.
We have thousands of copies of the originals and the fact is that they all agree with one another pretty much 99.99% of the time.

Out of the many thousands of differences the vast majority of them are completely benign - they don't affect the semantics at all.

There are only a very few places where different understandings occur.

And you don't need any of those verses to build your theology.

Well having said that, it is the trinity worshippers and the ones who want Jesus to be God who have to rely on those very few disputed verses to make their case.
Unknown

Seacliff, Australia

#37 Dec 12, 2012
Aneirin wrote:
<quoted text>
We have thousands of copies of the originals and the fact is that they all agree with one another pretty much 99.99% of the time.
Out of the many thousands of differences the vast majority of them are completely benign - they don't affect the semantics at all.
There are only a very few places where different understandings occur.
And you don't need any of those verses to build your theology.
Well having said that, it is the trinity worshippers and the ones who want Jesus to be God who have to rely on those very few disputed verses to make their case.
None of the original manuscripts exist, they are all copies.

“By grace you have been saved”

Since: May 09

Banbury, UK

#38 Dec 12, 2012
Unknown wrote:
None of the original manuscripts exist, they are all copies.
That is what Aneirin said

"We have thousands of copies of the originals"

Copies of the originals are exactly that -- copies!
Unknown

Seacliff, Australia

#39 Dec 12, 2012
Stanley Walker wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what Aneirin said
"We have thousands of copies of the originals"
Copies of the originals are exactly that -- copies!
How do you know that the copies are exactly like the originals?
Unknown

Seacliff, Australia

#40 Dec 12, 2012
Stanley Walker wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what Aneirin said
"We have thousands of copies of the originals"
Copies of the originals are exactly that -- copies!
You're whole argument is begging the question. You must demonstrate that the copies are in fact exactly like the originals rather than assume that they are. You may say that they are copies but that doesn't prove that they are exactly the same.

How do you know that the manuscripts we have are like the originals? Have you seen the originals to compare them?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
"RESURRECTION"- meaningless in Churchianity! 2 min dlmacoop 385
YES- People WILL get OUT of HELL! (Nov '15) 19 min PrufSammy 4,620
Who goes to heaven? 20 min Seentheotherside 34
Equal to God! 27 min Seentheotherside 112
Let's try this again, 144,000 ONLY? No jw has b... 42 min ihveit 2,892
News Leah Remini's A&E Series May Take on Jehovah's ... 48 min Goobe 91
Reinstatement and the prodigal son. 1 hr dlmacoop 8
More from around the web