Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Essay Concerning the New Testament

It's put together well, Otto. Is this new?

I only see one word that needs to be fixed "Grrek" 2nd paragraph, 3rd line down, 9th word from the left.

Also some grammar type fixes will make it perfect, like "hapened" instead of "happen" and "possibly", instead of "possible". Both which occur in the 5th paragraph as show below:

"Which is more likely and reasonable? Over the first four centuries when the Greek text was being copied over and over and old damaged copies were being destroyed, was it more likely that that some words or whole lines were accidentally missed or possible obscured on some worn or torn papyrus pages leading to the faulty Alexandrian Greek versions? Or was it more likely as Metzger apparently claims that the thousands of sacred manuscripts supporting Majority Greek Text were somewhat forged or augmented by numerous transcribers leading to the excellent Majority Greek Text? This had to have happen at times when long distance communication was difficult and printing presses did not exist. Bruce Metzger?s position appears to me to be unsupportable."

Also, I think that the 12th century is too late for the dating you have for the Khabouris Codex, which I think is said to be dated to about the years 800-1000, or the 9th to 10th century, unless I'm mistaken.

And I know you like the Lamsa version, Otto, but, if you would please take an un-biased examination of it, at, checking it against what is actually present in the Aramaic Text, you will find that far too many times, it has the wordings of the KJV translation from the Greek text, instead having what the Eastern Aramaic text really reads, which it is claimed to be a translation from.



Messages In This Thread
Essay Concerning the New Testament - by ograabe - 06-25-2013, 04:00 PM
Re: Essay Concerning the New Testament - by Thirdwoe - 06-26-2013, 01:13 AM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)