Toto

In honor of Bible Week, Oxford Journals is offering free access to selected articles in their religion journals.

Oxford Journals

This includes: "‘THOU SHALT COMMIT ADULTERY’ (EXOD. 20:14, AV 1631): A FIRST SURVEY OF ALTERATION INVOLVING NEGATIVES IN THE TRANSMISSION OF THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT AND OF EARLY CHURCH RESPONSES TO IT"

sotto voce

Thou shalt keep that piss-taker at arm's length. Who gives a damn what the Greek says?

Chili

You have to watch out for perversion Toto, where in 1 Cor:15-51 Paul writes that "Not all of us shall fall asleep, but all of us are to be changed."

This is the same thing as saying that "some of us will be saved, but all of us have the need to be saved." (from the poetic NAB).

And in Romans 5 he is telling us that sin through Adam is ours 'with or without' the law of Moses simply because we all have our 'eyes opened' to see the difference between good and bad when we became rational beings now with a mind of our own . . . and so we are doomed to die because we remember that our parents died etc.

Significant here is that in our conscious mind we live beside our own self and therefore are doomed to because we also have 'intimations of immortality' in our own mind but cannot consciously penetrate that realm of life and so condemn ourself.

The purpose of the law was not to stop man from sinning but to convict him of sin so that in seeking pardon for the sins we do admit also the Adamis sin nature will be 'snared' simple because we cannot consciously confess that sin. And it is for this reason that Moses placed 'evil opposite to good.'

Toto

English - if it was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for you?

Ratel

I'm sorry, please explain. I am baffled.:huh:

Sheshbazzar

sotto has got his own weird religion where no one known as a christian is really a christian.
-except maybe him, he has never been very clear on that particular point.

He doesn't give a damn what the Greek NT texts say because he has his own version which he makes up as he goes along.
Don't expect his explanations, if condescends to give you any more than his usual smart ass two or three word reply to questions, to make any sense.

sotto voce

It's good enough to sort out true believers. To use KJV English while proposing discussion of textual criticism is a bit like senior Buddhist monks wondering why they believe in Buddhism. People who use that sort of English, only for the Bible, of course, are so terrified of Jesus that Greek texts are just a bit redundant!