Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Amaleq13 · 11-30-2005, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orthodox_Freethinker

The point still stands that church fathers attempted to correct each other when there was reason to do so.

The point still stands that the quotes you provided do not depict any church father correcting another.

Quote:

For example, Origen is regarded as a father of the church but he taught universal salvation; something which other church fathers rebuked him for.

This, on the other hand, appears to be more what you describe. Is there anything earlier than Epiphanius at the end of the 4th century?

More relevant to your claim about Gospel authorship, however, would be examples of a church father correcting another on a factual claim rather than a belief or doctrine. Do you know of any?

Orthodox_Freethinker · 11-30-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amaleq13

More relevant to your claim about Gospel authorship, however, would be examples of a church father correcting another on a factual claim rather than a belief or doctrine. Do you know of any?

It is a factual claim on whether or not Jesus taught universal salvation.

Peace.

Amaleq13 · 11-30-2005, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orthodox_Freethinker

It is a factual claim on whether or not Jesus taught universal salvation.

That is true but your original statement only referred to Origen's teachings on universal salvation so it appeared to be another doctrinal dispute. It sounds, however, like a discussion that ultimately rests upon the interpretation of passages attributed to Jesus rather than upon whether he actually made a given statement. I wouldn't consider a dispute about what Jesus meant to be a "factual claim".

Again, is there anything earlier than Epiphanius at the end of the 4th century?

Vorkosigan · 11-30-2005, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orthodox_Freethinker

By comparison with other ancient works, the possibility additions, redactions, etc. is negligible.

Peace.

Can you give me some figures or data to support this claim?

Orthodox_Freethinker · 11-30-2005, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

Can you give me some figures or data to support this claim?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orthodox_Freethinker

By the standards of ancient historical documents, this is rather good.

"In considering the New Testament we have tens of thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament in part or in whole dating from the second century A.D. to the late fifteenth century when the printing press was invented. These manuscripts have been found in Egypt, Palestine, Syria, Turkey, Greece, and Italy, making collusion unlikely. The oldest manuscript, the John Rylands manuscript has been dated to 125 A.D. and was found in Egypt, some distance from where the New Testament was originally composed Asia Minor). Many early Christian papyri were discovered in 1935, which have been dated to 150 A.D., and include the four gospels. The Papyrus Bodmer II, discovered in 1956, has been dated to 200 A.D. and contains 14 chapters and portions of the last seven chapters of the gospel of John. The Chester Beatty biblical papyri, discovered in 1931, has been dated to 200-250 A.D. and contains the Gospels, Acts, Paul's Epistles, and Revelation. The number of manuscripts is extensive compared to other ancient historical writings, such as Caesar's "Gallic Wars" (10 Greek manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), the "Annals" of Tacitus (2 manuscripts, the earliest 950 years after the original), Livy (20 manuscripts, the earliest 350 years after the original), and Plato (7 manuscripts)."
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorg.html

Peace.

Vorkosigan · 12-01-2005, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orthodox_Freethinker

Peace.

OF, that "data" does not support your claim. Quite the opposite. That paragraph is full of nonsense (there are not tens of thousands of manuscripts), p52 does not date to 125...

The number of manuscripts does not tell us about reliability. Indeed, the more copies made, the greater the quantity of errors -- 300,000 by at least one count I have seen.

So again. Is there comparative data that supports your claim that the NT has been substantially less redacted, edited, etc, then other ancient texts?

Vorkosigan

andrewcriddle · 12-01-2005, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vorkosigan

OF, that "data" does not support your claim. Quite the opposite. That paragraph is full of nonsense (there are not tens of thousands of manuscripts), p52 does not date to 125...

IF one includes lectionaries as well as continuous text manuscripts and the various versions as well as the Greek text then there would be about 20,000 manuscripts (5000 Greek manuscripts 10,000 Latin Manuscripts maybe 2000 Armenian etc)

p52 might well date to 125 CE or even earlier; the problem is that it might equally well date to 150 CE or a little later. (IMVHO the claims that it may be from the end of the 2nd or beginning of the 3rd century are implausible.)

Andrew Criddle

Vorkosigan · 12-01-2005, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewcriddle

IF one includes lectionaries as well as continuous text manuscripts and the various versions as well as the Greek text then there would be about 20,000 manuscripts (5000 Greek manuscripts 10,000 Latin Manuscripts maybe 2000 Armenian etc)

I doubt the writer of that paragraph knows any of that. The impression left by the phrase "tens of thousands" isn't 20,000.

Quote:

p52 might well date to 125 CE or even earlier; the problem is that it might equally well date to 150 CE or a little later. (IMVHO the claims that it may be from the end of the 2nd or beginning of the 3rd century are implausible.)
Andrew Criddle

The point is that the 125 date is deliberately presented as a well-established fact, when research does not support that. In any case IMVHO the Gospel on Mark, on which all other gospels depends, is later than 125 and thus p52 can't date from 125.

It is also arguable whether p52 is from John.

Vorkosigan

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.