FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-06-2007, 09:21 PM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,691
Default

Even in the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus spends a lot of time talking about how people shouldn't worship anything other than God, while definitely allowing (even encouraging) people to worship him. John makes it even more clear. And John contains the critical commandment that wine is always preferable to water, something that almost drove me to convert! Clearly, it is the best Gospel.
xunzian is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 12:30 AM   #22
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BALDUCCI View Post
Son of Man does not mean Son of God.
Of course it does. Man is created in the image of God and will always be formed after the image of God. This is what makes man basically good and redemption possible.
Chili is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 12:38 AM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Bordeaux France
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Havermayer View Post
Fundies claim that modern Bibles are 99% as close to the original as we can get. How old are our earliest versions of the manuscripts that we're basing our translations on?
Codex Alexandrinus
A Greek manuscript of the Old and New Testaments, so named because it was brought to Europe from Alexandria and had been the property of the patriarch Alexandria. The handwriting is generally judged to belong to the beginning or middle of the fifth century or possibly to the late fourth. An Arabic note states that it was written by Thecla the martyr; and Cyril Lucar the Patriarch adds in his note that tradition says she was a noble Egyptian woman and wrote the codex shortly after the Nicene Council (325). But nothing is known of such a martyr at that date, and the value of this testimony is weakened by the presence of the Eusebian Canons (d. 340) and destroyed by the insertion of the letter of Athanasius (d. 373). On the other hand, the absence of the divisions into chapters and verses, invented by Euthalios towards the middle of the fifth century is regarded by Scrivener as proof that it can hardly be later than 450. This is not decisive, and Gregory would bring it down even to the second half of the fifth century. The character of the letters and the history of the manuscript point to Egypt as its place of origin.

Codex Amiatinus
The most celebrated manuscript of the Latin Vulgate Bible, remarkable as the best witness to the true text of St. Jerome and as a fine specimen of medieval calligraphy, now kept at Florence in the Bibliotheca Laurentiana.
The Italian scholar De Rossi established during the XIXth century that Amiatinus originated in Northumberland about the beginning of the eighth century, having been made, as Bede states, at Ceolfrid's order. Ceolfrid was the disciple of Benedict Biscop, who founded the monasteries of Wearmouth and Jarrow in Northumberland towards the end of the seventh century.

Codex Bezae
One of the five most important Greek New Testament manuscripts, and the most interesting of all on account of its peculiar readings. It receives its name from Theodore de Bèze (1519-1605), the friend and successor of Calvin, and from the University of Cambridge, which obtained it as a gift from Bèze in 1581 and still possesses it. The text is bilingual, Greek and Latin. It has commonly been held that the manuscript originated in Southern France around the beginning of the sixth century. However, this hypothesis has been shaken, and the probabilities now favour Southern Italy.
Following Scrivener, scholars universally dated it from the beginning of the sixth century, but there is a tendency now to place it a hundred years earlier. It probably belongs to the fifth century. Nothing necessitates a later date.
Codex Bezae is the so-called Western Text, or one type of the Western Text.

Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus
The last in the group of the four great uncial manuscripts of the Greek Bible, received its name from the treatises of St. Ephraem the Syrian (translated into Greek) which were written over the original text. Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus is placed in the first half of the fifth century.

Codex Sinaiticus
A Greek manuscript of the Old and New Testaments, of the greatest antiquity and value; found on Mount Sinai, in St. Catherine's Monastery, by Constantine Tischendorf. In 1859 he saw the manuscript, containing, beyond all his dreams, a great part of the Old Testament and the entire New Testament, besides the Epistle of Barnabas, and part of the "Shepherd" of Hermas, of which two works no copies in the original Greek were known to exist. Experts place it in the fourth century, along with Codex Vaticanus and some time before Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Ephræmi Rescriptus.

Codex Vaticanus :
A Greek manuscript written in uncial letters of the fourth century
The Vatican Codex, in spite of the views of Tischendorf, who held for the priority of the Codex Sinaiticus, discovered by him, is rightly considered to be the oldest extant copy of the Bible. Like the Codex Sinaiticus it represents what Westcott and Hort call a "neutral text", i.e. a text that antedates the modifications found in all later manuscripts, not only the modifications found in the less ancient Antiochene recensions, but also those met with in the Eastern and Alexandrine recensions. It may be said that the Vatican Codex, written in the first half of the fourth century, represents the text of one of those recensions of the Bible which were current in the third century, and that it belongs to the family of manuscripts made use of by Origen in the composition of his Hexapla. The original home of the Vatican Codex is uncertain. Hort thinks it was written at Rome; Rendel Harris, Armitage Robinson, and others attribute it to Asia Minor. A more common opinion maintains that it was written in Egypt.


All these manuscripts are later than the Council of Nicaea (325).

Source : New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, look at Codex.
Huon is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 12:39 AM   #24
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

[QUOTE=Havermayer;4512443]
Quote:
In this particular passage he isn't making an obvious claim of divinity at all actually. Are there any clearer passages.

Thanks for the help!
Jesus was not divine but just 'the way' to the end and needed to be crucified to set Christ free in the end and did so with: "Mother, there is your son."

Jesus worship is not a good idea and should never be part of religion in Christendom.
Chili is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 12:42 AM   #25
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland View Post
If Jesus had really said anything John claims he said, how did Matthew, Mark and Luke all miss them, even though the three other gospels agree on many of the same quotes?
Different traditions? Matthew and Luke are dependent on Mark for much of their material - that Matthew and Luke also quote Mark doesn't mean that they provide independent material. The Markan material in Mark, Matthew, and Luke is really just one tradition, and John is another. To what extent is the Johnannine material late and corrupt is to be discussed, but not dismissed out of hand because it isn't recorded in the synoptics.
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 12:44 AM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: none
Posts: 9,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Havermayer View Post
Fundies claim that modern Bibles are 99% as close to the original as we can get. How old are our earliest versions of the manuscripts that we're basing our translations on?
Fundies say this? Where? Usually fundies argue for Byzantine priority, and extreme fundies say that such and such modern Bible is 100% accurate (usually, again, Byzantine).
Chris Weimer is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 07:18 AM   #27
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: scotland
Posts: 365
Default

Quote:
How about John 10:30. "I and the father are One"
Its a biblical "high five"
BALDUCCI is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 08:23 AM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,307
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huon View Post
All these manuscripts are later than the Council of Nicaea (325).

Source : New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, look at Codex.
This source predates the discovery of the Bodmer and Beatty papyri.

Stephen
S.C.Carlson is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:02 AM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Midwest
Posts: 4,787
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by S.C.Carlson View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huon View Post
All these manuscripts are later than the Council of Nicaea (325).

Source : New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, look at Codex.
This source predates the discovery of the Bodmer and Beatty papyri.

Stephen
I have the manuscript sources for the canonical gospels laid out on one of my web pages. The list includes the approximate contents of each manuscript. My source was the lists in the UBS edition 4 and the NA edition 27.

Ben.
Ben C Smith is offline  
Old 06-07-2007, 09:20 AM   #30
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BALDUCCI View Post
Quote:
How about John 10:30. "I and the father are One"
Its a biblical "high five"
Except that to be fully one Jesus must be raised and until then is there another 'flock' wherein they are not one. The proper order must be that they are one side by side as in the number 11 instead of here as the number 7.
Chili is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:52 AM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.