Freethought & Rationalism Archive

darstec · 07-29-2010, 04:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

Stephan keeps mentioning original sources. We do not have any. We have copies of copies of copies about 1000 years removed from any original source. And those copies passed down through unashamedly biased hands, the Catholic Church.

But, do you have an original of any book today. There is really only ONE original and all we have are copies.

People normally copy books either by hand or by some printing machinery.

But for all intents and purposes, they can be considered original. Except of course if we find someone else took the printed book, changed the contents, then reprinted it under the name of the original author without that author's permission. If we can determine that, then we can hold that reproduction as invalid as the biblical texts we now have copied in modern times.

Note that I am not talking about exact facsimiles of the Codex Sinaiticus, which for all intents and purposes can serve as the Codex that dates back to the fourth century CE.

Why are you adding to the confusion? I know you don't accept these handed down copies as being exactly the same as the original first century gospels (which never existed in the first place).

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, you MUST ADMIT that the Dead Sea Scrolls may have been COPIED from some other source and perhaps NOT even copied from the original

That is very true. They must be copies if the Torah had been discovered after the Babylonian captivity. In fact the various DDS scrolls of Isaiah differ from each other. That is why one must carefully distinguish what source they are using and not mistake that for original sources.

Interestingly enough not one fragment of the OT has been found that has been radio carbon dated to a time before the sixth century BCE.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

We don't know what Papias, or Polycarp or Irenaeus said because there are no original copies of their works. We have fourth and fifth century authors telling us what they supposedly said. And worse, we have no evidence except for faith alone that those people even existed. Compound that with the fact that even those fifth century authors' writings are copies of copies of copies a thousand years old we can safely say we have no originals. What we have left for us is dubious and biased.

Well, if the Church was HONEST we should have very good COPIES OF the writings of Papias, Polycarp, or Irenaeus.

You forgot to put enough emphasis on the word "if". It should have been in 432 point type. Besides honesty and Christian Church is an oxymoron. And saying good copies of Papias, Polycarp and Irenaeus is like saying having good copies of Clark Kent's Daily Planet articles.

aa5874 · 07-30-2010, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

But, do you have an original of any book today. There is really only ONE original and all we have are copies.

People normally copy books either by hand or by some printing machinery.

But for all intents and purposes, they can be considered original. Except of course if we find someone else took the printed book, changed the contents, then reprinted it under the name of the original author without that author's permission. If we can determine that, then we can hold that reproduction as invalid as the biblical texts we now have copied in modern times.

So, when you claimed we have copies of copies you simply meant that we have lots of originals?

darstec · 07-30-2010, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by darstec

But for all intents and purposes, they can be considered original. Except of course if we find someone else took the printed book, changed the contents, then reprinted it under the name of the original author without that author's permission. If we can determine that, then we can hold that reproduction as invalid as the biblical texts we now have copied in modern times.

So, when you claimed we have copies of copies you simply meant that we have lots of originals?

NO. We have copies of copies of copies, etc separated by centuries. Copying an original, hundreds of thousands of copies on a printing press at the time, close to the time of the handwritten original, or typed, or computer generated can serve as an original if it is a faithful reproduction.

The copies of copies to which I refer are what we have for biblical texts, or even ancient authors. They changed down through the ages. Totally different thing.

You normally don't repond so obtusely. Are you playing games?

charles · 07-30-2010, 12:54 PM

I am surprised by aa5874's position too. I wonder whether he has come up with a new discovery. Maybe he has changed his forgery position

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

07-30-2010, 12:54 PM	#24
charles Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Midwest Posts: 94	I am surprised by aa5874's position too. I wonder whether he has come up with a new discovery. Maybe he has changed his forgery position

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.