FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-22-2003, 11:45 AM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default Textual Instability of ECW

I issued a challenge for a debate here:

http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthr...&threadid=7483

I'll extend the same offer here as well

Vinine
Vinnie is offline  
Old 07-22-2003, 12:16 PM   #2
CX
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Portlandish
Posts: 2,829
Default

Anybody here who is willing to take the negative obviously hasn't been here long enough.
CX is offline  
Old 07-23-2003, 12:29 AM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,875
Default

Vinnie,

Are you making a one-on-one challenge, or taking on all (however few) comers? If you want a one-on-one, I'll move this thread to the Formal Debates Challenge & Setup Forum.

Incidentally, so people don't have to bother with the hideous interface of that board, Vinnie's challenge is:
Quote:
My view: early Christian writings, including New Testament works, are textually unstable.
Joel
Celsus is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 03:57 PM   #4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by CX
Anybody here who is willing to take the negative obviously hasn't been here long enough.
Probably not But I think my arguments might go a little further and into more depth though. Demonstrating that the texts do not have early attestation or demonstrating that the texts have not been shown to be like the autographs isn't the same as demonstrating that the texts are most likely nothing like the autographs. It is the latter that I think I can argue quite convincingly. The former should be taken for granted given the lacking manuscript attestation.

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 04:25 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

Quote:
Are you making a one-on-one challenge, or taking on all (however few) comers? If you want a one-on-one, I'll move this thread to the Formal Debates Challenge & Setup Forum.
One on one or one on whatever. I'll take what I can get but it doesn't look like anyone wants to play with me

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 10:22 PM   #6
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: midwest usa
Posts: 1,203
Default I may take you on,but I must know

What do you mean textual instability and are you pro or con?
mark9950 is offline  
Old 07-27-2003, 11:21 PM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ventura, CA
Posts: 1,870
Default

You could try http://www.theologyforums.com/forums...?s=&forumid=17

There are a few there who might take up the challenge.
Capt_Drakes is offline  
Old 07-28-2003, 12:57 AM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default Eastern peshitta is very stable

Quote:
Originally posted by Vinnie
I issued a challenge for a debate here:

http://theologyweb.com/forum/showthr...&threadid=7483

I'll extend the same offer here as well

Vinine
For some reason my home computer has awful problems with the theologyweb site, so I can't join in there. My work computer finds it OK.

The 22 books of the eastern peshitta (nt) are very stable. These are written in aramaic and the greek versions were translated from them. This is why there are variants amongst the freek texts at at times.
judge is offline  
Old 07-31-2003, 12:39 PM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Waterbury, Ct, Usa
Posts: 6,523
Default

J.P. Holding has accepted my open challenge. We are in the process of working out the details of the debate now. I just responded but it takes a while for a post to show up as the forum is moderated.

Vinnie
Vinnie is offline  
Old 08-03-2003, 08:28 AM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: England
Posts: 5,629
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Vinnie
J.P. Holding has accepted my open challenge. We are in the process of working out the details of the debate now. I just responded but it takes a while for a post to show up as the forum is moderated.

Vinnie
Holding states he will be defending his position in

http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_02_02_01.html
This concedes that early Christian scribes would alter the text for doctrinal reasons.

'However, the orthodox corrupters changed the verse to read, "Joseph and his mother marvelled..." ' writes Holding.

As Holding already conceded?

Note that Holding deals with only one of Ehrman's places where the text was changed early. Did people add a eucharistic scence to Luke? Did people add 'Son of God' to Mark 1:1? Holding never tells his gullible readers that Ehrman makes out a strong case for these being additions to the original text.



http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/reli2.htm gives some of the details.

Holding never discusses these in his article, preferring half-truths (Ehrman used original readings, which have been preserved in early manuscripts), while not telling his readers how these original readings affect Christian doctrines, and how most Bibles (eg the NIV) do NOT print the original readings , as identified by Ehrman, but prefer readings which Ehrman says are not original.

As an aside,

Holding also writes '
'In another place, Ehrman asserts that the Gnostics could make a "plausible" case for claims of apostolicity: According to Clement of Alexandria, Valentinus was a disciple of Theudas, who was "allegedly" a disciple of Paul; and Basilides studied under Glaukia, a "supposed disciple" of Peter! [ibid., 22] I find VERY LITTLE plausibility for apostolicity here, inasmuch as a) the discipleship links are alleged, not definitive - by Ehrman's own admission! - and, b) after three generations, a goodly degree of change is possible - and there is quite a change from Paul to Valentinus and Peter to Basilides!'

So Holding scoffs at the idea that Valentinus could have been a disciple of a companion of Paul, because of the time gap.

However Holding writes in http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_02_02_02_JN.html

'The authorship of John has some interesting permutations. Kümmel pessimistically states that there is "no possibility of breaking through the anonymity" of John's Gospel [Kumm.Int, 234-7]. We do have a church tradition cited by Irenaeus (c. 180 AD), who quotes Polycarp:

John, the disciple of the Lord, who leaned back on his breast, published the Gospel while he was resident at Ephesus in Asia...'

and Holding defends this chain of hearsay to the teeth....

JP (double-standards) Holding strikes again.
Steven Carr is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:10 PM.

Top

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