GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text  (Read 1304 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

KiwiChristian

  • Guest
Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 04:55:18 »
Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text

(Antiquity, Number, Variety, Continuity, Credibility, Context, Internal Evidence)
Dean Burgon gives these seven tests to indicate which readings are correct.

1. Antiquity. We may allow only those witnesses who 'spoke' before 400 AD. These are:


i) Over 70 Church Fathers. iii) Early Papyri.
ii) Aleph, B, and some Uncials. iv) Earliest Versions.

For example: Ever since 1881, ‘vinegar’ in Matthew 27:34 has been despised by Westcott and Hort and others as a ‘late Byzantine’ reading. ‘They gave him vinegar...’

Question: What is the verdict of antiquity?

Answer: (a) For "wine": Aleph, B, Latin, Coptic versions, Apocryphal Acts, Gospel of
Nicodemus, Marcarius Magnes. (7 witnesses) eg: NIV, GNB, RSV, NWT.
(b) For "vinegar": Gospel of Peter, Acta Philippi, Barnabas, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Celsus,Origen, pseudo-Tatian, Athanaseus, Eusebius of Emesa, Theodore of Heraclea, Didymus, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, Ephraem Syrus, Lactantius, Titus of Bostra, Syriac version. (18 witnesses). "Vinegar", the KJV reading has much more support.

2. Number of Witnesses. A reading found in a majority of independent witnesses,
should be the original.

The fewer witnesses, the less likely it is to be genuine;

The more witnesses, the more likely it is to be the original reading;

Unanimous witnesses, means it is certainly the original reading.

3. Variety of Witnesses, is the agreement of independent witnesses.

Variety means that the reading is found in:

i) many geographical areas, and by
ii) different kinds of witnesses - eg: Greek manuscripts, Versions, Fathers, Lectionaries.


A good variety of witnesses are from: different countries, speaking different languages, who never met, and who never colluded. This is not true of Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus.

The vast majority of uncials and cursives have KJV type readings and have good variety:

i) They cover at least 1000 years (350-1550 AD).
ii) Belong to so many countries such as Greece, Constantinople, Asia Minor, Palestine,iii) Exhibit so many strange characteristics and peculiar sympathies.

Variety helps us to evaluate the independence of witnesses. If the witnesses which share a common reading come from only one area, such as Egypt, then their independence is doubted. It is quite unreasonable that an original reading should survive in only one location.

Witnesses supporting a reading in one limited area cannot be the original, as is the case with Aleph, B, and some papyri.

To illustrate: Many of the most ancient manuscripts come from Egypt. This is due to the hot, dry climate of Egypt favouring manuscript preservation more than the wet Mediterranean climate. Moisture is bad for manuscripts. The Egyptian texts are not an exact representation of texts in other parts of the world. To sample the flora and fauna of Egypt does not guarantee to be the same flora and fauna of Greece, Turkey or Italy, etc.

Variety + Number = Validity. Variety means independence of witnesses. Lack of
variety (as is the case for Aleph, B, papyri of Egypt) imply dependence. This is a strong reason to reject modern versions based on Egyptian manuscripts. Burgon said, ‘Generally, the testimony of 2, 4, 6 or more witnesses from many regions, is far weightier than the same number of witnesses from one locality, between which there probably exists some collusion or sympathy’. Hence, many witnesses only from Egypt is a weak case for NIV.

4. Continuity. A reading to be a serious candidate for the original, should be found
throughout the ages of transmission, from beginning to end. A reading is invented if it died out in the 5th century, or if it is not found before the 12th century. Where a reading has variety (or agreement of independent witnesses), it almost always has continuity over time.

The majority of manuscripts are independent witnesses, and must be counted. Westcott and Hort reject this absolutely, accounting for the Majority text by an assumed Lucian recension or revision of the New Testament text around 300 AD. Since there is no evidence that this Lucian recension ever happened, continuity is valid. Hence, number, variety and continuity, form a three-strand rope of textual criticism that is not easily broken. These 3 arguments strongly oppose B, Aleph, NIV and modern versions.

5. Credibility of Witnesses or weight, judged by the manuscripts ‘own performance’.

If manuscripts go wrong continually, their character and credibility must be low. The oldest manuscripts can be objectively, statistically shown to be habitually wrong, witnesses of very low character, and with many mistakes. Their credibility is near zero.


If you read Sir Herman Hoskier's book Codex B and its Allies carefully, you will lose all respect for B, Aleph, etc and modern versions based on them.

Since modern Greek critical texts are based on B, Aleph, some papyri, etc, it is clear that modern scholars have severely ignored 'credibility of witnesses' as an objective criterion.


If considered seriously, 'credibility' will overthrow the modern text type and the NIV.

6. Context is the behaviour (degree of corruption) of a manuscript in the immediate
vicinity of the problem. If in a certain manuscript, the context is clearly in a very corrupt state, then it is self-evident that this manuscript has very low credibility.

For example, Westcott and Hort in Luke 22-24, made 16 omissions from the Received Text based solely on Codex D. In Luke 22:19,20; 24:3,6,9,12,36,40,52 W&H's sole authority for changing the Textus Receptus was a single Greek Codex Beza (D), the most depraved of all.


Codex D in Luke 22,23,24 omits 354 words, adds 173 words, substitutes 146 words,
transposes 243 words, totalling 916 changes. In 8 places they omitted material from the Bible on the sole authority of D (Burgon, p.77,78).

With the scribe on a wild omitting spree, how can any value be given to Codex D here, much less prefer it above the united voice of every other witness?

Modern scholars and versions have completely ignored this Context test
7. Internal Evidence, concerns readings which are grammatically, logically,
geographically, or scientifically impossible, such as in Luke 19:37; 23:45 (impossible 3 hour eclipse of the sun at full moon in Aleph, B, and RV); 24:13; Mark 6:22; II Corinthians 3:3.



Conclusion: So then, how are we to identify the original wording?


1. We must gather the evidence: Greek manuscripts, Lectionaries, Fathers, and Versions.

2. We must evaluate the evidence to see which readings enjoy the earliest, widest, most numerous, most credible, and most varied attestation.

3. The independent, credible witnesses must then be counted.

4. This is how we arrive at the Received Text of the KJV.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 04:55:18 »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7637
  • Manna: 236
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #1 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 05:46:46 »
Conclusion: So then, how are we to identify the original wording?


1. We must gather the evidence: Greek manuscripts, Lectionaries, Fathers, and Versions.

2. We must evaluate the evidence to see which readings enjoy the earliest, widest, most numerous, most credible, and most varied attestation.

3. The independent, credible witnesses must then be counted.

4. This is how we arrive at the Received Text of the KJV.
I will make a really wild guess here.  The "we" in those four steps do not include you.  My guess is that "you", KiwiChristian, have not done even one of those four things.  You, KiwiChristian, have not gathered the evidence, you haven't evaluated the evidence, you haven't counted the credible witnesses and you didn't arrive at the Textus Receptus.

And that being the case, I am not sure what your point is.  I accept that you prefer the KJV.   But that has nothing really to say for the KJV one way or another at any level. 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #1 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 05:46:46 »

Ginger Rella

  • Guest
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #2 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 06:55:02 »
Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text

(Antiquity, Number, Variety, Continuity, Credibility, Context, Internal Evidence)
Dean Burgon gives these seven tests to indicate which readings are correct.

1. Antiquity. We may allow only those witnesses who 'spoke' before 400 AD. These are:


i) Over 70 Church Fathers. iii) Early Papyri.
ii) Aleph, B, and some Uncials. iv) Earliest Versions.

For example: Ever since 1881, ‘vinegar’ in Matthew 27:34 has been despised by Westcott and Hort and others as a ‘late Byzantine’ reading. ‘They gave him vinegar...’

Question: What is the verdict of antiquity?

Answer: (a) For "wine": Aleph, B, Latin, Coptic versions, Apocryphal Acts, Gospel of
Nicodemus, Marcarius Magnes. (7 witnesses) eg: NIV, GNB, RSV, NWT.
(b) For "vinegar": Gospel of Peter, Acta Philippi, Barnabas, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Celsus,Origen, pseudo-Tatian, Athanaseus, Eusebius of Emesa, Theodore of Heraclea, Didymus, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus, Ephraem Syrus, Lactantius, Titus of Bostra, Syriac version. (18 witnesses). "Vinegar", the KJV reading has much more support.

2. Number of Witnesses. A reading found in a majority of independent witnesses,
should be the original.

The fewer witnesses, the less likely it is to be genuine;

The more witnesses, the more likely it is to be the original reading;

Unanimous witnesses, means it is certainly the original reading.

3. Variety of Witnesses, is the agreement of independent witnesses.

Variety means that the reading is found in:

i) many geographical areas, and by
ii) different kinds of witnesses - eg: Greek manuscripts, Versions, Fathers, Lectionaries.


A good variety of witnesses are from: different countries, speaking different languages, who never met, and who never colluded. This is not true of Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus.

The vast majority of uncials and cursives have KJV type readings and have good variety:

i) They cover at least 1000 years (350-1550 AD).
ii) Belong to so many countries such as Greece, Constantinople, Asia Minor, Palestine,iii) Exhibit so many strange characteristics and peculiar sympathies.

Variety helps us to evaluate the independence of witnesses. If the witnesses which share a common reading come from only one area, such as Egypt, then their independence is doubted. It is quite unreasonable that an original reading should survive in only one location.

Witnesses supporting a reading in one limited area cannot be the original, as is the case with Aleph, B, and some papyri.

To illustrate: Many of the most ancient manuscripts come from Egypt. This is due to the hot, dry climate of Egypt favouring manuscript preservation more than the wet Mediterranean climate. Moisture is bad for manuscripts. The Egyptian texts are not an exact representation of texts in other parts of the world. To sample the flora and fauna of Egypt does not guarantee to be the same flora and fauna of Greece, Turkey or Italy, etc.

Variety + Number = Validity. Variety means independence of witnesses. Lack of
variety (as is the case for Aleph, B, papyri of Egypt) imply dependence. This is a strong reason to reject modern versions based on Egyptian manuscripts. Burgon said, ‘Generally, the testimony of 2, 4, 6 or more witnesses from many regions, is far weightier than the same number of witnesses from one locality, between which there probably exists some collusion or sympathy’. Hence, many witnesses only from Egypt is a weak case for NIV.

4. Continuity. A reading to be a serious candidate for the original, should be found
throughout the ages of transmission, from beginning to end. A reading is invented if it died out in the 5th century, or if it is not found before the 12th century. Where a reading has variety (or agreement of independent witnesses), it almost always has continuity over time.

The majority of manuscripts are independent witnesses, and must be counted. Westcott and Hort reject this absolutely, accounting for the Majority text by an assumed Lucian recension or revision of the New Testament text around 300 AD. Since there is no evidence that this Lucian recension ever happened, continuity is valid. Hence, number, variety and continuity, form a three-strand rope of textual criticism that is not easily broken. These 3 arguments strongly oppose B, Aleph, NIV and modern versions.

5. Credibility of Witnesses or weight, judged by the manuscripts ‘own performance’.

If manuscripts go wrong continually, their character and credibility must be low. The oldest manuscripts can be objectively, statistically shown to be habitually wrong, witnesses of very low character, and with many mistakes. Their credibility is near zero.


If you read Sir Herman Hoskier's book Codex B and its Allies carefully, you will lose all respect for B, Aleph, etc and modern versions based on them.

Since modern Greek critical texts are based on B, Aleph, some papyri, etc, it is clear that modern scholars have severely ignored 'credibility of witnesses' as an objective criterion.


If considered seriously, 'credibility' will overthrow the modern text type and the NIV.

6. Context is the behaviour (degree of corruption) of a manuscript in the immediate
vicinity of the problem. If in a certain manuscript, the context is clearly in a very corrupt state, then it is self-evident that this manuscript has very low credibility.

For example, Westcott and Hort in Luke 22-24, made 16 omissions from the Received Text based solely on Codex D. In Luke 22:19,20; 24:3,6,9,12,36,40,52 W&H's sole authority for changing the Textus Receptus was a single Greek Codex Beza (D), the most depraved of all.


Codex D in Luke 22,23,24 omits 354 words, adds 173 words, substitutes 146 words,
transposes 243 words, totalling 916 changes. In 8 places they omitted material from the Bible on the sole authority of D (Burgon, p.77,78).

With the scribe on a wild omitting spree, how can any value be given to Codex D here, much less prefer it above the united voice of every other witness?

Modern scholars and versions have completely ignored this Context test
7. Internal Evidence, concerns readings which are grammatically, logically,
geographically, or scientifically impossible, such as in Luke 19:37; 23:45 (impossible 3 hour eclipse of the sun at full moon in Aleph, B, and RV); 24:13; Mark 6:22; II Corinthians 3:3.



Conclusion: So then, how are we to identify the original wording?


1. We must gather the evidence: Greek manuscripts, Lectionaries, Fathers, and Versions.

2. We must evaluate the evidence to see which readings enjoy the earliest, widest, most numerous, most credible, and most varied attestation.

3. The independent, credible witnesses must then be counted.

4. This is how we arrive at the Received Text of the KJV.

And also the texts of the Holy Word , other then the Catholic bibles, that were on the scenes before KJV.... right?

Everyone of you who tout the KJV or which ever you biblical choice is , as being the one and only accurate translation,  fails  to mention what those folks in places like Italy, Germany, France, Spain... etc... are reading that is all wrong because unless I am wrong..... could be  ::shrug::... those other countries do not read the KJV or any other bible written in some form of English language. Are their translations all wrong?

And speaking of other countries....

Here is a question for all of you learned folks with sound biblical history and some understanding of Koine Greek.

In Greece, they speak Greek... albeit modern day. Any idea of how different modern Greek is from Koin Greek and how that alters the New Testament in that country?


Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #2 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 06:55:02 »

KiwiChristian

  • Guest
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #3 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 12:58:06 »
And also the texts of the Holy Word , other then the Catholic bibles, that were on the scenes before KJV.... right?

Are you implying the earlier the texts are, the better?!

The AGE of the text does not determine its correctness.


Everyone of you who tout the KJV or which ever you biblical choice is , as being the one and only accurate translation,  fails  to mention what those folks in places like Italy, Germany, France, Spain... etc... are reading that is all wrong because unless I am wrong..... could be  ::shrug::... those other countries do not read the KJV or any other bible written in some form of English language. Are their translations all wrong?

Wow. No offense, but that is an ignorant statement. The KJV is available in many languages.

Can i say that it has nothing to do with the translation into a specific language but WHAT is being translated. WHICH texts, WHICH manuscripts.



Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #3 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 12:58:06 »
Pinterest: GraceCentered.com

KiwiChristian

  • Guest
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #4 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 13:00:26 »
I will make a really wild guess here.  The "we" in those four steps do not include you. 

No, it includes EVERYONE. INCLUDING you.

My guess is that "you", KiwiChristian, have not done even one of those four things.  You, KiwiChristian, have not gathered the evidence, you haven't evaluated the evidence, you haven't counted the credible witnesses and you didn't arrive at the Textus Receptus.


More personal attacks and false assumptions by you about me.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #4 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 13:00:26 »



Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7637
  • Manna: 236
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #5 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 13:54:09 »
More personal attacks and false assumptions by you about me.
Not personal attacks and if the assumptions are false, you should be able to prove them false.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #5 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 13:54:09 »

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7637
  • Manna: 236
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #6 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 14:01:58 »
Wow. No offense, but that is an ignorant statement. The KJV is available in many languages.
Now that is an ignorant statement.  The KJV is an English translation.

Quote from: Kiwi
Can i say that it has nothing to do with the translation into a specific language but WHAT is being translated. WHICH texts, WHICH manuscripts.
While it does depend upon which Greek version is being translated, when speaking of the KJV it most definitely has everything to do with the specific language into which it is being translated.

KiwiChristian

  • Guest
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #7 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 20:27:45 »
Now that is an ignorant statement.  The KJV is an English translation.

But its available in different languages.


While it does depend upon which Greek version is being translated,

True.

 when speaking of the KJV it most definitely has everything to do with the specific language into which it is being translated.

You just contradicted yourself.

Why does it matter WHICH text is being translated for other versions but NOT for the KJV?



Online NorrinRadd

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1548
  • Manna: 67
  • Gender: Male
  • Everybody is somebody's heretic
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #8 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 22:15:30 »
Kiwi, please learn to use the Quote function.  If you need help, please ask.

Quote
Quote
Now that is an ignorant statement.  The KJV is an English translation.

But its available in different languages.

That is a silly assertion.  It's like saying the English Standard Version is available in non-English forms.


Quote
Quote
While it does depend upon which Greek version is being translated,

True.

....

Quote
Quote
when speaking of the KJV it most definitely has everything to do with the specific language into which it is being translated.

You just contradicted yourself.

Why does it matter WHICH text is being translated for other versions but NOT for the KJV?

That is not what he said.  He said the language INTO which the texts are being translated.  By definition, the KJV is an ENGLISH translation.

Do you really not grasp this?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #8 on: Sun Mar 04, 2018 - 22:15:30 »

Offline Wycliffes_Shillelagh

  • Down with pants! Up with kilts!
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12235
  • Manna: 350
  • Gender: Male
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #9 on: Mon Mar 05, 2018 - 01:00:32 »
Let's fill in the blanks.

King James was the king of ______.

The people in that country spoke the ________ language.

King James Bible is a translation of the Greek into _________.

Offline 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7637
  • Manna: 236
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #10 on: Mon Mar 05, 2018 - 05:01:07 »
You just contradicted yourself.

Why does it matter WHICH text is being translated for other versions but NOT for the KJV?
No, I did not contradict myself.  I said nothing at all about other versions.

Online AVZ

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5918
  • Manna: 120
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #11 on: Mon Mar 05, 2018 - 05:11:51 »
Let's fill in the blanks.

King James was the king of ______.

The people in that country spoke the ________ language.

King James Bible is a translation of the Greek into _________.

Hmmm.
Scotland ... Celtic ... Gaelic ?

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #12 on: Mon Mar 05, 2018 - 10:11:01 »
Kiwi, I appreciate your research so I will post some information about Vinegar-Wine and later address the various New Testament texts which were personal copies and people made marginal notes.

John 19:28 After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished,
        THAT the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I THIRST

The Jews were having others murder Jesus so they were not interested in satisfied His thirst as modern Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites have any interest in NOT starving everyone for lack of the water of the Word. (Amos 8; Isaiah 5]]

The fruit of the vine (wine) will quickly turn to vinegar or worse unless you concentrate it put it in fumigated jars or new wineskins.  When the wine turned to Vinegar they would mix it with lots of sea water or tars to make it into a drink.

John 19:29 Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a spunge with vinegar,
         and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth.
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the VINEGAR,
        he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

THE LAW WOULD NOT BE DEFANGED UNTIL HOLY SCRIPTURE OR THE PROPHETS AND OTHER PROPHECIES "CONCERNING ME" COME TO AN END.  Their and modern attempts to STOP THE MOUTH OF THE VICTIM was defeatedd.

HE DIDN'T DRINK IT:

PROPHECY
Psa. 22:16 For DOGS  ::applause:: have compassed me: the ASSEMBLY of the wicked have inclosed me:
        they pierced my hands and my feet.
Psa. 22:17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
Psa. 22:18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
Psa. 22:19 But be not thou far from me, O Lord: O my strength, haste thee to help me.
Psa. 22:20 Deliver my soul from the sword; my darling from the power of the DOG. Soon, we pray.

Lam. 3:14 I was a derision to all my people; and their song all the day.
Lam. 3:15 He hath filled me with bitterness, he hath made me drunken with wormwood. [Hemlock]
Lam. 3:18 And I said, My strength and my hope is perished from the Lord:
Lam. 3:19 Remembering mine affliction and my misery, the wormwood and the GALL.

Matt. 27:33 And when they were come unto a place called Golgotha, that is to say, a place of a skull,
Matt. 27:34 They gave him VINEGAR to drink mingled with GALL:
         and when he had tasted thereof, HE WOULD NOT DRINK.
Matt. 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots:
         that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,
        They parted my garments among them,
         and upon my vesture did they cast lots.

IT WAS VINEGAR and not the WINE in the modern sense.

g3690. oxos, oz-os; from 3691; vinegar, i.e. sour wine: — vinegar.
g3691. oxus, oz-oos´; probably akin to the base of 188 (“acid”); keen; by analogy, rapid: — sharp, swift.

A NAZARITE, KING OR PRINCE YOU DID NOT DRINK INTOXICANTS.

Num. 6:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them,
         When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite,
         to separate themselves unto the Lord:
Num. 6:3 He shall separate himself from wine and strong drink,
         and shall drink no vinegar of wine, or vinegar of strong drink,
         neither shall he drink any liquor of grapes, nor eat moist grapes, or dried.

g2558.  chomets, kho´-mets; from 2556; vinegar:—vinegar.
g556 chamets, khaw-mates´; a primitive root; to be pungent; i.e. in taste (sour, i.e. literally fermented, or figuratively, harsh), in color (dazzling):—cruel (man), dyed, be grieved, leavened.

IT WAS WINE BUT VINEGAR GIVES THE TRUE MEANING OF THE JEW'S CONTEMPT FOR JESUS.  THEY COULD NOT DENY THAT HE WAS MESSIAH BUT HE WAS NOT THEIR EXPECTED BACCHUS OR DIONYSUS THEIR WINESKINS GOD.

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: Seven Tests to Determine the True New Testament Text
« Reply #13 on: Mon Mar 05, 2018 - 10:45:37 »
The Preface to the KJV.  Literature for those who could buy copies continued to be in Attic Greek for a long time.  Preacher's studied BIBLE GREEK until the papyri: In 1989 were known 96 papyri, and in 2008 124 papyri. As of 2017, a total of 134 papyri are known.

However, Latin is a "dead language" and least likely to be tampered with.  We still have access to unaltered Classical literature which helped drag the world out of church-induced dark ages. 

http://www.piney.com/DocKJVPref1611.html

Quote
The Apostle excepteth no tongue; not Hebrew the ancientest, not Greek the most copious, not Latin the finest. Nature taught a natural man to confess, that all of us in those tongues which we do not understand, are plainly deaf; we may turn the deaf ear unto them.

The Scythian counted the Athenian, whom he did not understand, barbarous; [Clem. Alex. 1 Strom.] so the Roman did the Syrian, and the Jew (even S. Jerome himself called the Hebrew tongue barbarous, belike because it was strange to so many) [S. Jerome. Damaso.] so the Emperor of Constantinople [Michael, Theophili fil.] calleth the Latin tongue, barbarous, though Pope Nicolas do storm at it: [2::Tom. Concil. ex edit. Petri Crab] so the Jews long before Christ called all other nations, "Lognazim,", which is little better than barbarous. Therefore as one complaineth, that always in the Senate of Rome, there was one or other that called for an interpreter: [Cicero 5::de finibus.] so lest the Church be driven to the like exigent, it is necessary to have translations in a readiness. Translation it is that openeth the window, to let in the light; that breaketh the shell, that we may eat the kernel; that putteth aside the curtain, that we may look into the most Holy place; that removeth the cover of the well, that we may come by the water, even as [4] Jacob rolled away the stone from the mouth of the well, by which means the flocks of Laban were watered [Gen 29:10]. Indeed without translation into the vulgar tongue, the unlearned are but like children at Jacob's well (which is deep) [John 4:11] without a bucket or something to draw with; or as that person mentioned by Isaiah, to whom when a sealed book was delivered, with this motion, "Read this, I pray thee," he was fain to make this answer, "I cannot, for it is sealed." [Isa 29:11]


Because scholars were Latin scholars they did not have to depend upon the various Catholic version nor numerous footnotes.

Judging translations is above my pay grade and unnecessary since the Church of Christ is built upon or Educated by the PROPHETS made more certain by Jesus and and left for OUR MEMORY.  Paul is a commentary on the Old Testament and DEBUNKS Greek mythology and JEWISH FABLES.