Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
About Luke 16:19-31 II century interpolation
#46
Quote:You are paying far too much attention to history and not enough to linguistics. Some of the books you have assigned to Greek (such as Revelation, John, and Mark) have higher concentrations of semiticisms than some of the ones you assign to Hebrew (Hebrews and Matthew, especially).

Yes, but becouse the autors was hebrews <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Well, I agree that the Revelation was told to John, in his native language, but, becouse his mission was for greeks, I am not imagine, that he wrote to them in his native language.
He spent a couple of years among greeks, and he knows thear language.
Reply
#47
Innoire Wrote:
Quote:You are paying far too much attention to history and not enough to linguistics. Some of the books you have assigned to Greek (such as Revelation, John, and Mark) have higher concentrations of semiticisms than some of the ones you assign to Hebrew (Hebrews and Matthew, especially).

Yes, but becouse the autors was hebrews <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

Well, I agree that the Revelation was told to John, in his native language, but, becouse his mission was for greeks, I am not imagine, that he wrote to them in his native language.
He spent a couple of years among greeks, and he knows thear language.
I don't think Revelation was written for a pagan Greek audience. It would have been incomprehensible to them. It might possibly could have been for a Hellenized Jewish audience, but I have my doubts even about that.
Reply
#48
Yes, of course, not for pagans.
The prophecies is just for believers: 1Corinthians 14:22 part b
Reply
#49
"Learned men, so called Correctores were, following the church meeting at Nicea 325 AD, selected by the church authorities to scrutinize the sacred texts and rewrite them in order to correct their meaning in accordance with the views which the church had just sanctioned."

Prof. Eberhard Nestle: "Textkritik des griechischen Testaments"
Reply
#50
About Codex Bezae, by Dr. Vincent Taylor:

"It is characterized by a series of remarkable omissions in Luke, especially in chapters XXII and XXIV, and by many striking additions and variations in the Acts"

Dr. Vincent Taylor: "The Text of the New Testament"
Reply
#51
The problem of interpolations was wellknowed by Celsus, an Epicurean philosopher:

"Certain Christians, like men who are overcome by the fumes of wine and care not in the least what they say, alter the original text of the Gospels so that they admit of various and almost indefinite readings. And this, I suppose, they have done out of worldly policy, so that when we press an argument home, they might have the more scope for their pitiful evasions".

The so called "Church Father" Origen's reply:

"Besides, it is not at all fair to bring this charge against the Christian religion as a crime unworthy of its pretended purity; only those persons who were concerned in the fraud should, in equity, be held answerable for it"

Origen: "Contra Celsus"
Reply
#52
Wow. Now we're quoting Celsus as an authority on textual purity and doctrine? No wonder nobody takes you guys seriously.
Reply
#53
Dawid, I don't say that <!-- sSad --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/sad.gif" alt="Sad" title="Sad" /><!-- sSad -->
You misunderstand me.

"Origen pointed out by certain marks of his own, namely, the signs of asterisks and obeli, which words had been, so to speak, killed by other translators, and those which had been superfluously introduced. But he put in no single word of his own, nor did he make it appear that the certainty of our copies was in any point shaken; but those things which, as the actual words run, seemed wanting in plainness and clearness, he showed to be full of the mysteries of a spiritual meaning. What comfort then can the conduct of Origen give you in this matter, when your work is shown to be quite unlike his, and when all your labor is spent upon making one letter kill the next, whereas his endeavor, on the contrary, is to vindicate the Spirit which giveth life?" (Apology Of Rufinus).
Reply
#54
Rufinus about Jerome's Vulgate:

"Last of all I have shown that be has altered the sacred books which the Apostles had committed to the churches as the trustworthy deposit of the Holy Spirit, and that he who calls out about the audacity shewn in translating mere human works himself commits the greater crime of subverting the divine oracles."
(Apology Of Rufinus)

"The causes of these discrepancies I have more fully set forth in the Apology which Pamphilus expressly wrote for the works of Origen, to which I added a very short paper in which I shewed by proofs which appear to me quite clear, that his books have been in very many places tampered with by heretics and ill disposed men..."
(Apology Of Rufinus).
Reply
#55
So, don't wory, I don't fighting against the Bible, I fighting against the early interpolations.

Versions of the Scriptures, The New Unger's Bible Dictionary:

"Jerome had not been long in Rome (A.D. 383) when Damasus asked him to make a revision of the current Latin version of the New Testament with the help of the Greek original. 'There were,' he says, 'almost as many forms of text as copies.' The gospels had naturally suffered most. Jerome therefore applied himself to these first. But his aim was to revise the Old Latin and not to make a new version. Yet, although he had this limited objective, the various forms of corruption that had been introduced were, as he describes them, so numerous that the difference of the old and revised (Hieronymian) text is clear and striking throughout. Some of the changes Jerome introduced were made purely on linguistic grounds, but it is impossible to ascertain on what principle he proceeded in this respect. Others involved questions of interpretation. But the greater number consisted in the removal of the interpolations by which especially the synoptic gospels were disfigured".
Reply
#56
Church Historian Eusebius quotes the Church Father Dionysius (Hist. Eccl., Bk. 4. 23):

"When my fellow Christians invited me to write letters to them I did so. These the devil's apostles have filled with tares, taking away some things and adding others. For them the woe is reserved. Small wonder then if some have dared to tamper even with the word of the Lord Himself, when they have conspired to mutilate my own humble efforts".
Reply
#57
"Therefore they have laid their hands boldly upon the Divine Scriptures, alleging that they have corrected them. That I am not speaking falsely of them in this matter, whoever wishes may learn. For if any one will collect their respective copies, and compare them one with another, he will find that they differ greatly. Those of Asclepiades, for example, do not agree with those of Theodotus. And many of these can be obtained, because their disciples have assiduously written the corrections, as they call them, that is the corruptions, of each of them. Again, those of Hermophilus do not agree with these, and those of Apollonides are not consistent with themselves. For you can compare those prepared by them at an earlier date with those which they corrupted later, and you will find them widely different. But how daring this offense is, it is not likely that they themselves are ignorant. For either they do not believe that the Divine Scriptures were spoken by the Holy Spirit, and thus are unbelievers, or else they think themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and in that case what else are they than demoniacs? For they cannot deny the commission of the crime, since the copies have been written by their own hands. For they did not receive such Scriptures from their instructors, nor can they produce any copies from which they were transcribed".

According to St. Augustine:

"For those who are anxious to know the Scriptures ought in the first place to use their skill in the correction of the texts, so that the uncorrected ones should give way to the corrected" (De Doctrina Christ., II. 14).

Under the heading of Apostolic Fathers - Ignatius, the 1968 edition of the Britannica states: "In the 4th century (or perhaps later) his letters suffered interpolation, and six more were added by someone who found Ignatian theology hard to reconcile with the conclusions of the council of Nicaea (or of Chalcedon)".

OK, this is my last post. Thx for. All this quotations confirm that Luke 16:19-31 could be a II century interpolation, and I believe it is.

Bye!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)