|
Author
|
Topic: Which Version of the Bible is the Word of God?
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
Nighttrain writes: Josephus MAY have had access to the Temple texts captured by Titus at the fall of Jerusalem, but we don`t know which strand they followed. Couldn`t have been the Septuagint (LXX) since Orthodox (?) Jews probably wouldn`t allow Greek texts in their Holy Place. im not sure what 'strand' ...not that it matters because as Josephus testified the many sacred texts they had were all copied exactly and had no variations among them.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 58 by Nighttrain, posted 01-31-2009 7:24 PM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4286 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
Message 62 of 174 (497013)
02-01-2009 3:25 AM
|
Reply to: Message 61 by Peg
02-01-2009 1:06 AM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
im not sure what 'strand' ...not that it matters because as Josephus testified the many sacred texts they had were all copied exactly and had no variations among them.
Not so, Peg, because one of the tasks undertaken by the Academy at Jamnia c.100C.E., formed of leading scholars, was to determine which of the texts were genuine or not. A celebrated tale from the discussion is Rabbi Akiva`s fight to retain the Song of Songs. If you wander through the OT, you will see mention of a number of books that aren`t found in today`s OT: From here: Scriptures
The so-called lost books of the Bible are those documents that are mentioned in the Bible in such a way that it is evident they are considered authentic and valuable, but that are not found in the Bible today. Sometimes called missing scripture, they consist of at least the following: book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21: 14); book of Jasher (Josh. 10: 13; 2 Sam. 1: 18); book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11: 41); book of Samuel the seer (1 Chr. 29: 29); book of Gad the seer (1 Chr. 29: 29); book of Nathan the prophet (1 Chr. 29: 29; 2 Chr. 9: 29); prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr. 9: 29); visions of Iddo the seer (2 Chr. 9: 29; 2 Chr. 12: 15; 2 Chr. 13: 22); book of Shemaiah (2 Chr. 12: 15); book of Jehu (2 Chr. 20: 34); sayings of the seers (2 Chr. 33: 19); an epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, earlier than our present 1 Corinthians (1 Cor. 5: 9); possibly an earlier epistle to the Ephesians (Eph. 3: 3); an epistle to the Church at Laodicea (Col. 4: 16); and some prophecies of Enoch, known to Jude (Jude 1: 14). To these rather clear references to inspired writings other than our current Bible may be added another list that has allusions to writings that may or may not be contained within our present text, but may perhaps be known by a different title; for example, the book of the covenant (Ex. 24: 7), which may or may not be included in the current book of Exodus; the manner of the kingdom, written by Samuel (1 Sam. 10: 25); the rest of the acts of Uzziah written by Isaiah (2 Chr. 26: 22). Were they inspired or not? Were the scribes of the OT copies in fear of changing Scriptures? Didn`t seem to worry those copyists who did the 'Emendations of the Sopherim' and other changes. The Dead Sea Scrolls show that scribes of that era felt free to change texts to suit beliefs. Of course, tampering with the Bible didn`t stop there. Centuries of Christian copyists felt free to add, omit, conflate, alter and change book order to suit their 'inspiration'. Edited by Nighttrain, : Swapped 'm' for 'n'
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by Peg, posted 02-01-2009 1:06 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 63 by Peg, posted 02-01-2009 4:03 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
i believe these are the Apocryphal writings that were looked at and the council of Jamin left them out of the cannon because they were not considered inspired. They were added by the Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria who inserted such Apocryphal writings into the Greek Septuagint version and apparently viewed them as part of an enlarged canon of sacred writings But according to Josephus, those Apocryphal books were not part of the hebrew cannon in his day as is clearly seen by his words quote:
"we have but only twenty-two books, which contain the records of all the past times; which are justly believed to be divine; and of them five belong to Moses, which contain his laws and the traditions of the origin of mankind till his death.
This is likely the same reason why the Jewish Council of Jamnia specifically excluded all such writings from the Hebrew canon. I know of additional christian books that have also been found, but are not considered to be authentic such as The Gospel of St Thomas. Its due to the work of the ancient scholars who made a study of such materials and came to the conclusions they did about them. Because of this I believe that what we have today is the inspired word of God and not a heap of bogus writings which could have easily had crept in had it not been for the work of these men. Edited by Peg, : No reason given. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 62 by Nighttrain, posted 02-01-2009 3:25 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4286 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
|
Message 64 of 174 (497022)
02-01-2009 6:07 AM
|
Reply to: Message 63 by Peg
02-01-2009 4:03 AM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
i believe these are the Apocryphal writings that were looked at and the council of Jamin left them out of the cannon because they were not considered inspired. They were added by the Greek-speaking Jews of Alexandria who inserted such Apocryphal writings into the Greek Septuagint version and apparently viewed them as part of an enlarged canon of sacred writings Nice bit of fancy footwork, Peg, BUT
The king gave the translators instructions designed to guarantee that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its beliefs about an ordained clergy. The translation was by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England. In common with most other translations of the period, the New Testament was translated from the Textus Receptus (Received Text) series of the Greek texts. The Old Testament was translated from the Masoretic Hebrew text, while the Apocrypha were translated from the Greek Septuagint (LXX), except for 2 Esdras, which was translated from the Latin Vulgate. King James Version - Wikipedia Now the KJV, and and I expect most modern Bibles, used the Masoretic HEBREW text, and they include mention of these supposedly apocryphal books. Why would they refer to uninspired books?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 63 by Peg, posted 02-01-2009 4:03 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 65 by Peg, posted 02-01-2009 9:47 PM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
Nighttrain writes: Now the KJV, and and I expect most modern Bibles, used the Masoretic HEBREW text, and they include mention of these supposedly apocryphal books. Why would they refer to uninspired books? we can 'thank' the Roman Catholic Church for that. They added these books to the cannon at the Council of Trent in 1546. Catholic writers refer to these books as deuterocanonical, meaning “of the second (or later) canon,” as distinguished from protocanonical. its not hard to identify area's where the RC church have things wrong, and this is one of them. But most scholars and translators are aware of this and so dont include the books in their translations... i have never seen a modern bible with an apocryphal book as part of the cannon. We could probably ask ICANT to clarify this, as he uses over 40 modern translations. My guess is that if any do have these apocryphal books in their bible, they would be set apart from the canonized scriptures and titled as non cannon books. Edited by Peg, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 64 by Nighttrain, posted 02-01-2009 6:07 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4286 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
|
Message 66 of 174 (497243)
02-02-2009 9:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 65 by Peg
02-01-2009 9:47 PM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
we can 'thank' the Roman Catholic Church for that. They added these books to the cannon at the Council of Trent in 1546. Catholic writers refer to these books as deuterocanonical, meaning “of the second (or later) canon,” as distinguished from protocanonical.
Are you saying a billion Catholics are wrong? :-)
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 65 by Peg, posted 02-01-2009 9:47 PM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 67 by Peg, posted 02-04-2009 4:12 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
i would go so far as to say that if any christian believed the apocryphal books were inspired, they would be wrong
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 66 by Nighttrain, posted 02-02-2009 9:40 PM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4286 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
|
Message 68 of 174 (497417)
02-04-2009 5:14 AM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by Peg
02-04-2009 4:12 AM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
would go so far as to say that if any christian believed the apocryphal books were inspired, they would be wrong
Then why would 'inspired' writers of the Bible mention them?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by Peg, posted 02-04-2009 4:12 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 71 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 3:51 AM | | Nighttrain has replied | | | Message 74 by Peg, posted 02-07-2009 7:17 AM | | Nighttrain has not replied |
|
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4482 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2007
|
|
|
Message 69 of 174 (497451)
02-04-2009 7:26 AM
|
Reply to: Message 67 by Peg
02-04-2009 4:12 AM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
i would go so far as to say that if any christian believed the apocryphal books were inspired, they would be wrong Where is the evidence that any of the Biblical books are inspired and why? Why is Esther inspired but Judith isn't? Why is Daniel inspired but Sirach isn't? Why is Jonah inspired but Tobit isn't? Why is 1 & 2 Kings inspired but 1 & 2 Machabees isn't?
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 67 by Peg, posted 02-04-2009 4:12 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 70 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 3:50 AM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
The evidence is in that the Hebrew canon was complete by the fifth centuryB.C.E. the Jews didnt include the books in the cannon as can be seen in the words of Josephus and so rightly do not form part of it today. Also, none of the Christian Bible writers quoted from these books. Origen made a distinction between these writings and those of the true canon. A number of catalogs were made by scholars such as Gregory of Nazianzus, Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Amphilocius in the 4th century CE and either ignored these additional writings or placed them in a secondary class Jerome is another one who took a stand against such Apocryphal books and he is considered to be the foremost of the ancient scholars Unlike the OT and NT they dont contain prophecies. They often contradict the canonical books and they even contradict themselves. They have a distinct pagan Greek influence. Two of the writers even imply that they were not inspired.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 69 by bluescat48, posted 02-04-2009 7:26 AM | | bluescat48 has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
Nighttrain writes: Then why would 'inspired' writers of the Bible mention them? who mentions them?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 68 by Nighttrain, posted 02-04-2009 5:14 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4286 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
|
Message 72 of 174 (498014)
02-07-2009 6:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 71 by Peg
02-06-2009 3:51 AM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
Nighttrain writes: Then why would 'inspired' writers of the Bible mention them? who mentions them?
I`ve already listed the external books in post 62. My question still is -why would writers working under the 'inspiration' of God need to quote uninspired writers?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 71 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 3:51 AM | | Peg has not replied |
|
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 4286 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: 06-08-2004
|
|
|
Message 73 of 174 (498015)
02-07-2009 6:28 AM
|
Reply to: Message 70 by Peg
02-06-2009 3:50 AM
|
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
The evidence is in that the Hebrew canon was complete by the fifth century B.C.E. And that evidence is?
Also, none of the Christian Bible writers quoted from these books. I think you will find both Jewish and Christian writers quote from the Book of Enoch and Jubilees.
Origen made a distinction between these writings and those of the true canon
Well, Origen certainly didn`t know which was the real OT. That`s why he compiled the Hexapla--six versions.
Jerome is another one who took a stand against such Apocryphal books and he is considered to be the foremost of the ancient scholars
Jerome worked with 'the most corrupt Latin versions' he`d found--The Vetus Latina, and a 'good' greek NT, whatever that means. Oddly, though he had studied under the head of the Byzantine Church 'founded' by Constantine, he never referenced those fabulously-expensive fifty Bibles compiled by Eusebius. Wonder what happened to them? Edited by Nighttrain, : nasty spell error
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 70 by Peg, posted 02-06-2009 3:50 AM | | Peg has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 75 by Peg, posted 02-07-2009 8:04 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
Nighttrain writes: Then why would 'inspired' writers of the Bible mention them? i've done a little more research on that and its reasonable to accept that the Isrealites, like other nations, had many writings by many people But they did not all write with the same purpose. Inspired books which were cannonized, were books where the writer was directed to write...prophets for example were giving the people messages from God as were other writers. But some isrealites wrote simple accounts of an event for reportings sake. They were not all inspired writings though, God did not direct them or give them special directives to do so the same way he did with his prophets. Obviously some of the uninspired writings were even source material for inspired writers. For example Genesis 5:1 says, 'This is the book of Adams history' Its very likely that this book was written by Adam himself and Moses may have used this book to collate some of the pre flood Genesis account including Adams geneology. Some appear to be journals compiled from state records. Some such as the Book of Jashar for instance, mentioned at 2Sam1:18, sets forth a poem called “The Bow,” It's believed that the book may have been a collection of poems, songs, and other writings. Not necessarily inspired, but still of historical value nonetheless.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 68 by Nighttrain, posted 02-04-2009 5:14 AM | | Nighttrain has not replied |
|
Peg
Member (Idle past 5222 days) Posts: 2703 From: melbourne, australia Joined: 11-22-2008
|
Re: gimme those oldtime MS
there are a few lines of evidence Josephus wrote “From Artaxerxes to our own time the complete history has been written..." Josephus writings names all the books and the orders of the OT. He mentions that the complete history was written from Artaxerxes time to the present, this Persian King was ruling in 455 BCE.
Nighttrain writes: I think you will find both Jewish and Christian writers quote from the Book of Enoch and Jubilees. do you have some verse's so i can look into it???
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 73 by Nighttrain, posted 02-07-2009 6:28 AM | | Nighttrain has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2
