- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2012,07:05) Hi Ed,
(1)So who is the man and (2)why are those manuscripts the best?
Hi Nick,1) Huh?
2) Original Manuscripts “are” better than translations.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ May 30 2012,18:41) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2012,07:05) Hi Ed,
(1)So who is the man and (2)why are those manuscripts the best?
Hi Nick,1) Huh?
2) Original Manuscripts “are” better than translations.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
but we do not have originalsQuote (terraricca @ May 30 2012,11:50) Quote (Ed J @ May 30 2012,18:41) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2012,07:05) Hi Ed,
(1)So who is the man and (2)why are those manuscripts the best?
Hi Nick,1) Huh?
2) Original Manuscripts “are” better than translations.God bless
Ed J
but we do not have originals
Hi Pierre,The purest copies of the originally penned manuscripts were translated into the “AKJV Bible”.
The Masoretic scribes had to count the number of words and letters in their scribed copies
to insure they were exact copies; so we can be assured their copies mirrored the original.The “Majority Texts” (written in Greek) that were being past around by the Church
was made into a master copy called the “Textus Receptus” (or the “received text”).Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
holycitybiblecode.orgQuote (Ed J @ May 30 2012,19:07) Quote (terraricca @ May 30 2012,11:50) Quote (Ed J @ May 30 2012,18:41) Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 30 2012,07:05) Hi Ed,
(1)So who is the man and (2)why are those manuscripts the best?
Hi Nick,1) Huh?
2) Original Manuscripts “are” better than translations.God bless
Ed J
but we do not have originals
Hi Pierre,The purest copies of the originally penned manuscripts were translated into the “AKJV Bible”.
The Masoretic scribes had to count the number of words and letters in their scribed copies
to insure they were exact copies; so we can be assured their copies mirrored the original.The “Majority Texts” (written in Greek) that were being past around by the Church
was made into a master copy called the “Textus Receptus” (or the “received text”).Your brother
in Christ, Jesus.
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
holycitybiblecode.org
edjare not the Masoretic manuscripts from around 8 0r 9 century,???
while the KJV dated the 17 century
Textus Receptus (Latin: “received text”) is the name subsequently given to the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament which constituted the translation base for the original German Luther Bible, the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version, and for most other Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western and Central Europe. The series originated with the first printed Greek New Testament to be published; a work undertaken in Basel by the Dutch Catholic scholar and humanist Desiderius Erasmus in 1516, on the basis of some six manuscripts, containing between them not quite the whole of the New Testament. The lacking text was back-translated from Vulgate. Although based mainly on late manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type, Erasmus's edition differed markedly from the classic form of that text.
Contents
[hide] 1 History of the Textus Receptus
2 Textual criticism and the Textus Receptus
3 Defense of the Textus Receptus
4 Relationship to the Byzantine text
5 See also
6 Notes
7 Further reading
8 External links[edit] History of the Textus Receptus
Main article: Novum Instrumentum omne
The Dutch humanist Erasmus had been working for years on two projects: a collation of Greek texts and a fresh Latin New Testament. In 1512, he began his work on a fresh Latin New Testament. He collected all the Vulgate manuscripts he could find to create a critical edition. Then he polished the Latin. He declared, “It is only fair that Paul should address the Romans in somewhat better Latin.”[1] In the earlier phases of the project, he never mentioned a Greek text: “My mind is so excited at the thought of emending Jerome’s text, with notes, that I seem to myself inspired by some god. I have already almost finished emending him by collating a large number of ancient manuscripts, and this I am doing at enormous personal expense.”[2]
Hi Pierre, what is your point?
The “Textus Receptus” was penned in 1550.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi ED,
yours
“The purest copies of the originally penned manuscripts were translated into the “AKJV Bible”.”Quote (Nick Hassan @ May 31 2012,06:05) Hi ED,
yours
“The purest copies of the originally penned manuscripts were translated into the “AKJV Bible”.”
Hi Nick,How is my point 'moot'?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Nick,
Moot generally means something is not applicable,
but this information “IS” applicable even if you disagree.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Nick,
That is why you need to define your use of the term 'an evil angel',
for us to have any meaningful discussion on preexistence as angels.God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orgHi Ed,
Why would we need to?
Your interest in promoting your opinion that men are all pre existent and that angels become men seems to have waned.Do you disagree with the dictionary meaning of MOOT?
Hi Nick,
I gave you the meaning of the use, I use, for the term moot; is that not good enough for you?
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
