cure-real
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 104

Thread: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

  1. #46
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    5,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pe****ta

    While I was looking at the history of your text, I find here: http://www.pe****ta.org/initial/pe****ta.html that is claims that this document is from 6th or 7th century. That is not what you are claiming.

    I didn't stop there. I also found:

    http://www.ntcanon.org/Pe****ta.shtml



    I guess this articles are evidence that the Per****ta is newer than these other manuscripts. I think I will stick with the older ones.

    All of the other documents that are written AFTER the older manuscripts do not constitute authority to accept the added ending of the book of Mark.
    I think you missed the point....the source documents in Syriac are from the 2nd century. This predates the Vaticanus or the Siniaticus. In fact,there are many other verses that those two manuscripts omit that have been shown to be valid. The FACT is that the ECF's quoted Mark 9-16 on several occasions.(16) Therefor we know it belongs. You are free to stick to whaterver opinion you want,even after it has shown to be wrong,however,it doesn't make it true.

    Blessings

    and Popcorn


    "You can make the scriptures say whatever you want if you torture them long enough"

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by shepherdsword View Post
    I think you missed the point....the source documents in Syriac are from the 2nd century. This predates the Vaticanus or the Siniaticus. In fact,there are many other verses that those two manuscripts omit that have been shown to be valid. The FACT is that the ECF's quoted Mark 9-16 on several occasions.(16) Therefor we know it belongs. You are free to stick to whaterver opinion you want,even after it has shown to be wrong,however,it doesn't make it true.
    I guess you think the book of Mark was written after the original manuscripts? You think that the long ending to the book of Mark was not added to prior to your Syriac Vulgate? Oh, I get is, you think that someone took that ending off of the book of Mark when the other manuscripts were copied.

    Yes, the ECF - some of them, like the ones living in and around Rome, would quote that long ending. They are the ones who had the long ending. The others did not, so you won't find them quoting it.

    Please don't attempt to tell me that I am wrong and that I am free to be. Historical documents show that your dates are not in evidence, so it is entirely possible that you are wrong.

    However, since you gave me permission to go along with all the biblical historians that say that you are wrong, I'll go with them. Thank you.
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  3. #48
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    5,851
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    I guess you think the book of Mark was written after the original manuscripts? You think that the long ending to the book of Mark was not added to prior to your Syriac Vulgate? Oh, I get is, you think that someone took that ending off of the book of Mark when the other manuscripts were copied.

    Yes, the ECF - some of them, like the ones living in and around Rome, would quote that long ending. They are the ones who had the long ending. The others did not, so you won't find them quoting it.

    Please don't attempt to tell me that I am wrong and that I am free to be. Historical documents show that your dates are not in evidence, so it is entirely possible that you are wrong.

    However, since you gave me permission to go along with all the biblical historians that say that you are wrong, I'll go with them. Thank you.
    Since the ECF quotations predate any know manuscript by at 100 years they are solid evidence for verses 9-16 as original. When you couple that fact with their being in the Per****ta and the vast majority of Greek manuscripts the evidence is overwhelming.

    Blessings

    and Popcorn


    "You can make the scriptures say whatever you want if you torture them long enough"

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by shepherdsword View Post
    Since the ECF quotations predate any know manuscript by at 100 years they are solid evidence for verses 9-16 as original. When you couple that fact with their being in the Per****ta and the vast majority of Greek manuscripts the evidence is overwhelming.
    The references that I found do say the Vulgate to which you refer is from 300 years after the oldest known manuscript, I cannot accept your logic. Also, if that ending was in the original book, it would also be in those other manuscripts. That is what textual criticism is all about. Therefore, it is not "overwhelming" to me.
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  5. #50

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    The references that I found do say the Vulgate to which you refer is from 300 years after the oldest known manuscript, I cannot accept your logic. Also, if that ending was in the original book, it would also be in those other manuscripts. That is what textual criticism is all about. Therefore, it is not "overwhelming" to me.
    Well, Boo, the answer is simple. Devise some forensic test that you can perform upon those verses that will render a clear conclusion on whether or not they are inspired by God. You are forgetting that the inclusion of those verses is not based upon whether they are written by Mark or not, but on whether they are inspired of God or not.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by pax View Post
    Well, Boo, the answer is simple. Devise some forensic test that you can perform upon those verses that will render a clear conclusion on whether or not they are inspired by God. You are forgetting that the inclusion of those verses is not based upon whether they are written by Mark or not, but on whether they are inspired of God or not.
    I don't think that is true. Anyone can claim that any notes added by a scribe because "it seemed right" is not clearly inspired by God. And, since some of those verses contradict what Jesus taught, I'd say that they could not have been.

    I have some other references that serve to prove their invalidity, but they are long and can seem dry to many. The simple fact is that textual criticism denies their originality, and their content denies their Divine Inspiration.
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  7. #52

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    I don't think that is true. Anyone can claim that any notes added by a scribe because "it seemed right" is not clearly inspired by God. And, since some of those verses contradict what Jesus taught, I'd say that they could not have been.

    I have some other references that serve to prove their invalidity, but they are long and can seem dry to many. The simple fact is that textual criticism denies their originality, and their content denies their Divine Inspiration.
    Well, this was the inevitable conclusion of Luther cutting seven books and several chapters from the Holy Scriptures. You have set your feet on the road to implosion. Why not cut Deutero-Isaiah while you are at it? Why hang on to the Daniel, when any textual critic will tell you it is obvious Daniel was written hundreds of years after the captivity? Why hang on to John when any textual critic will tell you that John was not written by John but by his disciples years after John's death. If you are going to let textual critics tell you what is inspired, pretty soon you will have a Bible that can be written on one small piece of paper in large type, and even most of that will be in doubt.

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    You must be getting irritated, my brother. You are now jumping to conclusions and making statements are that are not valid.

    "Any textual critic" does not say those things. There are many bibles out there written by teams of translators (last count showed the over 500 of them have been involved since 1607, and there are probably more) that have footnotes about the long ending of Mark and the adulteress being dragged before Jesus. There are not footnotes about the book of Daniel not being valid, nor are there any remarks that tell us that the Book of John was not written by John.

    Besides, I have found nothing in those books that run counter to what the rest of the Bible teaches either.

    If you are willing to accept any book as valid, then you have more than 66 books in your bible, right?
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  9. #54

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    You must be getting irritated, my brother. You are now jumping to conclusions and making statements are that are not valid.

    "Any textual critic" does not say those things. There are many bibles out there written by teams of translators (last count showed the over 500 of them have been involved since 1607, and there are probably more) that have footnotes about the long ending of Mark and the adulteress being dragged before Jesus. There are not footnotes about the book of Daniel not being valid, nor are there any remarks that tell us that the Book of John was not written by John.

    Besides, I have found nothing in those books that run counter to what the rest of the Bible teaches either.

    If you are willing to accept any book as valid, then you have more than 66 books in your bible, right?
    Yes, I am getting irritated at a person who otherwise demonstrates good sense except here. Tell me, did the Bible come into being in 1607? Were there no other translations prior to 1607? You are ignoring or trying to erase all of Christian history prior to that time. Saints Cyril and Methodius (9th century) invented the Ukrainian alphabet so they could translate the Scriptures for their new converts. The Canon of Scripture was established in the late 4th/early 5th centuries. There was no Canon prior to that to which anyone can appeal. Luther removed seven books and several chapters from the Holy Scriptures. If you want to follow Luther, do so, but do not tell me that somehow his canon has more authority over the Canon used by all Christians for the almost 1200 years before Luther, and still used by the vast majority of Christians after Luther. Who is Luther that I should listen to him?

    And let us get one other thing perfectly clear: I do not use a Canon of Scripture to which books have been added. You use a Canon of Scripture of which books have been subtracted. I use the full Canon of Scripture that God delivered to His Church. You use a truncated version of that Canon. All of the Bibles that pre-date Luther -- and there are many -- contain the entire and full Canon. All of them. No exceptions. Now, what does the Bible say about subtracting from the Scriptures?

  10. #55
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Well, perhaps the fact that nobody had ever determined which books were written by those who were either disciples of Jesus or their companions before, we had too many books and they taught conflicting theology. The story of that determination is interesting, but I just believe that you won't approve. I don't think you and I disagree about much, but those few issues are certainly not worth fighting over.
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  11. #56

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    Well, perhaps the fact that nobody had ever determined which books were written by those who were either disciples of Jesus or their companions before, we had too many books and they taught conflicting theology. The story of that determination is interesting, but I just believe that you won't approve. I don't think you and I disagree about much, but those few issues are certainly not worth fighting over.
    Too many books? Sez who? Conflicting theology with what? If you do not take your theology from the entire corpus of Holy Scripture, from where do you take your theology? Do you have a Sacred Tradition against which you can compare the Sacred Texts? No. Therefore, if the corpus of Scripture from which you take your theology is truncated, then your theology is truncated as well. That much is as self-evident as your own self-awareness.

    The Canon was determined around 380 by Augustine of Hippo, and finalized in 405 by Pope Damasus, and no other Canon was used until Martin Luther. If you want to believe that God allowed His Church to have "too many books" and "conflicting theology" for 1200 years until Luther came along, that is between you and God. I personally find such an idea not only preposterous, but alien to everything God has revealed about Himself.

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    I am not at home right now, so I am not prepared to address your post. However, for my information, what books are in your bible?
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  13. #58

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    I am not at home right now, so I am not prepared to address your post. However, for my information, what books are in your bible?
    Old Testament »

    Genesis
    Exodus
    Leviticus
    Numbers
    Deuteronomy
    Joshua
    Judges
    Ruth
    1 Samuel
    2 Samuel
    1 Kings
    2 Kings
    1 Chronicles
    2 Chronicles
    Ezra
    Nehemiah
    Tobit
    Judith
    Esther
    1 Maccabees
    2 Maccabees
    Job
    Psalms
    The Proverbs
    Ecclesiastes
    The Song of Songs
    Wisdom
    Ecclesiasticus / Sirach
    Isaiah
    Jeremiah
    Lamentations
    Baruch
    Ezekiel
    Daniel
    Hosea
    Joel
    Amos
    Obadiah
    Jonah
    Micah
    Nahum
    Habakkuk
    Zephaniah
    Haggai
    Zechariah
    Malachi


    New Testament »

    Matthew
    Mark
    Luke
    John
    Acts of Apostles
    Romans
    1 Corinthians
    2 Corinthians
    Galatians
    Ephesians
    Philippians
    Colossians
    1 Thessalonians
    2 Thessalonians
    1 Timothy
    2 Timothy
    Titus
    Philemon
    Hebrews
    James
    1 Peter
    2 Peter
    1 John
    2 John
    3 John
    Jude
    Revelation

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Florida panhandle
    Posts
    4,076

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    I see. So you accept the Apocrypha as inspired writing.

    Nothing more for me to say. I disagree.

    So have a great many theologians - long before Martin Luther, by the way.
    Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
    George Orwell




  15. #60

    Re: “Even the Devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.”

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo View Post
    I see. So you accept the Apocrypha as inspired writing.

    Nothing more for me to say. I disagree.

    So have a great many theologians - long before Martin Luther, by the way.
    Please name them. I have never heard of them.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 166
    Last Post: Sep 25th 2009, 02:33 AM
  2. The devil won't win
    By Christian_lady in forum Praise
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Jun 19th 2009, 01:40 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •