1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Does the Greek Text Matter?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by John of Japan, Jul 11, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Top Posters
Page 2 of 11
  1. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    My point was, as I said, the doctrine "of the particular passage in question." Maybe it would make more sense if I used the word "exegesis" rather than "doctrine," but of course the Greek word for "doctrine" simply means "teaching."
     
    #21 John of Japan, Jul 13, 2015
  2. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Here are some stats as promised in the OP. (These stats are from my correspondence with a noted textual critic, who shall remain anonymous. I mean, what true scholar wants to be prominent on the BB? :laugh:)

    Omitting problems of spelling, orthography, word order or synonyms being substituted, about 98% of the text of both Greek texts is solid.

    In the crucial 2%, both texts cannot be correct. At that point, we cannot say that "we have the exact Word of God." Therefore, contra Yeshua's words quoted in the OP, textual criticism and which text we use becomes very important.
     
    #22 John of Japan, Jul 13, 2015
  3. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The expanded 11:6 of the KJV makes no doctrinal change vs the shorter one"But if it is by grace, it is no longer on basis of works, otherwise Grace is no longer Grace.". It looks like a scribe(s) attempted to clarify or balance the statement. Again I see no difference of doctrine being formed here.
     
    #23 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
  4. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
     
    #24 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
  5. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
     
    #25 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
  6. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Why do you consider 2% out of 100% crucial? Why do you consider it very important?
     
    #26 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
  7. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I'm simply using the KJV because it is handy. I am actually checking the NA and Byz textform Greek texts for the differences.

    It makes a difference in how you teach and exegete the text. The omitted phrase is a strong argument for Paul's point.

    As for a scribe adding the change, that is pure speculation, with no proof. The Byzantine-priority method does not use speculative emendation.

    The textual commentary of Metzger says, "There appears to be no reason why, if the words were original, they should have been deleted" (p. 464). This ignores the very real possibility of accidental omission.
     
    #27 John of Japan, Jul 13, 2015
  8. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, I miss understood then. When you said "doctrine", terms such as Trinity, Baptism, Christology, eschatology come to mind.
     
    #28 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
  9. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    And your reasoning is based on what criteria?

    You don't even entertain the idea that the exemplars were being faithfully followed?
    By "our" you mean the Byz. tradition.
    How about pietistic expansion and harmonization with sister texts? You think that the smoothness of the Byz. manuscripts isn't due to a massaging of the message?
     
    #29 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
  10. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Accidental omission is highly improbable. Intentional omission is unthinkable.
     
    #30 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
  11. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sorry, such unsupported statements are not textual criticism. You have to give reasons.
     
    #31 John of Japan, Jul 13, 2015
  12. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The expansion of "otherwise work is no more work" does not seem to work like "Grace is no longer Grace". I don't see how this strengthens Paul's writings.

    Grace would turn into a wage and not a gift, if we worked for it. To flip this and say "work is no longer work" makes no sense. It doesn't seem to fit.
     
    #32 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
  13. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I made the point in my OP on this thread that whichever text a church uses its doctrine will remain the same.
     
    #33 John of Japan, Jul 13, 2015
  14. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,356
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The first and second parts of the verse look like Hebrew parallels to me, in which case it makes perfect sense. Regardless, textual criticism doesn't work well by deciding what "seems to fit" and what does not. That is conjectural emendation, which is where the eclectic method often fails.
     
    #34 John of Japan, Jul 13, 2015
  15. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Sorry JoJ, that is an unsupported charge.

    It is true that the Byz. text-platform has the tendency to add though.
     
    #35 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
  16. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I wasn't addressing the greek as I was focused more on the "strength " the additional text offers. Per the statement below. I don't find it strengthens the argument.

    As far as the last statement. The reverse can be said. To claim the Alexandrian text omits original text is "pure speculation and without proof".
     
    #36 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 13, 2015
  17. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Methinks JoJ is employing a classic double standard.
     
    #37 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
  18. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Fair enough

    You posted your "list" on a reply I sent to Van, stating that there will not be a list of the TR and Nestle-Aland teaching different doctrines. I quickly assumed your reply to that was supporting different "doctrines" taught, not different exegesis. My fault for not remembering back to OP.
     
    #38 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
  19. McCree79

    McCree79 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    2,232
    Likes Received:
    305
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Statement works both ways.....like so many things in TR vs Nestle-Aland debates.
     
    #39 McCree79, Jul 13, 2015
  20. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You mean:"Just as it also does in TR vs. N-A debates."

    TR proponents aren't in the exact category as Byz. priority advocates.
     
    #40 Rippon, Jul 13, 2015
Page 2 of 11
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...