What I am saying is, that the opinions and suggestions of some "scholars" on textual readings are taken into consideration, and often their conclusions are accepted. Take, for example Dr G Vance Smith who was on the Committee of the Revised Version of 1881-1885, it was his strong objection to the reading of "God" in 1 Timothy 3:16, that won the day. He was a Unitarian! Likwise the USB Textual Commentary on the New Testament, often quotes/refers to Dr Ezra Abbott, when examining the reading of a text. He too was a Unitarian! Who we consult or quote is of importance to the bearing of the Truth, and to appeal to a Unitarian scholar to determine a reading for a text on the Deity of Jesus Christ, in my opinion is foolish indeed!
The Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, etc
Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by icthus, Mar 18, 2005.
Page 5 of 5
-
-
Here is a quote from the note on 1 John 5:7, as found in the USB Greek Commentary of the New Testament, which is part of the textual evidence used by the USB text:
"For the story of how the spurious words came to be included in the Textus Receptus, see any critical commentary on 1 John, or Metzger, The Text of the New Testament, pp. 101 f.; cf. also Ezra Abbot, "I. John v. 7 and Luther’s German Bible," in The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays (Boston, 1888), pp. 458–463."
Notice Ezra Abbot's name! Why the need to quote from a Unitarian on the Holy Trinity? -
:rolleyes:
Poisoning the Well -
-
Ichtus (to quote yourself)
"to suppose that because Burgon and Scrivener were Anglicans, and not "reformed", that this in any way demeans their judgement as scholars, is complete nonsense!""
"I would not consult the likes of Barth or Bultman, even though they wrote on this subject. Likewise, it is not worth looking at "evidence" that is against what Scripture teaches, like most of the Dead Sea Scrolls "
Now here is evidence of a double standard.
Time to explain yourself ichtus. -
Secondly, do you like to arge for the sake of it? If someone speaks the truth, then how can I ignore it? But, you again fail to understand, that, for example, Ezra Abbott wrote AGAINST 1 John 5:7, a work that I have actually seen, where he further quotes other Unitarian scholars to try to disprove the reading! Again, please get your facts right -
I thought this thread was supposed to be about Aleph & B. Can't anyone stay on topic here?
Yours,
Bluefalcon -
Page 5 of 5