Rob_Roy
|
Augoeideian,
There are a few problems with your approach.
One, you are repeating something that falls within a field of study that happens to be well develped with many experts, many who are non-believers, who have established themselves as authorities on the subject of texual criticism. Yet you fail to give credit to any of them, if indeed you are quoting even one of them. Neither have you established your credibility as a knowledgable layperson in this area in lieu of an expert. So why should anyone take what you wrote seriously? It would be different if you were stating YOUR OWN opinions and saying as much. But you put forth "facts" without substantiation, either by someone credible or by self-evident means.
Which translation of the bible did you find these supposed 'mistranslations'? The King James Version, The New King James Version, The Jerusalem Bible, The New Jerusalem Bible, The New Amercan Standard Bible, Josepth Smith, Jr's (The Mormon Prophet) translation, The Living Bible, The New Revised Standard Edition, The Vulgate, The Good News Bible, and on and on and on...?
A few questions you might want to ask:
Is your translation more literal (New Amercian Standard), or does it tend to paraphrase (The Good News Bible)?
Which manuscipt(s) was your translation taken from? Do you have any idea how many manuscripts there are and all the thousands of differences between them? There are more differences between them than there are words in the NT. Were you aware of this? So how can you be sure what you are quoting isn't full of translation or transcription errors, never mind deliberate tampering for apologetic purposes?
Are you aware there is no such thing as the Roman Catholic Church? You won't find a single official document by the Catholic Church that refers to the Roman Catholic Church. Go ahead. Look. But everyone knows there is a Roman Catholic Church, everyone except the Vatican, that is. I point this out because even though something may be common knowledge, it doesn't mean what is *known* by everyone is true. How much more careful do we need to be about supposed truths from a single source that is less than credible?
Why did you blow off Beserk? You say you respect his comments, after he tells you he can read Christian scripture in the original languages, but you failed to take him up on that. Why?
There is a brand new book out. It's called "Misquoting Jesus." It's written by a guy who chairs the department of religious studies at a top American university. It an easy read and part of the field of study I mentioned above. I think you will find it interesting. If you cannot afford it, send me a PM and I'll send you a copy. In it you will learn of actual mistranslations and additions to the NT from a more credible source, and who knows, maybe you will be able to make posts in the future with more confidence and credibility, with points that have impact and believability. This book, btw, is the most recent in a long and very interesting line of books on the subject going back many years.
Rob
|