Posts by TheWonderofYou

49

What kind of errors in the Bible?

by TheWonderofYou in

the new testament specialist daniel wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the new testament, this number is very misleading.

most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like.

a side by side comparison between the two main text families (the majority text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18].

TheWonderofYou

Did he try to make the dogs bolloks citation to show the prophecy-fullfillment but did he fail to

understand that "even on a colt, the foal of a donkey'" was only a poetic paralellism?

49

What kind of errors in the Bible?

by TheWonderofYou in

the new testament specialist daniel wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the new testament, this number is very misleading.

most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like.

a side by side comparison between the two main text families (the majority text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18].

Was Matthew's writer a splendid rethoric who used the hebrew scripture and its greek version the septuagint LXX in the most wonderful way - rabbinic like - or was he a scharlatan who misquoted Gods word to make the impression that Christ is the awaited jewish messiah? He shall be innocent until proven guilty anyway. He is our best gospel writer still about the kingdom. I am currently reading all google books previews where i can find something about two donkeys and Jesus entry. Already found some interesting books about grammar and rethoric in Matthew, there are many sientific books about that matter. You need to compare and go into detail. But interesting

The important site Zechariah 9,9

"Rejoice greatly, o daughter of Zion! Shout in triumph o daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your king is coming to you, he is just and endowed with salvation, humble and mounted on donkey, even on a colt, the foal of a donkey"

which is speculated that Matthew mistranslated or only copied from a unknow version of the greek bible translation called septuagint

"Say to daugther Zion, see your king comes to you, gentle and riding on a donkey, and on a colt, the foal of a donkey" Matthew 21,5.

Is not merely a citation of Matthew of a greek translation of Zecharia but even more interesting. Its not merely a misunderstood copying. Some researchers say that he tried to cite the hebrew spricture in a special kind, that is a even a better translation of the hebrew origian than the Septuagint made. Did h try to make the dogs bolloks citation to show the prophecy-fullfillment with the example ot this one site. And did he fail?

49

What kind of errors in the Bible?

by TheWonderofYou in

the new testament specialist daniel wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the new testament, this number is very misleading.

most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like.

a side by side comparison between the two main text families (the majority text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18].

TheWonderofYou

Is gospel Matthew really an Eyewitness report or is it not more a early rabbinic rethoric, Matthew was written for a audience in Syria, perhaps Damascus, as we hear from the bibel exegets, where a mixed community of many jewish-christians and many jews lived togehter, the daily problem was to preach the christian gospel to the jews, the aim of the gospel matthew was to explain a Jew with all best jewish rethoric methods that fulfills all dreams of sophistacted Jew or rabbi at this time. Written for a apostolic school e.c.

Some believe Matthew is an eyewitness report? We could think, okay, Matthew read in Mark and Luke about one donkey,ojojoj they forgot the second and added I will add it. And now everything is clear. I write about two because I have the septuagint version with two monkeys, after all here stand "and", although I know that this was a paralelis. Doens not mind me, i create a wonderful story about two donkeys and the citation has to fit my idea.

But his usage of the Septuagint citation and interpreting in a some creative crazy way and directing it to a such sophisticated jewish-christian audience,he should have known that a misinterpretation of the scripture would bring resistance, incomprehenions under the jewish audience. But the gospel of Matthew became the most prominent. Was the jewish audience completely unaware of the hebrew bible text? Where they uneducated? Could they be easily be mislead of the christian sect leaders? Could they made believe by these constructions that Jesus fulfills every prophesy and would they never notice his errorr? Was it Matthews big mistake? Did it destroy his least fame and scientific reputation?

found that https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.php?id=25755

I notice that the different verions 1 donkey- 2 donkey is a good example of in which manner the biblical canon developed. The different stories in the gospels, here Mat, Lk, and Mk have not been harmonized. Never. Would not be a harmonisation important to avoid misunderstandings of the readers? Today perhaps yes. But Jesus never said to anyone that they should write gospels for the audience! He did not say that they will go around with bibels to preach and they shall translate it in all languages. It was because of the love for stories that the church wrote down the storeis about Jesus. But it was not necessary at all to read the stuff it became a tradition. The church decided to read some scriptures in the assemblies, but it was not necessary for every christian to study the bible - say the complicated words of the relevation or the letters of paul - to buy or make a copy of parchments or papyry or to open translation offices.

Moreover the bible was only understandable in the antic asian world with knowledge of their customs, why should the whole world read that book at all? The western church had many problems to understand it. - the jewish concepts, because of the sepration between jews and christians. Because the holy spirit found it would be not bad to use it as study material, because god decided lately that this was his only possibility to speak to man? Doesnt God have other possibities than written letters? Doesnt God speak to hearts (as is written in the Bible) when it is silent and in moments when no crazy and busy writing committees are around, which could destroy the silence ? Did Jesus not 40 days keep silent in the desert to contact God before accomplishing his will and not reading in parchments?

Later more about the citation....

49

What kind of errors in the Bible?

by TheWonderofYou in

the new testament specialist daniel wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the new testament, this number is very misleading.

most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like.

a side by side comparison between the two main text families (the majority text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18].

TheWonderofYou

"You have to understand that the canon was not the result of a series of contests involving church politics. The canon is rather the separation that came about because of the intuitive insight of Christian believers. They could hear the voice of the Good Shepherd in the gospel of John; they could hear it only in a muffled and distorted way in the Gospel of Thomas, mixed in with a lot of other things. "When the pronouncement was made about the canon, it merely ratified what the general sensitivity of the church had already determined. You see, the canon is a list of authoritative books more than it is an authoritative list of books. These documents didn't derive their authority from being selected; each one was authoritative before anyone gathered them together. The early church merely listened and sensed that these were authoritative accounts."

Found that in the interview with Bruce Metzger

49

What kind of errors in the Bible?

by TheWonderofYou in

the new testament specialist daniel wallace notes that although there are about 300,000 individual variations of the text of the new testament, this number is very misleading.

most of the differences are completely inconsequential--spelling errors, inverted phrases and the like.

a side by side comparison between the two main text families (the majority text and the modern critical text) shows agreement a full 98% of the time.[18].

TheWonderofYou

Thank you for so many comments. I will have to check thoroughly.

My comment refers to the New Testament, the christian scriptures,

The orginal writings are not conserved because they were written on papyri and parchment.

The text is not errorless but anyhow the church treated the gospels and letters as holy.

The scriptures played always an important role in the church and were translate into many languages already early.

The gospel writers were very creative writers to convince some jews to become christians, so they changed the meaning of words that were used in Hebrew bible and gave them a new meaning in the christian context.

E.g. the man of sorrows in Jesaja 53 an hundreds of other examples.

The NT is thus a document of the church's faith. But not everything that is important for the faith is written down in the bible.

The bible canon was not a rewriting of older manuscripts at the church council,

http://www.consider.org/library/text.htm

Permanet problems that bible translators have to face:

http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/article_trans_metzger3.html

Canon, Textual Criticism and Copies of copies, the wealth of evidence, Interview with Bruce Metzger:

http://ho-logos.blogspot.co.at/2009/02/canon-textual-criticism-and-more-with.html

754

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

by The Quiet One in

..specifically, the suffering of animals.

you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.

i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.

TheWonderofYou

cofty: The answer of the catolic church is according to pope john paul II., Yes, God is in a certain wise powerless and he stands on the side of the suffering ones like the biblical "man of sorrows". I ask for patience because english is not my motherlangue.

Furthter its seems to be that the whole creation - and men are part of creation expecially if we think of the natural laws that lead to human life, and the natural laws that regulate our life and our pain - has the same fate as the other creation living and non living, and as animals.

Sparrows: Jesus said that God knows about the fate of the sparrows not because he was anaware of their actual lifesituation, but to show that God stands on our side, that God is our only hope for salvation, and in the jewish-christian thinking context, that fate of mankind is always the fate of the whole cosmos.

Jesus'suffering was not a necessary quanititive asset to be paid to a God or the Devil as ransom, but is the merely the conclusion of a devoted life, thus his suffering is the same suffering that we face , it is a suffering "with us together", a kind of solidarity. like a brother gives his life for his sister or similar.

I looked up more infos about that matter and will write later beginning what the hebrew sprictures tell about suffering.

754

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

by The Quiet One in

..specifically, the suffering of animals.

you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.

i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.

TheWonderofYou

Cofty asked me

So Jesus' god is powerless in the face of a tsumani is he? I thought he made the universe.

If you are positing that the god of Jesus is as powerless do anything in the world as a crying baby then that is an interesting theology. It is one way of getting god off the hook. Christians tend to resort to some form of deism when faced with reality but I have never seen it done so thoroughly. It suggests an obvious question of why bother worshipping such a useless deity?

Another comment was : Jesus suffering has no worth

754

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

by The Quiet One in

..specifically, the suffering of animals.

you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.

i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.

TheWonderofYou

omnipotent, almighty does not mean only the most powerfull, the biggest, the greates, the allknowing-in advance, in christian belief but the most little too, the poorest, the little baby in the crib, the man on the cross, the spitted messiah,
tortured anointed, the submitted king, the surrendered, ....a .loving god of submittance, surrender, relinquising himself like a baby in the crib, discharded to his trial, fully dependent of men and as baby of his mother.

„Almightyness“ does refer to the biblical notion of god in israel, Not so much meaning " The one that has the most might and knows everything" but „the lord of all“, hebrew „Zebaoth“, greek pano-krator - literally "god of hosts"," god of powers", in opostion to the babylonian religion of the stars!!! As the lord to whom the stars belong, stars are not gods but his tools, so Jahweh zebaoth does not mean as JW think the lord of a big powerful and very strong myriad angelarmy that is lead by jesus, no, but simple lord of all stars in the heaven.

So this „almightness“ comes orginally from thinking of the jewish god as REAL lord over all stars in contrast to babylon star worship and does not mean that he knows everything in advance or plans everything like an architect or clockmaker-creator.

The evolution of the strong and the meek is thus in no contrary with that "almighty" "full-love"-God, a love in the sense of mercy, loving kindness- the motherly love - but not a almightyness as biological perfection of a special imagined kind. The biblical god is the God of mother love and not the god of perfect bios, thus he gifts us with gifts of love and zoe (eternal life) not perfect biological life.

read page 148

https://books.google.at/books?id=LJlkwvExekkC&pg=PA137&hl=de&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false.

754

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

by The Quiet One in

..specifically, the suffering of animals.

you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.

i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.

TheWonderofYou

cofty:These links shall show which scientifc areas are touched of the question at hand ….....about evil and animals at hand. As mere armchair biologist and armchair theologian I do my best to collect english info for you all.

I think that we have to accept joy and pain as a package, because obviously human and animal life would not be possible at all without that „life principles“: Fear – run away, suffering - improvement, whatever the professional names for these processes are, it seems to be right what was said: we live in the best possible world according to Leibnitz, but some evil accidents even a „perfect“ evolution could not be changed by evolution, like the hunters killing lovely deers, or terrorists killing nice babes on a beach.

The testimonals and stories of the bible are a guide even for this question.

The answers about life and suffering are not written in the bible, Job didnt get the answer for his suffering, but he had hope that his suffering cries to heaven, as we have. Our God is a loving kindness god and a suffering God too, as Jesus demonstrated on the cross. The redeem cant be without suffering, love cant be without suffering, love cant be without tears, thats a christian principle.

For the ancient antic world, judaism, too the fate of humankind and fate of cosmos was the same, and too the fate of animals.

754

Theists, why does God allow suffering..

by The Quiet One in

..specifically, the suffering of animals.

you can talk about free will/sin/people choosing to not listen to god etc to explain human suffering being allowed.. but how can you love a god that allows animals, that haven't sinned or chosen to not have anything to do with god, to have their short lives ended in often long, drawn out, painful ways.

i could list stories i've read that would probably make you feel ill, but i'm not looking to shock anyone or start an emotional debate.

TheWonderofYou

Man's Search for Meaning …..Discovering the meaning of suffering in context with meaning of life

“The question was whether an ape which was being used to develop a poliomyelitis serum, and for this reason punctured again and again, would ever be able to grasp the meaning of its suffering. Unanimously, the group replied that of course it would not; with its limited intelligence, it could not enter into the world of man, i.e., the only world in which the meaning of its suffering would be understandable. Then I pushed forward with the following question: ‘And what about man? Are you sure that the the human world is a terminal point in the evolution of the cosmos? Is it not conceivable that there is still another dimension, a world beyond man’s world; a world in which the question of an ultimate meaning of human suffering would find an answer?”

Viktor E. Frankl, Man's Search for Meaning

Source: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/516361-the-question-was-whether-an-ape-which-was-being-used

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logotherapy#Discovering_meaning