Scholars use unsound subjective criteria when deciding which "reading" is best. The #1 reason for trusting the critical apparatus of the Majority Text is its objective nature. Doctor Everhard's well-reasoned argument for the Majority is compelling.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
The Majority Text: Divine Preservation and Christian Reason
- Thread starter Alfred Persson
- Start date
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth!
They assume where John “stood” or whether he “stood” at all is "wholly immaterial; where the dragon stood is material". Of course the variant conforming to their presupposition is the one they prefer: "he [the Dragon] stood", not "I [John] stood". Dr. Bruce Metzger opines "The latter reading appears to have arisen when copyists accommodated ἐστάθη to the first person of the following εἶδον."-Metzger, B. M., United Bible Societies. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a companion volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) (p. 673). United Bible Societies.
Consider the stupidity of having John and the Dragon as tourists calmly gazing out to the sea. Weren't we just told "the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 12:17 NKJ). Wow! That was a short war!
If we let blind scholars rewrite our scriptures, what does that say about us? Let the shiny dragon capture their attention.
We will interpret the phrase "I stood upon the sand of the sea" as allusion to Daniel 7:4-8:27 where the "interpretive keys to the symbolism of beasts and horns are found.
The monster having seven heads and ten horns (Rev. 13:1-5) is the last global government to rise in the seven-year end time "week" before the coming Kingdom of God. In the book of Daniel this is the fourth and last government beast to rise (Dan. 7:7). Because it is a Grecian version of the old Byzantine Roman Empire (before the split) it has 7 heads (count the heads Dan. 7:2-7) in a leopard body. The head that died and was revived is Ancient Babylon, its first head. So this entire beast is in effect the Eighth king "out of seven" (Rev. 17:7-10). The Beast is both Empire and Emperor just as in Daniel 7:17.
John saw two phases of this revived Grecian Roman Babylonian Empire Beast. It rises from a sea of spiritism (Job 38:16-17; Isa. 27:1; Ps. 74:13; Dan. 7:2 compare Rev. 21:1) when Satan and his fallen angels appear on earth (Rev. 12:7-9) insisting they can only work through global government to deliver global peace and safety (1 Thess. 5:3).
They install the False Christ Rider on the White Horse as its first "Chancellor", "the mouth of a lion" (Rev. 13:2). The second phase begins at mid week, after 3.5 years when Adonikam the false Christ breaks the covenant he made with the world's religions and reveals he actually is the Seed of Satan "Son of Destruction" (Dan. 9:27; Rev. 13:5). He now denies the Father and Son and blasphemes Yahweh God, both His dwelling and His angels:
5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months.
6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven.
7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.
8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear.
10 He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. (Rev. 13:5-10)
They assume where John “stood” or whether he “stood” at all is "wholly immaterial; where the dragon stood is material". Of course the variant conforming to their presupposition is the one they prefer: "he [the Dragon] stood", not "I [John] stood". Dr. Bruce Metzger opines "The latter reading appears to have arisen when copyists accommodated ἐστάθη to the first person of the following εἶδον."-Metzger, B. M., United Bible Societies. (1994). A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Second Edition a companion volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) (p. 673). United Bible Societies.
Consider the stupidity of having John and the Dragon as tourists calmly gazing out to the sea. Weren't we just told "the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (Rev. 12:17 NKJ). Wow! That was a short war!
If we let blind scholars rewrite our scriptures, what does that say about us? Let the shiny dragon capture their attention.
We will interpret the phrase "I stood upon the sand of the sea" as allusion to Daniel 7:4-8:27 where the "interpretive keys to the symbolism of beasts and horns are found.
The monster having seven heads and ten horns (Rev. 13:1-5) is the last global government to rise in the seven-year end time "week" before the coming Kingdom of God. In the book of Daniel this is the fourth and last government beast to rise (Dan. 7:7). Because it is a Grecian version of the old Byzantine Roman Empire (before the split) it has 7 heads (count the heads Dan. 7:2-7) in a leopard body. The head that died and was revived is Ancient Babylon, its first head. So this entire beast is in effect the Eighth king "out of seven" (Rev. 17:7-10). The Beast is both Empire and Emperor just as in Daniel 7:17.
John saw two phases of this revived Grecian Roman Babylonian Empire Beast. It rises from a sea of spiritism (Job 38:16-17; Isa. 27:1; Ps. 74:13; Dan. 7:2 compare Rev. 21:1) when Satan and his fallen angels appear on earth (Rev. 12:7-9) insisting they can only work through global government to deliver global peace and safety (1 Thess. 5:3).
They install the False Christ Rider on the White Horse as its first "Chancellor", "the mouth of a lion" (Rev. 13:2). The second phase begins at mid week, after 3.5 years when Adonikam the false Christ breaks the covenant he made with the world's religions and reveals he actually is the Seed of Satan "Son of Destruction" (Dan. 9:27; Rev. 13:5). He now denies the Father and Son and blasphemes Yahweh God, both His dwelling and His angels:
5 And he was given a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies, and he was given authority to continue for forty-two months.
6 Then he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme His name, His tabernacle, and those who dwell in heaven.
7 It was granted to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.
8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
9 If anyone has an ear, let him hear.
10 He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. (Rev. 13:5-10)
The Grecian-Roman Empire with Seven Heads and Ten Horns | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
The monster having seven heads and ten horns (Rev. 13:1-5) is the last global government to rise in the seven-year end time "week" before the coming Kingdom of God. In the book of Daniel this is the fourth and last government beast to rise (Dan. 7:7). Because it is a Grecian version of the old
endtimenews.net
You need to read my two-part post in https://christianforums.net/threads/can-you-continue-to-knowingly-sin-and-remain-a-christian, posts #187 and #188
They explain the error of your claim: "Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth!"
They explain the error of your claim: "Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth!"
No, I don't need or want to.
Make your argument. No links, compose a cogent argument making your case. And I'll respond.
I'm certain you don't know how to compose an argument to make a point, hence the absurd suggestion two bit ideas about sin are relevant to my critique of lower criticism.
Last edited:
It's not important to me if you respond or not. And I will make my argument as I see fit; I don't need to follow your rules.
You posted an opinion about modern translations which is clearly wrong. I posted excerpts from their introductions as proof that of your error. I don't need to rephrase what they wrote or repost it here.
There are books on how to argue a point.
My opinion is correct, scholars are hopelessly subjective when choosing "the best reading" for the eclectic texts THEY create. They don't even agree with their earlier decisions as the same teams keep revising their own bibles. Nestle Aland has undergone 28 or so revisions. Can't seem to get it right. That's evidence of subjectivism
First, they try to understand the text. Then they pick which words best convey that understanding = circular reasoning.
Rev. 13:1 "I stood" rather than "he stood" proves my point perfectly. The shiny Dragon has their attention, so they put it as standing on the sand of the sea.
Revelation 13:1 “I stood” versus “He stood” | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth! They assume...
endtimenews.net
ps:
This is an argument, with a main and minor premise, then a conclusion:
First, they try to understand the text. Then they pick which words best convey that understanding = circular reasoning.
Last edited:
That is simply your opinion, nothing more, and to me it is clearly biased. You start with a foregone conclusion, then manufacture reasons to prove yourself right. And writing that "my opinion is correct" is simply laughable!There are books on how to argue a point.
My opinion is correct, scholars are hopelessly subjective when choosing "the best reading" for the eclectic texts THEY create. They don't even agree with their earlier decisions as the same teams keep revising their own bibles. Nestle Aland has undergone 28 or so revisions. Can't seem to get it right. That's evidence of subjectivism
First, they try to understand the text. Then they pick which words best convey that understanding = circular reasoning.
Rev. 13:1 "I stood" rather than "he stood" proves my point perfectly. The shiny Dragon has their attention, so they put it as standing on the sand of the sea.
Revelation 13:1 “I stood” versus “He stood” | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth! They assume...endtimenews.net
ps:
This is an argument, with a main and minor premise, then a conclusion:
First, they try to understand the text. Then they pick which words best convey that understanding = circular reasoning.
FYI, the King James Bible has undergone three major revisions, incorporating more than 100,000 changes! So which version of the King James Bible is correct? LOL!!!
I have the greatest respect for scholarship! That includes the teams of translators who have devoted countless hours translating ancient texts into modern English as clearly as possible. I do not respect people who, on their own personal authority, claim to know more than those teams of gifted men and women. That includes you!
What about biblical verses that imply a generalization and not a specific absolute?
Example: Matt 3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
In general and not every single person went out
Not every single person was baptized
Example: Matt 3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
In general and not every single person went out
Not every single person was baptized
I didn't advocate the KJV.
You made two mistakes, because you failed to read carefully.
The "Majority Text" is just that, the "Majority text" found in all the versions, not a reading created by scholars based on their subjective reasons.
That is why I like it, its created by Divine Providence. The Majority reading is the text. Its objective.
That is why I prefer it over the KJV, even though it and the Majority are almost the same. As you observe, men have changed the KJV also.
The text underlying the KJV was replicated by Scrivener: The New Testament in the Original Greek According to the Text Followed in The Authorized Version, F.H.A. Scrivener (Cambridge: 1894).
I have no respect for the vast majority of unbelieving scholars who believe the Bible to be myth and error filled human writing, but couldn't get real jobs after they lost their faith.
What is odd and inexplicable, is Christians letting wolves into the henhouse, demon inspired men change the text of the Bible. That is inexplicable.
Last edited:
Your definition of the "Majority Text" is wrong. The Majority Text, also known as the Byzantine and Ecclesiastical Text, is a method of determining the original reading of a Scripture by discovering what reading occurs in a majority of the manuscripts. It is not "found in all the versions". Many of the versions differ, but clearly you don't know that. There is no single version that was "created by Divine Providence!
It is irrelevant that you have no respect for the vast majority of scholars. I have never read that any of the modern translators are unbelievers; quite the contrary! Saying that they believe the Bible to be myth and error filled human writing is totally wrong! Even more absurd is your claiming that they couldn't get real jobs after they lost their faith.
Since you are so obviously opinionated and totally wrong, I am leaving this discussion. May God have mercy on your soul!
Each mss has "one vote", the reading with the majority wins the election. But as the video shows, the geographical area is also considered. The criteria is "objective", it is what God has permitted come into existence, in that sense the text is decided by Divine Providence.
Every other method utilizes subjective criteria, elevating some mss above others when in fact that is all guesswork.
Review scholarly disputes and you will quickly discern how little of it is scientific. But they have great publicists. Unfortunately, there are no "truth in advertising" laws on the books to sue them when they are wrong, or malicious.
You hope to cloak yourself with scholarly respectability, and cast me in a bad light of the "anti-scholar". But you failed to address my "proof" of how foolish they are, and the criticism applies to all modern eclectic versions. I proved scholars suck at what they do, where it counts:
Revelation 13:1 “I stood” versus “He stood” | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth! They assume...
endtimenews.net
You end with a solemn "may God have mercy on your soul"! He already has, Jesus is my LORD and Saviour!
Last edited:
Ignorance is bliss, but it is nothing to be proud of!Each mss has "one vote", the reading with the majority wins the election. But as the video shows, the geographical area is also considered. The criteria is "objective", it is what God has permitted come into existence, in that sense the text is decided by Divine Providence.
Every other method utilizes subjective criteria, elevating some mss above others when in fact that is all guesswork.
Review scholarly disputes and you will quickly discern how little of it is scientific. But they have great publicists. Unfortunately, there are no "truth in advertising" laws on the books to sue them when they are wrong, or malicious.
You hope to cloak yourself with scholarly respectability, and cast me in a bad light of the "anti-scholar". But you failed to address my "proof" of how foolish they are, and the criticism applies to all modern eclectic versions. I proved scholars suck at what they do, where it counts:
Revelation 13:1 “I stood” versus “He stood” | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth! They assume...endtimenews.net
You keep calling me ignorant etc., but you fail to prove it.
I claim all the scholars YOU LOVE are wrong about Rev. 13:1.
So, prove me an ignorant ass. Show where I am wrong, and all your faithless scholars are right:
Revelation 13:1 “I stood” versus “He stood” | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth! They assume...
endtimenews.net
YOU ARE BEING CHARGED 1 POINT FOR INSULTING AND DEMEANING OTHER MEMBERS.
3 POINTS ARE GROUNDS FOR YOU TO BE BANNED FROM THIS SITE.
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS POST IN THIS THREAD.
USE TWTS IF NECESSARY.
I am putting you on "ignore". I have zero interest in any of your further posts!You keep calling me ignorant etc., but you fail to prove it.
I claim all the scholars YOU LOVE are wrong about Rev. 13:1.
So, prove me an ignorant ass. Show where I am wrong, and all your faithless scholars are right:
Revelation 13:1 “I stood” versus “He stood” | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
Christians are told scholars establish the "original text" through careful analysis, picking the best variant that conforms to their idea of what the original said. However, that is unsound being circular. They produce a text in their own preconceived image and believe its the truth! They assume...endtimenews.net
Too bad, I don't want you to do that.
I was hoping you would take the side of the scholars about Rev. 13:1.
I find that kind of dialogue intellectually stimulating, even when proved wrong.
But, I'm not wrong. And faithless scholarship has only caused doubt about God's Word, it hasn't brought one good thing to light at all. And they had over 200 years to do so.
When is the last time you heard believers exclaim: "Wow, we didn't know that until the scholars uncovered it!" Never, because they haven't. The only thing they accomplished was to destroy their own faith, and that of others in the Word of God.
In Daniel its Greece:
7:6. The third beast Daniel saw was like a leopard, an animal noted for its swiftness (Hab. 1:8), cunning, and agility (Jer. 5:6; Hosea 13:7). This beast had four wings like … a bird, stressing a swiftness beyond its natural capacity. An additional feature of this beast is that it had four heads. Also authority to rule was given it. The kingdom that conquered Medo-Persia was Greece, which did so with great speed, conquering the entire empire between 334 and 330 B.C. A few years after Alexander died his kingdom was divided into four parts (cf. Dan. 8:8, 22).
Pentecost, J. D. (1985). Daniel. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 1, p. 1350). Victor Books.
In Revelation the Revived Roman Empire has a body like a leopard, to symbolize this is a revival of the Roman Empire with its Byzantine half prominent, it will include parts of the ancient Grecian Empire of Alexander the great. Because this Beast doubles as both Empire and Emperor, the Beast will be "Assyrian", of that ancient Grecian lineage. He will make rebuilt Babylon his capitol city:
The Grecian-Roman Empire with Seven Heads and Ten Horns | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
The monster having seven heads and ten horns (Rev. 13:1-5) is the last global government to rise in the seven-year end time "week" before the coming Kingdom of God. In the book of Daniel this is the fourth and last government beast to rise (Dan. 7:7). Because it is a Grecian version of the old
endtimenews.net
5 And this One shall be peace. When the Assyrian comes into our land, And when he treads in our palaces, Then we will raise against him Seven shepherds and eight princely men.
6 They shall waste with the sword the land of Assyria, And the land of Nimrod at its entrances; Thus He shall deliver us from the Assyrian, When he comes into our land And when he treads within our borders. (Mic. 5:5-6 NKJ)
The Antichrist His Names Titles and Descriptions | End Time News, Today - Rapture Ready News
The Antichrist will appear in the guise of Christ, to oppose Christ. Paul called him the "Son of Destruction" which implies a Jewish-Christian miracle worker evangelist. His name is Adonikam and he will rise from obscurity near the ancient city of Antioch, modern Turkey. He is from ancient...
endtimenews.net
Last edited:
Hi all,
For me, the best translation of the Scriptures is the one that speaks to one's heart.
In my life as a believer, I've read many different translations of the Scriptures. I have yet to find one, of the reliable translations, that doesn't settle on the exact same issue as being the preeminent issue of God's revelation of Himself to us.
Only Jesus saves.
God bless,
Ted
For me, the best translation of the Scriptures is the one that speaks to one's heart.
In my life as a believer, I've read many different translations of the Scriptures. I have yet to find one, of the reliable translations, that doesn't settle on the exact same issue as being the preeminent issue of God's revelation of Himself to us.
Only Jesus saves.
God bless,
Ted
That's a good test. But when digging deep into prophecy or doctrine, the "Majority Text" is best. Its the Greek version the church has always used, unlike the eclectic versions that are creations of the men making them these past two hundred years or so. Sometimes their flawed readings do affect sound doctrine adversely.