"Adam Marczyk" <see@sig.com> wrote in message
news:PAt7b.3555$_T.125@news02.roc.ny...
Didymos <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:dkt7b.5685$Yt.846@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
"Pastor Dave" <nospam-draymond@minister.com> wrote in message
news:73hslvc0rb1oidv7f8e9oek54tu60ios1g@4ax.com...
On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 20:22:01 GMT, "Didymos"
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
There reaches a point when one can become a bit too technical. : )
This isn't that point. You and I both know there is a
huge difference. If I consult the Majority Texts, but
tend to reject them, in favor of what the Alexandrian
Texts say, when there's a discrepancy, would you claim
that this final cut is based on the Majority Texts?
No, paster dave, we assuredly do not know "there is a huge
difference."
Well then, I would suggest a course in English.
Nice try paster dave. The manuscripts in question are not in English,
paster dave. They are in Greek, Syriac, and Latin. There are some
ancient manuscripts in other lanugages, but since you have not brought
them up, neither will I. I don't want to confuse you further.
You seem to have forgotten to show us single "huge difference," paster
dave. Why not? If these "differences are so "huge" surely you must know
right where they occur and in what manuscripts they occur in, don't you?
Again, paster dave, you produced how much evidence? None. Zero. You
failed to refute or falsify a single statement of fact in my post, most
of which you snipped without attribution, as usual. Why do you delete
all of the groups except alt.bible from your posts? Don't you care to
shine the light of your "knowledge" in those groups too? Or don't you
wish to be embarrassed on such a scale?
I will restore your snip here in order to remind you of the issues you
failed to respond to..
"No, paster dave, we assuredly do not know "there is a huge
difference."
Why
don't you inform us exactly what these "huge difference[s]" are? Can
you, paster dave, give us 5 verses that demonstrate a "huge difference"
between a specific Byzantine manuscript and a specific Alexandrian
manuscript? That is the only way to gather, examine and elevaluate
evidence, paster dave. No two manuscripts are exactly the same. None.
Not any two Byzantine manuscripts, not any two Alexandrian, not any two
Western, and not any two Caesarean. You
King-James-is-the-only-scripture fanatics like to bang that theory home
concerning the "disagreements" between Manuscripts Aleph and B. What you
apparently do not realize is that the same is true of every
Byzantine/Majority manuscript: no two are identical. Therefore, if the
"disagreements" between Manuscripts Aleph and B somehow reduce their
value as witnesses, does not the same reduction in value hold true for
Manuscript F, Codex Boreelianus, and Manuscript G, Codex Wolfiii A, both
typical Byzantine texts although both contain many lacunae? [lacuna:
n. pl. -nae, -nas. 1. a gap or missing part, as in a manuscript,
rational argument, or the like: hiatus.] You see, paster dave, most of
the Byzantine uncials and papyri contain just as many lacunae, if not
more, that Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. If you had any knowledge at all of
the New Testament manuscripts, you would know that. And then you
possibly would not have posted your bizarre and false maundering about
how corrupt Manuscripts Aleph and B are. But then you do have this
propensity towards blatant falsehood, so how can we know?"
"Oh, by the way, paster dave, you still have not explained how the
oldest
Greek uncial of the Byzantine family, Mauscript A, Codex Alexandrinus,
is
only Byzantine in the gospels but is Alexandrian in in all other books.
How can we interpret that set of facts, paster dave, against your silly
assertion that every manuscript containg even a single error was
destroyed? Obviously, since all Byzantine manuscripts "disagree" in at
least some words, those scribes were not quite as quality control
conscious as you seem to have dreamed up. Kindly produce a single
Byzantine uncial manuscript that does not contain the mark of an editor
or corrector. Can you do that, paster dave? Can anyone?"
"By the way, how are you doing on that list of sources to prove your
dumb
statement that Jesus is the most documented figure in the ancient world?
You've been working on that one since March, paster dave. Writing a
dissertation for us?"
"And you are not an ordained pastor of anything."
Can't stand to look at the evidence piling up against you, can you
paster
dave?
And you are still not an ordained pastor of anything.
Heh. Way to take Dave to the cleaners, Didymos. I predict we will see
nothing but more stalling, snipping without attribution, and irrelevancies
from him, but never an admission of error; he's obviously too proud for
that. Doesn't it ever occur to him that maybe it means something that he's
always bested by more knowledgeable people on virtually every subject on
which he ventures an opinion?
Thank you. The man is an enigma to me. He has one problem common to liars:
he cannot remember his lies. So he regularly makes an ***** of himself
becasue he cannot remember what he said.
--
"We have loved the stars too fondly | a.a. #2001
to be fearful of the night." | http://www.ebonmusings.org
--Tombstone epitaph of | e-mail: ebonmuse!hotmail.com
two amateur astronomers, | ICQ: 8777843
quoted in Carl Sagan's _Cosmos_ | PGP Key ID: 0x5C66F737
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.
