Apostolic Friends Forum
Tab Menu 1
Go Back   Apostolic Friends Forum > The Fellowship Hall > Fellowship Hall
Facebook

Notices

Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #271  
Old 02-10-2021, 12:40 AM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
Psalm 22 and Isaiah 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
Psalm 22:16 in the Masoretic rabbinical texts reads "like a lion my hands and my feet". The same verse in the LXX reads "they pierced my hands and feet." The KJV follows the Greek here rather than the Hebrew.
Psalm 22:16 (AV)
For dogs have compassed me:
the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me:
they pierced my hands and my feet.

They followed a minority reading that has strong Hebraic/Masorah support. And later it received additional support from the DSS.

The Drusius claim (in English in Haydock) is interesting.

Psalm 22:16 - the Ben Hayim rabbinic Bible and the Drusius report
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index...s-report.1673/

===================================

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
Isaiah 7:14 in the Jewish text reads "a young girl" whereas the LXX is very specifically "a virgin". The KJV follows the LXX here as well rather than the Masoretic text.
Isaiah 7:14 (AV)
Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign;
Behold, a virgin shall conceive,
and bear a son,
and shall call his name Immanuel.

The proper contextual translation from the Hebrew text.

Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-10-2021 at 01:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 02-10-2021, 01:00 AM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
the corruption of the GOT - Psalm 14

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
By the time of Origen, the rabbins had been repeatedly charged by Christians with intentional alterations of the Scriptures in various attempts to obscure prophecies concerning Jesus.
Like the false claim of Justin Martyr and Tertullian that they had removed "reigned from the tree".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
The Jewish corruption attempts began with attempting to corrupt the common Jewish and Christian Bible of the day (the Greek).
The GOT had corruption from a variety of sources. e.g. The Christians mangled Psalm 14 in a bumbling and irresponsible attempt to match Romans 3, which is a beautiful pastiche of quotes from the OT.

The book most likely to be mangled for prophetic purposes would be Isaiah. Yet the Great Isaiah Scroll shows us that the Masoretic Text is totally faithful to the Ante-Christian Hebrew text.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
Eventually at the rabbinic Council of Jamnia they rejected as authoritative ALL Greek manuscripts and compiled and assembled what would hundreds of years later become their authoritative Hebrew text (later known as the Masoretic text).
Maybe. Do you have primary source documents?

Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-10-2021 at 01:02 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 02-10-2021, 01:03 AM
Amanah's Avatar
Amanah Amanah is offline
One Thing-Phil 3:13-14


 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sebastian, FL
Posts: 8,225
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
The Alexandrian LXX reading of Isaiah 9:6 follows the KJV more or less. You are quoting from the Vaticanus LXX if I am not mistaken.

Psalm 22:16 in the Masoretic rabbinical texts reads "like a lion my hands and my feet". The same verse in the LXX reads "they pierced my hands and feet." The KJV follows the Greek here rather than the Hebrew.

Isaiah 7:14 in the Jewish text reads "a young girl" whereas the LXX is very specifically "a virgin". The KJV follows the LXX here as well rather than the Masoretic text.

The apostles definitely quoted the LXX rather than the Masoretic text, as for example Luke 4:18 quoting Isaiah 61:1, Acts 15:16-18 quoting Amos 9:11-12, and so forth.

By the time of Origen, the rabbins had been repeatedly charged by Christians with intentional alterations of the Scriptures in various attempts to obscure prophecies concerning Jesus. The Jewish corruption attempts began with attempting to corrupt the common Jewish and Christian Bible of the day (the Greek). Eventually at the rabbinic Council of Jamnia they rejected as authoritative ALL Greek manuscripts and compiled and assembled what would hundreds of years later become their authoritative Hebrew text (later known as the Masoretic text).
Thank you Elder.
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 02-10-2021, 01:10 AM
Amanah's Avatar
Amanah Amanah is offline
One Thing-Phil 3:13-14


 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sebastian, FL
Posts: 8,225
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Avery View Post
His statement above is a disaster top to bottom.

Beyond that, like most scholastic modernist textual charlatans, he avoids telling his readers about the massive Bible verse differences between the Reformation Bible and the Westcott-Hort recension.
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 02-10-2021, 04:23 AM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
Byzantine and Majority Texts (and Received Text)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
The Majority Text, especially as CAPITALIZED (as you did) refers to a specific TEXT, published as such, and which is the basis for the revised editions of the New King James Version as well as the various Orthodox Bible versions published in English in the last several decades.
Incorrect on various points.

1) the NKJV text is the Received Text, as is the Authorized Version. Arthur Farsted had an idea to use a Majority Text edition, but that was abandoned. In the New Testament there are only a couple of small (yet important, like Hebrews 3:16) textual distinctions between the AV and the NKJV. The NKJV does manage to mangle itself in its translation attempts to depart from the AV.

2) Orthodox Bible versions are not based on a majority text either. Simply read the heavenly witnesses and Acts 8:37 in those texts to determine that for yourself. Another verse good to check is 1 John 2:23b.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias View Post
"The "Majority Text" is a statistical construct that does not correspond exactly to any known manuscript. It is arrived at by comparing all known manuscripts with one another and deriving from them the readings that are more numerous than any others. There are two published Greek texts which purport to represent the Majority readings -- Hodges & Farstad 1982 and Pierpont & Robinson 1991. The reader may click on the links in the previous sentence to go to brief descriptions of these texts, and a list of all their differences is given here."

--- http://www.bible-researcher.com/majority.html
The R&P text is called the Byzantine text, not Majority, and works on a threshold basis. If no variant makes a specified pct (80, maybe 70) then other factors are brought to play, the most numerous is not necessarily taken.

The Hodges & Farsted text used a limited number of mss.

Similarly with the Wilbur Pickering text, based on Family 35. On conceptual argumentation, Pickering is often considered the follow-up to Hodges.

The Greek New Testament According to Family 35 (2015)
Wilbur Pickering
https://www.amazon.com/Greek-New-Tes.../dp/0989827372

The Sovereign Creator has Spoken -- New Testament Translation with Commentary: Objective Authority for Living
https://www.amazon.com/Sovereign-Cre.../dp/0989827305

WM 86: Review: Pickering's Greek NT and English Translation (2017)
Jeffrey Riddle
http://www.jeffriddle.net/2017/12/wm...ek-nt-and.html

Quote:
Preface (pp. i-iii): Pickering begins by noting his doubts about the reliability of Hermann von Soden’s Greek NT (1911-1913), which underlies the Hodges-Farstad and Robinson-Pierpont editions of the Majority (Byzantine) Text.

...

The apparatus also includes comparison to six published editions:

RP: Robinson-Pierpont (2005)
HF: Hodges-Farstad
OC: text of the Orthodox Church
TR: Textus Receptus
CP: Complutension Polyglot
NU: Nestle-Aland 26/UBS 3

He notes that this new edition of the Majority/Byzantine text justifies its existence, since it holds over a thousand differences from either the HF or RP editions. He affirms his belief in inerrancy and states in a footnote: “I venture to affirm to the reader that all original wording of the NT is preserved in this edition, if not in the Text, at least in the apparatus” (ii, n. 4).

...

The translation style allows for dynamic equivalence. The prose is awkward, sometimes overly colloquial, and stiff.
The colophon notations are interesting for New Testament dating.

Quote:
Notes on the ending of Mark (16:20):
It cites the colophon note on the date as “published ten years after the ascension of Christ.”

Notes on the ending of Luke (24:53):
It cites the colophon note on the date of Luke as “published fifteen years after the ascension of Christ.”

Notes on the ending of John (21:25):
It cites the colophons on the date of John as “published thirty-two years after the ascension of Christ.”

Notes on ending of Matthew (28:20):
Note 7, p. 87 observes that 50% of the colophons for the f35 mss. read “published eight years after the ascension of Christ.” Pickering suggests, “this probably means that the tradition is ancient.” He adds:

If this information is correct, then Matthew was “published” in 38/39 AD. The same sources have Mark published two years later (40/41) and Luke another five years later (45/46), while John was “published” thirty-two years after the ascension, or 61/62 AD. Not only were the authors eyewitnesses of the events, but many others were still alive when the Gospels appeared. They could attest to the veracity of the accounts, but could also be the source of textual variants, adding tidbits here and there, or ‘correcting’ something that they remembered differently.
In the comments, in addition to the concern about the quirkiness of the F35 dogma, a concern is raised about his 'Days of Noah' doctrines.

Days of Noah
http://somehelpful.info/Christian/Days-of-Noah.pdf

========================

Still checking a bit.
Here are a few resources.

========================

Pure Bible Forum
Received Text and Majority Text
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index...ority-text.78/

========================

John S. Holland points out some other aspects, such as in how Revelation is handled.

Majority Texts
http://biblekjv.com/cmt/nttxt/nttext03.htm

========================

What is the Authentic New Testament Text
Steve Rafalsky
https://www.puritanboard.com/threads...nt-text.15134/

========================

Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-10-2021 at 05:55 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 02-10-2021, 07:15 AM
Jito463 Jito463 is offline
J.esus i.s t.he o.ne God (463)


 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,688
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

I may not know the MT from the LXX, but I do know I trust the KJV. I do like to reference other translations from time to time, just to get alternate insights into a verse, but I always stay with the KJV as my primary source. I even have a KJV 1611 version on my phone, but the different letters (like 'V' for 'U', or 'F' for 'S') make it hard to read through at times.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Originalist View Post
Sometimes hidden dangers spring on us suddenly. Those are out of our control. But when one can see the danger, and then refuses to arrest , all in the name of "God is in control", they are forfeiting God given, preventive opportunities.
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 02-10-2021, 08:04 AM
1 God 1 God is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 680
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah View Post
Our organization believes that the KJV is the pure word of God.
Good, which organization is that? The head of the UPC says it is flawed.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 02-10-2021, 08:08 AM
1 God 1 God is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: May 2020
Posts: 680
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah View Post
Versions DKB mentions as ok to use:
KJV
NKJV
ESV
NASB
CSB
MEV
NIV
NLT
This all started after Dan Seagraves came back from seminary over 3 decades ago, touting the NKJV. It started a snowball effect to what you posted.
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 02-10-2021, 09:29 AM
Amanah's Avatar
Amanah Amanah is offline
One Thing-Phil 3:13-14


 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sebastian, FL
Posts: 8,225
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1 God View Post
This all started after Dan Seagraves came back from seminary over 3 decades ago, touting the NKJV. It started a snowball effect to what you posted.
The organization's function is administrative. It is not the papal office.

I have a personal responsibility to search the scripture to see if what is being taught is true (acts 17:11).
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 02-10-2021, 09:39 AM
Steven Avery Steven Avery is offline
Registered Member


 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,341
Re: Sid Roth, Branham, Cain, and Reed

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1 God View Post
This all started after Dan Seagraves came back from seminary over 3 decades ago, touting the NKJV. It started a snowball effect to what you posted.
Up to about 1984 (paperback edition was published) he seemed to be fairly solid Authorised Version. He slipped into accepting the NKJV mode at some point.

However, the seminarian textcrit dupes really became big in the UPC, supporting the Westcott-Hort corruption versions. And I don't think they would care too much about Segraves either way.

And I wrote this on a Daniel Segraves thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Avery View Post
... Segraves remains, afaik, a supporter of the Received Text and uses the AV and NKJV. The problem is that they have at times very different, even opposite, translational meanings.

In that situation it is pretty much impossible for anyone to hold an English Bible in their hand and believe they have the pure and perfect word of God.

Some of my friends studied under him, and learned about the excellence of the AV from his teaching. His efforts should be respected. However, his AV support is significantly lessened. ...

Last edited by Steven Avery; 02-10-2021 at 09:42 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Chris Reed mfblume Fellowship Hall 220 08-26-2020 01:33 PM
Special Prayer for Ralph Reed Godzchild Fellowship Hall 5 03-07-2013 07:20 PM
Daily game Jan 31 : SW: The Mary Reed Chro... dailygame Daily Game 0 01-31-2011 05:09 AM
Since this is a Branham thread ---- Dr. Vaughn Branhamism 5 10-04-2009 10:33 PM
Retirement ? on 403b roth Truthseeker Fellowship Hall 3 08-08-2009 12:11 PM

 
User Infomation
Your Avatar

Latest Threads
- by coksiw
- by shag

Help Support AFF!

Advertisement




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.