James White and his super ultra violet Bible camera
Critical Text high priest (and Orange Julius Professor of Theology from the University of Stripmall), James White, has declared, using his super ultra violet Bible camera Christians for centuries have been waiting to be invented, that verse 1 Tim. 3:16 in the traditional, Received Text is accurate after all...'
We Christians eagerly await more super ultra violet Bible camera discoveries from the Orange Julius Professor of Theology in the coming years validating the text God has preserved for His elect (the always controversial Received Text underlying the Authorized Version, 1611!). These are exciting times for textual criticism!
ps- Read the tone of White's post above. He is a mocking, 16th century Romanist cleric wearing modern Protestant garb. And notice how he never misses a chance to equate elect Christians (those of us who actually can discern and value - and humble ourselves to - the pure and whole Word of God) to Muslims. The irony of that is White's Critical Text-loving Roman Catholic Church of today considers Muslims to be part of their communion. White needs to upgrade his material for mocking...
Remember: the reformers defeated the Romanists on the manuscript issues in the 1500s (and starting prior of course). The battle is nothing new. (It started in the Garden when the devil questioned God's Word when deceiving Eve.) Many of the reformers heroically fought and lost their lives in the most horrible ways in that battle. God bless them, and God have vengeance on the ministers of the devil who preach and teach and mock and attempt to intimidate Christians (in the exact same way Darwinian evolutionists do to people who don't buy that Satanic lie), and who attempt to fool Christians into buying the devil's corrupt manuscripts and the [per]versions based on them such as the one White gets paid money to push, the Arian/Romanist New American Standard Perversion.
God have vengeance on all who willfully corrupt God's Word.
1 Comments:
Archiving White's post which I linked (his post includes images):
10/31/2006
I Just Could Not Resist
James R. White
Jeff Downs sent me a link about the reading of 1 Timothy 3:16 in Codex Alexandrinus, and though I have a ton of things to be doing this morning before the DL (mainly packing!), I just could not resist taking the time to do what I love to do. Here's a close up of the text. For those who are not familiar with the issue, it is one of the major textual variants in the NT, hence, one that comes up in the KJV Only debate, and, of course, with Jehovah's Witnesses and Muslims as well. I addressed it rather fully in The King James Only Controversy as well. The difference in reading, in English, is between "God was manifest in the flesh" and "He was manifest in the flesh." While at first glance that seems like a major variant (and it is, as far as meaning is concerned), the actual difference in the Greek is rather slight, the difference between OS and QS with a line over it. Well, more and more, high-quality digital images of the NT manuscripts are becoming available on line, this one coming from a tremendously valuable resource, www.csntm.org (a group well worth your support, I might add). Those of you who can read a little Greek (and more, can read uncial text), can make it out, even in this small version (the version on line is higher quality). Here is the uncial text of the passage so you can follow along with it:
KAIOMOLOG
OUMENWSMEGAESTINTOTHSEUSEB
EIASMUSTHRIONOSEFANERW
QHENSARKIEDIKAIWQHENPNE
UMATIWFQHAGGELOIS
Here is the same line but in more standard (non-uncial) script: kaiomolog
oumenwjmegaestintothjeuseb
eiajmusthrionojefanerw
qhensarkiedikaiwqhenpne
umatiwfqhaggeloij
Yes, I know, the BibleWorks font does not have an exact representation of an uncial final form sigma, which, as you can see in the graphic, looks like a capital "C" in the English script. In any case, here is a blow up of the point of the variant. If you check your NA text, they list the "original" as OS and the "corrected" as QS. Now, they may have been able to do some kinds of studies with ultraviolet light, etc., to come to that conclusion, but you sure can't tell that from this image. It is fascinating to see this text, and hopefully, it is useful in calming the wild-eyed fears created by KJV Onlyists who run about screaming about how Westcott and Hort "altered" the text and "took out the deity of Christ" and all that stuff. The difference between the two readings, orthographically, is small. I don't know about you, but it sure looks like it reads "God" to me!
OK, enough of this enjoyable stuff, back to work I must go! Oh, almost forgot. I was sent multiple links to this all-too accurate advertisement on the Sacred Sandwich website. Hey, I really had nothing to do with its production...aside from being the one who prompted some of the doll's statements, anyway.
posted at 09:06:40 on 10/31/2006 - Category: Textual Issues
Post a Comment
<< Home