Posted on 02/15/2006 6:22:47 AM PST by NYer
Can you imagine when the last apostle was gone and the wars that took place and how many were killed for processing copies or even original or seal of approval!
I cringe at how many scared manuscripts were destroyed or burn!
Such is the stuff of imagination ... or speculation (at best).
Do you not believe that God would be able to protect His scriptures ?
Do you mean the Dead Sea Scrolls?
I think history speaks for that and manuscripts were burn and just asked Tyndale?
there are others and more is starting to surface!
that is part of it but those were there person version and the New Testament was not among them!
BTW in that area over time there was over 800 scrolls founds I believe the OT only has 39 of those books!
BBL
I think history speaks for that and manuscripts were burn and just asked Tyndale?
There are others and more is starting to surface!
So ... none of these manuscripts survived (in any form) ?
Do you believe there are no outright contradictions and changes (some simply due to copy errors, some deliberate changes over the various iterations) contained in the current Bible(s)?
Just wondering if you also were looking for the same answers from Full Court, as I've tried to get them for some time now.
Are you open to, or allowed to, entertain the idea that you have a mistaken impression of what the passage actually meant to convey?
Sure, I could have a mistaken impression. But I don't believe I do.
Back to the point I have made many times with you. Is your mind closed on the matter?
Here's the point. I can allow (much like you) that the words written can be interpreted in more than one way. I can allow how one taking a "text only" viewpoint and not taking into account history or tradition might come to one conclusion. I believe it is the wrong conclusion, and it falls apart when one really digs into it and discovers who is named as the mother or father of the various persons identified as "brothers" of Jesus.
But, if one does not agree with this analysis or does not wish to look at things too deeply, I can accept that one simply taking one's own reading of the verses in question can come to that conclusion.
Full Court and those of her(?) persuasion are ill-informed and yet genuinely trying their best to understand the text. I do not think they are deliberately straying from the Bible nor making a liar of God or any of the other things which Catholics have been accused.
I ask only that the same consideration be given to the Catholic view.
I am not persuaded by anything that has been offered as proof to change my well-decided opinion. Largely because nothing has been offered except the repetition of the verses in English. I have rejected the arguments offered after examining them.
I do not think the other side can honestly say that.
SD
You thought I might have bought into your spin over the years....think again.
BigMack
All that's asked for is to look at the arguments presented and respond to them in an intelligent fashion. Because we interpret things differently does not mean we are against the Scripture, which is how FC put it, and what you applauded her for.
SD
I am not persuaded by anything that has been offered as proof to change my well-decided opinion. Largely because nothing has been offered except the repetition of the verses in English. I have rejected the arguments offered after examining them.
Face it, Mother Church has spoken and you are not allowed to think differently. I believe your "openness" is nothing but a bluff - so there!
I do not think the other side can honestly say that.
Am I on this "other side"? I actualy think Jesus did have blood brothers and sisters but cannot find absoloute proof in our current day Bible(s). Further, I don't think it makes any difference except to those of you who are locked into a position which, despite your protestation of open mindendness, cannot change unless you are prepared to become an "ex".
Such is the stuff of imagination ... or speculation (at best).
Do you not believe that God would be able to protect His scriptures ?
Why of course He would be able to protect His (scriptures) unchanged and with no contradictions if He chose to do so. He could also have chosen a different path for mankind - no wars - no killing, stealing-lying, etc. The fact He didn't must be because He had a different plan.
He (God) also could have allowed mankind to wipe itself off of the face of the planet by now.
That He has allowed some evils to occur ... does not mean that He has not caused some particular things to endure.
It's His plan.
He promises that His scripture will endure.Mark 13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
Do you believe there are no outright contradictions and changes (some simply due to copy errors, some deliberate changes over the various iterations) contained in the current Bible(s)?
There are few, if any, significant contradictions (I know of a few insignificant examples ... like numbers not matching up) ... and, likewise, a few differences in the textual copies ... that have been detected and known about for several centuries now.
My point is that it's a rather large leap from this which we have evidence for ... to the presumption that scripture has somehow been twisted (or obliterated) beyond recognition.
Dave, the Greek is the idiom for sex between a man and a woman. What else could that possibly mean?
There is no reason at all to look for another meaning when that one is perfectly clear. It follows every rule of Biblical interpretation.
Dave, I posted the Greek. It means sex between a man and a woman. Now why you want to claim I am not looking at it fully it not true.
You're actually a voice of moderation here, at least on the issue of what the Bible does and does not say on this issue.
How about that?
SD
Dave, there is no obvious reason in Scripture to disregard the clear meaning and try and make it obscure, that's my point.
The Bible says Mary and Joseph had sex.
The Bible says Jesus had brothers and sisters.
The Bible says Jesus was the firstborn, meaning other came after.
THere is no reason at all to disregard the clear teaching to try and make the Bible mean something it does not say, unless you are trying to support a false doctrine.
Yeah, I place people into two general categories. Those who can examine an argument and respond to it, and those who can not.
SD
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.