Posted on 02/22/2010 9:47:13 PM PST by restornu
Since ancient scribes were so totally accurate in their work, how could any mistakes ever enter into the Bible?
There is a myth among some circles that ancient scribes were so incredibly cautious, making sure that every letter was perfectly copied, that they never produced any mistakes when copying the manuscripts, and thus all ancient manuscripts agree with each other.
This is entirely bogus - a deceptive lie or statement of shear stupidity. The great Hebrew scholar,
Emmanuel Tov, for example, has discussed numerous scribal problems in Hebrew manuscripts.
In a 1994 lecture entitled "The Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls," Dr. Tov explains what we learned about ancient scribes and Hebrew manuscripts with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls:
Let me explain the importance of having discovered these documents from a very early period relating to the Hebrew Bible.
Before these discoveries were made in 1947, the earliest sources for the Hebrew Bible were the texts found in the Cairo Geniza.
The Geniza is a storeroom in which discarded writings considered to be holy or that contained the name of God were placed [when they were worn out].
The earliest of these document are from the eighth century of the Common Era [A.D.].
Until 1947 we had no ancient records in Hebrew of the Hebrew Bible.
You might say we had no really good evidence of what the Hebrew Bible looked like, until the discoveries of Qumran.
It turns out that our knowledge was rather good, but we had no evidence in our hands.
So, the first time that we were able to see what an ancient Hebrew Bible looked like was after these documents were found near the Dead Sea.
We now know what is meant by a copy of the Hebrew Bible from early periods.
We now know that the text was written in a scroll, and when we say scroll, we really mean something which was rolled.
We mean that these were sheets of leather sewn to each other or glued to each other, on each of which you could have a number of columns of writing.
Each column is what we would probably call a page, and so normally you'd have three or four columns on each sheet, with a fixed number of lines.
We now see what the text looked like.
We see that there are scribes who wrote well, and we see that there are scribes who were rather sloppy.
One of the scribes was a terrible scribe, the scribe who wrote the Isaiah scroll.
When I say terrible, I mean terrible.
This is a scribe who made a mistake in every second, third, or fourth -- well, let's say every fifth word.
Already the second word of that scroll has a mistake.
It starts with the vision of Isaiah, and in that word Yisha'yahu the third letter, the 'ayin, he simply forgot, because this is a guttural letter, which he (like I) did not pronounce, so he just wrote yod shin yod hay vav and then afterwards when he realized what he did, he, or a reader, put the 'ayin above the line.
Mistakes in guttural letters in that scroll abound. Words are omitted.
Words are added.
Words are added in the margin.
This is sloppy handwriting.
We simply must remember that this is a human scribe of blood and flesh who wrote this scroll and hence produced a product which, in his case, was not a good product.
(Emmanuel Tov, "The Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls," Seventh Annual F.A.R.M.S. Lecture, Feb. 20, 1994, Document TOV-94, Provo, Utah: FARMS, 1994, pp. 6-7; see also Emmanuel Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, 2nd edition, Fortress Press, 2001)
It's not just that some scribes were sloppy.
They were condemned as a class by the Lord for their unrighteousness ("Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!" in Matt. 23:39).
Evidence supports the idea that changes were deliberately made due to their religious bias.
Some early Christians reported that Hebrew scriptures had been changed to take out some clear prophecies of Christ, which was an entirely logical but corrupt response from those who kept the manuscripts and hated Christianity.
One thing is clear: there are numerous variants between the different ancient texts, both in Greek and Hebrew.
While the manuscripts agree with each other in many ways, there are thousands of differences due to the vagaries of human activity.
Scribes were imperfect.
They were not infallible.
Their products cannot possibly be considered infallible, perfect and complete.
One can ignore the abundant evidence, but it's time to recognize that only God is the final and perfect authority, and that's why we need continuing revelation from his authorized prophets and apostles.
The Bible is scripture and needs to be studied with faith, but also with a recognition that it is a book printed by humans, translated by humans, copied by humans, and even originally written by inspired humans, none of whom were infallible. Mistakes happen. Errors creep in.
Translations create unintended meanings. This is mortality, and these kind of things happen.
Thank goodness there is a mechanism to overcome these problems when it's critical, and that mechanism is continuing revelation, which was meant to be an integral part of the Church of Jesus Christ from the beginning, and which has been restored in our day.
That is true, IE Joe Smith.
If some clergy did not corrupt the scriptures how do you think they were able to have the Lord Crucified?
Are you saying in this statement that Jesus was not supposed to be Crucified? Please clarify.
It was a conspiracy we can read a little of it in the NT and between the lines of what was not said!
Read between the lines, well that's something I have never heard before. Guessing at what God was really supposed to mean.
Why? Because “E” was posting from lds sources?
Yes and that was considered antagonistic.
Pinkies up...
Indoor voices...
I just want to say that PEEPs are the best Easter candy ever, hands down. Maybe just the best candy ever.
I just want to say that PEEPs are the best Easter candy ever, hands down. Maybe just the best candy ever.
- - - - — -
I have to respectfully disagree, svcw. I don’t want to appear antagonistic, but I find PEEPs to be cloying and messy. And they scare me.
Cadbury creme eggs are the best Easter candy.
Cadbury creme eggs are the best Easter candy.
__________________________________________________
Not intending to be antagonistic, svcw...
But I have to agree with reaganaut...
I bet you said that without raising your pinkie...
didntya eh ???
Go on admit it ...
LOL
STALE???
Now I may be on the verge of getting antagonistic. ;)
getting antagonistic
______________________________________
Miss Manners says stale is par say...
You NEVER serve stale..
Its bad manners...
:)
Most of the deleted posts were antagonistic by making the same provocative posts that are common on "open" RF threads, especially ridicule.
Ridicule is antagonistic.
When I see the usual "open" thread posters on "ecumenical" threads, I expect to see a more respectful, academic tone. Making fun of another poster's beliefs is neither respectful nor academic.
And again, the article of an "ecumenical" RF thread may contain some antagonism. But the discussion must not be antagonistic.
This thread has been trashed by both sides. At this point, I'd normally lock it for "childish behavior." But I'll leave it active for awhile to see if anyone can salvage an ecumenical discussion of the ISSUES raised in the article.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
I don’t know about Tov but my comments weren’t about him - more the need for his credentials to be posted over and over. It’s ‘man’s’ way of relying on ‘man’ for TRUTH!!
- — - - - - - -
I am aware of that and I agree with you completely. My comments were directed at Resty.
The LDS rely on feelings to know ‘truth’ rather than the Bible alone. They also often, in my experience having been Mormon before I became a Christian, take the arguments of LDS apologists or other scholars who are often abused by LDS apologists and their work twisted (like in the case of Tov) rather than do research themselves.
I became LDS as a teenager because I did not know to test everything with the Bible. When I started to really study the Bible, in context, I was quickly led out of Mormonism and into Christ.
We also see it in politics.
“The Bible is scripture and needs to be studied with faith, but also with a recognition that it is a book printed by humans, translated by humans, copied by humans, and even originally written by inspired humans, none of whom were infallible.
Mistakes happen.
Errors creep in.”
Amen I say to you, Was not one message Jesus was sending to the Jewish scribe’s and Pharisees that they had lost sight of Gods message with all their rules and regulations? The message/covenant Jesus brought was simple “Love thy neighbor as you love thy self”. To take this simple message and dig deeper what is it that occurred with the Jew’s over the years? Human frailties filled their practices and developed there rules pushing them from further from Gods intent.
Jesus spoke many times in parables, which are little stories to teach specific lessons. The bible is full of similar types of messages and for one to say man did not fault in writing, copying or just plain adlib, how many stories in the bible show those not fulfilling God’s intent, is a bit nigheve in my eyes.
Why do we have so many Christian denominations to begin with? Why are there so many versions of the bible? Is it not man making these decisions on what is true and what is false? To tie all your energy into a book or word of God is not what God intended. His intent was your actions. To say discussion like this is not good would be an error for this is a good tool to discuss, but as you first post shows there are many that take it beyond discussing to a level of verbal insult and this by people whom say God’s message is their life’s goal?
One of many good post and discussion’s. I will ignore the arrogance of some of the post and read the insight of the others. Keep it up!
Supporting point to mans failings at work in the bible
God did write the 10 commandments but here is a great case study is it:
Thou shalt not kill (also written You shall not kill)
Or
Thou shat not murder (also written You shall not murder)
These are the main two variations of just one commandment yet the meaning is substantially different. If Gods word was murder then the premise is you can defend yourself and not comment a sin, but if Gods intent was kill then one would comment sin if they killed the other while in self defense. Yet this is the one thing God did write with his hand and not with a man’s hand according to the bible.
These are the main two variations of just one commandment yet the meaning is substantially different.
- - - - - -
Not in the Hebrew. Translation from any language to any other language requires some variance in word choice but that does not mean that the Bible is unclear in English. Anyone who has done serious translation work is aware of this.
That does not mean the Bible is full of errors or is not trustworthy in matters of faith and doctrine.
Check out any verse in a parallel translation (Bible.cc is a good site) and you can grasp the meaning of the text.
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.