Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

See http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=294&p=69120#p69120 George Kiraz's edition shows the clear relation between these different Syriac translations. Andrew Criddle There is nothing specific there on our earlier page. As for relations between Syriac translations, often the ...

And, more basically, why were the Greek and Latin textual traditions so different from one another, until the unification by the Reformation-era scholarship? (The development of the Received Text in the 1500s.) I hope you didn't just read over my "respectively". They mostly lost contact a...

Because the Peshitta is a revision ... I've never seen any real evidence for this claim. If you have any, please share. The Peshitta is radically different from the Curetonian and Old Syriac manuscripts, so it is unlikely to be a revision (they are also very different from each other.) The fact tha...

Smarter Christian Apologists like Snapp/Steven understand the problem the above creates for Christianity: 1) The primary Christian supposed historical assertion is that there was known historical witness to a resurrected Jesus. 2) It's generally thought that GMark is the first extant Gospel. 3) It'...

Even know that you finally actually read Black you omit the basics. ======================= David Alan Black: Mark published an edition first, without the ending. Years went by. The new ending may or may not, "most likely", have been written by Mark. ======================= This is not aut...

When you look at the Peshitta and compare it with Byzantine and Alexandrian variants, in a 3-way comparison, the result is about 75% Byzantine. This is a study of 200 major omission variants. I challenge spin to find 25 places where there are radical differences between the Syriac and both text line...

When you look at the Peshitta and compare it with Byzantine and Alexandrian variants, in a 3-way comparison, the result is about 75% Byzantine. This is a study of 200 major variants.

If your position is KJVOnly, or even Textus Receptus only, if you're a fundamentalist in inerrancy etc., it shouldn't even matter what the original text was, God guided the process of history to produce the pure TR or the KJV itself, everyone before the TR/KJV went to hell, all praise the holy KJV,...

Hi Ulan, If the church hierarchy unified the Greek and Latin textual traditions, over some unspecified centuries and some unspecified geography, why are the Syriac Peshitta manuscripts largely In agreement with the Greek Byzantine mss? And, more basically, why were the Greek and Latin textual tradit...

If I understand it correctly, Steven Avery's position is based on the point that he doesn't accept our two oldest existing bibles as authentic. Until a few years back, I accepted Vaticanus and Sinaiticus as authenic manuscripts of the Alexandrian text, and considered authenticity as slam-dunk. Now ...