now that i've kept you in suspense for about 1 week, here's the answers
1.if you believed that god kept his promise...
turns out this did occur; around the middle ages, when an english bible was greatly needed for the masses, as a unanimous one did not exist yet, the great majority of hebrew and greek texts, regardless of time it was produced, were thoroughly examined by the greatest of biblical scholars, and found this: 95% of all of them agreed with one another; only 5% did not. GOD DID KEEP HIS PROMISE! the texts that were in majority of agreement were then pooled together, and then a greek text was written. this was called the "textus receptus." this text would become the basis for which was used to write the kjv of the bible.
if you believe the bible to be the pure word of god, then this is your book.
no other single bible version uses this method.
2.if you believed that god didn't keep his promise...
this method was also used; modern day biblical scholars(let's say, somewhere around the mid 19th century) decided that only the earliest biblical texts could be used; the earlier, the more accurate. they were able to find 2 biblical texts, which still remain the earliest than anybody else's, that exists(around 200 AD i would say? gotta go back and check). these two are named the vaticanus and the sinaicitus; the 1st was found in the Vatican, and lay in excellant condition, but was virtually unused for 1000s of years. it lacked MANY key christian doctrines. the sinaicitus was found in a wastebasket in a monastery at the base of mount sinai. it was reedited so many times and scribbled so badly that anybody staring at it could tell you that it was a bad job. both not only disagreed with most texts and lacked MANY verses, but also disagreed with each other. and yet... both were used to create all other bible versions that were NOT the kjv... niv, tniv, rsv, nlt, nasb, nkjv, etc.
furthermore, what did the scholars do when they came across a verse where both texts disagreed? they had an expert scholar pick what they thought was the right one. so in essence, you're not reading the word of god; you're reading what a scholar thinks is the word of god.
yes, what i'm stating down here is VERY contraversial. i am basically saying the kjv is the only english bible you should be reading. you may be thinking i'm nuts. you may be thinking i've been too gullible, and picked this up from some random joe's site. but we know something like this is not found on biblegospel.com. would never be. that's why i believe now it's my turn to research in the tradition of the skeptics-turned-christians. except now i'm travelling a road is even less clear-cut. evidence is truth, and once i compile enough and can safely say i've looked at the majority of what matters, i'll be able to determine the truth, whatever it is, and it'll set me free. but don't worry; jerm and jon are skeptical enough to keep me in check every step of the way.
only pray that i won't give up on this quest; most likely it'll take all of my spring quarter and maybe 1 year to more than 3. and that i don't lose sight of everything else in the persuit(grades, jobs/internships, spiritual life, etc)
yeah... jon and jerm are going along for this ride whether they like it not.
one thing's for certain though... no matter the outcome, i think i'll end up a changed man.
Friday, April 08, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment