Puritan’s Mind Special Offer
October 31, 2006
Around the Web
October 31, 2006
Favorite Papyrus
October 30, 2006
This is similar to my “Favorite Uncial” post
So here’s the question that i posted as a poll …
Which is the best papyrus (however you define best)?
* P38
* P45
* P46
* P48
* P52
* P66
* P69
* P72
* P74
* P75
* Other
I will keep you updated as to the votes in the comments section.
Also, i don’t ever think i told y’all what my responses would have been to these 2 polls.
Favorite uncial - Vaticanus
Favorite papyrus - P75
Vaticanus is probably the oldest nearly complete Greek Bible in existence. It is a text that dates before alterations are found in later manuscripts (1st half of the 4th century). It is relatively free from obvious transcriptional errors. It is probably the best representative of the Alexandrian text.
P75 was written around the beginning of the 3rd century. It’s text is very close to the Vaticanus, and that’s probably one of the reasons that it is my favorite. It is a text that reproduced its exemplar with little variation and liberty, very strictly reproducing the text.
Verse of the Week
October 27, 2006
Jn 14:6 (NASB) - Jesus *said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
—–
This verse speaks volumes as to the nature of God. God’s attributes are part of His essence. He not only shows the way, He is the way. He not only tells the truth, He is truth. He not only has life, He is life.
Human nature is quite different. Someone can say something funny without being naturally funny. Someone can say something intelligent without being naturally intelligent.
Around the Web
October 27, 2006
14 Anti-KJVO Theses
October 26, 2006
These are from the book that i am reading - The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism; By D.A. Carson
1. There is no unambiguous evidence that the Byzantine text-type was known before the middle of the fourth century.
2. The argument that defends the Byzantine tradition by appealing to the fact that most extant manuscripts of the Greek New Testament attest to this Byzantine text-type, is logically fallacious and historically naive.
3. The Byzantine text-type is demonstrably a secondary text.
4. The Alexandrian text-type has better credentials than any other text-type now available.
5. The argument to the effect that what the majority of believers in the history of the church have beleived is true, is ambiguous at best and theologically dangerous at worst; and as applied to textual criticism, the argument proves nothing very helpful anyway.
6. The argument that defends the Byzantine text by appealing to the providence of God is logically and theologically fallacious.
7. The argument that appeals to the fourth-century writing practices to deny the possibility that the Byzantine text is a conflation, is fallacious.
8. Textual arguments that depend on adopting the TR and comparing other text-types with it are guilty, methodologically speaking, of begging the issue; and in any case they present less than the whole truth.
9. The charge that the non-Byzantine text-types are theologically aberrant is fallacious.
10. The KJV was not accepted without a struggle, and some outstanding believers soon wanted to replace it.
11. The Byzantine text-type must not be thought to be the precise equivalent of the TR.
12. The argument that ties the adoption of the TR to verbal inspiration is logically and theologically fallacious.
13. Arguments that attempt to draw textual conclusions from a prejudicial selection of not immediately relevant data, or from a slanted use of terms, or by a slurring appeal to guilt by association, or by repeated appeal to false evidence, are not only misleading, but ought to be categorically rejected by Christians who, above all others, profess both to love truth and to love their brothers in Christ.
14. Adoption of the TR should not be made a criterion of orthodoxy.
Around the Web
October 25, 2006
BBC Internal Memo Admits Anti-Christian Bias
Achtung! Germany drags homeschool kids to class
Not only does the ESV have a blog
But the TNIV has a blog as well
I’m still waiting for the NASB to get a blog 
Jn 5:25 - the First Resurrection
October 25, 2006
There has been much discussion about what is meant by the first resurrection from Rev 20:5.
Perhaps Jn 5:25-29 has some clues as to what the 2 resurrections are.
“Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming, and is now here, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live. For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son also to have life in himself. And he has given him authority to execute judgment, because he is the Son of Man. Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment. (Joh 5:25-29, ESV)
In v.25 we see that there is a resurrection that Jesus says “is now here” when the dead hear His voice and live. This seems to be the first resurrection, that of being born again.
In v.28-29 Jesus only says that “a time is coming,” He does not claim that it is now here as the other verse did. This is the resurrection of the just and unjust, which would be the second resurrection - the resurrection of judgement.
Bruce Metzger’s Library Collection
October 24, 2006
I got this from Evangelical Textual Criticism Blog.
You can get books from Metzger’s collection online here…
Metzger’s Library Collection
