dumb questions I was emailed

[Chadrho]

There are no original manuscripts.
They are calling copies. of copies, of copies, of manuscripts "manuscripts".
That's not what they are.

Here's the oldest fragment they have. What they call a manuscript.

View attachment 37225

Oldest Gospel of John fragment - Discover Historic Jesus

THE RYLANDS LIBRARY PAPYRUS P-52, ALSO KNOWN AS THE ST. […]

discoverhistoricjesus.com

/

It's almost as if God wanted to make sure folks wouldn't fall into idolatry. Ha! *We'll find a way around that*

 

[St. SteVen]

It's almost as if God wanted to make sure folks wouldn't fall into idolatry. Ha! *We'll find a way around that*

You misspelled Bibliolatry. - LOL

/

 

[BarneyFife]

Did Adam, Eve, and all the animals have bumholes…did they poop, or is that a result of the corruption of sin? How does a YEC answer such a dilemma? Can a YEC honestly make the seemingly ridiculous claim “no need to poo and wee in the garden of eden” in answer to such a question?

I really like this one, because only natural selection could account for the advancement human waste has made over recorded history, right?

.

 

[Chadrho]

I really like this one, because only natural selection could account for the advancement human waste has made over recorded history, right?

.

We should all thank God for the sewer system. Evolution took a good turn there. Mysophobia was a true nightmare prior to pipes and gravity.

 

[TLHKAJ]

The evening and the morning were the first day. What determines the evening and morning?

Sounds very plain to me.

 

[TLHKAJ]

Well God said there was light on the first day and I believe him so something took place of the Sun.

John chapter one confirms this, too. Notice where "Light" is capitalized, showing Who it is referring to.

John 1:1-10
[1]In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[2]The same was in the beginning with God.
[3]All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
[4]In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
[5]And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
[6]There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
[7]The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
[8]He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
[9]That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
[10]He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

 

[St. SteVen]

I really like this one, because only natural selection could account for the advancement human waste has made over recorded history, right?

.

The advancement of human waste?
Originally known as the Bowel Movement. - LOL

/

 

[St. SteVen]

We should all thank God for the sewer system. Evolution took a good turn there. Mysophobia was a true nightmare prior to pipes and gravity.

In the original world war we saw the use of germ warfare.
Complete with graffiti slogans. Like...
"Brown spots on your hut by Hoo Flung Poo."

/

 

[Lambano]

Well, because it's a given when a flesh and blood person eats food ....and since it isn't written that the disciples did #1 or 2 ....do you think they didn't either?? It's not relevant to the message of the Bible. It's just common sense that He did. He came in the likeness of fallen, sinful flesh. He had a body just like ours. He got hungry. He got thirsty. It had to come out.

The question-behind-the-question is, what was/is Jesus Christ's real nature? And that is a much more serious question than my indulging in some childish potty humor. (Though Valentinus apparently seriously contemplated Jesus's toilet habits.) Even today, I have heard Christians say that Jesus could not have had "real" flesh because flesh is sinful, and Christ could not be sinful. (They're not swayed by 1 John 4:3.) This is called the "Docetic Heresy", and apparently the early church considered it a serious Christological issue.

 

[Lambano]

I'm Farticus!

No, I'M Farticus!

No, .... Okay children, that's enough.

 

[Lambano]

Jesus talks about it here.

Mark 7:18-19 NIV
“Are you so dull?” he asked.
“Don’t you see that nothing that enters a person from the outside can defile them?
19 For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.”
(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)

/

Okay, that's one of my pet peeves with the translators. The Greek reads καὶ εἰς τὸν ἀφεδρῶνα, (kai eis ton aphedrona), literally, "and into the latrine". I checked over ten translations, and only one translates it so. What, do they think our sensitivities are so tender we would be offended by blunt talk about body functions?

The KJV uses the phrase, "into the draught". Apparently, this word is pronounced "draft" and in UK-English has something to do with beer. Okay; I'll give this one to the KJV.

 

[St. SteVen]

Okay, that's one of my pet peeves with the translators. The Greek reads καὶ εἰς τὸν ἀφεδρῶνα, (kai eis ton aphedrona), literally, "and into the latrine". I checked over ten translations, and only one translates it so. What, do they think our sensitivities are so tender we would be offended by blunt talk about body functions?

The KJV uses the phrase, "into the draught". Apparently, this word is pronounced "draft" and in UK-English has something to do with beer. Okay; I'll give this one to the KJV.

That clears things up.
I always thought it was about an out-of-body experience. My bad.
(the bowels of mercy?) Colossians 3:12 KJV

/

 

[Lambano]

(the bowels of mercy?) Colossians 3:12 KJV

That KJV phrase always cracks me up.

That and "rendering unto the wife her 'due benevolence'", 1 Corinthians 7:3 KVJ.

 

[St. SteVen]

That KJV phrase always cracks me up.

That and "rendering unto the wife her 'due benevolence'", 1 Corinthians 7:3 KVJ.

Yes, that's an occasion every good husband should rise to. - LOL

/

 

[Lambano]

Yes, that's an occasion every good husband should rise to. - LOL

/

Would a KJV-only wife say to her husband, "I thank thee, my beloved, for thou hath rendered unto me three benevolences"?

(Well, this is the "dumb questions" thread.)

(And actually, that sounds kinda sweet.)

 

[St. SteVen]

Would a KJV-only wife say to her husband, "I thank thee, my beloved, for thou hath rendered unto me three benevolences"?

I suppose so. - LOL

 

[Big Boy Johnson]

Meet the Translators - NIV Bible

Absolutely meaningless! The vast majority of those that teach false doctrine have degrees from various institutions which is WHERE they were indoctrinated by satan to be carnally minded concerning God's Word and accept the wisdom of man rather than the Wisdom of God.

There are no original manuscripts.
They are calling copies. of copies, of copies, of manuscripts "manuscripts".
That's not what they are.

Here's the oldest fragment they have. What they call a manuscript.

Un-believers burn in hell for all eternity you know....

 

[BarneyFife]

There are no original manuscripts.
They are calling copies. of copies, of copies, of manuscripts "manuscripts".
That's not what they are.

Here's the oldest fragment they have. What they call a manuscript.

View attachment 37225

Oldest Gospel of John fragment - Discover Historic Jesus

THE RYLANDS LIBRARY PAPYRUS P-52, ALSO KNOWN AS THE ST. […]

discoverhistoricjesus.com

/

Isn't there a difference between the term "manuscript" and "original manuscript?"

I read a lot about this stuff many years ago.

I even read Wilkinson's "Our Authorized Bible Vindicated." I have no idea how I got through it.

What I get from this is pretty much the same thing I get from nearly all issues that are polarized:

Nothing.

The Bible makes sense to me but most of what people say about it is utter confusion to me.

.

 

[St. SteVen]

Isn't there a difference between the term "manuscript" and "original manuscript?"

That's the problem right there.

The SAY "manuscript" when they MEAN manuscript copies.
They are even numbered "manuscripts" (copies) for the same book.
Depending on where they found the COPY and the approximated COPY date.
Like Papyrus P-52, mentioned earlier. Which was only a fragment.
From a very early manuscript COPY.

So, the main difference between the terms "manuscript" and "original manuscript"
is that THERE ARE NO original manuscripts. They actually use the term "autograph"
to refer to what they attempt to determine what the "original manuscript" said.

And part of the problem in New Testament translation is that they are "blessed"
with SO MANY copies, that it takes a lot of work to sort through it all.

When comparing all the copies, they have to identify all the scribal errors,
additions, embellishments, and deletions, to get to their best guess.

After that, the text is subject to the
doctrinal biases of the translators.
With their chosen method of Textual Criticism being:
Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus.
And errors in the original translations can carry forward
as a matter of tradition. What a mess.

We hear none of this at church. What did the church tell us?
"That Bible in your hands is the Word of God.
Every word is God-breathed and inerrant."

/

​

 

[Scott Downey]

John chapter one confirms this, too. Notice where "Light" is capitalized, showing Who it is referring to.

John 1:1-10
[1]In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
[2]The same was in the beginning with God.
[3]All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
[4]In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
[5]And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
[6]There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
[7]The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
[8]He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
[9]That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
[10]He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

In the New Heavens and New Earth, the sun is deprecated.

1. Revelation 21:23
   The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light.
   
   
2. Revelation 22:5
   There shall be no night there: They need no lamp nor light of the sun, for the Lord God gives them light. And they shall reign forever and ever.