. Listening to the Steven Anderson discussion with James White: . Hi, . The Full Two and a Half Hour Conversation with Steven Anderson aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2014/08/11/the-full-two-and-a-half-hour-conversation-with-steven-anderson/ , Around the twenty minute mark, two discussions of some interest. . The bogus Granville Sharp rule .. always a major James White try. As with many AV defenders, Steven Anderson takes an incorrect tact, essentially that the alternate translations do not have a substantive difference. There is a CARM thread that can be very educational on the history and logic of the rule. . Circular reasoning. Here Steven Anderson is a good listen. Taking a type of persuppositional approach. There is another point. Someone like myself came to an AV belief though study of textual concepts and paradigms, combined later with the preservational imperative, pointing to a faith-consistent Bible belief. It will be interesting to see if SA moves in that direction. . ========================= . At the 30-minute area, SA uses the diamond vs. counterfeit (cubic zirconia) analogy, expressed well. He distances himself from the acrostic algebra of Gail Riplinger, which for some reason JW uses as his analogy (along with theorizing that a NKJV reader might feel the opposite.) Then the mormon attitude (remember burning in the bosom is compared) and SA says that this is simply objectively wrong, and not an analogy. So there is a lot of objective/subjective back-and-forth. . ========================= . At 47:00, into Vaticanus and Sinaitcus. The answer of James White is to quickly try to attack Erasmus first edition :). . Ok, at 51:00 a Sinaiticus discussion begins. At a bit after 53:00 there is a limited discussion of Erasmus, his request to Bombasius for a couple of readings including the heavenly witnesses and Vaticanus. James White does not understsand that the important issue there was whether the heavenly witnesses had early Greek ms asttestation, not any great significance of Vaticanus. JW does not mention that later Erasmus received over 350 readings from Sepulveda (from memory) with minimal effect, mostly one marginal note in Acts. . ========================= . Steven Anderson 55:18 the Textus Receptus represents one stream of the Byzantine . Not a proper understanding of the Reformation Bible development. . ========================= . James White 55:37 there was an imbalanced prejudice on the part of Westcott and Hort for Aleph & B . Followed by the typical dance, including absurdities about the papyri. Then Ehrman is brought into the discussion. . ========================= . At 57:00 SA introduces the lectio difficilior theory as one of two principles of modern TC to discuss, goes into John 1:18. . John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. . (the textus corruptus has the Arian only begotten God/god (e.g. NAS) that they now try to smooth to a different translation.) . JW switches to the idea that there will some manuscript somewhere (58:18) that will harmonize perceived differences in the synoptics, either accidentally or deliberately. . The basic issue gets lost in JW meandering, we will see if it comes back. ========================= . 1 Timothy 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. . (the corrupt text has, literally, who was manifest.) Steven Anderson 1:01 Well you go with the King James reading on that anyway . kudos to SA, he prepared a bit. Lets watch JW backtrack and dance and see if SA quotes him directly (as I have done on various threads.) . ok, SA nails the dancing hypocrite, referring to what JW said in a London debate, however he could have been prepared with the quotes from the book and the blog where JW clearly writes that he prefers the reading God was manifest... Now he takes a totally different position. . ========================= , 1:02 on to the shorter reading. John 5:4 is a verse discussed. Again, not much substance to the discussion, although it is listenable. . John 5:3-4 In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water. For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. . Critical text leaves out all of John 5:4 and latter part of 5:3. av1611/kjbp/charts/themagicmarker.html . ========================= . 105:50 Go to verses. (SA should read each verse when referenced in the pure AV) . Luke 2:33. And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him. . CT - the childs father and mother . SA never points out that the Greek, Latin, versional and ECW evidence is all overwhelming for the pure Bible text. . e.g. LaParola laparola.net/greco/index.php?rif1=49&rif2=2:33 . This is a missing link in virtually every verse discussed. . 109:30 - JW attacks Luke 9 and 22 (actually Acts) saying the mormons use that as a contradiction. He does not attack the TR text, he falsely claims an AV inaccuracy in translation. . Then before a translational point by SA on: . 1 Corinthians 9:27 But I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway. . JW raises at 1:10:20: . Luke 2:22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord; . where most versions have the errant their purification including earlier TR editions. . ========================= . Steven Avery
Posted on: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 00:06:56 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015