(September 13, 2017 at 12:20 pm)Minimalist Wrote: BTW, we don't have any original writings by this paul fucker, either. It has been noted that no two manuscripts of any pauline horseshit agree with each other. Something doesn't pass the smell test here.
We don't have original copies of most of the writings from this time.
Do you have an example of where two manuscripts disagree with each other in something significant? From what I have been told the manuscript collection for the new testament is vast, consisting of earlier and more manuscripts than we have for most anything comparable for the time. It is also my understanding, that the collection of manuscripts support the consistency in transmission of the text. There are differences, but it is important to look at what those differences consist of. They are mostly spelling errors, transposing of words, or a missing jot or tilde (mundane errors, which are easily dismissed). There may may be a different use of words, which don't change the meaning, but are technically different. It is my understanding, that there are very very few variants, which have any doctrinal significance, and that we can weigh those, by looking at earlier or the majority of text (because we have so many).
So what is it, that you are saying, by saying that no two manuscripts agree with each other? Do you have evidence of something other, that is significant?
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
