GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-07 > 1090208612


From: "Barrie J. Wright" <>
Subject: Re: Jesus
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:13:32 +0930
References: <84.2e6a05b2.2e2b360e@aol.com>


For the record, Gordon's opinion below is completely wrong.
There is a vast literature of 'lower criticism' that proves that the
texts, probably completed in present form before 100AD and almost all
before 80AD, have been copied with only very minor changes, none of
which affect the substance of Christian claims, except maybe the
highly-disputed ending of Mark - one small passage -and a few other bits.

We are dealing with copyists and editors over 50 years or less, not
imaginative plagiarists who are all over the place, Gordon.
Think about it...
They are full of convincing, accurate detail of place and time.
Luke-Acts, for instance, claims to be a sober account of contemporary
and near contemporary facts.
The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle has a different character, scope and
aim altogether.

The resulting NT documents are by far the best attested ancient documents
still in existence, being copied repeatedly with great care and some very
minor, explicable variations over time.
If I am wrong, show us the evidence and prove I am credulous to hold
this view.

'Interpretation' and copying are two quite different terms for different
activities.
I ask Gordon to return from ignorant rhetoric to scholarship.

Barrie J. Wright

----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Sunday, July 18, 2004 11:40 AM
Subject: Re: Jesus


>
> In a message dated 7/17/2004 8:14:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> writes:
>
> Similarly in this case. How many times was the Gospel of Luke copied
before
> the earliest copies we now have came into existence? How much were the
> gospels reconciled to each other? That's the problem.
> Will
>
>
>
> They should take a look at the many versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronocles
> and note how many variances there can be in the "interpretation" of any
> information. The Christian Bible has been "interpreted" so many times, in
both the
> languages used, and in the actual meanings, that it is doubtful if the
> original contrivers of the tome would recognize much of it.
>
> Gordon Hale
> Grand Prairie, Texas
>
> ______________________________








This thread: