tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post5167698427683147183..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Do We Have the Word of God in light of Textual Variation?Ryanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-66461900139448907772010-03-19T00:20:15.591-04:002010-03-19T00:20:15.591-04:00Brother Steve,
I think you are looking at this th...Brother Steve,<br /><br />I think you are looking at this the wrong way. Dusman thanked me, and I interpret that as a sign that he took my brief comment in the helpful spirit (however candid) in which it was intended. Improvement is more likely to be made when one notices where there is room for it. <br /><br />As for critiquing Bart Ehrman, btdt. It's precisely because Dr. Ehrman has a background in textual criticism that extra care is needed when describing this sort of manuscript-evidence, instead of simply absorbing Metzger's Textual Commentary, rephrasing it, and imagining that the work is done. <br /><br />And, no; the objections I have raised have not been adequately addressed by Bock, Carson, Fee, or Wallace. Wallace is the best textual critic of the four, and in Wallace's recent comments about Mark 16:9-20 in "Perspectives on the Ending of Mark," he made several errors. And he still hasn't corrected the citation-errors about Mk. 16:9-20 in the NET, even though he was informed about them years ago. <br /><br />If there is wisdom in fixing the fence where it needs mending, then this was a suitable time for brief comments such as mine. If the only cost of improving Dusman's future statements about Mark 16:9-20 is that I'm called a mutinous back-stabber, I think I can live with that absurd and unfair charge. <br /><br />Yours in Christ,<br /><br />James Snapp, Jr.James Snapp Jrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09493891380752272603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-16241817459069137652010-03-18T21:55:57.044-04:002010-03-18T21:55:57.044-04:00Mr. Snapp,
When a Christian evangelist/apologist ...Mr. Snapp,<br /><br />When a Christian evangelist/apologist like Dustin does a post critiquing a sworn enemy of the faith such as Bart Ehrman, it is mutinous on your part to give public aid and comfort to the enemy by knifing him in the back. One Bart Ehrman is already one Bart Ehrman too many. We don't need more enemy collaborators. <br /><br />I'd add that the sorts of objections you raised have already been addressed by a variety of NT scholars and textual critics (e.g. Darrell Bock, D. A. Carson, Gordon Fee, Dan Wallace). <br /><br />Go ride your hobby horse somewhere else. This is not the time or place.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-57132592407720945652010-03-18T17:50:20.659-04:002010-03-18T17:50:20.659-04:00For those who are interested, I had a lengthy disc...For those who are interested, I had a lengthy discussion with James Snapp regarding the ending of Mark in <a href="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2010/01/do-modern-versions-change-key-doctrines.html" rel="nofollow">a thread earlier this year</a>. His last replies to me were posted around the time when Dave Armstrong began his responses to me on other issues, and I've been writing a lot of material in response to Dave since then. I also had some overtime at work and other responsibilities to tend to. I should be returning to the discussion with James later this year, and I intend to let him know by email if I decide to continue the discussion with him (I haven't read through his latest replies yet, so I can't judge whether there's anything there I'd want to respond to or how much of it). But what's posted already should be useful for anybody who's interested in the subject.Jason Engwerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17031011335190895123noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-4045428331360788412010-03-18T02:43:52.747-04:002010-03-18T02:43:52.747-04:00I don't spell well eitherI don't spell well eitherreMARCablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04640004395232609103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-13682201744402440452010-03-18T02:41:59.982-04:002010-03-18T02:41:59.982-04:00God is a living and breathing God. He put his bre...God is a living and breathing God. He put his breah in us and is not prone to mistakes. We are exposed to what the Holy Spirit deems we need for the growth this shot time on earth is desingned for. Just believe we are loved by a God whose plan is so much larger than we can comprehend. "Now that your rose in in bloom a light hits the gloom of the grave."reMARCablehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04640004395232609103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-68010032955215593782010-03-17T15:59:22.749-04:002010-03-17T15:59:22.749-04:00Hi John,
It's a complex issue indeed and I ce...Hi John,<br /><br />It's a complex issue indeed and I certainly am not an expert, but I know enough to know when I'm being snowed by guys like Ehrman as well as KJV-only guys. I recommend all Christians to do a little reading in the field of textual criticism and become familiar with the basic issues of canonicity, textual transmission, etc. so that they can answer these common objections. Thanks for reading!Dusmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18050174688923887698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-50307385495249992262010-03-17T10:40:03.567-04:002010-03-17T10:40:03.567-04:00Dusman -- thank you for putting this together. I r...Dusman -- thank you for putting this together. I recently was in a discussion with a commenter who made very Ehrman-esque arguments, and this, really, was the response:<br /><br /><i>Why should we believe textual variation precludes inspiration when Jesus and the apostles had no such standard given the fact that both Jesus and the apostles freely quoted from the Septuagint and sometimes they quoted a textual variant? (!) They not only rejected Ehrman’s assumption, but they also, (like the KJV translators) believed that even imperfect translations could be called “The Word of God”.</i><br /><br />It's a very complex situation that very few of us are qualified to comment upon, but your last paragraph up above is a remarkable summary.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.com