Search This Blog

Tuesday, 10 December 2013

The Watchtower Society's Commentary on Mark's Gospel.

A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article
 
 
MARK, GOOD NEWS ACCORDING TO
 
 
The divinely inspired record of the ministry of Jesus Christ written by John Mark. This account of “the good news about Jesus Christ” begins with the work of Christ’s forerunner, John the Baptizer, and concludes with a report of the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ resurrection. Hence, it covers the time from the spring of 29 to the spring of 33 C.E.—Mr 1:1.
This Gospel, the shortest of all four, is a rapid-moving and descriptive record of the ministry of Jesus Christ as the miracle-working Son of God. Frequent is the use of “immediately” or “at once.” (Mr 1:10, 12, 18, 21, 29) The account is almost evenly divided between conversation and action.
Source of Information. Ancient tradition indicates that Peter provided the basic information for Mark’s Gospel, and this would agree with the fact that Mark was associated with Peter in Babylon. (1Pe 5:13) According to Origen, Mark composed his Gospel “in accordance with Peter’s instructions.” (The Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius, VI, XXV, 3-7) In his work, “Against Marcion” (IV, V), Tertullian says that the Gospel of Mark “may be affirmed to be Peter’s, whose interpreter Mark was.” (The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, p. 350) Eusebius gives the statement of “John the presbyter” as quoted by Papias (c. 140 C.E.): “And the Presbyter used to say this, ‘Mark became Peter’s interpreter and wrote accurately all that he remembered, not, indeed, in order, of the things said or done by the Lord. . . . Mark did nothing wrong in thus writing down single points as he remembered them. For to one thing he gave attention, to leave out nothing of what he had heard and to make no false statements in them.’”—The Ecclesiastical History, III, XXXIX, 12-16.
John Mark evidently also had other sources of information. Since Jesus’ early disciples met in the home of his mother (Ac 12:12), Mark must have been acquainted with persons other than Peter who had known Jesus Christ well, individuals who had seen him doing his work and had heard him preach and teach. Probably being the “certain young man” whom those arresting Christ tried to seize but who “got away naked,” Mark himself was apparently not totally without personal contact with Jesus.—Mr 14:51, 52.
Evidently Written With Non-Jews in Mind. While the good news according to Mark would interest and benefit Jewish readers, apparently it was not written specifically for them. It seems to have been composed primarily for non-Jewish readers, especially the Romans. Its conciseness and abrupt character have been viewed as particularly suitable for the intellect of Roman readers. Latin terms are sometimes transliterated into Greek, as when the Greek word prai·to′ri·on is used for the Latin term praetorium. (Mr 15:16, Int) Also, the Greek word ken·ty·ri′on is employed for the Latin word centurio, an officer in command of a hundred soldiers.—Mr 15:39, Int.
The account contains explanations that would not have been necessary for Jewish readers. It indicates that the Jordan was a river and shows that the temple could be seen from the Mount of Olives. (Mr 1:5; 13:3) It mentions that the Pharisees practiced “fasting” and that the Sadducees “say there is no resurrection.” (2:18; 12:18) This Gospel also explains that the Passover victim was sacrificed on “the first day of unfermented cakes” and that “Preparation” was “the day before the sabbath.”—14:12; 15:42.
Whereas it would not normally have been necessary to explain Semitic terms for Jewish readers in general, Mark’s Gospel provides many of such explanations. Interpretations are given for “Boanerges” (“Sons of Thunder”), “Tal′i·tha cu′mi” (“Maiden, I say to you, Get up!”), “corban” (“a gift dedicated to God”), and “E′li, E′li, la′ma sa·bach·tha′ni?” (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”).—Mr 3:17; 5:41; 7:11; 15:34.
Time and Place of Composition. According to ancient tradition, Mark’s Gospel was first made public in Rome, this being the testimony of such early writers as Clement, Eusebius, and Jerome. Mark was in Rome during Paul’s first imprisonment there. (Col 4:10; Phm 1, 23, 24) Thereafter he was with Peter in Babylon. (1Pe 5:13) Then, during Paul’s second imprisonment in Rome, Paul asked that Timothy come soon and bring Mark with him. (2Ti 4:11) Probably Mark did then return to Rome. Since no mention is made of Jerusalem’s destruction in fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy, Mark must have compiled his account before that event in 70 C.E. His presence in Rome at least once, and likely twice, during the years 60-65 C.E. suggests that Mark may have completed his Gospel there sometime during those years.
Some Unique Features of Mark’s Account. Though largely covering material similar to that of Matthew and Luke, Mark also provides supplementary details. Some of these illuminate how Jesus felt about certain things. He was ‘grieved at the insensibility of the hearts’ of persons who objected to his healing a man’s withered hand on the Sabbath. (Mr 3:5) When Jesus received a poor reception from people in his home territory, “he wondered at their lack of faith.” (6:6) And he “felt love” for the rich young man who asked about the requirements for gaining everlasting life.—10:21.
Also unique with Mark’s account are certain points regarding the end of Jesus’ earthly life. He reports that at Jesus’ trial the false witnesses were not in agreement. (Mr 14:59) The passerby impressed into service to carry Jesus’ torture stake was Simon of Cyrene, “the father of Alexander and Rufus.” (15:21) And Mark relates that Pilate made sure that Jesus was dead before granting permission for Joseph of Arimathea to take the body for burial.—15:43-45.
One of the four illustrations of Jesus found in Mark’s Gospel is unique. (Mr 4:26-29) The account mentions at least 19 miracles performed by Jesus Christ. Two of these (the healing of a deaf man who also had a speech impediment and the cure of a certain blind man) are contained only in Mark’s Gospel.—Mr 7:31-37; 8:22-26.
References to the Hebrew Scriptures. Although Mark appears to have written primarily for the Romans, this record does contain references to and quotations from the Hebrew Scriptures. The work of John the Baptizer is shown to have been a fulfillment of Isaiah 40:3 and Malachi 3:1. (Mr 1:2-4) Also to be found in the account are instances of Jesus’ applying, quoting from, or alluding to the Hebrew Scriptures. These include: Giving God mere lip service (Mr 7:6, 7; Isa 29:13); honoring parents (Mr 7:10; Ex 20:12; 21:17); the creation of man and woman and the institution of marriage (Mr 10:6-9; Ge 1:27; 2:24); various commandments (Mr 10:19; Ex 20:12-16; Le 19:13); Jesus’ comments regarding the temple (Mr 11:17; Isa 56:7; Jer 7:11); his statement about being rejected (Mr 12:10, 11; Ps 118:22, 23); Jehovah’s words to Moses at the burning thornbush (Mr 12:26; Ex 3:2, 6); the two great commandments on love (Mr 12:29-31; De 6:4, 5; Le 19:18); the prophetic words of Jehovah to David’s Lord on the subjugation of foes (Mr 12:36; Ps 110:1); the scattering of Jesus’ disciples (Mr 14:27; Zec 13:7); Jesus’ statement on being forsaken by God (Mr 15:34; Ps 22:1); his instructions to a healed leper (Mr 1:44; Le 14:10, 11); and his prophetic statement regarding the disgusting thing causing desolation (Mr 13:14; Da 9:27).
The references to the Hebrew Scriptures in Mark’s account amply illustrate that Jesus Christ had confidence in them and used those Scriptures in his ministry. The Gospel also provides a basis for becoming better acquainted with the Son of man, who “came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his soul a ransom in exchange for many.”—Mr 10:45.
Long and Short Conclusions. Some have thought that Mark 16:8, which ends with the words “and they told nobody anything, for they were in fear,” is too abrupt to have been the original ending of this Gospel. However, that need not be concluded in view of Mark’s general style. Also, the fourth-century scholars Jerome and Eusebius agree that the authentic record closes with the words “for they were in fear.”—Jerome, letter 120, question 3, as published in Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, Vienna and Leipzig, 1912, Vol. LV, p. 481; Eusebius, “Ad Marinum,” I, as published in Patrologia Graeca, Paris, 1857, Vol. XXII, col. 937.
There are a number of manuscripts and versions that add a long or a short conclusion after these words. The long conclusion (consisting of 12 verses) is found in the Alexandrine Manuscript, the Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus, and the Bezae Codices. It also appears in the Latin Vulgate, the Curetonian Syriac, and the Syriac Peshitta. But it is omitted in the Sinaitic Manuscript, the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209, the Sinaitic Syriac codex, and the Armenian Version. Certain late manuscripts and versions contain the short conclusion. The Codex Regius of the eighth century C.E. has both conclusions, giving the shorter conclusion first. It prefixes a note to each conclusion, saying that these passages are current in some quarters, though it evidently recognized neither of them as authoritative.
In commenting on the long and short conclusions of the Gospel of Mark, Bible translator Edgar J. Goodspeed noted: “The Short Conclusion connects much better with Mark 16:8 than does the Long, but neither can be considered an original part of the Gospel of Mark.”—The Goodspeed Parallel New Testament, 1944, p. 127.
[Box on page 339]
HIGHLIGHTS OF MARK
Mark’s concise, fast-moving account of Jesus’ life, presenting Jesus as the miracle-working Son of God
The shortest Gospel, it was the third to be written (c. 60-65 C.E.), evidently with non-Jews in mind
Jesus conducts a vigorous campaign of Kingdom preaching
Jesus is baptized and begins preaching, “The kingdom of God has drawn near” (1:9-11, 14, 15)
He invites Simon, Andrew, James, and John to leave the fishing business and be his followers (1:16-21)
After preaching in the synagogue at Capernaum, he proceeds to preach throughout the whole of Galilee (1:21, 22, 35-39)
Levi, a tax collector, responds to invitation to be Jesus’ follower (2:14-17)
Jesus forms a group of 12 apostles to preach (3:13-19)
He uses many illustrations when teaching about the Kingdom of God so that only worthy ones get the full sense of what he says (4:1-34)
Jesus encounters lack of faith while witnessing in his home territory (6:1-6)
He steps up the preaching activity by sending out his apostles (6:7-13)
His activity reaches into Phoenicia and the Decapolis (7:24, 31)
Jesus is transfigured in Kingdom glory (9:1-8)
Outside Jerusalem, he prophesies about ‘the coming of the Son of man with great power and glory’ (13:1-37)
At the Lord’s Evening Meal, Jesus promises that his followers will be with him in the Kingdom (14:12-31)
The miracle-working Son of God
At the synagogue in Capernaum, he frees a man from demon possession; afterward, he heals Simon’s mother-in-law and cures many others of various afflictions (1:23-34, 40-42)
By curing a paralytic, Jesus demonstrates his power to forgive sins (2:1-12)
Sufferers crowd in from all parts seeking relief (3:1-12)
After calming a storm on the Sea of Galilee, he expels demons from a man and allows them to enter a herd of swine (4:35–5:17)
He heals a woman suffering from a flow of blood and resurrects Jairus’ daughter (5:21-43)
After feeding 5,000 with two fishes and five loaves, Jesus walks on the windswept Sea of Galilee (6:35-52)
He casts a demon from the daughter of a Syrophoenician woman and cures a deaf man having a speech impediment (7:24-37)
He feeds 4,000 with seven loaves; at Bethsaida, he restores sight to a blind man (8:1-9, 22-26)
From a speechless, deaf boy, Jesus expels a demon that had resisted the disciples; he restores sight to a blind beggar at Jericho (9:14-29; 10:46-52)
He curses a fig tree, which subsequently withers (11:12-14, 20)
Opposers of God’s Son are unsuccessful
After Satan’s efforts at temptation in the wilderness, angels minister to Jesus (1:12, 13)
When scribes of the Pharisees criticize his eating with tax collectors and sinners, Jesus refutes them (2:15-17)
Later the Pharisees object to his disciples plucking heads of grain on the Sabbath and Jesus’ healing on the Sabbath; they join the Herodians in wanting to destroy him (2:23–3:6)
Jesus convincingly refutes the accusation that he expels demons by means of Satan (3:20-30)
Jesus’ forerunner John the Baptizer is beheaded, but Jesus continues to teach (6:14-29, 34)
Pharisees and scribes protest that his disciples disregard their tradition about hand washing; Jesus exposes their hypocrisy and explains the real source of uncleanness (7:1-23)
Pharisees question Jesus regarding divorce in order to test him, but without success (10:1-12)
Chief priests, scribes, and older men challenge Jesus’ authority after he cleanses the temple, but he silences them (11:15-18, 27-33)
He tells the parable of the vineyard to expose the opposition of the religious leaders to God’s will and their intent to kill Jesus; these seek to seize him but fear the crowd (12:1-12)
Pharisees and Herodians ask Jesus whether it is right to pay taxes to Caesar; Sadducees pose a difficult question about the resurrection. All fail to trap Jesus (12:13-27)
Judas betrays Jesus; Jesus is arrested and the Sanhedrin judges him worthy of death; nevertheless, he foretells he will ‘sit at the right hand of power and come with the clouds of heaven’ (14:1, 2, 10, 11, 32-65)
Pilate is pressured into condemning Jesus to death; Jesus dies on the stake and is buried (15:1-47)
Angels announce the resurrection of Jesus (16:1-8)

The transmission of the sacred text

A reproduction of the Watchtower Society's article
 
MANUSCRIPTS OF THE BIBLE
 
 
The Holy Scriptures have a superhuman origin as to content but a human history as to their writing and preservation. Moses began compiling them under divine inspiration in 1513 B.C.E., and the apostle John wrote the final portion thereof more than 1,600 years later. The Bible was not originally one book, but as time passed, a demand arose for copies of its various books. This was so, for instance, after the Babylonian exile, for not all released Jews returned to the land of Judah. Instead, many settled elsewhere, and synagogues sprang up throughout the vast territory of the resultant Jewish Dispersion. Scribes prepared copies of the Scriptures needed for these synagogues where the Jews gathered to hear the reading of God’s Word. (Ac 15:21) In later times, among Christ’s followers, conscientious copyists labored to reproduce the inspired writings for the benefit of the multiplying Christian congregations so that there might be an interchange and general circulation of these.—Col 4:16.
Before printing from movable type became common (from the 15th century C.E. onward), the original Bible writings and also copies of them were handwritten. Hence, they are called manuscripts (Latin, manu scriptus, “written by hand”). A Bible manuscript is a handwritten copy of the Scriptures, the whole or in part, as distinguished from one that is printed. Bible manuscripts were produced principally in the form of rolls and codices.
Materials. There are leather, papyrus, and vellum manuscripts of the Scriptures. The noted Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah, for instance, is a leather roll. Papyrus, a type of paper made from the fibers of a water plant, was used for Bible manuscripts in the original languages and for translations thereof until about the fourth century C.E. At that time its use for Bible manuscripts began to be superseded by the use of vellum, a fine grade of parchment generally made from calf, lamb, or goat skins, a further development of the earlier use of animal skins as writing material. Such manuscripts as the renowned Codex Sinaiticus (Sinaitic Manuscript) and the Codex Vaticanus (Vatican Manuscript No. 1209) of the fourth century C.E. are parchment, or vellum, codices.
A palimpsest (Lat., palimpsestus; Gr., pa·lim′pse·stos, meaning “scraped again”) is a manuscript from which earlier writing was removed or scraped off to make room for later writing. A noted Bible palimpsest is the Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus of the fifth century C.E. If the earlier writing (the writing scraped off) is the important one on the palimpsest, scholars can often read this erased writing by employing technical means that include the use of chemical reagents and photography. Some manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures are lectionaries, selected Bible readings for use at religious services.
Styles of Writing. Bible manuscripts written in Greek (whether translations of the Hebrew Scriptures, or copies of the Christian Greek Scriptures, or both) can be divided, or classified, as to writing style, which is also an aid in dating them. The older style (employed especially down to the ninth century C.E.) is the uncial manuscript, written in large, separated capital letters. In it there is generally no word separation, and punctuation and accent marks are lacking. The Codex Sinaiticus is such an uncial manuscript. Changes in writing style began to develop in the sixth century, eventually leading (in the ninth century C.E.) to the cursive, or minuscule, manuscript, written in smaller letters, many of which were joined in a running or flowing writing style. The majority of extant manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures have a cursive script. Cursive manuscripts remained in vogue until the inception of printing.
Copyists. As far as is known today, no handwritten original, or autograph, manuscripts of the Bible are in existence. Yet the Bible has been preserved in accurate, reliable form because Biblical copyists in general, accepting the Scriptures as being divinely inspired, sought perfection in their arduous labor of producing manuscript copies of God’s Word.
The men who copied the Hebrew Scriptures in the days of Jesus Christ’s ministry on earth and for centuries before that time were called scribes (Heb., soh·pherim′). Among the early scribes was Ezra, spoken of in the Scriptures as “a skilled copyist.” (Ezr 7:6) Later scribes made some deliberate alterations of the Hebrew text. But their scribal successors, the Masoretes, detected these and recorded them in the Masora, or notes appearing in the margins of the Hebrew Masoretic text they produced.
Copyists of the Christian Greek Scriptures also made earnest efforts to reproduce faithfully the text of the Scriptures.
What assurance is there that the Bible has not been changed?
Despite the care exercised by copyists of Bible manuscripts, a number of small scribal errors and alterations crept into the text. On the whole, these are insignificant and have no bearing on the Bible’s general integrity. They have been detected and corrected by means of careful scholastic collation or critical comparison of the many extant manuscripts and ancient versions. Critical study of the Hebrew text of the Scriptures commenced toward the end of the 18th century. Benjamin Kennicott published at Oxford (in 1776-1780) the readings of over 600 Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts, and the Italian scholar Giambernardo de Rossi published at Parma comparisons of 731 manuscripts in 1784 to 1798. Master texts of the Hebrew Scriptures were also produced by the German scholar Baer and, more recently, by C. D. Ginsburg. Hebrew scholar Rudolf Kittel released in 1906 the first edition of his Biblia Hebraica (The Hebrew Bible), providing therein a textual study through a footnote service, comparing many Hebrew manuscripts of the Masoretic text. The basic text he used was the Ben Hayim text. But, when the older and superior Ben Asher Masoretic texts became available, Kittel undertook the production of an entirely new third edition, which was completed by his colleagues after his death.
The 7th, 8th, and 9th editions of the Biblia Hebraica (1951-1955) furnished the basic text used to render the Hebrew Scriptures into English in the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures originally published in 1950-1960. A new edition of the Hebrew text, namely Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia, is dated 1977. This edition was used for updating the information presented in the footnotes of the New World Translation published in 1984.
The first printed edition of the Christian Greek Scriptures was that appearing in the Complutensian Polyglott (in Greek and Latin), of 1514-1517. Then in 1516 the Dutch scholar Desiderius Erasmus published his first edition of a master Greek text of the Christian Greek Scriptures. It contained many errors, but an improved text thereof was made available through four succeeding editions from 1519 to 1535. Later, Paris printer and editor Robert Estienne, or Stephanus, issued several editions of the Greek “New Testament,” based principally on Erasmus’ text, but having corrections according to the Complutensian Polyglott (edition of 1522) and 15 late manuscripts. The third edition of Stephanus’ Greek text (issued in 1550) became, in effect, the “Received Text” (called textus receptus in Latin), which was used for many early English versions, including the King James Version of 1611.
Quite noteworthy in more recent times is the master Greek text prepared by J. J. Griesbach, who availed himself of materials gathered by others but who also gave attention to Biblical quotations made by early writers such as Origen. Further, Griesbach studied the readings of various versions, such as the Armenian, Gothic, and Philoxenian. He viewed extant manuscripts as comprising three families, or recensions, the Byzantine, the Western, and the Alexandrian, giving preference to readings in the latter. Editions of his master Greek text were issued between 1774 and 1806, his principal edition of the entire Greek text being published in 1796-1806. Griesbach’s text was used for Sharpe’s English translation of 1840 and is the Greek text printed in The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, in 1864.
A Greek master text of the Christian Greek Scriptures that attained wide acceptance is that produced in 1881 by Cambridge University scholars B. F. Westcott and F. J. A. Hort. It was the product of 28 years of independent labor, though they compared notes regularly. Like Griesbach, they divided manuscripts into families and leaned heavily on what they termed the “neutral text,” which included the renowned Sinaitic Manuscript and the Vatican Manuscript No. 1209, both of the fourth century C.E. While Westcott and Hort viewed matters as quite conclusive when these manuscripts agreed and especially when they were supported by other ancient uncial manuscripts, they were not bound to that position. They took every conceivable factor into consideration in endeavoring to solve problems presented by conflicting texts; and when two readings were of equal weight, that, too, was indicated in their master text. The Westcott and Hort text was the one used principally in translating the Christian Greek Scriptures into English in the New World Translation. However, the New World Bible Translation Committee also consulted other excellent Greek texts, among them Nestle’s Greek text (1948).
Commenting on the history of the text of the Christian Greek Scriptures and the results of modern textual research, Professor Kurt Aland wrote: “It can be determined, on the basis of 40 years of experience and with the results which have come to light in examining . . . manuscripts at 1,200 test places: The text of the New Testament has been excellently transmitted, better than any other writing from ancient times; the possibility that manuscripts might yet be found that would change its text decisively is zero.”—Das Neue Testament—zuverlässig überliefert (The New Testament—Reliably Transmitted), Stuttgart, 1986, pp. 27, 28.
The extant manuscripts of the Christian Scriptures (in Greek and other languages) show textual variations. Variations are to be expected in view of human imperfection and the copying and recopying of manuscripts, especially by many copyists who were not professionals. If certain manuscripts had a common ancestor manuscript, perhaps came from a particular revision of early texts, or were produced in a particular area, they would probably have at least some variations in common, and hence they are said to belong to the same family, or group. On the basis of similarity in such differences, scholars have sought to classify the texts into groups, or families, the number of which has increased with the passing of time, till reference is now made to the Alexandrian, Western, Eastern (Syriac and Caesarean), and the Byzantine texts, represented in various manuscripts or in different readings scattered throughout numerous manuscripts. But despite the variations peculiar to different manuscript families (and the variations within each group), the Scriptures have come down to us in essentially the same form as that of the original inspired writings. The variations of reading are of no consequence as to Bible teachings in general. And scholastic collations have corrected errors of any importance, so that today we enjoy an authentic and reliable text.
Since Westcott and Hort produced their refined Greek text, a number of critical editions of the Christian Greek Scriptures have been produced. Noteworthy among them is The Greek New Testament published by the United Bible Societies and now in its third edition. Identical in wording is the 26th edition of the so-called Nestle-Aland text, published in 1979 in Stuttgart, Germany.—See CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES.
Manuscripts of Hebrew Scriptures. There are possibly 6,000 manuscripts of all or portions of the Hebrew Scriptures extant today in various libraries. The vast majority contain the Masoretic text and are of the tenth century C.E. or thereafter. The Masoretes (of the second half of the first millennium C.E.) sought to transmit the Hebrew text faithfully and made no changes in the wording of the text itself. However, to preserve the traditional pronunciation of the vowelless consonantal text, they devised systems of vowel pointing and accenting. Additionally, in their Masora, or marginal notes, they drew attention to textual peculiarities and gave corrected readings they considered necessary. It is the Masoretic text that appears in printed Hebrew Bibles of the present day.
Damaged Hebrew Scripture manuscripts used in Jewish synagogues were replaced by verified copies, and the defaced or damaged manuscripts were stored in a genizah (a synagogue storeroom or repository). Finally, when it was full, the manuscripts were removed and ceremoniously buried. Doubtless many ancient manuscripts perished in that way. But the contents of the synagogue genizah in Old Cairo were spared, probably because it was walled up and forgotten for centuries. Following the rebuilding of the synagogue in 1890 C.E., the manuscripts in its genizah were reexamined, and from there fairly complete Hebrew Scripture manuscripts and fragments (some said to be of the sixth century C.E.) found their way into various libraries.
One of the oldest extant fragments containing Biblical passages is the Nash Papyrus, found in Egypt and preserved at Cambridge, England. Evidently part of an instructional collection, it is of the second or first century B.C.E. and consists of only four fragments of 24 lines of a pre-Masoretic text of the Ten Commandments and some verses of Deuteronomy, chapters 5 and 6.
Since 1947 many Biblical and non-Biblical scrolls have been found in various areas W of the Dead Sea, and these are referred to generally as the Dead Sea Scrolls. Most significant among them are manuscripts discovered in a number of caves in and about the Wadi Qumran (Nahal Qumeran). These are also known as the Qumran texts and evidently once belonged to a Jewish religious community centered at nearby Khirbet Qumran (Horvat Qumeran). The first discovery was made by a Bedouin in a cave about 15 km (9.5 mi) S of Jericho, where he found a number of earthenware jars containing ancient manuscripts. One of these was the now-renowned Dead Sea Scroll of Isaiah (1QIsa), a well-preserved leather roll of the entire book of Isaiah, except for a few gaps. (PICTURE, Vol. 1, p. 322) It contains a pre-Masoretic Hebrew script and has been dated toward the end of the second century B.C.E. Hence, it is about a thousand years older than the oldest extant manuscript of the Masoretic text. However, though showing some differences in spelling and grammatical construction, it does not vary doctrinally from the Masoretic text. Among the documents recovered in the Qumran area are fragments of over 170 scrolls representing parts of all Hebrew Scripture books except Esther, and in the case of some books, more than one copy exists. These manuscript scrolls and fragments are believed to range in date from about 250 B.C.E. to about the middle of the first century C.E., and they exhibit more than one type of Hebrew text, such as a proto-Masoretic text or one underlying the Greek Septuagint. Studies of such materials are still in progress.
Among notable vellum Hebrew manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures is the Cairo Karaite Codex of the Prophets. It contains the Masora and vocalization, and its colophon indicates that it was completed in about 895 C.E. by the noted Masorete Moses ben Asher of Tiberias. Another significant manuscript (of 916 C.E.) is the Leningrad Codex of the Later Prophets known as the Codex Babylonicus Petropolitanus. The Aleppo Sephardic Codex, once preserved at Aleppo, Syria, and now in Israel, until recently contained the entire Hebrew Scriptures. Its original consonantal text was corrected, punctuated, and furnished with the Masora about 930 C.E. by Aaron ben Asher, son of Moses ben Asher. The oldest dated manuscript of the complete Hebrew Scriptures in Hebrew is the Leningrad Manuscript No. B 19A, preserved in the Public Library in Leningrad. It was copied in 1008 C.E. “from the corrected books prepared and annotated by Aaron ben Moses ben Asher the teacher.” Another noteworthy Hebrew manuscript is a codex of the Pentateuch preserved in the British Museum (Codex Oriental 4445), consisting of Genesis 39:20 to Deuteronomy 1:33 (except for Nu 7:46-73 and Nu 9:12–10:18, which are lacking or have been supplied by a later hand) and probably dating from the tenth century C.E.
Many manuscripts of the Hebrew Scripture portion of the Bible were written in Greek. Among those of particular note is one in the collection of the Fouad Papyri (Inventory Number 266, belonging to the Société Egyptienne de Papyrologie, Cairo), containing portions of the second half of Deuteronomy according to the Septuagint. It is of the first century B.C.E. and shows, in various places, the divine name written in square Hebrew characters within the Greek text. Fragments of Deuteronomy, chapters 23 to 28, are found in Rylands Papyrus iii. 458 of the second century B.C.E., preserved in Manchester, England. Another leading manuscript of the Septuagint contains fragments of Jonah, Micah, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Zechariah. In this leather scroll, dated to the end of the first century C.E., the divine name is rendered by the Tetragrammaton written in ancient Hebrew characters.—See NW appendix, pp. 1562-1564.
Manuscripts of Christian Greek Scriptures. The Christian Scriptures were written in Koine. Though no original autograph manuscripts thereof are known to exist today, according to one calculation, there are some 5,000 extant manuscript copies, whole or in part, of these Scriptures in Greek.
Papyrus manuscripts. Biblical papyri of great importance were among papyrus codices found in Egypt about 1930, their purchase being announced in 1931. Some of these Greek codices (dating from the second to the fourth centuries C.E.) consist of parts of eight Hebrew Scripture books (Genesis, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and Esther), and three contain portions of 15 books of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Most of these Scriptural papyri were purchased by an American manuscript collector, A. Chester Beatty, and are now preserved in Dublin, Ireland. The rest were acquired by the University of Michigan and by others.
The international designation for Biblical papyri is a capital “P” followed by a small superior number. The Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 1 (P45) consists of parts of 30 leaves from a codex that probably once had about 220 leaves. P45 has portions of the four Gospels and the book of Acts. The Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 3 (P47) is a fragmentary codex of Revelation containing ten somewhat damaged leaves. These two papyri are believed to be from the third century C.E. Quite noteworthy is the Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 2 (P46) believed to be from about 200 C.E. It has 86 somewhat damaged leaves out of a codex that probably had 104 leaves originally, and it still contains nine of Paul’s inspired letters: Romans, Hebrews, First Corinthians, Second Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and First Thessalonians. It is noteworthy that the letter to the Hebrews is included in this early codex. Since Hebrews does not give its writer’s name, its composition by Paul has frequently been disputed. But this letter’s inclusion in P46, evidently consisting of Paul’s letters exclusively, indicates that in about 200 C.E., Hebrews was accepted by early Christians as an inspired writing of the apostle Paul. The letter to the Ephesians appears in this codex, thus also refuting arguments that Paul did not write this letter.
At the John Rylands Library, Manchester, England, there is a small papyrus fragment of John’s Gospel (some verses of chapter 18) cataloged as Rylands Papyrus 457. It is internationally designated as P52. This is the oldest extant manuscript fragment of the Christian Greek Scriptures, having been written in the first half of the second century, possibly about 125 C.E., and thus only a quarter of a century or so after John’s death. The fact that a copy of John’s Gospel was evidently circulating in Egypt (the place of the fragment’s discovery) by that time shows that the good news according to John was really recorded in the first century C.E. and by John himself, not by some unknown writer well along in the second century C.E., after John’s death, as some critics once claimed.
The most important addition to the collection of Biblical papyri since the discovery of the Chester Beatty Papyri was the acquisition of the Bodmer Papyri, published between 1956 and 1961. Particularly noteworthy are Papyrus Bodmer 2 (P66) and Papyrus Bodmer 14, 15 (P75), both written about 200 C.E. Papyrus Bodmer 2 contains a large part of the Gospel of John, while Papyrus Bodmer 14, 15 has much of Luke and John and is textually very close to Vatican Manuscript No. 1209.
Vellum manuscripts. Bible manuscripts written on vellum sometimes include both the Hebrew and Christian Greek Scripture portions of the Bible, though some are only of the Christian Scriptures.
Codex Bezae, designated by the letter “D,” is a valuable manuscript of the fifth or sixth century C.E. Though its actual place of origin is unknown, it was acquired in France in 1562. It contains the Gospels, the book of Acts, and only a few other verses, and is an uncial manuscript, written in Greek on the left-hand pages, with a parallel Latin text appearing on the right-hand pages. This codex is preserved at Cambridge University in England, having been presented to that institution by Theodore Beza in 1581.
Codex Claromontanus (D2) is likewise written in Greek and Latin on opposite pages, Greek on the left and Latin on the right. It contains Paul’s canonical letters, including Hebrews, and is considered to be of the sixth century. It was reportedly found in the monastery at Clermont, France, and was acquired by Theodore Beza, but it is now preserved at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.
Among more recently discovered vellum manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures is Codex Washingtonianus I, containing the Gospels in Greek (in the common Western order: Matthew, John, Luke, and Mark). It was obtained in 1906 in Egypt and is preserved at the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. The international symbol of this codex is “W,” and it is thought to have been written in the fifth century C.E., except that apparently, because of damage, Matthew and part of John were replaced in the seventh century C.E. Codex Washingtonianus II, having the symbol “I,” is also in the Freer Collection and contains portions of Paul’s canonical letters, including Hebrews. This codex is believed to have been written in the fifth century C.E.
Hebrew and Christian Greek Scriptures. The most important and most complete extant Bible manuscripts in Greek were written on vellum in uncial letters.
Vatican Manuscript No. 1209. The Vatican Manuscript No. 1209 (Codex Vaticanus), designated internationally by the symbol “B,” is an uncial codex of the fourth century C.E., possibly produced in Alexandria, and it originally contained the entire Bible in Greek. A corrector of later date retraced the letters, perhaps because the original writing had faded, except that he skipped letters and words he considered incorrect. Originally this codex probably had approximately 820 leaves, of which 759 remain. Most of Genesis is gone, as well as a part of Psalms, Hebrews 9:14 to 13:25, and all of First and Second Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Revelation. Codex Vaticanus is preserved at the Vatican Library in Rome, Italy, and is known to have been there as early as the 15th century. However, Vatican Library authorities made access to the manuscript extremely difficult for scholars and did not publish a full photographic facsimile of the entire codex until 1889-1890.
Sinaitic Manuscript. The Sinaitic Manuscript (Codex Sinaiticus) is also of the fourth century C.E., but Codex Vaticanus may be a little older. The Sinaitic Manuscript is designated by the symbol א (ʼa′leph, first letter in the Hebrew alphabet), and while it evidently once contained the entire Bible in Greek, part of the Hebrew Scriptures has been lost. However, it has all the Christian Greek Scriptures. Likely this codex originally consisted of 730 leaves, at least, though the whole or parts of just 393 are now verified to be extant. It was discovered (one portion in 1844 and another in 1859) by the Bible scholar Konstantin von Tischendorf at the Monastery of St. Catherine at Mount Sinai. Forty-three leaves of this codex are kept in Leipzig, portions of three leaves are at Leningrad, and 347 leaves are preserved at the British Museum in London. It has been reported that 8 to 14 more leaves were discovered in the same monastery in 1975.
Alexandrine Manuscript. The Alexandrine Manuscript (Codex Alexandrinus), designated by the letter “A,” is a Greek uncial manuscript containing most of the Bible, including the book of Revelation. Of possibly 820 original leaves, 773 have been preserved. This codex is generally considered to be of the first half of the fifth century C.E., and it is also preserved in the British Museum.—PICTURE, Vol. 2, p. 336.
Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus. The Codex Ephraemi Syri rescriptus (Codex Ephraemi), designated internationally by the letter “C,” is also generally considered to have originated in the fifth century C.E. It is written in Greek uncials on vellum and is a rewritten codex, a palimpsest manuscript. The original Greek text was removed, and a number of leaves were then written over with discourses of Ephraem Syrus (the Syrian), rendered in Greek. This was done probably during the 12th century, when there was a scarcity of vellum. However, the underlying text has been deciphered. While “C” evidently once contained all the Scriptures in Greek, just 209 leaves remain, 145 being of the Christian Greek Scriptures. Hence, this codex now contains only portions of Hebrew Scripture books and parts of all books of the Christian Greek Scriptures except Second Thessalonians and Second John. It is preserved at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.
Reliability of the Bible Text. Appreciation of the reliability of the Bible is greatly enhanced when it is realized that, by comparison, there are only very few extant manuscripts of the works of classical secular writers and none of these are original, autograph manuscripts. Though they are only copies made centuries after the death of the authors, present-day scholars accept such late copies as sufficient evidence of the authenticity of the text.
Extant Hebrew manuscripts of the Scriptures were prepared with great care. Respecting the text of the Hebrew Scriptures, scholar W. H. Green observed: “It may be safely said that no other work of antiquity has been so accurately transmitted.” (Archaeology and Bible History, by J. P. Free, 1964, p. 5) The late Bible text scholar Sir Frederic Kenyon made this reassuring statement in the introduction to his seven volumes entitled The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri: “The first and most important conclusion derived from the examination of them [the Papyri] is the satisfactory one that they confirm the essential soundness of the existing texts. No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines. The variations of text affect minor matters, such as the order of words or the precise words used. . . . But their essential importance is their confirmation, by evidence of an earlier date than was hitherto available, of the integrity of our existing texts. In this respect they are an acquisition of epoch-making value.”—London, 1933, Fasciculus I, p. 15.
Concerning the Christian Greek Scriptures, Sir Frederic Kenyon stated: “The interval then between the dates of original composition and the earliest extant evidence becomes so small as to be in fact negligible, and the last foundation for any doubt that the Scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed. Both the authenticity and the general integrity of the books of the New Testament may be regarded as finally established.”—The Bible and Archaeology, 1940, pp. 288, 289.
Centuries ago, Jesus Christ, “the faithful and true witness” (Re 3:14), repeatedly and emphatically confirmed the genuineness of the Hebrew Scriptures, as did his apostles. (Lu 24:27, 44; Ro 15:4) Extant ancient versions, or translations, further bespeak the exactness of the preserved Hebrew Scriptures. Manuscripts and versions of the Christian Greek Scriptures bear unassailable testimony to the marvelous preservation and accurate transmission of that portion of God’s Word. We are therefore now favored with an authentic, thoroughly reliable Bible text. A thoughtful examination of preserved manuscripts of the Holy Scriptures bears eloquent testimony to their faithful preservation and permanence, giving added meaning to the inspired statement: “The green grass has dried up, the blossom has withered; but as for the word of our God, it will last to time indefinite.”—Isa 40:8; 1Pe 1:24, 25.

The Watchtower Society's commentary on the Book of Malachi

MALACHI, BOOK OF
The final book of the Hebrew Scriptures in modern English Bibles. In the traditional Jewish canon, it is placed last among the writings of the so-called minor prophets but before the Writings (Hagiographa). It constitutes a pronouncement of Jehovah regarding Israel by means of Malachi.—Mal 1:1.
Circumstances in Malachi’s Time. At the time Malachi prophesied, a deplorable situation existed among the priests. Contrary to the Law, they were accepting lame, blind, and sick animals for sacrifice on Jehovah’s altar. (Mal 1:8; Le 22:19; De 15:21) They failed to give proper direction and instruction to the people, causing many to stumble. (Mal 2:7, 8) When judging matters, they showed partiality. (2:9) All of this had a bad effect on the Israelites in general, causing them to view Jehovah’s service as being of little value. (3:14, 15) This is apparent from the fact that the Israelites did not support the temple by paying their tithes. So far had they fallen from their devotion to Jehovah that apparently they were divorcing their wives to marry women worshiping false gods. Also, sorcery, adultery, lying, fraud, and oppression came to exist among the Israelites. (2:11, 14-16; 3:5, 8-10) For this reason Jehovah gave advance warning of his coming to his temple for judgment. (3:1-6) At the same time he encouraged wrongdoers to repent, saying: “Return to me, and I will return to you.”—3:7.
Time of Composition. Internal evidence provides a basis for dating the completion of the book of Malachi. It was written after the Babylonian exile, for the Israelites were under the administration of a governor. Worship was carried on at the temple, indicating that it had been rebuilt. (Mal 1:7, 8; 2:3, 13; 3:8-10) This points to a period later than that of Haggai (520 B.C.E.) and Zechariah (520-518 B.C.E.), as these prophets were active in urging the Israelites to complete the temple. (Ezr 5:1, 2; 6:14, 15) Israel’s neglect of true worship and its failure to adhere to God’s law appear to fit conditions existing when Nehemiah again arrived at Jerusalem sometime after the 32nd year of King Artaxerxes (c. 443 B.C.E.). (Compare Mal 1:6-8; 2:7, 8, 11, 14-16; Ne 13:6-31.) Therefore, like the book of Nehemiah, the book of Malachi may well have been committed to writing after 443 B.C.E.
Harmony With Other Bible Books. This book is in full agreement with the rest of the Scriptures. The apostle Paul quoted from Malachi 1:2, 3 when illustrating that God’s choosing depends, “not upon the one wishing nor upon the one running, but upon God, who has mercy.” (Ro 9:10-16) Jehovah is identified as the Creator (Mal 2:10; compare Ps 100:3; Isa 43:1; Ac 17:24-26) and as a just, merciful, and unchangeable God who does not leave deliberate wrongdoing unpunished. (Mal 2:2, 3, 17; 3:5-7, 17, 18; 4:1; compare Ex 34:6, 7; Le 26:14-17; Ne 9:17; Jas 1:17.) The importance of God’s name is stressed. (Mal 1:5, 11, 14; 4:2; compare De 28:58, 59; Ps 35:27; Mic 5:4.) And encouragement is given to remember the Law of Moses.—Mal 4:4.
The book also directed Israel’s attention to the coming of the Messiah and to the day of Jehovah. While it is pointed out that Jehovah would send forth the one called “my messenger,” this one would be only the forerunner of the still greater “messenger of the covenant” who would accompany Jehovah. (Mal 3:1) The inspired accounts of Matthew (11:10-14; 17:10-13), Mark (9:11-13), and Luke (1:16, 17, 76) combine to identify Jesus’ forerunner John the Baptizer as the “messenger” and the “Elijah” initially meant at Malachi 3:1 and Mal 4:5, 6.
[Box on page 299]
HIGHLIGHTS OF MALACHI
A pronouncement emphasizing accountability to Jehovah God when his requirements are disregarded
Written by the prophet Malachi, evidently some 95 years after the first Jewish exiles returned from Babylon
Jehovah loved Israel, but they despise his name (1:1-14)
Jehovah loved his people just as he loved Jacob, though he hated Esau
Nevertheless, Israel’s priests despise God’s name, accepting lame and sick animals for sacrifice; they would not give animals like that to a human governor
Priests and people are censured for failure to keep Jehovah’s ways (2:1-17)
The priests have departed from God’s way, causing many “to stumble in the law,” and thus have “ruined the covenant of Levi”
There has been a marrying of foreign wives, and some have dealt treacherously with the wives of their youth by divorcing them
Israelites have wearied God by claiming that he approves of those doing bad
The true Lord will judge and refine his people (3:1-18)
Jehovah will come to the temple with the messenger of the covenant; he will refine and cleanse the Levites, and Judah’s gift offering will please Jehovah
Sorcerers, adulterers, those swearing falsely, defrauders, and oppressors will experience a speedy judgment
Bring the whole tenth part into Jehovah’s storehouse and thus receive a flood of blessings
A book of remembrance will be written for those fearing Jehovah; His people will discern the distinction between the righteous and the wicked
The coming of the great and fear-inspiring day of Jehovah (4:1-6)
Jehovah’s day will bring the complete destruction of the wicked, while ‘the sun of righteousness will shine forth’ to those fearing God’s name
That day will be preceded by a restoration work, to be accomplished by the prophet Elijah

On Miracles and the Miraculous.II

Deuteronomy4:32-34ASV"For ask now of the days that are past,which were before thee,since the day that God created man upon the earth,and from the one end of heaven unto the other,whether there had been any such thing as this great thing is,or had been heard like it?Did ever a people here the voice of God speaking out of the midst of the fire,as thou has heard,and live?Or had God assayed to go and take him a nation from the midst of another nation,by trial,by signs,and by wonders,and by war,and by mighty hand,and by outstretched arm,and by great terrors,according to all that Jehovah your God did for you in Egypt before your eyes."

Jehovah God is the archetypal Philosopher,Scientist,Technologist,the Great Sage.The scriptures tell us,
Jeremiah10:12NASB"It is he who made the earth by his power,who established the world by his Wisdom;and by his Understanding He has stretched out the heavens."
Unsurprisingly then,the holy scriptures which are in part a historical record of his dealings with his Church/congregation here on earth contain examples of his transcendent technology.Some though,find fault with the Bible's reporting of miraculous phenomena,and would submit these reports as evidence that the Bible is nothing more than a collection of fairy tales.
It does not require much effort though to see this objection as the circular reasoning that it is.Basically the principle is that any report of the miraculous must be rejected out of hand simply because it reports the miraculous,and everyone knows miracles never happen(so much for linear logic).
What though is a miracle as defined by the bible;the N.T uses a number of words to refer to miraculous phenomena at John4:48 the Greek word "teras" is rendered"wonders"in a number of popular English language translations.At Luke6:19 the Greek word "dynamis"basically meaning power is used in connection with miraculous phenomena associated with Jesus.
The words and their context in the scriptures suggest phenomena that elicit wonder,even puzzlement or that fill one with reverence,suggesting as they do intervention by a superhuman power and intelligence.
Do scientists or philosophers really know enough about the continuity of the laws of nature to dismiss the the Bible's miracles as impossible?Can they authoritatively dismiss the possibility of an intelligence that can engineer,say,the splitting of the red sea or the resurrection of a dead individual?
Famous author/futurist Arthur.C.Clarke once made the observation that any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from divinity.Technologies that would have been rejected as fanciful,or perhaps even as violations of the laws of physics by scientists living as little as a hundred years ago(not long at all in historical terms) are now part of our daily lives,but these are nothing compared to what is being discussed in all seriousness by technologists and futurists;the reverse engineering of the human brain,creating synthetic life,telekinesis,androids indistinguishable from humans complete with emotions.Perhaps persons who invoke modernity as a reason for rejecting the mere possibility of the miraculous aren't as well read as they think.
The fact is that Scientists whether they style themselves atheist or otherwise must acknowledge the existence of the miraculous.For they must all acknowledge the emergence of life from non-living matter,and the subsequent emergence of major new lifeforms in the planet's natural history.
The point is that to appeal to science or modernity as an excuse for rejecting the possibility of the miracles recorded in the Bible is to be philosophically inconsistent


PS
How strong the lens,how keen the eyes,to see what we
hypothesise,to watch so small a thing in motion,as what
we've christened the Higgs boson.A tiny,massive thing
that passes,for what best explains the masses of other things
we cannot see,but somehow nonetheless must be.

A thing so small is surely cute,though weirdly shaped,
perhaps hirsute,and just as real as any wraith,conjured
with the eyes of faith._Jay Curlin.



A pregnant comma










Read article here.




On occasion, opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses attempt to attack the scholarship and honesty of the translators of the New World Translation Bible. One passage that is cited by them is Luke 23:43 and the issue concerns punctuation.

Addressing this issue, the late Dr. Julius Mantey, noted NT Greek scholar and strong trinitarian, allegedly wrote a powerful attack against the honesty and accuracy of the NWT. He complained of the NWT's "attempt to deliberately deceive people by mispunctuation by placing a comma after `today' in Luke 23:43," when he knows better than anyone that none of the earliest manuscripts (up to the 9th century A.D.) originally had capitalization or punctuation! Later copyists have added punctuation wherever they felt it should be!

Just because a modern text writer decides where he wants the punctuation and capital-ization to be in his interpretation of the original text (as Westcott and Hort did for the text that is used by the NWT and Nestle did in the text used by the NASB, etc.) does not mean that is how the original Bible writer intended the meaning - as explained in the Kingdom Interlinear footnote for this verse.

For example, at John 8:58, most (if not all) text writers have left ego eimi uncapitalized. However, some respected trinitarian Bibles (such as NASB, TEV, and Phillips) have ignored the text writer's preference and used capitalization here in an attempt to make this verb appear to be a Name: "I AM."

Are these popular trinitarian Bibles also guilty of "deliberately deceiving," then, by miscapitalization?

Clearly, for Dr. Mantey to even hint that punctuation can be precisely determined at Luke 23:43 is totally dishonest. We see The Emphasized Bible by Joseph B. Rotherham also punctuating this Scripture to produce the meaning found in the NWT:

"Verily I say unto thee this day: With me shalt thou be in Paradise."

And the footnote for Luke 23:43 in Lamsa's translation admits:

"Ancient texts were not punctuated. The comma could come before or after today."

The Concordant Literal New Testament renders it: "43 And Jesus said to him, 'Verily, to you am I saying today, with Me shall you be in paradise.'"

2001 Translation – An American English Bible: 43 And [Jesus] replied, `I tell you this today; you will be with me in Paradise.'

A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to the English and Greek New Testament by E.W. Bullinger, DD., page 811 says:

"'And Jesus said to him, Verily, to thee I say this day, with Me shalt thou be in the Paradise.' The words today being made solemn and emphatic. Thus, instead of a remembrance, when He shall come in...His kingdom, He promises a presence in association (meta, 'with') Himself. And this promise he makes on that very day when he was dying.... Thus we are saved (1) the trouble of explaining why Jesus did not answer the question on its own terms; and (2) the inconvenience of endorsing the punctuation of the [KJV] as inspired; and we also place this passage in harmony with numberless passages in the O.T., such as 'Verily I say unto you this day,' etc.; 'I testify unto you this day.' etc. Deut.vi.6; vii.1; x.13; xi.8;,13,23; xii.13; xix.9; xxvii.4; xxxi.2, etc., where the Septuagint corresponds to Luke xxii.43."

Yes, there is no reason to deny the rendering of Luke 23:43 as, "I tell you today, You will be with me in Paradise."

............................................

A couple examples from the Hebrew Scriptures of the OT in modern Bibles:

(NKJV) Deuteronomy 30:18 "I announce to you today that you shall surely perish"

(NASB) Deuteronomy 30:18 I declare to you today that you shall surely perish.

(RSV) Deuteronomy 30:18 "I declare to you this day, that you shall perish"

(God's Word) Deuteronomy 30:18 "If you do, I tell you today that you will certainly be destroyed"

(MKJV (Green)) Deuteronomy 30:18 "I declare to you today that you shall surely perish"

.........................................

(NASB) Zechariah 9:12 "Return to the stronghold, O prisoners who have the hope; This very day I am declaring that I will restore double to you."

(KJV) "even to day do I declare [that] I will render double unto thee;" (TEV) "Now I tell you that I will repay you twice over"

(RSV) "today I declare that I will restore to you double."

(JPS) "even to-day do I declare that I will render double unto thee"

(BBE) "today I say to you that I will give you back twice as much"

(God'sWord) "Today I tell you that I will return to you double blessings."

(CEV) "because today I will reward you with twice what you had."

(NJB) "This very day, I vow, I shall make it up to you twice over."

(NAB) "This very day, I will return you double for your exile."

[Also compare Deut. 5:1 and 6:6]




so much evolving,so little time





and again,





Monday, 9 December 2013

Exraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?Says Who?



In the beginning?




War on logic and common sense.




Evaluating the FDA:Pros and cons



Is my waist measurement the nations business?:Pros and cons.



Teacher's unions,to blame or not to blame?:Pros and cons.





May the nuclear family R.I.P:pros and cons.



Overlooking the obvious.

An example of how some trinitarian apologists attempt to explain away the obvious implications of the sahidic coptic's rendering of John 1:1.

Read article here

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Scholarly Misunderstanding of Sahidic John 1:1

The Sahidic Coptic translation of the New Testament is of great interest to seekers of the truth. It sheds much insight on an early Christian understanding of the Scriptures - one that pre-dates the Council of Nicea of 325 CE. Of particular interest is John 1:1. The Sahidic literally translates into English as "and a god was the word." This translation was made over 1700 years ago when Koine Greek was a living spoken language, and it is in sharp contrast to the traditional rendering found in most English versions - the definite rendering ". . . and the Word was God." (For more information on the Sahidic Coptic translation, see here and here. For the definite meaning of the traditional rendering of John 1:1, see here.)


Of course, Trinitarian apologists do not like the obvious implications of the Sahidic rendering, and try to explain it away. Since they assume that the Sahidic translators must have been Trinitarian, and since most Trinitarians do not know Sahidic - they make obvious blunders when trying to show that when the Sahidic said "the Word was a god," it really meant "the Word was God."


Coptic scholar George Horner produced a translation of the Sahidic NT in the early 20th century. His rendering of John 1:1c is "and [a] God was the Word." Many Trinitarian apologists have jumped on the fact that Horner chose to put the word "a" in brackets. They say this means the "a" in Sahidic John 1:1 is not a necessary translation in English. I have run across this argument several times, which has prompted me to write this post.


As a premier example of this argument, note this excerpt from the article "Jesus as Θεός: A Textual Examination," by Brian James Wright:



Horner translates John 1.1c into English as follows: “. . . and [a] God was the Word.”49 The apparatus, however, states, “Square brackets imply words used by the Coptic and not required by the English, while curved brackets supply words which are necessary to the English idiom.”50 Unlike English, the Sahidic indefinite article is used with abstract nouns (e.g., truth, love, hate) and nouns of substance (e.g., water, bread, meat).51 An example of this can be seen in Horner’s translation of John 19.34b (where there are no Greek articles, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν εὐθὺς αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ): “. . . and immediately came out [a] blood and [a] water.”52 None of the words in brackets are necessary in English but are still noted by Horner due the presence of the indefinite article in the Coptic MSS.
-----
Footnotes:
49 Ibid. [George W. Horner ed., The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, Otherwise Called Sahidic and Thebaic, with Critical Apparatus, Literal English Translation, Register of Fragments and Estimate of the Version, 7 vols. (Oxford: Clarendon, 1911-1924), 3.2.], Sahidic, 3.3.
50 Ibid., 3.376 (italics mine).
51 Thomas Lambdin, Introduction to Sahidic Coptic (Macon, GA: Mercer, 1983), 5. Cf. also Bentley Layton, A Coptic Grammar: Sahidic Dialect (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2000).
52 Horner, Sahidic, 3.307. A few other examples from the Gospel of John include: 1.16, 26, 33; 3.5, 6; 5.39; 6.10; 16.33.


There are two problems with the argument in this quotation:
1) Horner is saying that the word "a" in brackets is not needed in the English translation of the Sahidic John 1:1, which would effectively make his translation mean "and God was the Word" in proper English.
2) The author compares the count noun "God" with abstract nouns (such as truth, love, hate) and nouns of substance (such as water, bread, meat).
We will deal with issue #2 first.


Comparing Sahidic Count Nouns with Nouns of Substance
Mr. Wright says that the "a" in brackets in Horner's translation of John 1:1 is not necessary in English. He shows an example - John 19:34b - where the "a's" in brackets obviously are not needed in English. However, the author's argument is irrelevant. "God" is not an abstract noun or a noun of substance, it is a count noun. How Sahidic uses the articles with abstract nouns or nouns of substance do not have a bearing on the count noun "god."


Though the author's argument is flawed, the biblical example he provides as a comparison is fundamentally flawed in another way - it actually disproves his point. The Greek of John 19:34b is καὶ ἐξῆλθεν εὐθὺς αἷμα καὶ ὕδωρ. The English translation of the Greek would be ". . . and immediately blood and water came out." In Greek, the nouns blood and water lack the Greek article. The Sahidic translation of this verse is:
"ΑΥѠ ΝΤΕΥΝΟΥ ΑϤΕΙ ΕΒΟΛ ΝϬΙ ΟΥСΝΟϤ ΜΝ ΟΥΜΟΟΥ"
A literal interlinear translation into English is:
"and immediately came out namely a blood and a water."
In Sahidic, the indefinite article is used to show that some water and blood - not all water and blood - came out. In English, it is not required for us to state the indefiniteness in a sentence such as this - it is implicitly understood. However, we can state such indefiniteness in an English translation of the Sahidic of John 19:34b. We could translate the Sahidic into proper English as:
"and immediately some blood and some water came out."
Here we translated the Sahidic indefinite article with the English word "some." In English, "some" is not used as an indefinite article, but it can be used to show the indefiniteness of a substance, as our English translation shows. We can therefore accurately render into English the indefinite articles of Sahidic John 19:34b, with no need to drop out bracketed words.


In fact Bentley Layton's "Coptic in 20 Lessons," on page 15, gives an example of a Coptic noun of substance with the indefinite article. Interestingly, he uses the English word "some" as a translation for the Sahidic indefinite article. He even uses one of the words found in John 19:34b. He says:
"ΟΥ-ΜΟΟΥ = some water"
If we apply this to Horner's translation of John 1:1c, we get:
". . . and [some] God was the word."
Obviously this doesn't work because "god" is a count noun, not a noun of substance. Therefore, how the Sahidic uses the indefinite articles in John 19:34b and how this relates to English translation has absolutely no bearing on the use of the indefinite article in John 1:1c and its English translation. Sahidic treats count nouns, abstract nouns, and nouns of substance differently in terms of article usage. Like I said before, the comparison is irrelevant.


The argument actually disproves the author's point, because "blood" and "water" have the indefinite article in the Sahidic, and a good English translation implicitly retains the indefiniteness - we understand that "blood and water came out" means that some blood and water came out. We can't count them because they are nouns of substance, but we get the sense that an indefinite amount of those substances came out.


Now we will deal with the first problem of the quote.


Dropping Horner's Bracketed Words
The first problem contained in Mr. Wright's quote above is that Horner says the "a" in brackets of his translation of John 1:1c is not needed in English. It is easy to prove that Horner, although a Coptic scholar, is in fact wrong about this when dealing with John 1:1c.


If Horner is right about John 1:1c, and if "a" is not needed in English, then his translation rendered properly into English would be:
"and God was the word."
We discarded the [a] because, according to Horner, it is not needed in English. Horner's full translation of John 1:1 would be:
"In the beginning was being the word, and the word was being with God, and God was the word."
Now we will show how this works using the two verses used in Mr. Wright's quotation.


1) John 1:1c as it stands -
". . . and [a] God was the word."
2) John 1:1c dropping the bracketed indefinite article -
". . . and God was the word."
3) John 19:34b as it stands
". . . and immediately came out [a] blood and [a] water."
4) John 19:34b dropping the bracketed indefinite articles -
". . . and immediately came out blood and water."
Note that whereas in translation #4, blood and water remain implicitly indefinite in English, translation #2 becomes implicitly definite in English. Comparing these two verses is not a fair comparison at all.


As my post about the English word "God" showed, "God" with a capital G is inherently definite in meaning in English. With the implied definiteness in blue, and dropping the "a" in brackets, we have:
"and (the) God was the word."
Horner's complete translation of John 1:1 with the brackets removed, and with the implied definiteness would therefore be:
"In the beginning was being the word, and the word was being with (the) God, and (the) God was the word."
Here is a clear case of a controvertible proposition, with both "Gods" in John 1:1 being one and the same. That is, "God was the Word" = "The Word was God," and the Word who is God in John 1:1c is the same God as the God the Word was with in John 1:1b. This is what Horner's English translation is saying if the bracketed "a" is truly not needed in English.


Also consider that most biblical Greek scholars believe that the "god" of John 1:1c is possibly definite in meaning, though most now consider this unlikely (See Daniel Wallace, GGBB, pgs. 259-269). They say it is more probable that "god" is qualitative in meaning, but the Greek does have some ambiguity. However, it is impossible for the Sahidic "god" of John 1:1c to be definite in meaning. Yet that is basically what Horner is saying. For if we drop the "a" in brackets, we are left with a capitalized "God," which is definite in English and not distinguishable from the God the Word was with.


With the above facts available to us, it is clear that Horner was not making an unbiased scholarly translation of John 1:1c, but was in error.


Other Coptic scholars do not believe that the "a" of Sahidic John 1:1c should be left untranslated. One example is the translation by Coptic scholar Lance Jenott. Basing his translation on Horner's text, he renders John 1:1 as:
ϨΝ ΤЄϨΟΥЄΙΤЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝϬΙΠϢΑϪЄ, ΑΥѠ ΠϢΑϪЄ ΝЄϤϢΟΟΠ ΝΝΑϨΡΜ ΠΝΟΥΤЄ. ΑΥѠ ΝЄΥΝΟΥΤЄ ΠЄ ΠϢΑϪЄ
In the beginning existed the Word, and the Word existed with God, and the Word was a God.

(From: http://depts.washington.edu/cartah/text_archive/coptic/coptjohn.shtml)


In conclusion, it must be pointed out that Sahidic John 1:1c can most certainly be translated as ". . . and the Word was a god." There is absolutely nothing wrong with this translation from the standpoint of translating the Sahidic text. An alternate valid translation would be ". . . and the Word was divine." This would be taking "god" in the verse as an adjectival predicate. On page 34 of Bentley Layton's "Coptic in 20 Lessons," he has:
ΟΥΝΟΥΤЄ ΠЄ
This matches part of the syntax of Sahidic John 1:1c. He says there are two possible meanings:
He is a god
He is divine
One who is "divine" could be thought of being "a god-like one," one having the qualities of a god. In no way could it be said that the Word shared the same nature, essence, or substance of the God mentioned earlier. Such cannot be drawn from the Sahidic text. We are not dealing with a Greek anarthrous pre-verbal predicate nominative. This is Sahidic, and it tells us that the Word was just a god, a god-like one, divine. He is either a god or adjectivally divine. Those who say that the Word was more than simply "a god" or "divine" in Sahidic John 1:1c are working with a Trinitarian understanding of the Greek John 1:1c, and not with the Sahidic text itself. Those reading the Trinity into the Sahidic of John 1:1 are reading their theology into the text, because the Sahidic is only saying that the Word is a god, a god-like one, divine.