New to your channel! I found out your channel by Dwayne Green. I am interested in the Majority text position but I also think about the TR position. I wrestle with those. Also, I heard today in your video with Dwayne how Bible translations have differences or say different things, for example 2 kings 23:29. I have heard these arguments from King James Only people and it stresses me out. When I look at another version I get the thought what if I’m reading a corrupt Bible. I’m sure brother you have heard people struggles coming out of King James Only. Appreciate feedback, God Bless!
Thanks, Rev! 😊I agree this is an excellent book! Also, I agree it looks intellectually intimidating, but it's really not. At worst, maybe one could say it's an intermediate level book. But actually I think if someone is completely new to the topic of how we got our Bible, then I'd first recommend reading a relatively recently published and up-to-date popular level book like Scribes and Scripture: The Amazing Story of How We Got the Bible (Gurry and Meade), then reading Myths and Mistakes. Just reading Scribes and Scripture first will give you more than enough background to understand Myths and Mistakes. A slight caveat is Scribes and Scripture favors the Critical Text (rather than, say, the Majority Text), but it's still a very informative and helpful book. The Text and Canon Institute has a number of excellent articles about how we got our Bible too.
If you want boss that will actually give you insight into the true origen of the Bible then you need to get a few on comparative mythology. Like "mythology among the Hebrews and it's historical development" by Ignaz Goldziher and "the ugaritic texts and the Bible" by Jerry Neal.. it goes a lot deeper than just Noah's flood being a retelling of the sumerian/akkadian/babyloian flood myths (which textual criticism proves absolutely was) The Psalms are much older ugaritic poetry and absolutely not written by David. If you don't understand mythology and its very specific purpose in the ancient world then you're just taking literally what was written as highly complex symbolic allegory and completely missing the point I bet that book never even mentions anything I've just said and there's a vast body of work out there that is just ignored because it can't just be dismissed and to not present that is a just something confirming what you already believe which is sad
Well the book is on NT Textual Criticism so no it wouldn't mention what you brought up in your comment. But on the Hebrew OT connection to Ugarit. I have spent time looking into it and I am not impressed. I see it more as desperation to make the Hebrew Scriptures derivative of Ugaritic writings than anything else. For instance, they take the Song of Moses in Ex 15 as derivative of the Baal Epic basically because Yahweh used the waters to drown Pharaoh and Baal triumphed over the waters in the primordial depths. It is such a weak link that it is embarrassing but it somehow passes for scholarship.
@@johnnylollard7892 They made no claim. They simply said there is no evidence. When there is evidence, please let us know. Do you have evidence that anything supernatural is real? I would love to see it.
@@ohana8535 A universal negative is a type of claim. "There is no common ancestor between humans and chimpanzees," for example, is a type of claim. "There is no proof of intelligent life between your ears," is a claim. Saying you can't prove a negative is foolish. Of course one can prove negatives.
New to your channel! I found out your channel by Dwayne Green. I am interested in the Majority text position but I also think about the TR position. I wrestle with those. Also, I heard today in your video with Dwayne how Bible translations have differences or say different things, for example 2 kings 23:29. I have heard these arguments from King James Only people and it stresses me out. When I look at another version I get the thought what if I’m reading a corrupt Bible. I’m sure brother you have heard people struggles coming out of King James Only. Appreciate feedback, God Bless!
What is an NA 27? At 1:05
Thanks, Rev! 😊I agree this is an excellent book!
Also, I agree it looks intellectually intimidating, but it's really not. At worst, maybe one could say it's an intermediate level book. But actually I think if someone is completely new to the topic of how we got our Bible, then I'd first recommend reading a relatively recently published and up-to-date popular level book like Scribes and Scripture: The Amazing Story of How We Got the Bible (Gurry and Meade), then reading Myths and Mistakes. Just reading Scribes and Scripture first will give you more than enough background to understand Myths and Mistakes. A slight caveat is Scribes and Scripture favors the Critical Text (rather than, say, the Majority Text), but it's still a very informative and helpful book.
The Text and Canon Institute has a number of excellent articles about how we got our Bible too.
Sounds like it’s going on my wish list :)
Do you have my Textual Commentary on the Greek Archetype of the Gospels yet?
No, I have not heard of it before.
@@RevReads That's because it's not published yet.
Well send a copy my way once it is ready and I will make a video on it.
Good work !
Haha I haven’t read it yet not because I thought it would be boring but because I was intimidated by its content 😂
It's very much not intimidating. They present the info very well.
Valid 😂
If you want boss that will actually give you insight into the true origen of the Bible then you need to get a few on comparative mythology. Like "mythology among the Hebrews and it's historical development" by Ignaz Goldziher and "the ugaritic texts and the Bible" by Jerry Neal.. it goes a lot deeper than just Noah's flood being a retelling of the sumerian/akkadian/babyloian flood myths (which textual criticism proves absolutely was)
The Psalms are much older ugaritic poetry and absolutely not written by David. If you don't understand mythology and its very specific purpose in the ancient world then you're just taking literally what was written as highly complex symbolic allegory and completely missing the point
I bet that book never even mentions anything I've just said and there's a vast body of work out there that is just ignored because it can't just be dismissed and to not present that is a just something confirming what you already believe which is sad
Well the book is on NT Textual Criticism so no it wouldn't mention what you brought up in your comment. But on the Hebrew OT connection to Ugarit. I have spent time looking into it and I am not impressed. I see it more as desperation to make the Hebrew Scriptures derivative of Ugaritic writings than anything else. For instance, they take the Song of Moses in Ex 15 as derivative of the Baal Epic basically because Yahweh used the waters to drown Pharaoh and Baal triumphed over the waters in the primordial depths. It is such a weak link that it is embarrassing but it somehow passes for scholarship.
Why start in the middle. First you have to provide evidence of the supernatural. So far, there is none.
How about you provide evidence for your universal negative instead.
@@johnnylollard7892 So you have none. Got it. And just a tip. You don't prove negatives. I mean really. Did you finish high school?
@@johnnylollard7892 They made no claim. They simply said there is no evidence. When there is evidence, please let us know. Do you have evidence that anything supernatural is real? I would love to see it.
@@wellhellothere6347 "You don't prove negatives." Okay, then you have no brain, nor evidence thereof.
@@ohana8535 A universal negative is a type of claim. "There is no common ancestor between humans and chimpanzees," for example, is a type of claim. "There is no proof of intelligent life between your ears," is a claim. Saying you can't prove a negative is foolish. Of course one can prove negatives.