And still new sects of christianity are born every week.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Catholic Church is Satanic in your opinion?
- Thread starter Spiderman
- Start date
And still new sects of christianity are born every week.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Are you a "quasi Christian" yourself? If you answer "no", how does one go about supposedly proving that they're not a "quasi Christian"?
Sure, I’ll look for information.I'm aware of the Nebuchadnezzar story and God using him, and him walking on all fours and eating grass.
Could you share more about Nebuchadnezzar though? I read the Bible , with Apocrypha, front to back, once. It's been so long since I read about him though.
I remember the furnace and the three men who were unharmed by the flames. It doesn't sound true, but possible with God.
Anyway, any interesting facts you have about King Nebuchadnezzar and God using him, are appreciated!
Take care
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
For example, Codex Siniaticus for the NT is in the original greek, and the Masoretic texts for the Tanakh (OT) are in the original Hebrew.
Yet there are differences between the codex Siniaticus and the bible with bits missing from the codex so either it is complete and the bible has added extra bits or it is incomplete.
Though the OT and Tanakh essentially the same there are differences
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I never said there weren't problems. I simply pointed out that there we do have complete manuscripts.
Sorry about being late to reply.I'm aware of the Nebuchadnezzar story and God using him, and him walking on all fours and eating grass.
Could you share more about Nebuchadnezzar though? I read the Bible , with Apocrypha, front to back, once. It's been so long since I read about him though.
I remember the furnace and the three men who were unharmed by the flames. It doesn't sound true, but possible with God.
Anyway, any interesting facts you have about King Nebuchadnezzar and God using him, are appreciated!
Here you go:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1200003200
There’s more at this site. Check the links on left side of page.
And as i stated, there is stuff in the bible not in the codex Siniaticus therefore not complete
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
It is considered a complete manuscript. There are manuscripts that leave out il.e. the ending of Mark or the Johanine comma, and they are considered complete manuscripts.
But are they physically complete? The answer is no.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
You are set in your mind about this. It doesn't seem to matter that I have given you examples of complete manuscripts. II see no reason to continue trying to reason with you.
Sorry but if there are parts in the bible that are not in older manuscripts then as i stated previously either they are incomplete or the bible has been added to. Whatever the situation, if the older documents do not contain all that is in the bible then by definition they are not complete.
You are welcome to your view that documents with missing parts are complete, that is not my problem.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
It's called variations.
Therefore different, not the same, parts missing, parts added. I really cannot see your argument here.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I'm saying that it can be a variation and still be a complete manuscript. An incomplete manuscript is one where pages or parts of pages are missing.
Parts of the manuscript are missing that have been (I don't know) "made up" in the bible.
The Codex Sinaiticus may be a complete Codex Sinaiticus but it is not a complete bible
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The question was whether there were complete manuscripts. The answer is yes.
No my statement was (it wasn't a question) that there are no original copies of the bible. The oldest being the vulgate.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Oh no, you said no complete manuscripts. Of course we don't have the originals.
My original statement was no original copies of the bible, you and sojourner brought the codex sinaiticus into it