Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Freestate316

hate to say this but this part of the Bible is not in all the older manuscripts. I wouldn’t use it for any debate.

However, the only thing that is righteous about the chairman in chief coming out of the closet in regards to supporting this abomination is that he is finally telling the truth. Not flip-flopping or turning around or repenting, just finally telling the truth.


22 posted on 05/09/2012 5:39:44 PM PDT by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]


To: huldah1776

True


23 posted on 05/09/2012 5:42:09 PM PDT by Freestate316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: huldah1776

I know. It was later added onto the end of John 7. I was merely responding to someone who was using it to make a point.


29 posted on 05/09/2012 6:26:08 PM PDT by Freestate316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

To: huldah1776

It’s in the Byzantine, and that’s good enough for me. Much of the focus on the physical age of Biblical manuscripts is misleading. The oldest manuscripts were also like the least used by the active church. No, I am not a crypto-King James Onlyist. But I do think the Byzantine tradition (majority text) is grossly underrated, primarily due to the blind acceptance of various presumptions of the theologically liberal German school.


31 posted on 05/09/2012 6:46:15 PM PDT by Springfield Reformer (Winston Churchill: No Peace Till Victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson