Originally Posted by George

Minor Correction

Vaticanus (the product of a "Classical" Greek education, i.e. - "snooty" classical philosophical "scholars") is NOT a "Koine" Greek manuscript....

Brother George is correct on this, pretty common knowledge among KJV circles of reference...

"Linguistic scholars have observed that Codex Vaticanus is reminiscent of classical and Platonic Greek, not Koine Greek of the New Testament (see Adolf Deissman's Light of the Ancient East). Nestle admitted that he had to change his Greek text (when using Vaticanus and Sinaiticus) to make it "appear" like Koine Greek."

"Codex Vaticanus contains the false Roman Catholic apocryphal books such as Judith, Tobias, and Baruch, while it omits the pastoral epistles (I Timothy through Titus), the Book of Revelation, and it cuts off the Book of Hebrews at Hebrews 9:14 (a very convenient stopping point for the Catholic Church, since God forbids their priesthood in Hebrews 10 and exposes the mass as totally useless as well!)"
http://www.1611kingjamesbible.com/codex_vaticanus.html/

That last part is not relevant but I had to leave it in just for fun...

"Linguistic scholars have observed that the Vaticanus is classical and Platonic Greek, not the Koine Greek of the New Testament. Codicologists note that the Vaticanus was written on vellum scrolls (skin obtained from animals not yet born), and not papyrus codices, as were used among "the early Christians." The Vaticanus omits crucial parts of Mark and Luke. Theologians question its lack of use by anyone for 1300 years, then its "sudden" discovery in the Vatican in 1481. Protestant researches have never been permitted to examine the actual manuscript and work only from copies provided by the Vatican."
http://ecclesia.org/truth/nt_manuscripts.html

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Greektim

Uhhh...Vaticanus is a Koine mss. It was not written in Classical or Attic unless you think the passages that match the TR are also Classical. Classical or Attic is a stage of development in Greek the Greek language just as Koine is. The letters were uncial in form (like ALLCAPS). But that does not make it classical.

Just wanted to clarify.

Tin, when I became aware and embroiled in the version battle in 1984. It was instantly apparent that a fair amount of revisionism was present. The attempt to retranslate Psalms 12 and endless flame wars over the Hebrew suffix "-nu", the attempt to shovel Rev. 1:6 into a grammatical "theory" that was not conceived till the late 1700s(Granville-Sharp), and of course, the attempt to turn Attic into Koine' and Koine' into Attic. I respect you opinion and info, though it goes against my college teaching and the volumes of info also to the contrary. To say that Ravianus(16th Century) has the same orthography, caligraphy, and vocabulary as Codex B(alleged 4th Century) is nothing more than Orwellian revisionism.

Grace and peace to you

Tony

[Brother Tim]

Thanks, guys. You solved the question that I had about the koine I found in my uncial's attic. It was left there by the three blind mice!

-----

Sorry. I'm in that kind of mood today.

LOL, okay Brother Tim---sorry, I just have to take a swipe at the Pope's so-called "Bible" every now and then... vats and cans and VATICANUS---they always attract a few flies you know...

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

This is why I don't bother with the Greek!

I once found a koine in my uncial Bob's attic on top of a box a classical records.

Tim, I laughed so hard it just tore me all aparteid. I found something almost as funny in the book of Job in the Watchtower NWT, I'll post it shortly.

Grace and Peace brother

Tony

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Brother Tim

Thanks, guys. You solved the question that I had about the koine I found in my uncial's attic. It was left there by the three blind mice!

-----

Sorry. I'm in that kind of mood today.

What a coincidence. I am preparing to write some more songs for my fairy tale, WESTCOTT IN HORTLAND. and it's modern update, KUTILEK IN BLUNDERLAND..

Glaze and Peas

ynoT

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Greektim

I think you accurately touched on the major difference between attic and koine - lexical meanings. Your blind mice illustrated that well. But word meanings do not determine whether Vaticanus is Classical or Attic.

Now for some honesty...

I stepped into this issue without researching it extensively. In fact, I have never heard a view that Vaticanus is not koine. I don't see any compelling reason why it is not koine. But I wish I hadn't rushed in (as fools do). Koine or Attic, it can still be used to determine readings just as Latin, Coptic, Syrian,... can as well. And I like to point out that Vaticanus makes an argument for the longer reading in Mark 16 w/ the blank space at the end.

Brother, while we are on the subject of honesty, I think I can speak for my friends here in saying that we have examined the manuscript evidence issue and seeing it as being settled in 1885 by Hoskier and JW Burgon, we have abandoned it as a valid issue and look upon it as a minor annoyance in that it still continues to be of interest to many who claim to be Christians but reject the doctrine of the preservation of the Scriptures, which causes me to doubt many of their membership in the universal Body of Christ. Those Scriptures which work effectually in us were in no way, shape, or form preserved for us in custodial administration by the Catholic Church. We believe Vaticanus is not at issue and is not evidence or an argument "for" anything, except as possibly a lesson in heresiology, a sadly neglected niche' on the shelf of theology.

As the line soldiers, as it were, the blue collar Christians, the study of dead languages as Biblical Hebrew, Latin, Koine'/Attic Greek, Coptic, Goth, Saxon, or Aramaic/Chaldee/Syriac is not efficatious to the ministry of reconciliation commanded by Paul. The canon of the OT was decided by the Levites around 400 BC, the canon of the NT was decided by one of the Twelve Apostles, most likely John. We employ binary logic in that the paradox of the early Alexandrian/late Majority text witnesses point to the Alexandrian being herectical and rejected, as literally thousand of copies of this text should be extant in competition to the Majority texts. It's simple digital logic and the practice of the saying, You Are Known By The Company You Keep. If the KJV is the most hated Bible of the Catholic Church, then it must be the right one, as just one measure of it's authenticity. It was the flagship of the most successful wing of the Reformation, the English, the last wing to give in to Rome. In 1611 for the first time the Scriptures were given to everyone without regard for ethnicity, creed, financial standing, and this gift of the Scriptures had the backing of the most powerful nation in the world at the time.

If honesty is the issue, we have to tally the souls put into Christ since 1611 by the preaching of the KJV as the words of God versus its competitor, the Alexandrian-backed counterfeits. My own personal opinion is that if God breaths through the KJV, he must wheeze through the NIV.

I notice from your website you have categorized all things theological into neat little rows, Am I correct in assuming you are Calvinist? Sublapsarian, supralapsarian, or infralapsarian? I also notice you are anti-progressive dispensationalist. Oh boy, you and me are gonna have some fun. I studied under the ministry of Pastor Richard Jordan, who was sacked as the President of The Berean Bible Society, Cornelious Stam and "the dry cleaners". Jordan was dumped when he stated the only Bible to be used by the Bereans would be the KJV.

I am looking forward to further discussions with you brother.

Grace and peace.

Tony

[Greektim]

I am not a Calvinist. I tend to find myself in agreement with the Free Grace movement of the Free Grace Alliance (not to be confused w/ the Grace Evangelical Society). Boy, I thought titles and labels were supposed to shorten not lengthen.

You are right about the PD issue. I am what I call a "Refined/Strict Dispensationalist." In fact, I am hoping to publish an article in the Journal of Dispensational Theology on a PD related issue. I would love to talk about it.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by Greektim

I am not a Calvinist. I tend to find myself in agreement with the Free Grace movement of the Free Grace Alliance (not to be confused w/ the Grace Evangelical Society). Boy, I thought titles and labels were supposed to shorten not lengthen.

You are right about the PD issue. I am what I call a "Refined/Strict Dispensationalist." In fact, I am hoping to publish an article in the Journal of Dispensational Theology on a PD related issue. I would love to talk about it.

Brother GreekTim, I want to welcome you to the forum and the thread. My banter with Brother Tim might have lead you to believe my message to you was of a sarcastic, facetious nature, and nothing could be farther from the truth. Plain text messages over a computer, even with these little facey things, fails sometimes to convey the true tone of a message and can cast it into unknown perceptions of a given message. I have the highest respect for your participation here and look forward to your participation as a welcome and contributing member. My question on Calvinism is that I just sometimes notice where someone has systematized theology into neat little cubbyholes, most times they are Calvinists. That's not saying it's a crime to be Calvinist. I was just curious and should have read your site more closely but time constraints do sort of have a way of cramping one's style. I cast a slightly jaundiced eye at theological sytems for the simple reason sometimes we sign our names to them(as I once did to the canon of Church Of Christ Scripture; Mark 16 to Acts 2) and then discover an error, not in the theology of the Scriptures, but in ourselves, and we utter that Upper Coptic word famous down through the centuries: Oops. Let not my jaundiced eye offend thee.

Tim, the best word to describe me and my fellow dispensationalists is we call ourselves Pauline Dispensationalists, and stick without moving to the defined ages as Paul decsribes in Ephesians 3: Times Past, But Now, Ages To Come. Paul is saying to me that this present "Grace Age", "Church Age". "churchoftheonebody", whatever you wish to call it, is a great Parenthetical Age not prophesied and kept hid in God and revealed to no one but Paul. None of the Twelve knew of it. None of the OT prophets knew of it. We look back on a complete canon of Scripture and see what was past, what is now, and what is to come. If Luther had adopted this theology, then James, Paul, Hebrews, and Leviticus would harmonize perfectly. There are no mistakes, mistranslations, or contradiction in the KJV to me, nor are there any doctrinal mysteries as I can see now what was, what is now, and what is to come.

Genesis-Acts 28:Times Past
Romans-Philemon: But Now
Hebrews Revelation: Ages To Come

While Bullinger tried to whittle down the exact nanosecond the Body of Christ began, he was left with the belief only the books of Galatians, Ephesians, Phlippians, and Colossians were doctrinally applicable Church Age doctrine. I believe he was in error. I believe Romans-Philemon is applicable today, though all Scripture is profitable for doctrine.

I am what many hardcase Baptists call a "church splittin' hyperdispensationalist dry cleaner". I'm none of the three. I am dripping wet in the Blood of Jesus Christ. If I am hyper anything, it's hyperevangelistic. I did not join this forum to worm my way in unawares to preach the Pauline doctrine of right division. I joined this forum for fellowship, and found it, abundantly, and to add my voice to the defense of the Scriptures. Every day it seems someone tries to worm their way in either as an Alexandrian Bible Corrector or teaching some bizarre cult, or to place folks back under the Law.

With the indulgence of the others here I'll discuss the Grace Believer's doctrines on tongues, signs, wonders, water baptism, the Great Commission Vs The Ministry Of Reconciliation. Your, and their, meat is Baptist, I do not want to offend anyone with my meat. Let not my levity be misconstrued as sarcasm, today was a good day, I'm happy to be alive, I'm happy my family is well, I'm happy to be in Christ.

Grace and peace to you Tim.

Tony