Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

The Trustworthy Scriptures

stephen

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2006
Messages
5,265
The most groundless of all of the assumptions of the radical critics with regard to the text of the Old Testament Scriptures is that the text, as it emerged into historic times, had already been so changed from its original form as to be utterly unrecognizable by its own composers.

Yet what convincing evidence is there to prove that such radical changes were ever made in the original text of the Old Testament? None whatsoever, except an analogy derived from the Egyptian and Babylonian liturgies and legends. No trace of any such radical changes can be found in the parallel portions of the Old Testament, nor in any statements of the Scriptures, nor in any tradition of the Jews.

On the contrary, so far back as we can go with manuscripts and versions (i.e., to 200 B. C), the evidence is overwhelming and convincing, that in general no changes, even in sporadic cases of consonantal letters, have been made in the text of the Old Testament; except such as might occur in the copying or translating of any document, especially one of a long past age.

The Egyptian papyri, recently discovered and published, some of them more than 2,000 years old, show that some of the fragments of the Classics differ by not a single letter from the texts of the ordinary text-books now used in the preparatory schools

-- Robert **** Wilson (February 4, 1856 - October 11, 1930. American linguist and Presbyterian scholar, who devoted his life to an attempt to prove the reliability of the Hebrew Bible. In his quest to determine the accuracy of the original manuscripts, Wilson learned 45 languages, including Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, as well as all the languages into which the Scriptures had been translated up to 600 AD).
 
Coming back to this post and the comment that we could go back to 200 B.C. and see the integrity of the text I was assuming that this was made in the light of the Qumran texts.

But I have been surprised to note that the author of the comment had passed away nearly 2 decades before the the discover of documents that would make that case even more strongly than he had asserted it.

I find it interesting and highly reassuring that the more modern critical scholarship gives its attention to the origins of the text the more it confirms it, not the other way around.
 
Back
Top