Re: Vernon's claim (2)

From: Vernon Jenkins (vernon.jenkins@virgin.net)
Date: Sun Sep 23 2001 - 18:57:03 EDT

  • Next message: gordon brown: "Re: Vernon's claim (2)"

    Terry,

    On the contrary, I believe it reveals to us something of the mystery of
    divine inspiration.

    Vernon

    http://www.otherbiblecode.com

    Terry M. Gray wrote:
    >
    > Perhaps this remarkable result is not so much a message from God as
    > it is a message from the KJV editorial committee.
    >
    > TG
    >
    > >Gordon,
    > >
    > >Thanks for the additional comments.
    > >
    > >It appears that one could now argue for the particular authority of the
    > >English KJV in that it achieves, (a) the centrality of the shortest
    > >chapter (Ps.117) - an outward appeal, invoking all to praise God, and
    > >(b) the centrality (in terms of verses) of a matching inward appeal,
    > >encouraging the soul to bless the Lord (Ps.103:1,2).
    > >
    > >With respect to Bruce Metzger, if the Lord has indicated his approval in
    > >this particular way (as he has, for example, in respect of Genesis 1:1
    > >and the Creator's name), then the opinions of generations of 'experts'
    > >are of little account for, clearly, they had no knowledge of these
    > >developments.
    > >
    > >Vernon
    > >
    > >http://www.otherbiblecode.com
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > >gordon brown wrote:
    > >>
    > >> Vernon,
    > >>
    > >> I don't have time to compile a complete list of verses missing from recent
    > >> translations of the Bible, and so let me give just a couple of examples.
    > >> Mark 9:44 and 46 are missing from the NIV. This is the sort of thing
    > >> that would change the calculation of the central verse of the Bible.
    > >>
    > >> There are also many cases in which a phrase found in the AV is missing
    > >> from a verse in the recent translations, but this would not affect the
    > >> counting of the total number of verses in the Bible. There are also a
    > >> number of verses that are separated from the rest of the text by such
    > >> devices as including them in brackets to indicate doubt that they were
    > >> part of the original text. The two long examples of this are Mark 16:9-20
    > >> and John 7:53-8:11.
    > >>
    > >> It is interesting that although there are 150 psalms in the Russian Bible,
    > >> due to splitting and combining a couple of our psalms, the numbering is
    > >> different, and their Psalm 117 is actually our Psalm 118.
    > >>
    > >> I don't know how you can conclude that the dispute involving Mark 16:9-20
    > >> has been resolved in favor of its legitimacy. For that to happen
    > >> plausible explanations would have to be found for the following phenomena.
    > >> I have taken these from a textual commentary by Bruce Metzger. The long
    > >> ending of Mark is absent from the two oldest Greek manuscripts (which are
    > >> considered to be the most reliable) and from many translations into other
    > >> languages (some in manuscripts as late as the tenth century). Clement of
    > >> Alexandria and Origen show no knowledge of these verses. Eusebius and
    > >> Jerome attest that the passage was absent from almost all copies of Mark
    > >> known to them. Many manuscripts that do contain it have a scribal note
    > >> stating that the older Greek manuscripts lack it. Others mark it with
    > >> asterisks or obeli, a conventional way of indicating a spurious addition.
    > >> Some manuscripts have a different, shorter ending. The connection between
    > >> vs. 8 and vs. 9 is awkward. The women are the subject of vs. 8, but the
    > >> verb of the first clause of vs. 9 is third person singular with no subject
    > >> indicated.
    > >>
    > >> Gordon Brown
    > >> Department of Mathematics
    > >> University of Colorado
    > >> Boulder, CO 80309-0395
    > >>
    > >> On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Vernon Jenkins wrote:
    > >>
    > >> > Gordon,
    > >> >
    > >> > Thanks for these comments. The text I took as the basis of my analysis
    > >> > was that of the Authorized (King James) Version. However, I observe that
    > >> > the NIV and NASB display identical chapter/verse structures - each with
    > >> > a footnote to the effect that some of the older mss do not contain
    > >> > Mk.16:9-20. It appears that other versions, while omitting these verses
    > >> > from the main text, nevertheless provide them as a footnote.
    > >> >
    > >> > What, then, are we to make of these matters? Here again are the facts:
    > >> >
    > >> > 1) The central chapter of all English versions of the Christian Bible is
    > >> > Psalm 117 - the shortest of all its 1189 chapters, and one that
    > >> > powerfully exhorts all peoples to praise the Lord.
    > >> >
    > >> > 2) For the AV, NIV and NASB (and possibly others), standing at the
    > >> > centre of the verse structure are the first two of Psalm 103. These also
    > > > > take the form of an exhortation - but now directed inwardly at the soul
    > >> > of the individual believer.
    > >> >
    > >> > While verses of exhortation are no rare thing in the Book of Psalms, I
    > >> > suggest, nevertheless, that such common ground between these two
    > >> > _biblical centres_ can hardly be attributable to blind chance -
    > >> > particularly in view of the parallel phenomena to which attention has
    > >> > already been drawn. Indeed, the strong suggestion is that the dispute re
    > >> > Mk.16:9-20 is now resolved in favour of their legitimacy!
    > >> >
    > >> > Would you agree ?
    > >> >
    > >> > Vernon
    > >> >
    >
    > --
    > _________________
    > Terry M. Gray, Ph.D., Computer Support Scientist
    > Chemistry Department, Colorado State University
    > Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
    > grayt@lamar.colostate.edu http://www.chm.colostate.edu/~grayt/
    > phone: 970-491-7003 fax: 970-491-1801



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 23 2001 - 19:08:08 EDT