Re: Genealogies (was Re: personal revelations)

From: John Burgeson (burgythree@hotmail.com)
Date: Thu Mar 13 2003 - 13:20:38 EST

  • Next message: John Burgeson: "Re: test questions-old topic"

    George asked; "So you believe in "inerrancy in the autographs?" (:))"

    No. I neither believe nor disbelieve in something I cannot possibly know
    anything about, because the act of either belief or disbelief does not deem
    to carry with it anything useful.

    But you knew that.

    Thanks for the additional reference. I'll look for it in the Iliff library.

    Burgy

    www.burgy.50megs.com

    >From: George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
    >To: John Burgeson <burgythree@hotmail.com>
    >CC: pruest@mysunrise.ch, asa@calvin.edu
    >Subject: Re: Genealogies (was Re: personal revelations)
    >Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 07:04:26 -0500
    >
    >John Burgeson wrote:
    > >
    > > George wrote, in part: "Inerrancy isn't the issue - there are, inter
    >alia,
    > > errors of fact in the biblical text. But I think Christians should give
    >it
    > > the benefit of the doubt & before concluding that some passage is in
    >error,
    > > try to understand what theological point the
    > > writer may have been making."
    > >
    > > I agree 100%.
    > >
    > > "In the case of the genealogy, it's hard to see why the writer would
    >have
    > > made an elementary arithmetic error."
    > >
    > > Evaluating the text as in error does not demand that I attribute that
    >error
    > > to Matthew. But I don't see that "it is hard to see" him making that
    >error.
    > > Although it seems more likely that a copyist did it some years after the
    > > original was written.
    >
    > So you believe in "inerrancy in the autographs?" (:))
    > But seriously folks -
    > I don't have the full textual apparatus here but while there are some
    >textual
    >variants in Mt.1:16 there seem to be none that would correct the error -
    >irf error it
    >was. In any case it's a rule of thumb in such matters to accept the more
    >difficult
    >reading, on the principle that later scribes would be more likely to
    >correct what
    >appeared to them errors than vice versa.
    > It may be worth mentioning that Brown's _The Birth of the Messiah_ has a
    >detailed discussion of the genealogies in Mt & Lk including a section
    >(pp.81-84)
    >entitled "Could Matthew Count?"
    > Shalom,
    > George
    >
    >George L. Murphy
    >gmurphy@raex.com
    >http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

    _________________________________________________________________
    MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
    http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 13 2003 - 13:21:15 EST