Scribal Changes

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

 

Scribal Changes

 

 

[Key]

Wow! Very interesting. I'll Have to watch the other part later. 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Key said:

Wow! Very interesting. I'll Have to watch the other part later. 

 

 

 

Within the English translations alone, there is tremendous variety in wording.  Each difference in wording, has great change in meaning.

 

www.BibleGateway.Com   

 

Have fun.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Key]

1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

Within the English translations alone, there is tremendous variety in wording.  Each difference in wording, has great change in meaning.

 

www.BibleGateway.Com   

 

Have fun.

 

 

 

 

Yes, that has been pointed out numerous times just in this forum alone. Here, and everywhere else I've seen this presented has always been explained away as being "some words cannot be translated as they were originally conveyed, so it is as close to the meaning as it can get". 

But here, with the obvious editing being shown is quite different. 

Whether it was done to reconcile continuity or not, it still shows someone made a personal judgement to make changes. Therefore, it begs to question, if this is allowed, what else had been changed or added without the knowledge of the masses that followed the final results? Also brings legitimacy to questions of an agenda being made within the pages, no?

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Key said:

Yes, that has been pointed out numerous times just in this forum alone. Here, and everywhere else I've seen this presented has always been explained away as being "some words cannot be translated as they were originally conveyed, so it is as close to the meaning as it can get". 

But here, with the obvious editing being shown is quite different. 

Whether it was done to reconcile continuity or not, it still shows someone made a personal judgement to make changes. Therefore, it begs to question, if this is allowed, what else had been changed or added without the knowledge of the masses that followed the final results? Also brings legitimacy to questions of an agenda being made within the pages, no?

 

 

If God were all powerful.  If God cared.  A way could be found.  People couldn't do it.  God could.

 

If God were not all powerful.  If God could not be bothered.  If people were behind all of it.  We would have a situation, that looks like what we have.

 

If God, the all powerful, all good, all knowing, all caring, involved with Humanity -- were really the force behind religion -- what would the world look like?  Not like this.

 

If people were behind all of it -- what would the world look like?  Exactly like this.

 

Is this proof of God's non-existence?  No.  God could still exist.  Still, call it circumstantial evidence.

 

Of course, if we only care about faith -- and belief -- and ignore the obvious.........     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 26, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Nathaniel]

Hello Jonathan. You might be interested in my first book Jehovah Unmasked, the true Identity of the Biblegod Revealed. It was published 15 years ago and went through two editions. It is now out of print but can be found online as a free PDF if you Google "Jehovah Unmasked PDF." It was written to laypeople not scholars. Please keep that in mind if you read it. 😉

Namaste,
BN

[Nathaniel]

Here is a link to the PDF:

https://thegodabovegod.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Jehovah-Unmasked.pdf

[Nathaniel]

Here is a recording of an interview I did with Miguel Conner of Aeon Byte (a Gnostic podcast) about Jehovah Unmasked:
 

 

[Nathaniel]

I meant to tell you to fast forward to the twenty minute mark. That's where the interview begins. There is also a second interview but another fellow is also interviewed. Move ahead to the 47 minute mark. 
 

 

[Coolhand]

On 12/26/2019 at 12:48 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

If God were all powerful.  If God cared.  A way could be found.  People couldn't do it.  God could.

 

If God were not all powerful.  If God could not be bothered.  If people were behind all of it.  We would have a situation, that looks like what we have.

 

If God, the all powerful, all good, all knowing, all caring, involved with Humanity -- were really the force behind religion -- what would the world look like?  Not like this.

 

If people were behind all of it -- what would the world look like?  Exactly like this.

 

Is this proof of God's non-existence?  No.  God could still exist.  Still, call it circumstantial evidence.

 

Of course, if we only care about faith -- and belief -- and ignore the obvious.........     

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting thoughts. How, in your opinion, does this change the point and message of the Gospel of John?

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that God -- or God's puppet -- had authored the Gospel of John.  What would be the logical consequence?  There would be no arguments at all, about the meaning of the Gospel of John.  I expect there would be a lot fewer than 40,000 flavors of Christianity.  The more so if the "Spirit of God" were available for guidance.  A human author could never produce anything of such clarity.  God could.

 

In addition, God the all powerful and all knowing author, would be mindful of how language changes.  Also, that the Gospels would need to be translated into other languages.  God, the perfect author, could have created the perfect translation of the Gospel of John, into all other languages.  Including the languages that didn't yet exist, such as modern English and French.  That would actually constitute proof.  So much the better if God had actually produced the copies, in great number, and they were indestructible.  Impossible for men.  Not for God.

 

Now, let us suppose for the sake of argument, that God did not author the Gospel of John.  That the human authors of John were acting on their own.  There would be a lot of confusion and disagreement.  Scholars would be arguing about the authenticity of old manuscripts.  Linguists would be in disagreement about precise meaning.  Historians would be arguing about cultural context.  Pious fraud, called "interpolation"  would be inserted.

 

Now, let us look at the world.  The real world.  Not the world we want, but the world that is.  What do you see?

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

An addendum:

 

Does it not surprise you that God -- the Creator of everything -- The Universe, physics, chemistry, biology, life, trees, mountains -- Everything -- needs help producing a book or a building?

 

All the things that Humanity can create -- God can not produce without Human servants.

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

17 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

An addendum:

 

Does it not surprise you that God -- the Creator of everything -- The Universe, physics, chemistry, biology, life, trees, mountains -- Everything -- needs help producing a book or a building?

 

All the things that Humanity can create -- God can not produce without Human servants.

 

 

 

 

 

A further addendum:

 

God can only create things that Humanity can not create.  Nothing made by people, can be made by God.  It's almost as if God doesn't exist.

 

[Coolhand]

Yeah,  right, i get it, i appreciate your open mindedness.

 

Do you know what the point of the Gospel of John is?

 

And my question was related to how you feel the scribal edit/error/ conspiracy impacts the point and message of the book.

Edited June 8, 2020 by Coolhand

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

17 minutes ago, Coolhand said:

Yeah,  right, i get it, i appreciate your open mindedness.

 

Do you know what the point of the Gospel of John is?

 

And my question was related to how you feel the scribal edit/error/ conspiracy impacts the point and message of the book.

 

 

The Logos.  The Word made flesh.  I read it.  Your point?

 

 

[Coolhand]

In chapter 20, John states clearly why he is writing. Building up to that he uses 7 signs and 7 statements to support it.

 

And Im still wondering....how do you feel the scribal issue that this topic was started with impacts that message?

 

I can see youve read chapter one....lol

 

Edited June 8, 2020 by Coolhand

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

15 minutes ago, Coolhand said:

In chapter 20, John states clearly why he is writing. Building up to that he uses 7 signs and 7 statements to support it.

 

And Im still wondering....how do you feel the scribal issue that this topic was started with impacts that message?

 

I can see youve read chapter one....lol

 

 

 

It's been a while.  I will re-read it and get back to you.

 

 

[Coolhand]

On 6/8/2020 at 12:02 PM, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

It's been a while.  I will re-read it and get back to you.

 

 

 

 

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/newtestament/section4/

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Signs

 

https://www.thomasnelsonbibles.com/jesus-seven-i-am-statements/

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Coolhand said:

 

 

https://www.sparknotes.com/lit/newtestament/section4/

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Signs

 

https://www.thomasnelsonbibles.com/jesus-seven-i-am-statements/

 

 

 

 

 

I'm seeing plenty of bald assertions about Jesus and his nature.  Assertions are neither evidence nor proof.  Assertions are an argument.  This is a pointless argument.  What I'm not seeing, is a reason to accept these assertions as true.

 

You are free to accept any truth, based on Scripture.  I'm not here to tell you what to believe -- or disbelieve.  It doesn't work for me.

 

 

 

 

 

[Coolhand]

1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

 

I'm seeing plenty of bald assertions about Jesus and his nature.  Assertions are neither evidence nor proof.  Assertions are an argument.  This is a pointless argument.  What I'm not seeing, is a reason to accept these assertions as true.

 

You are free to accept any truth, based on Scripture.  I'm not here to tell you what to believe -- or disbelieve.  It doesn't work for me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Im still wondering....how do you feel the scribal issue that this topic was started with impacts that message?