![]() ![]() Now, when we go to Luke 24:32, we can see things in a new light. How could these people read or know the scriptures, if they had crumbled into dust centuries earlier? If "scripture(s)" refers to "original manuscripts," then one would have to say that Jesus was playing a cruel hoax on those to whom He spoke. Did the Bereans have all the original manuscripts of the Old Testament? If they had them all, what did the eunuch have or if the eunuch had Isaiah, the Bereans were deprived of Isaiah? How on earth did this fellow from Ethiopia get his hands on the original manuscript of the book of Isaiah? And why did that synagogue in Nazareth ever give it to him? And consider the Bereans at Acts 17:11. When Philip found him, he was reading something called "scripture". No one had the original manuscripts at that time.Īnd at Luke 4:21 "…This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." Did this synagogue in Nazareth have the original manuscript of Isaiah? And consider John 5:39 as Jesus told the Jews who had challenged Him to "Search the scriptures." Was He telling these people to search the original manuscripts? How would anyone know if the "scripture" were fulfilled if the original manuscripts had crumbled into dust centuries earlier?Ĭopies and translations of the original manuscripts!Īnd at Acts 8:32, Philip was sent to meet up with the Ethiopian eunuch. Every reference in the New Testament to the "scripture(s)" is rendered fromĬopies of the original manuscripts in Hebrew and the translations in Greek. (the Septuagint), since his father was a Greek and he lived in Derbeand/or Lystra, which were definitely Greek-speaking. It is possible that he had the Old Testament in Hebrew, but it is more likely that he had the Greek translation of the Old Testament Timothy knew "the scriptures." Did Timothy know the original manuscripts? Did he have them in his possession? Did he see them somewhere and learn them? We know that Timothy did not have the originals he had only aĬopy. If ones belief that only the original manuscripts were inspired, then one must conclude that "all scripture" in 2 Timothy 3:16 refers to the In 2 Timothy 3:15-17, our brother Paul refers to the Scriptures that Timothy had and called them Is it really true that only the original manuscripts in the original Hebrew language were inspired by God, and the copies and translations were not? Is it correct to call a translation of the scripture "the inspired Word of God"? These questions will be examined. For those that walk in such doubt, we hope this article will reveal the utter absurdity of such vain There is the belief in some circles that the written Word of God has become corrupted because it has been translated from the original languages, and is merely aĬopy of the original manuscripts, which no longer exist. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |