Minor Correction
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greektim
Uhhh...Vaticanus is a Koine mss. It was not written in Classical or Attic unless you think the passages that match the TR are also Classical. Classical or Attic is a stage of development in Greek the Greek language just as Koine is. The letters were uncial in form (like ALLCAPS). But that does not make it classical.
Just wanted to clarify.
|
GREEKtim,
"
Uhhh...." When you make a statement with such "finality" - as if it were "authoritative", you should be sure of your "FACTS"!
Quote:
|
From Nestle's Greek Text: "NESTLE-ALAND NOVUM TESTAMENTUM GRAECE" (25TH. EDITION - Page 63) - and I quote: "a) The Greek orthography, which in HTW was substantially that of the Greekwriters of the 4th. and 5th. centuries , has now been regulated according to that accepted by philological scholars for the time in which the N. T. writings originated." {G.A. NOTE: H=Hort / T=Tischendorf / W=Westcott}
|
Brother Tony is
CORRECT and you are terribly
WRONG! The "orthography" of Vaticanus & Sinaiticus have been CHANGED in the LATER "GREEK TEXTS" to MATCH the "orthography" of the genuine GREEK SCRIPTURES written by the Apostles and faithfully rendered in the Byzantine (Traditional or Textus Receptus) Greek manuscripts.
Vaticanus (the product of a "Classical" Greek education, i.e. - "snooty" classical philosophical "scholars") is NOT a "Koine" Greek manuscript - although the modern day Bible deniers ("textual CRITICS") have made every attempt to make it
appear so, by even
CHANGING THE "ORTHOGRAPHY" TO
MATCH the older genuine New Testament writings.
Perhaps the next time you make an attempt to "
clarify" an issue and make such a definitive statement, you might check your FACTS more carefully. But on the other hand, by the "tenor" of your Posts - I doubt it!
