Quote:
Originally Posted by Jordan
What about Origen, who was he?
|
Origen was essentially nothing more than a scribe assigned by the Emperor Constantine to produce a number of Bibles for the different churches after Constantine allegedly converted to "Christianity". Origen was more of a philosopher than theologian, and in the Scriptural realm codified Roman Catholicism as a systematized belief. That particular belief can be found in the manuscripts he edited, although as I said, Vaticanus was itself edited so many times as to be almost unreadable over the centuries.
Origen was an extreme ascetic(separatist) who had himself castrated after reading what Christ said about if your eye offends thee, pluck it out.
One thing you find evident in the Alexandrian manuscripts that survive today: They are written on very expensively tanned animal hides(vellum). It's apparent then that these manuscripts were abandoned very early as a textual foundation, which is why there are only 45 manuscripts in existence while the Majority text was copied onto papyrus, very cheap and widely used but not so durable. Though alleged to be "late" the Majority text is just that, the majority with over 5000 manuscripts extant. My question for the Alexandrian proponents is why would there not be over 5000 "late" copies of the Alexandrian text in evidence, if it were the "correct" text, in competition to the "incorrect" Majority text and also copied on cheap but not-so-durable papyrus?
To anyone with any logic running their thought processes, this is clear evidence the Alexandrian text was a REJECTED text, while the corrupted Catholic Vulgate, copied from the corrupted Alexandrian manuscripts, was hidden away in Catholic Churches, available only in Latin to people who did not speak Latin.
It's also my firm belief that anyone who accepts any "Bible" today translated from this corrupt text or defends it is saying, simply, that the Catholic Church and it's corrupted doctrines is the only correct and true church.
Grace and peace
Tony