Janosky:

Historians are aware the sahidic Coptic Bible existing as early as the 2nd century CE,
older than the Septuagint.
https://www.internationalstandardbible.com/C/coptic-versions.html

"..... A Coptic (Sahidic) MS, written considerably before 350 AD, and published by the British Museum in April, 1912, contains Deuteronomy, Jonah, and Acts, and is older than any other Biblical manuscript (except a few fragments) yet known to exist. It proves that this Sahidic version was made about 200 AD. It in general supports the "Western" text of codex Bezae (D). Much of the New Testament especially still exists in Sahidic"

" a god was the word" John 1:1 Sahidic Coptic Bible,200 AD."

Janosky:

Historians are aware the sahidic Coptic Bible existing as early as the 2nd century CE,
older than the Septuagint.
https://www.internationalstandardbible.com/C/coptic-versions.html

"..... A Coptic (Sahidic) MS, written considerably before 350 AD, and published by the British Museum in April, 1912, contains Deuteronomy, Jonah, and Acts, and is older than any other Biblical manuscript (except a few fragments) yet known to exist. It proves that this Sahidic version was made about 200 AD. It in general supports the "Western" text of codex Bezae (D). Much of the New Testament especially still exists in Sahidic"

" a god was the word" John 1:1 Sahidic Coptic Bible,200 AD."

MaxInDHouse:

He is still learning so he needs time to decipher sarcastic threads like this.
The OP doesn't believe the Bible but because he knows the difference between Churchgoers and competent scholars of the Bible he called out a real Bible student then instead of going straight to ask his questions he wanted to gather antagonists from all sects so he attached the name of a group that's most CRITICIZED.
That's why i ignored him.
But as for the young Maynman guy i decided to teach him a lesson now he's obsessed with my posts to the point of posting screenshots of my post forgetting that that's the main reason why the OP specifically created the thread in my name!

MaxInDHouse:
Matthew wasn't relating a literal event but a vision of what will happen in the nearest future!
It's a vision of what will happen in the future due to the sacrifice Jesus just made with his own blood. No dead bodies left their graves because resurrection will only take place when Jesus call {John 5:28-29} the one who will make that call is dead so it's a vision not literal event!

MindHacker9009:

Are most of your views based on that of Johannes Grieberr who "was a spiritualist heavily involved with the occult his translation was completed under the direction of spirit messengers with the aid of his wife who is a self-professed spirit medium"
If not where do you get your views from, you must have been inspired by someone else's teachings as you were not there when the events happened. Johannes Grieberr too wrote that the saints did not leave their tombs.
I'm not surprised you will avoid my post here as your source of information has been busted.

MaxInDHouse:

I avoided your thread because you're biased!

Is it the Watchtower Bible that's your problem or you don't believe in Jesus at all?

MaxInDHouse:

That book is not some textbook to be read and understood using common logics, because it's about intelligence beings both seen and unseen. So if you keep reading it expecting you can grasp it's content without anyone to guide you then it's better you leave it!
Those given the understanding are using it now and solving the problem that no faculty has ever attempted to solve because the author is not human but GOD!

MaxInDHouse:
Matthew wasn't relating a literal event but a vision of what will happen in the nearest future!
It's a vision of what will happen in the future due to the sacrifice Jesus just made with his own blood. No dead bodies left their graves because resurrection will only take place when Jesus call {John 5:28-29} the one who will make that call is dead so it's a vision not literal event!

MindHacker9009:


You always like to claim that you alone have the understanding of the Bible and you did mention that the saints did not come out of the tomb when Jesus was crucified but Matthew tells us that they did

MindHacker9009:


, so where do you get your information concerning the Bible from is it from Johannes Grieberr who "was a spiritualist heavily involved with the occult his translation was completed under the direction of spirit messengers with the aid of his wife who is a self-professed spirit medium"

Johannes Grieberr too wrote that the saints did not leave their tombs.

Janosky:

No the saints or holy ones did not.
That translation of Matthew 27:53 did not give precise rendition of what took place.

w90 9/1 p. 7
‘Many Bodies of the Holy Ones Were Raised Up’

“THE earth quaked, and the rock-masses were split. And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.” (Matthew 27:51-53) Catholic scholar Karl Staab calls this event that occurred at Jesus’ death “most mysterious.” What happened?

Epiphanius and other early Church Fathers taught that the holy ones literally came to life and went with the resurrected Jesus to heaven. Augustine, Theophylactus, and Zigabenus believed that these dead ones received a temporary resurrection but later returned to their tombs. The latter opinion, however, “did not gain wide recognition,” comments scholar Erich Fascher. When rendering Matthew 27:52, 53, many modern Bible translations give the impression that a resurrection took place. Not so the New World Translation, which points to the effects of an earthquake. Why?

First, whoever “the holy ones” were, Matthew did not say they were raised up. He said their bodies, or corpses, were. Second, he did not say these bodies came to life. He said they were raised up, and the Greek verb e·geiʹro, meaning to “raise up,” does not always refer to a resurrection. It can, among other things, also mean to “lift out” from a pit or to “get up” from the ground. (Matthew 12:11; 17:7; Luke 1:69) The upheaval at Jesus’ death opened tombs, tossing lifeless bodies into the open. Such occurrences during earthquakes were reported in the second century C.E. by Greek writer Aelius Aristides and more recently, in 1962, in Colombia.

This view of the event harmonizes with Bible teachings. In 1 Corinthians chapter 15, the apostle Paul gives convincing proof of the resurrection, but he completely ignores Matthew 27:52, 53. So do all other Bible writers. (Acts 2:32, 34) The corpses raised up at Jesus’ death could not have come to life in the way Epiphanius thought, for on the third day thereafter, Jesus became “the firstborn from the dead.” (Colossians 1:18) Anointed Christians, also called “holy ones,” were promised a share in the first resurrection during Christ’s presence, not in the first century.​—1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:14-17.

Most Bible commentators have difficulty explaining Mt 27 verse 53, although several of them suggest that Mt 27 verse 52 describes the opening of tombs by the earthquake and the exposing of newly buried corpses. For example, German scholar Theobald Daechsel gives the following translation: “And tombs opened up, and many corpses of saints laying at rest were lifted up.”

Who were those that “entered into the holy city” a considerable time later, namely after Jesus had been resurrected? As seen above, the exposed bodies remained lifeless, so Matthew must refer to persons who visited the tombs and brought news of the event into Jerusalem. Thus, the rendering of the New World Translation deepens Bible understanding and does not confuse readers concerning the resurrection"


JWs consulted Emphatic Diaglott of 1864 & Sahidic Coptic Bible as well as thorough examination of Greek grammatical construct which is reflected in your own Bible when it suits your Trinity mentors.

Whenever any Greek Bible texts references Theos (God) more than once, the Most High God is always differentiated by definite article ("ho/the" as ho Theos /the God),the other Theos is rendered as "a god" because that is not the God Most High.

Oga, your Bible translations did so at Acts 12:22-23 & Acts 28:6.
Did Johannes Grieberr revealed that to them?

John1:1,1 Corinthian 11:3,John 14:1, Acts 3:13, Greek Interlinear Bible proven that ho Theos
The God is head & Superior over Jesus Christ his son & servants.
Jesus Christ, Paul,John & Peter confirmed that.

Maynman:


There’s part 2 https://www.internationalstandardbible.com/S/septuagint-2.html
Only international Bible are historians? Lol
Google even already said it, you are just living in denial and being dogma.

Oga, nothing dogma about it.
Theos mean "a god" /God"
That is not dogma.
Emphatic Diaglott & New world translation reflected the correct meaning of Greek Theos at John 1:1, the same thing your Trinity mentors did at Acts 12:22-23 & Acts 28:6.

Whenever any Greek Bible texts references Theos (God) more than once, the Most High God is always differentiated by definite article ("ho/the" as ho Theos /the God),the other Theos is rendered as "a god" (with indefinite article "a" because that is not the God Most High.
Oga, go & learn.

Janosky:


Oga, nothing dogma about it.
Theos mean "a god" /God"
That is not dogma.
Emphatic Diaglott & New world translation reflected the correct meaning of Greek Theos at John 1:1, the same thing your Trinity mentors did at Acts 12:22-23 & Acts 28:6.

Whenever any Greek Bible texts references Theos (God) more than once, the Most High God is always differentiated by definite article ("ho/the" as ho Theos /the God),the other Theos is rendered as "a god" (with indefinite article "a" because that is not the God Most High.
Oga, go & learn.

Maynman:


Your God Is logos.
And why are you using a translation that came from a translation from a translation.
The Coptic Bible got his translation from the Alexander Greek Bible.

Even in what you posted earlier.
They said the books in the Bible were dated to 350, that means the language would have been created 200AD, which is even not that old compare to some language.
Don’t confuse dialect with the Coptic Bible.

Like John 1:1 like Acts 12:22-23

Is John 20:17 in your Bible, spoken by Jesus Christ?
Ho Theos at John 1:1,John 14:1 & 1 Corinthian 11:3 ( Mounce Greek Interlinear) is the only true God worshiped by Jesus Christ.

Janosky:

Like John 1:1 like Acts 12:22-23

Is John 20:17 in your Bible, spoken by Jesus Christ?
Ho Theos at John 1:1,John 14:1 & 1 Corinthian 11:3 ( Mounce Greek Interlinear) is the only true God worshiped by Jesus Christ.

MindHacker9009:

You always like to claim that you alone have the understanding of the Bible and you did mention that the saints did not come out of the tomb when Jesus was crucified but Matthew tells us that they did, so where do you get your information concerning the Bible from is it from Johannes Grieberr who "was a spiritualist heavily involved with the occult his translation was completed under the direction of spirit messengers with the aid of his wife who is a self-professed spirit medium"
Johannes Grieberr too wrote that the saints did not leave their tombs.

Maynman:


Why don’t you check the origin of the word theos? It’s a Latin word. Why are you fighting This?
The Septuagint is the earliest translation.why are you afraid of the words in it?
The Coptic septic Bible is a translation from Greek.

Janosky:

No the saints or holy ones did not.
That translation of Matthew 27:53 did not give precise rendition of what took place.

w90 9/1 p. 7
‘Many Bodies of the Holy Ones Were Raised Up’

“THE earth quaked, and the rock-masses were split. And the memorial tombs were opened and many bodies of the holy ones that had fallen asleep were raised up, (and persons, coming out from among the memorial tombs after his being raised up, entered into the holy city,) and they became visible to many people.” (Matthew 27:51-53) Catholic scholar Karl Staab calls this event that occurred at Jesus’ death “most mysterious.” What happened?

Epiphanius and other early Church Fathers taught that the holy ones literally came to life and went with the resurrected Jesus to heaven. Augustine, Theophylactus, and Zigabenus believed that these dead ones received a temporary resurrection but later returned to their tombs. The latter opinion, however, “did not gain wide recognition,” comments scholar Erich Fascher. When rendering Matthew 27:52, 53, many modern Bible translations give the impression that a resurrection took place. Not so the New World Translation, which points to the effects of an earthquake. Why?

First, whoever “the holy ones” were, Matthew did not say they were raised up. He said their bodies, or corpses, were. Second, he did not say these bodies came to life. He said they were raised up, and the Greek verb e·geiʹro, meaning to “raise up,” does not always refer to a resurrection. It can, among other things, also mean to “lift out” from a pit or to “get up” from the ground. (Matthew 12:11; 17:7; Luke 1:69) The upheaval at Jesus’ death opened tombs, tossing lifeless bodies into the open. Such occurrences during earthquakes were reported in the second century C.E. by Greek writer Aelius Aristides and more recently, in 1962, in Colombia.

This view of the event harmonizes with Bible teachings. In 1 Corinthians chapter 15, the apostle Paul gives convincing proof of the resurrection, but he completely ignores Matthew 27:52, 53. So do all other Bible writers. (Acts 2:32, 34) The corpses raised up at Jesus’ death could not have come to life in the way Epiphanius thought, for on the third day thereafter, Jesus became “the firstborn from the dead.” (Colossians 1:18) Anointed Christians, also called “holy ones,” were promised a share in the first resurrection during Christ’s presence, not in the first century.​—1 Thessalonians 3:13; 4:14-17.

Most Bible commentators have difficulty explaining Mt 27 verse 53, although several of them suggest that Mt 27 verse 52 describes the opening of tombs by the earthquake and the exposing of newly buried corpses. For example, German scholar Theobald Daechsel gives the following translation: “And tombs opened up, and many corpses of saints laying at rest were lifted up.”

Who were those that “entered into the holy city” a considerable time later, namely after Jesus had been resurrected? As seen above, the exposed bodies remained lifeless, so Matthew must refer to persons who visited the tombs and brought news of the event into Jerusalem. Thus, the rendering of the New World Translation deepens Bible understanding and does not confuse readers concerning the resurrection"


JWs consulted Emphatic Diaglott of 1864 & Sahidic Coptic Bible as well as thorough examination of Greek grammatical construct which is reflected in your own Bible when it suits your Trinity mentors.

Whenever any Greek Bible texts references Theos (God) more than once, the Most High God is always differentiated by definite article ("ho/the" as ho Theos /the God),the other Theos is rendered as "a god" because that is not the God Most High.

Oga, your Bible translations did so at Acts 12:22-23 & Acts 28:6.
Did Johannes Grieberr revealed that to them?

John1:1,1 Corinthian 11:3,John 14:1, Acts 3:13, Greek Interlinear Bible proven that ho Theos
The God is head & Superior over Jesus Christ his son & servants.
Jesus Christ, Paul,John & Peter confirmed that.

Janosky:

Oga, is Latin the original language of your Bible?
Stop deceiving yourself jare.

Theos meaning " a god/"God ",pls Go & learn, stop being dogmatic.
The Sahidic Coptic Bible is in Concord with the Greek rendition.
[/b]Westcott & Hortt, translators of the Septuagint into English knows that Theos mean
"a god/"God "[b]

MaxInDHouse:
My brother this guy doesn't worth the response, if he believes Matthew's gospel then we need to meditate thoroughly on the whole account instead of picking a verse to drag you into some fruitless arguments. 1Timothy 6:4; Titus 3:9

So if doesn't believe (trust) the account of Matthew there's no need arguing with him at all! Matthew 7:6

Maynman:



You are fighting the truth, you are afraid of what’s in their.
This further proves it, they’ve muddled it up.
Your god is logos..

Janosky:

Oga, place John 20:17 in your brain & in your heart until you understand Jesus Christ statement.

Maynman:


Was the Bible written written in Coptic sahidic? Wasn’t it written in Hebrew and Greek.
Septuagint Bible was written in Greek even before the language of Coptic sahidic developed.
You are fighting the truth.

Janosky:

In your own Bible is John 20:17 spoken by Jesus Christ written in Sahidic Coptic?

Oga, go & rest

Janosky:

Oga, is Latin the original language of your Bible?
Deus is Latin word for God.
Stop deceiving yourself jare.

Theos meaning " a god/"God ",pls Go & learn, stop being dogmatic.
The Sahidic Coptic Bible is in Concord with the Greek rendition.
[/b]Westcott & Hortt, translators of the Septuagint into English knows that Theos mean
"a god/"God "[b]

Janosky:

In your own Bible is John 20:17 spoken by Jesus Christ written in Sahidic Coptic?

Oga, go & rest

Maynman:


It was spoken in Greek as it is in the Septuagint Bible.
You are the one saying sahidic Coptic is the earliest translation of the Bible and it’s a FAT NO.

Maynman:


Show me where you got this fact ?” Westcott & Hortt, translators of the Septuagint into English knows that Theos mean
"a god/"God”
.

Maynman:

They lack history .
Stop fighting the Bible.

Your claim is not true.
Oga, go & learn John 20:17.
You seem not to understand Jesus spoken statement.

Janosky:

Why do you reject the truth of John 20:17?

John 20:17,Jesus Christ has his God Superior over Jesus & mankind.

Acts 12:22-23 Bill Mounce Greek Interlinear Bible, how did Bill Mounce knows that Theos mean "a god/ God"?

[/b]How did Biblehub knows that Theos mean "a god/ God"?[b]

Westcott & Hort na their Oga kpatakpata in Greek Bible scholarship.
Oga, go & find out.


Your claim is not true.
Oga, go & learn John 20:17.
You seem not to understand Jesus spoken statement.

Maynman:


Is this still a fact

Janosky:

It is a fact.
The Source you quoted acknowledged that Sahidic Coptic is around 300 AD about the same time as the Septuagint even though other scholars admitted the Coptic bible manuscripts is as old as 200AD.

Maynman:


Why don’t you start from John 1:1, as you said earlier?
A god was the word.
What does word mean in Hebrew and Greek?
Is Septuagint Bible not a Bible? Why are you scared of it and using a Coptic septic Bible?
Does theo mean “god”’ in Hebrew?

Janosky:

Oga, which kain GIBBERISH be this?
Is John 1:1 Hebrew language?
The Greeks say Theos mean "a god /God", why are you against this fact?

Maynman:

I quoted your source(which is a Jehovah witness source)
.

Maynman:


They said the sahidic Coptic dialect dated back to 200AD, and the Coptic Bible dated back to 350AD.
.

Maynman:

The Septuagint was written in Greek, Coptic septic is a translation from Greek, how can they be written at the same time?
.

Maynman:

Is theo the same as God in Hebrew?
The real meaning of theo in Greek is a boy name.

Janosky:

The Source I quoted from is not from Jehovah's witnesses.
Pls,cross check & get this fact clearly.

Not my source but the Wikipedia source you quoted from.

[/b]Does the Septuagint have monopoly of Greek?
You think the Septuagint is the only source of Greek Bible manuscripts texts?[b]

Haba !!


Maynman is very confused.
Greek Theos ,get the spelling correctly.

Greek Theos mean God ,a god.
Not a boy.

Maynman:


Really? This is the source you quoted, janosky “ https://www.internationalstandardbible.com/C/coptic-versions.html”
?

Maynman:


Do you even know what “Septuagint” is? It’s not a language. Septuagint BIBILE just like any other book then was written in Greek language, Coptic sahidic is a translation from Greek language.(English to Yoruba)

Maynman:


Does theo mean god in Hebrew as it is in Old Testament? Or was Old Testament written in Greek?