₦airaland Forum

Gwan2:
Abeg wetin be the difference between this goal wey Marcelo pass give Ronaldo against Bayern Munich and dem allow, and the goal wey Everton score dem cancel yesterday

Ibkhaleel01:
When somebody says that the Bible is inerrant, a good reply is to ask "Which Bible?" The first task of translators of the Bible into English is to decide which verses they want to put into each of the 27 New Testament books.

There are more than 5,000 Greek manuscripts, but not one has the same collection of verses as any popular English Bible. Indeed, there is no Greek manuscript before A. D. 800 which has 27 books in its New Testament. The Codex Sinaiticus, from about A. D. 350, comes closest, but it also contains the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas.

How did this textual variety come about, and what significance does it have?

The King James Version was produced on the basis of relatively few late manuscripts. Since then, many early manuscripts have been found. The impression is often given that these early manuscripts help us get back to what the authors originally wrote. Instead, they reveal that we can only guess what was originally written and that what was written was changed within decades, often for purely doctrinal reasons.

Let me give just a few examples, from many which could have been chosen. Take Luke 22:43-44, "And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down upon the ground." This is not present in the very earliest Greek manuscripts p66 and p75 from the third century. (P66 stands for papyrus number 66, p75 for papyrus number 75). Will they be dropped from future printings of the King James Version because they are not in the earliest manuscripts we have? Somehow, I doubt it.

These verses are also omitted by Codex Alexandrinus, Codex Vaticanus (4th century), Codex Washingtonensis (5th century), etc., but are in Sinaiticus (4th century) and the great majority of later manuscripts. They are cited by the early church father Justin (c. A. D. 130). Whenever these verses were added or dropped, it must have been very early.

We know that these verses were quoted, not always exactly, in the second century by the early church fathers to counter the heretical view that Jesus was not a real human being and only quoted for that doctrinal purpose.

For example, Justin said, "(I)t is recorded that His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying... in order that we may perceive that the Father wished His Son really to undergo such sufferings for our sakes, and may not say that He, being the Son of God, did not feel what was happening to Him and inflicted on Him" (Dialogue with Trypho, 103).

Irenaeus (c. A. D. 170) wrote, "(N)or would He have wept over Lazarus, nor have sweated great drops of blood; nor have declared, `My soul is exceeding sorrowful'; nor, when His side was pierced, would there have come forth blood and water. For all these are tokens of the flesh which had been derived from the earth, which He had recapitulated in Himself, bearing salvation to His own handiwork" (Against Heresy, 3, 22, 2).

Hippolytus (c. A. D 190) said, "Thus then, too, though demonstrated as God, He does not refuse the conditions proper to Him as man, since He hungers and toils and thirsts in weariness, and flees in fear, and prays in trouble. And He who as God has a sleepless nature, slumbers on a pillow. And He who for this end came into the world, begs off from the cup of suffering. And in an agony He sweats blood, and is strengthened by an angel..." (Against Noetus, 18).

These verses were cited only for doctrinal purposes and are missing from the earliest manuscripts of Luke's Gospel. What more proof is needed that Luke's Gospel was altered no more than decades after being written and that this was done for doctrinal reasons?

The biggest doctrinal issue in Christianity is whether Jesus is God and what the Trinity means. The earliest Christians held all kinds of views about the status of Jesus. Even as late as A. D. 200, the majority of Christians did not believe in the Trinity, as Tertullian freely conceded: "The simple, indeed, who always constitute the majority of believers, are startled at the dispensation (of the Three in One), on the ground that their very rule of faith withdraws them from the world's plurality of gods to the one only true God; not understanding that, although He is the one only God, He must yet be believed in with His own `economy'" (Against Praxeas, Chapter 3).

These sorts of disputes led to many alterations of the New Testament. At the time Tertullian wrote, many Christians believed that Jesus was God the Father. Noetus based this belief on John 14:9, "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father." The orthodox Christian Hippolytus had to go through contortions to show that this does not mean that Jesus was the Father. Is it any surprise that just a few years later, one of the very earliest manuscripts of John's Gospel we have was altered to read, "Whoever has seen me has seen the Father also"? A very useful change for doctrinal reasons.

Halopy:
Our major problem is not our leaders but we the people. The continued silence when being oppressed. If only we can get a thousand of dj switch, a thousand of Rinu, a thousand of igboho, so that when one is incarcerated nine hundred and ninety nine are back on the street, we will not be where we are today as a country. But once one is arrested, we all keep quiet. It's never a sign of seriousness. I don't see the freedom we seek coming so soon

Thatwasepic:
He will be afraid now if he go for power he can't last more than 7 rounds unless he knocks usky out .

Thatwasepic:
Then he will be well beaten this time cuz usky is a great p4p

Thatwasepic:
He better not go for a rematch cuz if usky beat him again he is not getting fury or Wilder again, this is not Luiz ,usky is assured

Luigi02:
Lukaku recently commented that he wants to win another scudetto with Inter.
Haaland is too costly and his salary would exceed what we can afford to give. Maybe someone else

Asiseeit:
Or Lewandoski... For 1-2 years at least, to help Timo correct him head

Luigi02:
Lukaku isn't coming to Chelsea anymore, sadly. And Harry Kane won't come, bcus Levy hates Chelsea and won't deal with us

princewarri1985:
I said it here that chelsea is going to win one dude on nairaland was asking me if odd is going to play the match the same way i forcasted villareal win and alot of my friends argued with me. DONT PLAY WITH ME COZ AM A WIZARD IN MATCH FORCASTING WITH 15 YEARS EXPERIENCE

Daguccizgreat:
You're the one saying trash. 4 Chelsea first team players did not play today and they still won. Mount, Silva,havertz and Kovacic. City will still fall come may 29

DaddyYankee:
[s][/s]Stop saying trash, about 8 of those guys that started today will not start the final

CardiNice:
Hehe bros!!! Na who never see anything for life, dey form strong man.

I be this, i be that, i get men when go fight for me, i get money, i get juju for backup, i be strong man, na so strong man enter car On his way from club, accident happen, na so strong man die throw Way.

A wise man i know will always tell me, only a fool does not think about death.
I know i am not holy and i am not perfect but sometimes i have this thought, the people that died, where are they now?
What are they going through now?
This questions have made me to re examine my life, the friends i have, and the people around me and have taught me to take life easy as it comes.
My whole point is that there is no strong man anywhere, because if death comes, only the Grace of GOD can save us.
Davido is only thinking about his money, a wise man will be thinking of where he will go if death comes suddenly.
Somebody should tell Davido that even Micheal jackson with all his assets died.
Like i said, there is no strong man anywhere. GOD is the only strong man i know.

osazsky:
Man u hooligan fans cant just postponed the game.wat happend to tv rights and sponsors pls the punishment for this is that the 3 points should be automatically given to liverpool...cuz as a liverpool Fan from benin CITy Cityzens this point should be given to us or is it because man u is d richest club in the world imagine wat actions the FA would have taken if it was Aston villa fans or Sheffield fans..all animals are equal or clubs are equal..y should fans force a sale when the club is not bankrupt or liquidating. Your duty as a fan is to support and nothing more

Galaticos444:
u 4gotten u guys lost against Porto,West Brom at Stamford bridge

Galaticos444:
I laugh at those who think Chelsea ar d happier team cos it ended in a draw and they got an away goal 4gotten real Madrid can't play dis badly in d 2nd leg and dey ar too experience to go out without a fight moreover there's noti like home advantage cos there will b no fans in d stadium