My understanding based upon what I have been taught is that when Turretin said "all the Greek manuscripts," he was referring to all of the **known & trusted** Greek manuscripts available to the reformed church at the time of his writing.
@re4mdjd Жыл бұрын
...and NO ONE knows what constitutes all of the *known and trusted* Greek manuscripts available to the Reformed churches at the time of his writing. It is practical atheism to conclude without any evidence that WE have a better set of them than they did. There is NO ONE alive today, no one alive since the time of the Puritans even, that are fit to untie the shoelaces of the Reformed Fathers. Any one of them would have forgotten more about textual studies than the entire body of purportedly "Christian" academics today could hope to know in 10,000 of their collective lifetimes. It is grave, blasphemous sin to argue that the Holy Spirit lied to our Fathers in the faith for thousands of years only to disclose the "truth" of the text of the Bible to heretics like Westcott & Hort and their Continental peers and contemporary defenders. Every single change to the text of Scripture that this charlatan accepts was evaluated and rejected by Turretin and all of his orthodox Reformed forbears who had anything to say on the matter. Men like Dan Wallace are the worst kind of wolves, conspiring against God and his word, and he along with all of his comrades will experience the wrath of God against all false teachers.
@BanishTheShadow4 ай бұрын
@@user-me358 The only question that matters is whether or not what I'm saying is true. To hell with your credentialism.
@Sweetpea1128 Жыл бұрын
Never stretch the truth to defend the truth! 👍🏻😃
@LittleLouieLagazza Жыл бұрын
Good point!
@skylergerald3546 Жыл бұрын
I was just talking about this volume of Turretin earlier this morning! Really enjoy his section on Adam and the covenant of works. Excited to watch this!
@alejandroalvarez5433 Жыл бұрын
Make a video on the regulative principle
@jaywallar4477 Жыл бұрын
Loved this teaching from the manuscripts and theology! PLEASE do a video on Genesis 1 vs. Gen 2, are they different creation accounts, thus being different authors (as liberal theogians teach) thus, Moses could not have been the author of Genesis...Or, is it just a synopsis of Genesis 1 in Genesis 2...When God formed animals, pluperfect form or not? etc. etc....
@michealferrell1677 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for this clarification
@charlesratcliff2016 Жыл бұрын
Let me pause 4:50 the video. I am going to go out on a limb and say that Turretin is willing to defend the Trinity as it is laid out in the Greek manuscripts that he has. I found this even to be a fallacy among KJV Onlyist that he may have gotten caught up in the phrasing of words or how. they are used.
@blackukulele Жыл бұрын
The appeal to authority is a good argument if the authority is God's word....our Lord Jesus did just that.
@alanstewart2042 Жыл бұрын
Wow. Sure glad you can straighten out "Sloppy Turretin."
@TheologyMukbang Жыл бұрын
Turretin’s work, I think was originally written in Latin (correct me if I am wrong), therefore I believe it is best to check Turretin’s original work to make sure that nothing was lost in translation.
@frankhartmann3824 Жыл бұрын
With due respect, your attribution as to who said what is a little vague here. Turretin, according to the text you show, said "All the Greek witnesses have it, ..." and then references Senensis. But it is Senensis, according to the quote, who says the words "always" and the phrase "all Greek manuscripts from the time of the apostles themselves." Certainly I take from context that Turretin affirms the words of Senensis but your words in the video seem to be continually inferring that Turretin said what is quoted for Senensis. The pronoun usage is a little vague and confusing, starting at 4:44 and also 5:56.
@blackukulele Жыл бұрын
Regarding universal negatives (or positives), Jesus made a universal negative about divorce. 'From the beginning it was not thus' but Moses gave this command because of the hardness of the human heart in Moses' day. The writer to the Hebrews did as well, To which of the angels did He ever say, 'You are my Son, today I have begotten you'?
@blackukulele Жыл бұрын
Verse 8 seems to be the major problem. the shorter versions of verses 7 and 8 seems to be the best attested.
@ussconductor5433 Жыл бұрын
I think there may be some other objective points to possibly consider if he has been proven to be trustworthy in other matters: 1. His appeal to another witness is interesting regarding 1 John 5:7. It is also interesting that his take on the longer ending of Mark is accurate to what we know. 2. Could the Greek manuscripts that he speaks of been more of a localized compilation. (For example, if he had 20 manuscripts that all had it, it would indeed seem that “all extant Greek manuscripts had them). 3. Could it also be that the number of Greek manuscripts were largely destroyed since his time (looking at WW1&WW2 as great destructive examples). Just some thoughts.
@hefinjones9051 Жыл бұрын
The problem with points 2 and 3 the rairity of 1 John 5.7 was openly discussed from 1519 onwards. The fact it was rarely found in mss. (and those which had it were often identified) was known to many though there was debate over what the marginal notes in Stephanus' Editio Regia of 1550 meant. Certainly WWI and WWII didn't destroy any manuscripts in Geneva (in fact we still have from nearby Basel the very manuscripts erasmus used to publish his first edition - with his own annotations written on them).
@re4mdjd Жыл бұрын
@@hefinjones9051 Deal with Dabney's and Burgon's grammatical arguments. Interestingly, while what you say is true, men far greater than you and I affirmatively decided to retain the TR readings.
@hefinjones9051 Жыл бұрын
@@re4mdjd I have had opportunity to discuss the grammatical objection before, including with native speakers of modern Greek and folk like Steven Avery. Beza and Turretin were aware of Gregory of Nazianzen's comments on 1 John 5 in his Theological Orations (where he comments on the a text that is missing the CJ and where Gregory chides his interlocutors for being bothered by the solecism).
@hefinjones9051 Жыл бұрын
Part of the problem lurking here is that basically almost every post-reformation era author was reliant on Stephanus and a combination of factors led to major misunderstandings about what Stephanus' apparatus did and didn't say, nit helped by a misprint. There is virtually zero evidence that the majority of dogmaticians and polemicists of the period prior to 1707 actually did much hands on textual work with manuscripts after Beza, and those who did got themselves into hot water (Brian Walton and co.).
@re4mdjd Жыл бұрын
Turretin forgot more the last few minutes he was breathing than this charlatan will know in 10,000 lifetimes.
@DjSostre7 Жыл бұрын
Why are you doing that? You have an issue with this pastor? Why?
@hefinjones9051 Жыл бұрын
GA 629 is not only late (from the 1360's) it: (a) Has lots of other curious readings - it is quite an eccentric manuscript (b) and it is a Latin-Greek diglot. And frankly (b) explains (a).
@jbmann4796 Жыл бұрын
At 14:43 the reading should be "so it is called in so many ways to Christ ..." instead of "so it is called in so really ways to Christ ..."
@jamessheffield4173 Жыл бұрын
A circumstantial case for the Comma of John: In 484 A.D. the bishop of Carthage with 400 bishops quoted the comma to an Arian Vandal king. Being the bishop of Carthage, he would have had access to the Scriptures of Cyprian, and he probably had a Vulgate, maybe a first edition. Also, Gregory Nazianzus wrote on the grammar, and he had a student named Jerome. Seems strong evidence to me. Blessings.
@Sevens-xc2mz Жыл бұрын
Ik this is weird, but I like that shirt
@AmericanShia786 Жыл бұрын
Your video brought to mind the classic Star Trek episode where Spock tells an Android that he tells the truth, but always tells lies. The statement is false because, if true, the speaker has told the truth one time, though there is both truth and falsehood in the statement. This might be an example of Diabologic, or diabolical logic, a concept discussed by a British Science Fiction writer, Eric Frank Russell, in the 1950s. Your video brought that Star Trek episode to mind.
@jaywallar4477 Жыл бұрын
I've had to defend the conservative position against liberal theologians on both these theological issues from the original Hebrew and Greek...
@AJMacDonaldJr Жыл бұрын
What else might he be wrong about? Reformed theology is also "Yikes Level" late.
@hudsontd7778 Жыл бұрын
Ya Reformed theology is Grounded on Gnostic Philosophical Neoplatonism that pushed this Unbiblical "Doctrine of God" that is called Classical Theism - Divine Simplicity, A "YIKES Way to long" late view of God that makes the Philosopher Nichie view of God as Dead logical in this context. Origen and Agustine were the fathers of this Blasphemous view of God and Calvinist who don't want to be accountable for anything that do in life. FATALISM is the god of Calvinism, it's Unbiblical and Pathetic.
@DjSostre7 Жыл бұрын
What if ALL the greek manuscripts Turriten read had it? Probable?
@mrtdiver Жыл бұрын
it seems Matthew says this is possible after 11:00 It is weird to think that any kid today can have more manuscripts access than textual scholars of Turretin's day.