I came across this video on YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCNmx11QNPM by a Muslim who calls himself Muslim by choice and He/She has made many videos trying to disprove Christianity, prove Islam, debates etc.
In the video above he/she shows James White explaining the variant of 1 Timothy 3:16 as later manuscripts say God was manifested in the flesh, where as the earlier manuscripts say He who was manifested in the flesh. James White clearly demonstrates that God and He who are two words that are nearly the same, but God has a line above it as seen in the video. Papyri was rough paper and original/ early manuscripts of Koine Greek were written in capitals with no spaces and the paper had lines like lined paper we have today. I mean it was like this IWENTTOTHEPARKWITHMYFRIEND, have you not had in school when you wrote on lined paper and you may put T.... and may think it said I.... just because the lines on the paper may play tricks on your mind. It was even harder with Koine Greek All this variant shows in 1 Timothy 3 16 is not a major viable corruption but a spelling mistake where a later scribe wrote the wrong letter instead of the other which changed the outcome of the word. How does this show meaningful corruption where the entire New Testament should be thrown out and discarded?
Muslim By Choice has posted videos by a Muslim apologist called Adnan Rashid in the past as showing that the Sana manuscripts of the Quaran are not different to the standard Quaran as we have today. Even though I disagree and have shown this in my previous post on my blog, Adnan Rashid in his debate with James White on the text of the Quaran and the bible admits that thereare spelling mistakes in the manuscript tradition and the latest topsaki variants of the topsaki manuscript has been published which shows non meaningful variants (spelling mistakes and viable variants. Even the Tafsir comments on variants between manuscripts.
Would Muslim By Choice then be consistent and say the Quaran is corrupt? of course not.
Gerd Puin who I use as a source to show Quaranic corruption (that being viable and meaningful corruption) demonstrates how the foggs palimpsest manuscript of the Quaran has these viable and meaningful variants to the standard Quaran. Even though Muslims keep saying he does not say anything is different, his books and academic journals say completely the opposite.
On page 302 of his book Die Dunklen Anfänge he says in surah 5 aya 46 of the foggs manuscript we read for a people who faith/ is assured where as in the standard text we read to those who fear \God.
By actually looking at the evidence and being consistent a Muslim cannot say the New Testament original wording is lost.
In the video above he/she shows James White explaining the variant of 1 Timothy 3:16 as later manuscripts say God was manifested in the flesh, where as the earlier manuscripts say He who was manifested in the flesh. James White clearly demonstrates that God and He who are two words that are nearly the same, but God has a line above it as seen in the video. Papyri was rough paper and original/ early manuscripts of Koine Greek were written in capitals with no spaces and the paper had lines like lined paper we have today. I mean it was like this IWENTTOTHEPARKWITHMYFRIEND, have you not had in school when you wrote on lined paper and you may put T.... and may think it said I.... just because the lines on the paper may play tricks on your mind. It was even harder with Koine Greek All this variant shows in 1 Timothy 3 16 is not a major viable corruption but a spelling mistake where a later scribe wrote the wrong letter instead of the other which changed the outcome of the word. How does this show meaningful corruption where the entire New Testament should be thrown out and discarded?
Muslim By Choice has posted videos by a Muslim apologist called Adnan Rashid in the past as showing that the Sana manuscripts of the Quaran are not different to the standard Quaran as we have today. Even though I disagree and have shown this in my previous post on my blog, Adnan Rashid in his debate with James White on the text of the Quaran and the bible admits that thereare spelling mistakes in the manuscript tradition and the latest topsaki variants of the topsaki manuscript has been published which shows non meaningful variants (spelling mistakes and viable variants. Even the Tafsir comments on variants between manuscripts.
Would Muslim By Choice then be consistent and say the Quaran is corrupt? of course not.
Gerd Puin who I use as a source to show Quaranic corruption (that being viable and meaningful corruption) demonstrates how the foggs palimpsest manuscript of the Quaran has these viable and meaningful variants to the standard Quaran. Even though Muslims keep saying he does not say anything is different, his books and academic journals say completely the opposite.
On page 302 of his book Die Dunklen Anfänge he says in surah 5 aya 46 of the foggs manuscript we read for a people who faith/ is assured where as in the standard text we read to those who fear \God.
By actually looking at the evidence and being consistent a Muslim cannot say the New Testament original wording is lost.
