Ok, I would love to here his response.
Got it. Good read. I believe it is more about Ruckman and others who take the KJV only concept to a massive extreme.
I like Mr. Koons' candor and his honesty about how he feels. Very proper.
JGiddings,
Thank you for your kind words, they are much appreciated.
Concerning Dr. White. Dr. White is a learned man and I do not dispute his knowledge of the Bible, and or the original languages. My problem with Dr. White is that his presentation of the 'facts' is not always done in a truthful manner. When I say a truthful manner, I am making reference to the same point as I normally do concerning the presentation of 'facts'. An example of this, for those who have read the thread I began concerning 1 John 5:7. In that thread I was presented with an outline by Mr. Doug Kutilek where he presented his 'Three Point Outline' on his 'Evidence' against the validity of the Comma. Mr. Kutilek is considered by many to be an authority on the subject of Biblical Studies, however, as I pointed out in the thread, (of 1 John 5:7) his 'Outline' was nothing more than a 'parroting' of that which was taught by the late Dr. Bruce Metzger. Furthermore, the information was presented in a way which did not fully represent the truth.
As an example, the following is Mr. Kutilek's presentation of his first point, along with my response:
Point # 1 Declared Misleading, at Best.
Point # 1 of the outline above:
1. Greek manuscripts-about 300 existing Greek manuscripts contain the book of I John. Of these manuscripts, only 4 (manuscript numbers 61, 629, 918, 2318) contain the disputed words of v.7. All four are very late manuscripts (16th, 14th or 15th, 16th, and 18th centuries A.D. respectively); none gives the Greek text exactly as it appears in printed Greek NTs, and all 4 manuscripts give clear evidence that these words were translated into Greek from Latin.
Four additional manuscripts (88, 12th century; 221, 10th; 429, 16th; 636, 15th) have the disputed words copied in the margin by much later writers.
Defense of the Johannine Comma
Please consider the following excerpt, taken from the above web address:
Further, it ought to be evident that the weight of numbers on the side of Comma-deleted manuscripts at least partially nullifies the "oldest-is-best" arguments which the Critical Text crowd loves to advance in favor of the Alexandrian texts. While it is true that only around 8-10 of the Greek texts contain the Comma, and most of these are late, the vast bulk of those without the Comma are also late, by the standards of the United Bible Society. Around 95% of these Comma-deleted texts are "late" by these standards (post-9th century). Further, at least three other marginal references date to a relatively early period, these being #221m (10th century), #635m (11th century), and #88m (12th century).
So let's put this into perspective. The main (not the only) argument or reason (according to textual critics) that the comma should NOT be included in the text is because the Greek MSS containing the comma are of "late" origin. It would therefore only be fair to apply the same rules to ALL Greek MSS containing 1 John 5. Doing so then removes 95% of the Greek manuscript evidence of the textual critics.
Do you remember me asking this question above?
Since you supplied me with the link that contained the above excerpt, I would like to know if you believe the information above is a truthful, and accurate presentation of the evidence shown.
The reason I ask this is because often times there are facts 'left out' in a presentation of such evidence, that if included, would cast an entirely different light on the exact same evidence that is provided.
So again I ask, is the information above a truthful, and accurate presentation of the evidence shown.
My point is simply this; the first point of Doug Kutilek's outline is true. However, it is also misleading. The reason it is misleading is because stating that the small number of Greek MSS containing the Comma are very late, leads the reader to believe that the majority of the rest of the MSS NOT containing the Comma, are other than very late, and quite possibly 'early'. When nothing is said pertaining to the rest of the Greek MSS, it would be assumed that the rest fall into a completely different category.
The question then that must be asked is this, Was this 'absence' of information accidental, or on purpose? Allow me to say this; when one is considered to be an 'authority' on a subject, (or if one claims to be an authority on the subject [as Doug Kutilek does]), one should be as truthful as possible about all the facts. Clearly, this was not the case in this first point of the outline.
Dr. White does the exact same thing in his presentation of the facts (which I will demonstrate in future posts). I want to make a point at this juncture in this discussion. It is my desire to show as much compassion as possible when dealing with 'motives' as to why scholars like Mr. Kutilek and Dr. White present their facts in such a manner. As I have said to at least one of my opponents in this Forum, it is my opinion that these men are 'products' of their education. When a person is presented this information in a format in which says, 'these are the absolute facts', one finds himself (or herself) being led through the education process as a 'horse wearing blinders', only seeing those things the 'driver' wishes them to see. In the early days of my studies, I was taught Dispensationalism, but along with that teaching, came a 'suggestion' that the opposing view was so blasphemous, that it was a complete waist of time to study, or investigate. After completing that part of my studies however, I did the unheard-of; I studied the opposing view. Wow, what an insight! (Just for the record, it is my belief that there is good, and bad in both. The real truth is in a proper combining of the two.) The point I am making is that many students (and educators) have beliefs due to the above scenario. Additionally, it is possible for this process to continue for generations (teacher student who becomes teacher).
I will do my best to present all facts in a truthful manner.
Jack