You are
in a court of law and making accusations against your opponent. The judge
demands that you present your evidence. You respond, “Well, actually, the
evidence is that he didn't do it, but you can believe me because I believe he
did commit the crime.” The judge belts out a hearty laugh and says, “Now wait a
moment. You just said there is no evidence and in fact the only evidence is
that your opponent did NOT commit the crime!? Why in the world would I believe
anything you say beyond that?”
You can
see how absurd such a scenario would be. Yet that is exactly what some so-called
Bible authorities and Bible publishers do. The following is a direct quote from
biblegateway.com: “[The earliest manuscripts and many other ancient witnesses
do not have John 7:53—8:11. A few manuscripts include these verses, wholly or
in part, after John 7:36, John 21:25, Luke 21:38 or Luke 24:53.]” And yet, they
(the New International Version and numerous other translations) go right ahead and actually put
those verses in their Bibles. Essentially what they are doing by including the text from John 7:31 through 8:11, is claiming that it was the writings of John, that it is part of his gospel, while at the same time saying the evidence speaks against it. When challenged, they have to admit that "the earliest manuscripts" do not contain those verses. And not only that but "other ancient witnesses" seem to discredit the charge that John wrote those.
In
contrast, Jehovah’s Witnesses not only recognize but then act on that knowledge
and do not include those verses in their Bible. You are welcome to believe what
you want, that is what free will is all about. However, I will side with the
ones who act in accord with what they know to be true. Excluding those spurious verses
is the most honorable thing to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment