For example, papyrus 66 >en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_66 _They say 66 is the oldest and nearly complete; but the trouble is I don't want anything that was DISCOVERED in 1952… even though it was dated as the earliest, I want there to be a historical record of the manuscripts existence since ancient times.
And I don't care about any other books of the bible, so it doesn't have to be one of the four unicials, which are known to be the oldest complete version of the entire bible. I'm just concerned with finding an old source for the gospel of John. Thanks
Yeah, probably because many of them think the Bible is actually divinely ordained and not written down by men and not finalized until the Council of Nicaea. To say nothing of all the parts which were discarded as not canon and then lost when those filthy fucking Religion of Cuck™ic sandniggers burned down all those libraries in the Levant.
Looks likea guy dancing. The upper right can be a face and it can be that dance where people put there arms at their sides like sticks and curve their hands back. Alternatively, the upper left can be the head where the upper right is a hand and the bottom left is their leg lifted up.
You have some research to do, but I think the Codex Vaticanus is probably the best candidate for a old source of the Gospel of John that has any type of recorded history. Here is what wiki said;
Maybe take this bullshit to /christian/ because it isn't Holla Forums cunt.
That's your mistake there. Stay away from nu-leftypol
Yep, keep tipping. You have no fucking argument.
Keep hitting yourself harder…
I read your post on/Christian/, you sounded like a skeptic with an axe to grind, looking for a "ha, gotcha" moment.
To answer your question, try the codex sinaticus, with the caveat that p66 is perfectly legitimate.
I don't understand your motive of finding the earliest gospel writing.
It doesn't matter user, there are more manuscripts that reference them. I clicked on this thinking;
nice trips… :/ , but they wont release vaticanus to the public. I remember trying to find it a year ago and it was NO WHERE. I think they don't show people it, right?
>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Sinaiticus Sinaiticus was discovered by Tischendorf in 1844. I was thinking we could do a little bit older than that…. honestly if there is only fragments. Is there any fragments that were discovered in the year 800 or something like that?
*tips fedora* Great going, retard.
Yes, I know the year the were first created. But I want the oldest manuscripts…
But it's descent to be a christian, lad. I'm just acting to show you that telling people they are "tipping" at the slightest criticism of christianity, or, in that case, for even pointing the right board for you, is retard behavior.
im actually im the process of getting a bilateral orchiectomy surgery. this is the medical term for a castration; the removal of both testicles
im getting it for religious reasons. matthew 19:12, matthew 18:8, matthew 5:29, mark 9:43
im also a ashkenazi jew
just wanted to throw that out there. not even making any of this shit up
Oh nevermind it was not a Cathedral and still not a good jew the joke was about suicide
Are you gay? There's no reason to lie about being a Jew.
ALRIGHT. SO I GUESS NOBODY KNOWS. Here's what I've discovered.
Vaticanus was discovered randomly in the vatican one day in 1516; and dates from the year 300.
Textus Receptus was a critical collation that coincidentally was first printed also in 1516.
But I'm certain there must be SOME copies left over of the greek bible that were discovered or collated before 1000.
Really, I thought this was going to be an easy quick answer… I didn't realize I was stepping into catholic vs orthodox political rivalry territory.
Honestly my man at this point there is really zero chance you will ever find a factual answer to your question given how much history has been taken/hidden by governments/Vatican/etc, destroyed, changed to meet narratives and so on.
I would absolutely love more than nearly anything to be able to see ancient texts and be able to read them but at this point there is just no way to tell since we are forced to endure somebody else telling us what it says and forced to endure someone telling us if its fake or real.
You will have far more luck trusting your instincts at this point regardless if you have no experience or not as it really is a crap shoot when it comes to history and what we are told.
>(((pagan))) intellectuals lmao
Do you even know what positive christianity stands for? Hint: The person behind it was Alfred Rosenberg.
NO NO NO NO. Surely, there is a copy of the gospel of John somewhere from 1200 or something that has been kept in a monestary or something.
Other hint: "Kirchenkampf"
>(((pagan))) larper thinks I'm against positive christianity
What church narrative did I tout?
Yes probably, but at that point you are not looking for an "original" Greek text but the oldest translation that has been continuously accountable and can be traced to an authenticated author or place of writing. There are so many different factors to take into account for New Testament manuscripts, it would take years to research.
I did say Christian Stack Exchange, as much as I love 8ch, it's not the best place for discussion of academic topics that are not actively suppressed.
No wonder you needed 1700 years of inquisitions, supported by certain shadowy elites, to maintain itself against "heretics" and what not, and once these elites got shaken off the thing, the whole cult felt into irrelevance and mockery - for degenerate atheism, sadly, but really makes one think…
With such an easy-to-trigger mentality, you fanatic lunatics would give a field day to the simplest heeb shill…
nah its more like
ANSWERS SO FAR SUMMARY:
Codex Bezae: Discovered around 1000. Created in 400. Best find so far.
Vaticanus was created in 300, but discovered in 1516. decent, but bezae beats it by 500 years.
Sinaiticus was created in 330, but discovered in 1844… definitely not old enough.
Textus Receptus was critical collation created in 1516 by Erasmus. That's great but I'm interested in seeing his raw sources; not his expert opinion on the best combination of sources.
It would be funny, if not sad that this is the state of posters here…
varg, instead of attacking churches how about you go into a mosque…cuck. it's always
But was that not what the church did in the middle-ages, out of a kiked mentality that included the sales of indulgences?
Also to claim european paganism is "jewish", but christianity which stems from actual jews is not speaks a lot for you retards. Lmao Positive Christianity thing stood for the rejection of the bible, both old testament and new, and even replacement of the cross, it was just an op to set people up for its replacement but you keep arguing… Look into what was done about it and lurk moar faggot.
lol don't have a seizure
You are on a NatSoc board, the solution is National Socialism, not "muh churches" and "christian identity". Muslim immigration is not the cause of the problem, ziocuck christian supporting Israel and having a common abrahamic heritage enabling in their countries is.
But I'm starting to get on arguments here, so I will leave you at that before you get too triggered and start self-flagellating - Take that Satan!
Muslim immigration is not the root cause of the problem, ziocuck christians supporting Israel and having a common abrahamic heritage, enabling jews to rule in their countries is*
see how thats a strawman now? Christians don't flaggelate now. No paganism is not jewish. pagans that attack christian doctrine are acting like jews. It's D/C lmao get the fuck off this board
And you accuse me of strawmans. Fuck off.
Pic related - but let me guess, the churches dindu and Hitler was a catholic warrior in truth, despite executing priests
That's the problem with you guys, you put your denomination above race and ignore all the problems with christianity, the fact is filled with pedophiles, its history and jewish elements and mindset as "liberal" or even "protestant" propaganda.
Stop, and lurk. Its not the churches that will save europe.
You sure made your point against muslims! pic related. These christians must have all been against natsocialism, huh?
And guess what religious group has the biggest amount of supporters of zionism besides the jews?
That quote is a long line of church tradition…
He also spoke quite angrily about the Third Reich, as in "Mit Brenender Sorge"…
Yeah, nice distancing yourself from jews you did there… As oppose to positive christianity which disregards everything that came from them and such satanic people. Oh and Natsocs, and pagans, by the way, don't need to distance themselves from Judaism, because their religion has nothing to do whatsoever with Judaism.
Hitler spoke on the tragedy of misguided Luther - too little, too late. A good exerpt is "Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin - a conversation between Hitler and me" by Dietrich Eckart.
ok, I will stop bantering
These aren't muh muslim boogeymen, retard. That was christian Mexico, your brothers. Lol and the majority of christian worshippers are non-whites in Third World countries (but christianity will save europe, yeah). But they do that in Europe too, Spain notably. It represents a mindset long inside the church.
Yes and Germany was a 99% christian country back then. It was National Socialism, and its "pagan and sinful" ideas, as the priests who propped up militant groups like The White Rose said, that fought against what become Germany today, not political christianity who sided with the jews and social democrats. And christian soldiers also fought for the USA and even for socialist mexico, does that mean the government was christians?
That's right. You can have based jews in your natsoc-pagan country. There is no reason to push them away. Christians. The ones that don't read their bible. The ones that do not understand scripture. The ones that do not understand jesus christ is a CARPENTER who does HONEST LABOR. Unlike the pharisee jews who EXTORT MONEY, GAMBLE, AND BANK. Jesus is the jew that rebelled against kikery. He tried to set them straight. And what did they do? They killed him for it…write how much they HATE him in the talmud. Then (((they))) go into every christian country and do BIBLE REVISIONISM, warp scripture to seem like christianity is about jews.
hitler…like jesus, revolted against the jewish way of life. They both got murdered and their vision perverted.
But none of this matters to you, you see yourself on the side of the jews when it comes to destroying the character of jesus christ. You'll post that ((("reconstructed face"))) of jesus, that (((they))) published. You'll make fun of christians and demoralize us….thinking and hoping that maybe your paganism will take off. Only to realize, you replaced christianity with a weimar culture with pockets of muslims and atheist sprinkled in it too. You are doing exactly what (((they))) want.
Go ahead. destroy christianity. lets see how successful you will be politcally. it took hundreds/a thousand years to unite europe under one belief. before that; this pagan clan, vs that one. german pagans sack roman pagans. rome destroys carthagian europeans.
It's not "true christians", thanks for clarifying, if only they read the books written by jews.
But of course, zionists are not true christians. It's debatable if Jesus was even a jew, m8, the problem is that zionism is justified by the bible, you're running into a trap, just like Luther, by falling into their scripture and their church doctrines (openly zionist in cases).
And they also hate pagans, write extensively on their book how they are subhumans, how all their temples should be torn down and destroyed (which they did with their proxies at the early church and muslims). You're doing the kikes agenda for them by hating pagans, that was not what went on National Socialist Germany. That is hating on your ancestors - kikes don't care if one of them gets baptized or what not, stop fooling yourself, they hate christians only in so far as they are whites.
And guess who perverted the vision of Jesus - people like Paul of Tarsus, who founded the church to the gentiles - despite Jesus commanding them not to! They are the ones who got doctrines like flagellation and sale of indulgences in the church, and indeed zionism that you can trace even in Paul! Many of (((them))) were even part of the church ranks - up to pope Alexander VII!
The christian parties actually supported the Weimar republic against the NSDAP, the treachery! You're falling into the same trap as them by promoting christianity in place of National Socialism here.
i don't hate pagans you retardedcuck. I don't like pagans that attack the (dying)church when there are bigger fish to fry.
>And guess who perverted the vision of Jesus - people like Paul of Tarsus, who founded the church to the gentiles - despite Jesus commanding them not to! They are the ones who got doctrines like flagellation and sale of indulgences in the church, and indeed zionism that you can trace even in Paul! Many of (((them))) were even part of the church ranks - up to pope Alexander VII! No. simply no. This is (((Revisionism))). Just like "gods chosen people are jews" is aswell. Christians are gods chosen. Christians are the ones that should inhabit jerusalem. Not jews.
Muslims do that too, but so do christians massively and you can look into that, stop being a dishonest cunt
As opposed to the Thirty Years War, fought over religious interpretation, that killed almost half of the German population, their christian brothers?!
The different types of paganism are just national variants of the same pan-european religion, that even believed in God. Christianity never united europeans, as much as they united them with Hebrew doctrines and their non-white converts. It took them 1000 years to subjugate europe and destroy what was there, not to unite europeans under a single faith but under thousands of meanigless denominations, all fighting over who was the true one and killing entire sects of heretics…
Carthaginians were semites that invaded Europe. The Third Reich was sucessful against degeneracy without resorting to christianity.
It's time for you to lurk more.
it's time that you go back to halfchan if you think natsocialism was exclusively pagan.
But all I was doing was, when a retard said "go tip your fedora elsewhere" when someone asked him to post this thread on the containment board, that I started saying that such behavior is a retarded strawman that has no place in Holla Forums, because there are no atheists in here.
You act like every small criticism of the church, even for things like Pedophilia inside it, or zionism, is a "shoah" against your beliefs and a persecution. And then you come up pre-emptively name-calling and attacking "pagans" as "immature", even if the Third Reich was packed with them and their symbolism. This is the mentality that everyone is trying to "divide you" so I must call them enemies, instead of seeking any improvement. This is a mentality of pushing a "christian identity" and not a racial one. There are bigger (((fish))) to fry, some of it carefully disguised behind the church narratives…
>No. simply no. This is (((Revisionism)))
That was Hitler's doctrine and that of the NSDAP, officialy, at least if you don't regard the claims by the Table Talks and people close to him that he was entirely averse to Christianity, and even Jesus, or that he was an esotericist.
Not Europe? This is the problem I'm talking, the hebrew mentality…
Also what is the reasoning behind your pictures?
you should read how moronic and nerdy you sound haha - lol