Alaska Railroad

Schedules, rail map, history, vendor and corporate information, employment, photo gallery, passenger and freight services from Seward to Fairbanks.

Alaska Railroad

Schedules, rail map, history, vendor and corporate information, employment, photo gallery, passenger and freight services from Seward to Fairbanks.

Alaska Railroad Tours

Brief history, route, photos, and links to tours which feature a ride on the railroad.

Alaska Railroad Tours

Brief history, route, photos, and links to tours which feature a ride on the railroad.

Alaska Tour and Travel: Alaska Railroad

Train reservations, information, schedules, and rates, including vacation packages using rail. Maps and links.

Alaska Tour and Travel: Alaska Railroad

Train reservations, information, schedules, and rates, including vacation packages using rail. Maps and links.

In article , ARBermudez3@yahoo.com
says...
>
>Matthew Johnson wrote:

[snip]

>And what is more, _contrary_
>to your
>> careless claim below, Amphoux says this mixure was already present in
>the
>> manuscripts Jerome himself used.
>
>I have never claimed the Vulgate was pure.

But how can you believe it is so close to pure, that it was better than any of
the Greek manuscripts? The difference between this claim and "the Vulgate was
pure" is too small for this to be a good defence for you.


[snip]

>I never claimed the Vulgate would be superior today, only that it was
>superior to anything else being used at the time.

And that claim too, is false. For it _already_ had the Byzantine mixture that
you criticize so harshly in the Greek manuscripts.

> More importantly, "more accurate" does NOT
>> mean "right".
>See above. Again, we seem to agree on something.

Thanks for confirming this. But then why _did_ you say 'right'?

>> But what I _really_ have a 'problem' with is the lengths you have
>shown you are
>> willing to go to in order to cover up the chauvinism of the Roman
>Church at that
>> time. They guessed that the Vulgate was better than the TR more out
>of sheer
>> luck than out of insight. And there really _was_ chauvinism in their
>breezy
>> dismissal of the Greek original of the NT.
>
>Can you point to a Greek "original" that was being used?

When I said 'original', I was NOT referring to the _autographs_. Of course they
had disappeared. But I see you snipped w/o comment where I made this point more
clear. SO why are you still refusing to see it?

> No because
>there are no "originals." Any Greek manuscripts that were being used
>were Byzantine and corrupt. There was no "breezy dismissal."

But that sentence of yours IS "breezy dismissal". That is why we are still at
loggerheads here. It is simply NOT TRUE that "Any Greek manuscripts that were
being used were Byzantine and corrupt." Where did you _think_ Codex Koridethi
and 1739 came from?


[snip]

>> Because no, the RCC did _not_ "need ONE official text". That was a
>fiction of
>> the over-legalistic Latin mind.
>
>And you talk of bigotry!

Yes, I do. It is NOT bigotry to point out that over-legalistic mindset of the
Latin world. On the contrary: this is well known, and sometimes even admitted
_within_ the Latin world. See, for example. Fr. Seraphim Rose's book on the
position of St. Augustine in the Orthodox Church, where he defends his cult
against certain rash detractors who wanted to deny that St. Augustine was in
fact a saint of the Orthodox Church.

>> Because it is absurd o