Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The account claimed to review the textual evidence available [2] from ancient sources on two disputed Bible passages: 1 John 5:7 and 1 Timothy 3:16. Newton describes this letter as "an account of what the reading has been in all ages, and what steps it has been changed, as far as I can hitherto determine by records", [ 3 ] and "a criticism ...
Isaac Newton wrote An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture, rejecting two Textus Receptus variants: the Johannine Comma and θεός ἐφανερώθη from 1 Timothy 3:16. Newton, fearing accusations of unitarianism, refrained from publishing his work, instead sending the manuscript to John Locke in 1690. [ 17 ]
The corruption of the Biblical text was elaborated more extensively by ibn Hazm in the 11th century, who popularized the concept of tahrif al-nass "corruption of the text". Ibn Hazm rejected claims of Mosaic authorship and posited that Ezra was the author of the Torah.
In 1754, 27 years after his death, Isaac Newton's treatise An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture would be published, and although it does not argue any prophetic meaning, it does exemplify what Newton considered to be just one popular misunderstanding of Scripture.
The title for Whiston's Boyle lectures was The Accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies. Rejecting typological interpretation of biblical prophecy, he argued that the meaning of a prophecy must be unique. His views were later challenged by Anthony Collins. [12] There was a more immediate attack by Nicholas Clagett in 1710. [13]
Along with his scientific fame, Newton's studies of the Bible and of the early Church Fathers were also noteworthy. Newton wrote works on textual criticism, most notably An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture and Observations upon the Prophecies of Daniel, and the Apocalypse of St. John. [163]
An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture; Holy Living and Holy Dying; The Holy War; Homily on the Archangel Uriel; I. Introduction to the Devout ...
I cleaned up a few errors and questionable statements in the Timothy section. I agree that the article could use a lot of improvement. On the Comma Johanneum page, there is a section "Other disputed New Testament passages". Probably 1 Timothy 3:16 would best have its own page, separate from the "Notable Corruption" page.