{"id":3758,"date":"2026-07-05T11:54:15","date_gmt":"2026-07-05T09:54:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/?p=3758"},"modified":"2026-07-12T11:55:01","modified_gmt":"2026-07-12T09:55:01","slug":"dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/","title":{"rendered":"Vedeck\u00e9 d\u00f4kazy, \u017ee cirkev manipulovala Bibliu. Star\u0161ie a mlad\u0161ie rukopisy sa l\u00ed\u0161ia v tom, \u010di je Kristus Boh"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_86 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Uvod_Mytus_o_neomylnom_zachovani_biblickeho_textu_a_iluzia_jedinej_pravdy\" >\u00davod: M\u00fdtus o neomylnom zachovan\u00ed biblick\u00e9ho textu a il\u00fazia jedinej pravdy<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Anatomia_textovych_rodin_Alexandrijsky_verzus_Byzantsky_typ\" >Anat\u00f3mia textov\u00fdch rod\u00edn: Alexandrijsk\u00fd verzus Byzantsk\u00fd typ<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Alexandrijsky_textovy_typ_Strohost_starobylost_a_absencia_dogmatiky\" >Alexandrijsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ: Strohos\u0165, starobylos\u0165 a absencia dogmatiky<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Byzantsky_textovy_typ_a_Textus_Receptus_Vytvorenie_uhladenej_teologie\" >Byzantsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ a Textus Receptus: Vytvorenie uhladenej teol\u00f3gie<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Vnutorny_rozkol_Alexandrijskej_rodiny_Codex_Sinaiticus_v_konfrontacii_s_inymi_svedkami\" >Vn\u00fatorn\u00fd rozkol Alexandrijskej rodiny: Codex Sinaiticus v konfront\u00e1cii s in\u00fdmi svedkami<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Obsahove_odchylky_a_flexibilita_posvatneho_kanonu\" >Obsahov\u00e9 odch\u00fdlky a flexibilita posv\u00e4tn\u00e9ho k\u00e1nonu<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Pisarske_zlyhania_a_sokujuci_pocet_oprav_v_Codex_Sinaiticus\" >Pis\u00e1rske zlyhania a \u0161okuj\u00faci po\u010det opr\u00e1v v Codex Sinaiticus<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Mechanika_vedomych_manipulacii_Ortodoxna_korupcia_Pisma\" >Mechanika vedom\u00fdch manipul\u00e1ci\u00ed: Ortodoxn\u00e1 korupcia P\u00edsma<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#1_Timotejovi_3_16_%E2%80%93_Mechanicka_vyroba_bozstva_Krista\" >1. Timotejovi 3:16 \u2013 Mechanick\u00e1 v\u00fdroba bo\u017estva Krista<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-10\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Lukas_3_22_%E2%80%93_Adopcionisticky_krst_a_systematicky_potlacena_verzia\" >Luk\u00e1\u0161 3:22 \u2013 Adopcionistick\u00fd krst a systematicky potla\u010den\u00e1 verzia<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-11\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Lukas_22_43-44_%E2%80%93_Krvavy_pot_a_zufaly_boj_proti_doketizmu\" >Luk\u00e1\u0161 22:43-44 \u2013 Krvav\u00fd pot a z\u00fafal\u00fd boj proti doketizmu<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-12\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Hebrejom_2_9_%E2%80%93_Zomrel_Jezis_z_Bozej_milosti_alebo_zavrhnuty_a_%E2%80%9Ebez_Boha%E2%80%9C\" >Hebrejom 2:9 \u2013 Zomrel Je\u017ei\u0161 z Bo\u017eej milosti alebo zavrhnut\u00fd a \u201ebez Boha\u201c?<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-13\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Jan_5_7-8_Comma_Johanneum_%E2%80%93_Umela_konstrukcia_Svatej_Trojice\" >J\u00e1n 5:7-8 (Comma Johanneum) \u2013 Umel\u00e1 kon\u0161trukcia Sv\u00e4tej Trojice<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-14\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Dalsie_klucove_vsuvky_a_zmeny_Konstruovanie_evanjelioveho_pribehu\" >\u010eal\u0161ie k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9 vsuvky a zmeny: Kon\u0161truovanie evanjeliov\u00e9ho pr\u00edbehu<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-15\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Fikcia_zmrtvychvstania_Marek_16_9-20_Dlhy_zaver\" >Fikcia zm\u0155tvychvstania: Marek 16:9-20 (Dlh\u00fd z\u00e1ver)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-16\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Perikopa_o_cudzoloznici_Jan_7_53-8_11\" >Perikopa o cudzolo\u017enici: J\u00e1n 7:53-8:11<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-17\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Mnozstvo_dalsich_uprav_deformujucich_teologiu\" >Mno\u017estvo \u010fal\u0161\u00edch \u00faprav deformuj\u00facich teol\u00f3giu<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-18\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Imperativ_mocenskej_struktury_Konstantinove_Biblie_a_fixacia_kanonu\" >Imperat\u00edv mocenskej \u0161trukt\u00fary: Kon\u0161tant\u00ednove Biblie a fix\u00e1cia k\u00e1nonu<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-19\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Zaver_Pismo_ako_historicky_konstrukt_a_rozklad_inerrancie\" >Z\u00e1ver: P\u00edsmo ako historick\u00fd kon\u0161trukt a rozklad inerrancie<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-20\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Codex_Sinaiticus_vs_text_Byzantskeho_typu_V_com_lisia_co_sa_tyka_argumentov_potvrdenia_bozstva_Krista_V_ktorych_versoch_su_rozdiely\" >Codex Sinaiticus vs text Byzantsk\u00e9ho typu. V \u010dom l\u00ed\u0161ia \u010do sa t\u00fdka argumentov potvrdenia bo\u017estva Krista? V ktor\u00fdch ver\u0161och s\u00fa rozdiely?<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-21\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Klucove_verse_a_ich_rozdiely\" >K\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9 ver\u0161e a ich rozdiely:<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-4' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-22\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#1_Jan_1_18_Jednorodeny_Syn_vs_Jednorodeny_Boh\" >1. J\u00e1n 1:18 (Jednoroden\u00fd Syn vs. Jednoroden\u00fd Boh)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-23\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#2_Matus_24_36_Vseveducnost_a_synovstvo_Jezisa\" >2. Mat\u00fa\u0161 24:36 (V\u0161eved\u00facnos\u0165 a synovstvo Je\u017ei\u0161a)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-24\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#3_Jan_9_35_Syn_Bozi_vs_Syn_cloveka\" >3. J\u00e1n 9:35 (Syn Bo\u017e\u00ed vs. Syn \u010dloveka)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-25\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#4_Lukas_24_51-52_Nanebovstupenie_a_klananie_sa_Jezisovi\" >4. Luk\u00e1\u0161 24:51-52 (Nanebovst\u00fapenie a kla\u0148anie sa Je\u017ei\u0161ovi)<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-26\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#List_Hermasov_pastier_bol_sucast_starsich_Biblii_ako_napriklad_Codex_Sinaiticus_silne_spochybnuje_bozstvo_Krista\" >List Hermasov pastier bol s\u00fa\u010das\u0165 star\u0161\u00edch Bibli\u00ed ako napr\u00edklad Codex Sinaiticus, silne spochyb\u0148uje bo\u017estvo Krista<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-3' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-27\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#I_Citaty_o_Kristovi_ako_o_%E2%80%9EBozom_sluzobnikovi%E2%80%9C_sluha_sluzobnik\" >I. Cit\u00e1ty o Kristovi ako o \u201eBo\u017eom slu\u017eobn\u00edkovi\u201c (sluha \/ slu\u017eobn\u00edk)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-4' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-28\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#1_Explicitne_stotoznenie_Sluzobnika_so_Synom_Bozim_Sim_552\" >1. Explicitn\u00e9 stoto\u017enenie Slu\u017eobn\u00edka so Synom Bo\u017e\u00edm (Sim. 5.5.2)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-29\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#2_Hermasova_otazka_o_podobe_sluhu_Sim_554\" >2. Hermasova ot\u00e1zka o podobe sluhu (Sim. 5.5.4)<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-30\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#3_Odpoved_pastiera_o_moci_Syna_Sim_561\" >3. Odpove\u010f pastiera o moci Syna (Sim. 5.6.1)<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-31\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#II_Pasaze_spochybnujuce_bozstvo_a_preexistenciu_Jezisa_Krista\" >II. Pas\u00e1\u017ee spochyb\u0148uj\u00face bo\u017estvo a preexistenciu Je\u017ei\u0161a Krista<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-4' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-32\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Klucovy_citat_o_%E2%80%9Etele_a_Duchu%E2%80%9C_Sim_565-7\" >K\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00fd cit\u00e1t o \u201etele a Duchu\u201c (Sim. 5.6.5-7):<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-33\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Dalsi_citat_stotoznujuci_Ducha_so_Synom_Sim_911\" >\u010eal\u0161\u00ed cit\u00e1t stoto\u017e\u0148uj\u00faci Ducha so Synom (Sim. 9.1.1):<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-34\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#III_Teologicke_pnutie_a_kontradikcia_v_texte_Similitude_9\" >III. Teologick\u00e9 pnutie a kontradikcia v texte (Similitude 9)<\/a><ul class='ez-toc-list-level-4' ><li class='ez-toc-heading-level-4'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-35\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Citat_podporujuci_preexistenciu_Syna_Sim_9122\" >Cit\u00e1t podporuj\u00faci preexistenciu Syna (Sim. 9.12.2):<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-36\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/#Zaver\" >Z\u00e1ver<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"560\" height=\"314\" src=\"\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/5qSJXt0ONYo\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\"><\/iframe><\/p>\r\n<h2 id=\"-vod-m-tus-o-neomylnom-zachovan-biblick-ho-textu-a-il-zia-jedinej-pravdy\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Uvod_Mytus_o_neomylnom_zachovani_biblickeho_textu_a_iluzia_jedinej_pravdy\"><\/span>\u00davod: M\u00fdtus o neomylnom zachovan\u00ed biblick\u00e9ho textu a il\u00fazia jedinej pravdy<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>V prostred\u00ed tradi\u010dnej kres\u0165anskej apologetiky a in\u0161titucion\u00e1lnej cirkevnej dogmatiky prevl\u00e1da hlboko zakorenen\u00fd narat\u00edv o prozrete\u013enostnom, bezchybnom a priam z\u00e1zra\u010dnom zachovan\u00ed textu Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona. Tento narat\u00edv, nevyhnutn\u00fd pre udr\u017eanie autority cirkvi, predpoklad\u00e1, \u017ee texty, ktor\u00e9 dnes veriaci \u010d\u00edtaj\u00fa, s\u00fa vern\u00fdmi, takmer dokonal\u00fdmi k\u00f3piami p\u00f4vodn\u00fdch autografov, nap\u00edsan\u00fdch apo\u0161tolmi alebo ich priamymi spolupracovn\u00edkmi. Kritick\u00e1 textov\u00e1 veda v\u0161ak na z\u00e1klade extenz\u00edvneho \u0161t\u00fadia tis\u00edcov zachovan\u00fdch starovek\u00fdch rukopisov odha\u013euje diametr\u00e1lne odli\u0161n\u00fd obraz [cite: 1, 2, 3]. Dejiny prenosu novozmluvn\u00e9ho textu nie s\u00fa pr\u00edbehom bo\u017eskej garancie, ale sk\u00f4r pr\u00edbehom nesmiernej \u013eudskej chybovosti, teologick\u00fdch bojov a vedom\u00fdch ideologick\u00fdch manipul\u00e1ci\u00ed [cite: 4, 5, 6]. Odhaduje sa, \u017ee v pribli\u017ene 5 800 zachovan\u00fdch gr\u00e9ckych rukopisoch Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona sa nach\u00e1dza 200 000 a\u017e 400 000 textov\u00fdch variantov [cite: 1, 2, 7]. Ako s ob\u013eubou podot\u00fdkaj\u00fa textov\u00ed kritici, v Novom z\u00e1kone je viac textov\u00fdch odch\u00fdlok, ne\u017e je v \u0148om samotn\u00fdch slov.<\/p>\r\n<p>Predkladan\u00e1 v\u00fdskumn\u00e1 spr\u00e1va poskytuje vy\u010derp\u00e1vaj\u00facu a kritick\u00fa anal\u00fdzu dvoch hlavn\u00fdch textov\u00fdch trad\u00edci\u00ed Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona: Alexandrijsk\u00e9ho textov\u00e9ho typu (reprezentovan\u00e9ho predov\u0161etk\u00fdm ranej\u0161\u00edmi papyrusmi a k\u00f3dexmi Sinaiticus a Vaticanus) a Byzantsk\u00e9ho textov\u00e9ho typu, ktor\u00e9ho najzn\u00e1mej\u0161ou neskor\u0161ou kompil\u00e1ciou je takzvan\u00fd <em>Textus Receptus<\/em>. Osobitn\u00e1 pozornos\u0165 je venovan\u00e1 kritick\u00e9mu porovnaniu t\u00fdchto trad\u00edci\u00ed, pri\u010dom \u0165a\u017eisko spr\u00e1vy spo\u010d\u00edva v detailnej anal\u00fdze najviac kontroverzn\u00fdch christologick\u00fdch a dogmatick\u00fdch pas\u00e1\u017e\u00ed. Anal\u00fdza nekompromisne ukazuje, \u017ee k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9 piliere cirkevnej dogmatiky \u2013 ako je absol\u00fatne bo\u017estvo Je\u017ei\u0161a Krista, u\u010denie o Sv\u00e4tej Trojici \u010di doktr\u00edna o integr\u00e1lnej z\u00e1stupnej obeti \u2013 neboli integr\u00e1lnou s\u00fa\u010das\u0165ou p\u00f4vodn\u00fdch textov. Tieto doktr\u00edny boli do textu \u010dasto implementovan\u00e9, dodato\u010dne upravovan\u00e9 alebo systematicky \u201euhladzovan\u00e9\u201c neskor\u0161\u00edmi pis\u00e1rmi v defenz\u00edvnej reakcii na ranokres\u0165ansk\u00e9 her\u00e9zy [cite: 8, 9, 10].<\/p>\r\n<h2 id=\"anat-mia-textov-ch-rod-n-alexandrijsk-verzus-byzantsk-typ\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Anatomia_textovych_rodin_Alexandrijsky_verzus_Byzantsky_typ\"><\/span>Anat\u00f3mia textov\u00fdch rod\u00edn: Alexandrijsk\u00fd verzus Byzantsk\u00fd typ<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>Na pochopenie rozsahu textov\u00fdch manipul\u00e1ci\u00ed je nevyhnutn\u00e9 definova\u0165 dve hlavn\u00e9 textov\u00e9 rodiny, ktor\u00e9 st\u00e1li pri formovan\u00ed modernej podoby Biblie. R\u00f4znorodos\u0165 rukopisov si vy\u017eiadala ich kategoriz\u00e1ciu do rod\u00edn na z\u00e1klade spolo\u010dn\u00fdch znakov, omylov a vedom\u00fdch editorsk\u00fdch z\u00e1sahov.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"alexandrijsk-textov-typ-strohos-starobylos-a-absencia-dogmatiky\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Alexandrijsky_textovy_typ_Strohost_starobylost_a_absencia_dogmatiky\"><\/span>Alexandrijsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ: Strohos\u0165, starobylos\u0165 a absencia dogmatiky<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Alexandrijsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ, ktor\u00fd dostal pomenovanie pod\u013ea jedn\u00e9ho z hlavn\u00fdch centier ranej kres\u0165anskej u\u010denosti v Egypte, je modernou textovou kritikou vo v\u0161eobecnosti pova\u017eovan\u00fd za najstar\u0161iu a najspo\u013eahlivej\u0161iu zachovan\u00fa formu textu [cite: 2, 11, 12]. Vznikol v prostred\u00ed, kde such\u00e9 egyptsk\u00e9 podnebie umo\u017enilo zachovanie krehk\u00fdch papyrusov. Medzi jeho hlavn\u00fdch predstavite\u013eov patria mimoriadne cenn\u00e9 ran\u00e9 papyrusy, ako s\u00fa P46, P66 a P75, datovan\u00e9 do neskor\u00e9ho 2. a\u017e 3. storo\u010dia, a n\u00e1sledne ve\u013ek\u00e9 unci\u00e1lne pergamenov\u00e9 k\u00f3dexy zo 4. storo\u010dia, najm\u00e4 <em>Codex Vaticanus<\/em> (ozna\u010dovan\u00fd ako B alebo 03) a <em>Codex Sinaiticus<\/em> (ozna\u010dovan\u00fd hebrejsk\u00fdm p\u00edsmenom Alef, \u2135 alebo 01) [cite: 2, 13, 14].<\/p>\r\n<p>Z h\u013eadiska liter\u00e1rnej charakteristiky je Alexandrijsk\u00fd text stroh\u00fd, stru\u010dn\u00fd a jazykovo menej vybr\u00fasen\u00fd [cite: 2, 11]. Na rozdiel od neskor\u0161\u00edch trad\u00edci\u00ed, ran\u00ed pis\u00e1ri tohto typu mali tendenciu zachov\u00e1va\u0165 \u0165a\u017e\u0161ie, neohraban\u00e9 a niekedy aj teologicky problematick\u00e9 \u010d\u00edtania (v textovej kritike zn\u00e1me ako pravidlo <em>lectio difficilior potior<\/em> \u2013 \u0165a\u017e\u0161ie \u010d\u00edtanie je pravdepodobnej\u0161ie p\u00f4vodn\u00e9). Neuchy\u013eovali sa k systematick\u00e9mu harmonizovaniu paraleln\u00fdch pas\u00e1\u017e\u00ed v synoptick\u00fdch evanjeli\u00e1ch [cite: 15]. Z poh\u013eadu historickej kritiky je tento textov\u00fd typ fascinuj\u00faci pr\u00e1ve preto, \u017ee odzrkad\u013euje chaotick\u00fa ran\u00fa f\u00e1zu v\u00fdvoja kres\u0165anstva. V tomto obdob\u00ed e\u0161te mnoh\u00e9 teologick\u00e9 koncepty neboli pevne \u0161tandardizovan\u00e9 koncilmi a text nebol \u201eo\u010disten\u00fd\u201c od drsn\u00fdch \u010di neortodoxne znej\u00facich vyjadren\u00ed. Z tohto d\u00f4vodu v Alexandrijskom texte \u010dasto \u00faplne ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa tie pas\u00e1\u017ee, expanzie a tituly, ktor\u00e9 neskor\u0161ia imperi\u00e1lna cirkev pova\u017eovala za k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9 pre budovanie svojej ortodoxie [cite: 6, 15].<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"byzantsk-textov-typ-a-textus-receptus-vytvorenie-uhladenej-teol-gie\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Byzantsky_textovy_typ_a_Textus_Receptus_Vytvorenie_uhladenej_teologie\"><\/span>Byzantsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ a Textus Receptus: Vytvorenie uhladenej teol\u00f3gie<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Na druhej strane spektra stoj\u00ed Byzantsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ, niekedy naz\u00fdvan\u00fd aj V\u00fdchodn\u00fd, S\u00fdrsky alebo V\u00e4\u010d\u0161inov\u00fd text. Ide o formu textu, ktor\u00e1 postupne mocensky dominovala v gr\u00e9cky hovoriacom svete (v Byzantskej r\u00ed\u0161i) od 5. storo\u010dia a z d\u00f4vodu in\u0161titucion\u00e1lnej podpory sa masovo reprodukovala. Z tohto d\u00f4vodu Byzantsk\u00fd typ dodnes tvor\u00ed zhruba 95 % v\u0161etk\u00fdch zachovan\u00fdch gr\u00e9ckych rukopisov Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona, hoci ide o rukopisy poch\u00e1dzaj\u00face z ove\u013ea neskor\u0161ieho obdobia (\u010dasto 9. a\u017e 15. storo\u010die) [cite: 11, 16, 17]. Pod\u013ea prevl\u00e1daj\u00facich te\u00f3ri\u00ed m\u00e1 tento text korene v systematickej rev\u00edzii (recenzii), ktor\u00fa na prelome 3. a 4. storo\u010dia vypracoval Luki\u00e1n z Antiochie v snahe vytvori\u0165 pre cirkev plynulej\u0161\u00ed, koherentnej\u0161\u00ed a teologicky bezpe\u010dn\u00fd text [cite: 11].<\/p>\r\n<p>Na z\u00e1sadn\u00fd rozdiel od drsn\u00e9ho Alexandrijsk\u00e9ho typu je Byzantsk\u00fd text plynulej\u0161\u00ed, gramaticky vycibrenej\u0161\u00ed a vyzna\u010duje sa silnou tendenciou k asimil\u00e1cii a harmoniz\u00e1cii. Ak sa v jednom evanjeliu nach\u00e1dzal detail, ktor\u00fd v druhom ch\u00fdbal, byzantsk\u00ed pis\u00e1ri ho jednoducho doplnili, aby vytvorili jednoliatej\u0161\u00ed a menej protichodn\u00fd pr\u00edbeh [cite: 2, 11]. \u010co je v\u0161ak z kritick\u00e9ho h\u013eadiska najd\u00f4le\u017eitej\u0161ie, Byzantsk\u00fd text obsahuje po\u010detn\u00e9 teologick\u00e9 expanzie, doplnky a vsuvky, ktor\u00e9 sp\u00e4tne rie\u0161ia biblick\u00e9 nekonzistentnosti a priamo podporuj\u00fa nesk\u00f4r sformovan\u00fa cirkevn\u00fa ortodoxiu [cite: 11].<\/p>\r\n<p>Z Byzantsk\u00e9ho textov\u00e9ho typu priamo vych\u00e1dza takzvan\u00fd <em>Textus Receptus<\/em> (Prijat\u00fd text). I\u0161lo o prv\u00fa zverejnen\u00fa tla\u010den\u00fa ed\u00edciu gr\u00e9ckeho Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona, ktor\u00fa v roku 1516 v obrovskom zhone pripravil Erazmus Rotterdamsk\u00fd. Kritick\u00fd poh\u013ead na Erazmovu pr\u00e1cu odha\u013euje zar\u00e1\u017eaj\u00facu absenciu vedeckej metodol\u00f3gie. Erazmus mal k dispoz\u00edcii len h\u0155stku neskor\u00fdch, podradn\u00fdch byzantsk\u00fdch rukopisov, preva\u017ene z 12. storo\u010dia [cite: 2, 18]. E\u0161te \u0161okuj\u00facej\u0161ie je, \u017ee pre knihu Zjavenia J\u00e1na mal k dispoz\u00edcii len jeden jedin\u00fd, aj to ne\u00fapln\u00fd rukopis. Ch\u00fdbaj\u00face posledn\u00e9 ver\u0161e knihy (a t\u00fdm aj celej Biblie) jednoducho sp\u00e4tne prelo\u017eil z latinskej Vulg\u00e1ty do gr\u00e9\u010dtiny. T\u00fdm vytvoril gr\u00e9cky text, ktor\u00fd sa v takomto znen\u00ed nenach\u00e1dza v \u017eiadnom starovekom gr\u00e9ckom rukopise na svete [cite: 2].<\/p>\r\n<p>Napriek tejto \u0161kandal\u00f3znej metodol\u00f3gii a evidentn\u00fdm nedostatkom sa Erazmov Textus Receptus stal posv\u00e4tnou dogmatickou normou na \u010fal\u0161ie takmer \u0161tyri st\u00e1ro\u010dia. Sl\u00fa\u017eil ako absol\u00fatny z\u00e1klad pre klasick\u00e9 reforma\u010dn\u00e9 preklady, ak\u00fdmi s\u00fa sl\u00e1vna anglick\u00e1 King James Version (KJV) z roku 1611, nemeck\u00fd preklad Martina Luthera \u010di \u010desk\u00e1 Kralick\u00e1 biblia [cite: 2, 19]. Zatia\u013e \u010do dogmatici a z\u00e1stancovia hnutia &#8220;King James Only&#8221; dodnes absurdne obhajuj\u00fa Textus Receptus ako prozrete\u013enostne a bezchybne zachovan\u00e9 Bo\u017eie slovo, kritick\u00e1 textov\u00e1 veda ho vn\u00edma ako kumul\u00e1ciu storo\u010d\u00ed pis\u00e1rskych omylov, vedom\u00fdch harmoniz\u00e1ci\u00ed a teologick\u00fdch korekci\u00ed, ktor\u00e9 mali legitimizova\u0165 cirkevn\u00fa moc [cite: 20, 21].<\/p>\r\n<h2 id=\"vn-torn-rozkol-alexandrijskej-rodiny-codex-sinaiticus-v-konfront-cii-s-in-mi-svedkami\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Vnutorny_rozkol_Alexandrijskej_rodiny_Codex_Sinaiticus_v_konfrontacii_s_inymi_svedkami\"><\/span>Vn\u00fatorn\u00fd rozkol Alexandrijskej rodiny: Codex Sinaiticus v konfront\u00e1cii s in\u00fdmi svedkami<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>V 19. storo\u010d\u00ed do\u0161lo k objavom, ktor\u00e9 definit\u00edvne otriasli mocensk\u00fdm monopolom Textus Receptus. Nemeck\u00fd u\u010denec Constantin von Tischendorf v Kl\u00e1\u0161tore sv\u00e4tej Katar\u00edny na Sinajskom polostrove objavil \u2013 a za dodnes kontroverzn\u00fdch okolnost\u00ed odniesol \u2013 <em>Codex Sinaiticus<\/em>, poch\u00e1dzaj\u00faci z obdobia rokov 330 a\u017e 360 n. l. [cite: 3, 13, 22]. Takmer v rovnakom historickom okamihu sa vedeckej obci po storo\u010diach exkluzivity viac spr\u00edstupnil <em>Codex Vaticanus<\/em> (datovan\u00fd e\u0161te o nie\u010do sk\u00f4r, 300 \u2013 330 n. l.), ktor\u00fd bol dovtedy \u017eiarlivo str\u00e1\u017een\u00fd vo Vatik\u00e1nskej kni\u017enici [cite: 13, 23]. Tieto dva obrovsk\u00e9 pergamenov\u00e9 k\u00f3dexy, p\u00edsan\u00e9 kontinu\u00e1lnou majuskulou (ve\u013ek\u00fdmi p\u00edsmenami bez medzier), sp\u00f4sobili revol\u00faciu a zmenili paradigmu biblickej kritiky. Viedli k sl\u00e1vnej Westcott-Hortovej te\u00f3rii z roku 1881, ktor\u00e1 systematicky uprednostnila Alexandrijsk\u00fd text pred neskor\u00fdm Byzantsk\u00fdm balastom [cite: 2, 12, 20].<\/p>\r\n<p>Cirkevn\u00e1 apologetika sa \u010dasto sna\u017e\u00ed prezentova\u0165 tieto ranej\u0161ie k\u00f3dexy ako d\u00f4kaz jednotn\u00e9ho, plynul\u00e9ho prenosu pravdy. Pri detailnej anal\u00fdze a vz\u00e1jomnom porovnan\u00ed Sinaiticu s in\u00fdmi rukopismi Alexandrijsk\u00e9ho typu (najm\u00e4 s k\u00f3dexom Vaticanus a ranej\u0161\u00edmi papyrusmi ako P75) sa v\u0161ak t\u00e1to il\u00fazia okam\u017eite r\u00faca. Alexandrijsk\u00e1 rodina nie je jednoliata; je pln\u00e1 vn\u00fatorn\u00fdch rozporov, ktor\u00e9 podkop\u00e1vaj\u00fa predstavu o existencii jedinej ranej ortodoxie.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"obsahov-odch-lky-a-flexibilita-posv-tn-ho-k-nonu\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Obsahove_odchylky_a_flexibilita_posvatneho_kanonu\"><\/span>Obsahov\u00e9 odch\u00fdlky a flexibilita posv\u00e4tn\u00e9ho k\u00e1nonu<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Zatia\u013e \u010do dne\u0161n\u00fd novozmluvn\u00fd k\u00e1non m\u00e1 fixn\u00fdch a dogmaticky uzavret\u00fdch 27 kn\u00edh, ran\u00e9 Alexandrijsk\u00e9 k\u00f3dexy empiricky dokazuj\u00fa, \u017ee hranice \u201ein\u0161pirovan\u00e9ho\u201c textu boli vo \u0161tvrtom storo\u010d\u00ed extr\u00e9mne fluidn\u00e9 a nedefinovan\u00e9. Codex Vaticanus p\u00f4vodne obsahoval takmer cel\u00fa Bibliu, no z d\u00f4vodu fyzick\u00e9ho po\u0161kodenia a straty str\u00e1n v \u0148om dnes ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa v\u00fdznamn\u00e9 \u010dasti: kniha Genezis, List Hebrejom (od kapitoly 9), v\u0161etky pastor\u00e1lne listy (1. a 2. Timotejovi, T\u00edtovi), list Filemonovi a napokon ch\u00fdba aj cel\u00e1 kniha Zjavenia J\u00e1na [cite: 13, 15].<\/p>\r\n<p>Na druhej strane, Codex Sinaiticus je jedin\u00fdm zachovan\u00fdm gr\u00e9ckym rukopisom z tohto ran\u00e9ho obdobia, ktor\u00fd obsahuje cel\u00fd Nov\u00fd z\u00e1kon bez str\u00e1t [cite: 13]. Av\u0161ak na obrovsk\u00e9 zdesenie tradi\u010dn\u00fdch dogmatikov Sinaiticus obsahuje ako integr\u00e1lnu s\u00fa\u010das\u0165 Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona aj knihy, ktor\u00e9 do modern\u00e9ho k\u00e1nonu nepatria a nesk\u00f4r boli cirkvou odmietnut\u00e9: <em>List Barnab\u00e1\u0161ov<\/em> a <em>Pastier Hermov<\/em> [cite: 12, 15, 23]. List Barnab\u00e1\u0161ov je textom so siln\u00fdm proti\u017eidovsk\u00fdm zameran\u00edm a netradi\u010dn\u00fdm alegorizovan\u00edm, zatia\u013e \u010do Pastier Hermov obsahuje siln\u00e9 prvky adopcionistickej christol\u00f3gie, hrani\u010diace s gnosticizmom [cite: 24]. Ich fyzick\u00e1 pr\u00edtomnos\u0165 v rovnakom zv\u00e4zku s apo\u0161tolsk\u00fdmi spismi ne\u00faprosne dokazuje, \u017ee ran\u00e9 kres\u0165ansk\u00e9 komunity, dokonca ani tie, ktor\u00e9 si mohli dovoli\u0165 vyrobi\u0165 tak\u00fdto mas\u00edvny a drah\u00fd k\u00f3dex, nerozli\u0161ovali striktne medzi textami, ktor\u00e9 s\u00fa dnes pova\u017eovan\u00e9 za k\u00e1nonick\u00e9 a nek\u00e1nonick\u00e9 [cite: 23]. Z poh\u013eadu nez\u00e1vislej kritiky to jasne ukazuje, \u017ee biblick\u00fd k\u00e1non je neskor\u0161\u00ed mocensk\u00fd a cirkevn\u00fd kon\u0161trukt, nie vnuknut\u00e1, zhora dan\u00e1 realita ranej cirkvi.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"pis-rske-zlyhania-a-okuj-ci-po-et-opr-v-v-codex-sinaiticus\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Pisarske_zlyhania_a_sokujuci_pocet_oprav_v_Codex_Sinaiticus\"><\/span>Pis\u00e1rske zlyhania a \u0161okuj\u00faci po\u010det opr\u00e1v v Codex Sinaiticus<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Ke\u010f vedci detailne porovn\u00e1vaj\u00fa Codex Sinaiticus s k\u00f3dexom Vaticanus, rozdiely v ich kvalite a presnosti s\u00fa priepastn\u00e9. Zatia\u013e \u010do Codex Vaticanus bol nap\u00edsan\u00fd relat\u00edvne starostlivo, kaligraficky a s men\u0161\u00edm po\u010dtom korekci\u00ed (\u010do z neho rob\u00ed pod\u013ea mnoh\u00fdch u\u010dencov najlep\u0161ieho z\u00e1stupcu Alexandrijsk\u00e9ho typu) [cite: 15, 23], Codex Sinaiticus je z h\u013eadiska kvality pis\u00e1rskej pr\u00e1ce vyslovene chaotick\u00fd. Tento fakt radi a \u010dasto vyu\u017e\u00edvaj\u00fa z\u00e1stancovia Byzantsk\u00e9ho textu (napr\u00edklad konzervat\u00edvny u\u010denec J. W. Burgon), aby zdiskreditovali cel\u00fa Alexandrijsk\u00fa textov\u00fa rodinu [cite: 17, 24].<\/p>\r\n<p>Text Sinaiticu obsahuje obrovsk\u00e9 mno\u017estvo nez\u00e1mern\u00fdch mechanick\u00fdch ch\u00fdb sp\u00f4soben\u00fdch \u00fanavou alebo nepozornos\u0165ou pis\u00e1rov. Naj\u010dastej\u0161ou chybou je <em>parablepsis<\/em> (presko\u010denie o\u010d\u00ed) sp\u00f4soben\u00e1 fenom\u00e9nom <em>homoioteleuton<\/em> (podobn\u00e9 zakon\u010denie riadkov alebo fr\u00e1z) [cite: 25, 26, 27]. Ke\u010f\u017ee text bol p\u00edsan\u00fd v syst\u00e9me <em>scriptio continua<\/em> (s\u00favisl\u00fd text bez medzier medzi slovami a bez interpunkcie), pis\u00e1r \u010dasto presko\u010dil cel\u00e9 riadky, ak sa kon\u010dili na rovnako vyzeraj\u00face slovo. Zn\u00e1my kritik John Burgon upozornil, \u017ee v Sinaiticu sa nach\u00e1dza najmenej 115 miest, kde pis\u00e1r pre t\u00fato nedbalos\u0165 vynechal cel\u00e9 ucelen\u00e9 my\u0161lienky, niekedy zah\u0155\u0148aj\u00face 10, 20 a\u017e 40 slov [cite: 24]. \u010eal\u0161\u00edmi be\u017en\u00fdmi chybami s\u00fa <em>haplografia<\/em> (nap\u00edsanie sekvencie iba raz, ke\u010f mala by\u0165 nap\u00edsan\u00e1 dvakr\u00e1t) a naopak <em>dittografia<\/em> (zbyto\u010dn\u00e9 opakovanie textu), ako aj z\u00e1mena podobne znej\u00facich p\u00edsmen (<em>itacizmus<\/em>) \u010di vizu\u00e1lne podobn\u00fdch znakov [cite: 26, 27]. Celkov\u00fd po\u010det slov vynechan\u00fdch v Sinaiticu (len v evanjeli\u00e1ch) v porovnan\u00ed s Byzantsk\u00fdm textom presahuje \u010d\u00edslo 3 400 [cite: 24].<\/p>\r\n<p>Tento obrovsk\u00fd v\u00fdskyt omylov mal za n\u00e1sledok bezprecedentn\u00e9 mno\u017estvo n\u00e1sledn\u00fdch z\u00e1sahov do textu. S\u00e1m Tischendorf, objavite\u013e k\u00f3dexu, zaznamenal pribli\u017ene 14 800 korekci\u00ed, no detailn\u00e9 modern\u00e9 \u0161t\u00fadie Britsk\u00e9ho m\u00fazea (veden\u00e9 odborn\u00edkmi ako D. C. Parker, Milne a Skeat) odhaduj\u00fa, \u017ee v k\u00f3dexe sa nach\u00e1dza dychber\u00facich <strong>27 000 korekci\u00ed a z\u00e1sahov<\/strong>, ktor\u00e9 do pergamenov vp\u00edsalo najmenej desa\u0165 r\u00f4znych korektorov od 4. storo\u010dia a\u017e po 12. storo\u010die [cite: 14, 15, 24, 28, 29].<\/p>\r\n<p>Tieto vrstvy opr\u00e1v funguj\u00fa ako geologick\u00e9 vrstvy, ktor\u00e9 odha\u013euj\u00fa, ako bola teol\u00f3gia cirkvi neust\u00e1le aktualizovan\u00e1. Prvotn\u00ed korektori, ktor\u00ed p\u00f4sobili priamo v skript\u00f3riu alebo kr\u00e1tko po \u0148om, menili text preva\u017ene smerom k alexandrijskej \u201e\u010distote\u201c, \u010dasto ho zla\u010fuj\u00fac s predlohami, ktor\u00e9 sa podobali na Codex Vaticanus a papyrus P75 [cite: 26, 28]. Tieto \u00fapravy ukazuj\u00fa, \u017ee v ranom obdob\u00ed alexandrijsk\u00fd pr\u00fad h\u013eadal vn\u00fatorn\u00fa konzistenciu. Av\u0161ak neskor\u0161\u00ed korektori (najm\u00e4 zo 6. a 7. storo\u010dia) sa agres\u00edvne pok\u00fa\u0161ali vtesna\u0165 archaick\u00fd text Sinaiticu do vtedy politicky a teologicky prevl\u00e1daj\u00faceho Byzantsk\u00e9ho znenia [cite: 14, 24, 28].<\/p>\r\n<p>Tento neust\u00e1ly proces premaz\u00e1vania, vy\u0161krab\u00e1vania star\u00e9ho atramentu a vpisovania nov\u00e9ho ne\u00faprosne dokazuje, \u017ee text Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona nebol pre ran\u00fdch kres\u0165anov nedotknute\u013enou, posv\u00e4tnou a statickou relikviou. Bol to flexibiln\u00fd, \u017eiv\u00fd organizmus, pracovn\u00fd materi\u00e1l, ktor\u00fd bol podrobovan\u00fd drastick\u00fdm \u00faprav\u00e1m pod\u013ea teologick\u00fdch a mocensk\u00fdch potrieb danej cirkevnej epochy [cite: 23, 28]. Neexistovala \u017eiadna \u201ep\u00f4vodn\u00e1 harm\u00f3nia\u201c. Dokonca aj pri porovnan\u00ed dvoch najvz\u00e1cnej\u0161\u00edch a najsl\u00e1vnej\u0161\u00edch alexandrijsk\u00fdch rukopisov, Sinaiticus a Vaticanus, vedci nar\u00e1tali len v samotn\u00fdch evanjeli\u00e1ch vy\u0161e 3 000 textov\u00fdch rozdielov (a\u017e 6 500 v celom Novom z\u00e1kone) [cite: 7, 17, 19]. V samotnom Evanjeliu pod\u013ea J\u00e1na sa tieto dva k\u00f3dexy nezhoduj\u00fa v 600 pr\u00edpadoch [cite: 15]. Ak sa najlep\u0161ie zachovan\u00e9 rukopisy z rovnak\u00e9ho teologick\u00e9ho centra a z rovnak\u00e9ho storo\u010dia l\u00ed\u0161ia tis\u00edckr\u00e1t, predstava o line\u00e1rnom a neporu\u0161enom odovzd\u00e1van\u00ed Bo\u017eieho slova sa st\u00e1va \u010d\u00edrou apologetickou fant\u00e1ziou.<\/p>\r\n<h2 id=\"mechanika-vedom-ch-manipul-ci-ortodoxn-korupcia-p-sma\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Mechanika_vedomych_manipulacii_Ortodoxna_korupcia_Pisma\"><\/span>Mechanika vedom\u00fdch manipul\u00e1ci\u00ed: Ortodoxn\u00e1 korupcia P\u00edsma<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>Zatia\u013e \u010do obrovsk\u00e9 mno\u017estvo ch\u00fdb v Sinaiticu (ako homoioteleuton) patr\u00ed do kateg\u00f3rie ne\u00famyseln\u00fdch mechanick\u00fdch pochyben\u00ed, kritick\u00e1 anal\u00fdza odhalila aj druh\u00fa, ove\u013ea znepokojuj\u00facej\u0161iu kateg\u00f3riu: z\u00e1mern\u00e9 teologick\u00e9 fal\u0161ovanie textu.<\/p>\r\n<p>Profesor Bart D. Ehrman, popredn\u00fd svetov\u00fd textov\u00fd kritik a historik ranej cirkvi, zaviedol pre tento fenom\u00e9n term\u00edn <em>\u201eortodoxn\u00e1 korupcia P\u00edsma\u201c<\/em> [cite: 4, 5, 6, 10, 30]. Tento koncept systematicky vysvet\u013euje, pre\u010do a ako pis\u00e1ri v 2. a\u017e 4. storo\u010d\u00ed z\u00e1merne upravovali texty. Ich cie\u013eom bolo zos\u00faladi\u0165 biblick\u00e9 texty s formuj\u00facou sa \u201eortodoxnou\u201c (ofici\u00e1lne schv\u00e1lenou) teol\u00f3giou a z\u00e1rove\u0148 vyvr\u00e1ti\u0165 argumenty vtedaj\u0161\u00edch konkuren\u010dn\u00fdch her\u00e9z. Kres\u0165anstvo toti\u017e v prv\u00fdch storo\u010diach nebolo zjednoten\u00e9; i\u0161lo o sple\u0165 s\u00faperiacich siekt. Pis\u00e1ri, presved\u010den\u00ed o svojej vlastnej pravde, nev\u00e1hali \u201evylep\u0161i\u0165\u201c Bo\u017eie slovo tak, aby ned\u00e1valo zbra\u0148 do r\u00fak ich oponentom [cite: 6, 10].<\/p>\r\n<p>Hlavn\u00fdmi cie\u013emi t\u00fdchto pis\u00e1rskych \u00fatokov boli tri mas\u00edvne teologick\u00e9 pr\u00fady:<\/p>\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li><strong>Adopcionizmus:<\/strong> N\u00e1zor, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 bol spo\u010diatku oby\u010dajn\u00fd, smrte\u013en\u00fd \u010dlovek, ktor\u00fd si \u017eil vzorn\u00fdm \u017eivotom, a Boh ho za svojho Syna prijal (adoptoval) a\u017e pri jeho krste v rieke Jord\u00e1n [cite: 4, 31].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Doketizmus a gnosticizmus:<\/strong> N\u00e1zor, \u017ee hmota je zl\u00e1 a preto Je\u017ei\u0161 ako dokonal\u00e1 bo\u017esk\u00e1 bytos\u0165 nemohol by\u0165 skuto\u010dn\u00fdm \u010dlovekom z m\u00e4sa a kost\u00ed. Jeho telo bolo len il\u00faziou (z gr\u00e9ckeho <em>dokein<\/em> \u2013 javi\u0165 sa), a preto na kr\u00ed\u017ei netrpel skuto\u010dnou \u013eudskou boles\u0165ou a potmi [cite: 9].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Arianizmus a subordinacionizmus:<\/strong> N\u00e1zor, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 bol s\u00edce vysoko postaven\u00e1 nebesk\u00e1 bytos\u0165, ale predsa len bol stvoren\u00fd Bohom Otcom, mal za\u010diatok a bol mu podriaden\u00fd, nebol teda rovnako ve\u010dn\u00fd a absol\u00fatne rovn\u00fd Bohu [cite: 24, 32].<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<p>Byzantsk\u00fd text a neskor\u0161\u00ed Textus Receptus, na ktorom stoj\u00ed dne\u0161n\u00fd cirkevn\u00fd in\u0161titucionalizmus, s\u00fa doslova preplnen\u00e9 t\u00fdmito \u201eortodoxn\u00fdmi korupciami\u201c. Tieto defenz\u00edvne vsuvky boli nesk\u00f4r pov\u00fd\u0161en\u00e9 na \u00farove\u0148 in\u0161pirovan\u00e9ho Bo\u017eieho slova.<\/p>\r\n<table>\r\n<thead>\r\n<tr>\r\n<th style=\"text-align: left;\">Biblick\u00fd ver\u0161<\/th>\r\n<th style=\"text-align: left;\">Sledovan\u00fd dogmatick\u00fd a teologick\u00fd probl\u00e9m<\/th>\r\n<th style=\"text-align: left;\">Alexandrijsk\u00fd pr\u00fad (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Papyry)<\/th>\r\n<th style=\"text-align: left;\">Byzantsk\u00fd pr\u00fad a Textus Receptus<\/th>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/thead>\r\n<tbody>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>1. Timotejovi 3:16<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Absol\u00fatne bo\u017estvo Krista<\/strong> (Proti arianizmu)<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\">Znenie: <em>\u201e<strong>On, ktor\u00fd (OC)<\/strong> bol zjaven\u00fd v tele.\u201c<\/em> Text nedeklaruje priamo Je\u017ei\u0161a ako Boha.<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\">Znenie: <em>\u201e<strong>Boh (\u0398C)<\/strong> bol zjaven\u00fd v tele.\u201c<\/em> Jasn\u00e1 trinit\u00e1rna \u00faprava pis\u00e1rov.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Luk\u00e1\u0161 3:22<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Adopcionizmus<\/strong> (Kedy sa Je\u017ei\u0161 stal Synom?)<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\">Ranej\u0161ia, aj ke\u010f potla\u010den\u00e1 verzia (zachovan\u00e1 v Codex Bezae a u otcov): <em>\u201eTy si m\u00f4j Syn, <strong>dnes som \u0165a splodil<\/strong>.\u201c<\/em><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\">Harmonizovan\u00e9 s Marekom: <em>\u201eTy si m\u00f4j milovan\u00fd Syn, <strong>v tebe m\u00e1m za\u013e\u00fabenie<\/strong>.\u201c<\/em><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Luk\u00e1\u0161 22:43-44<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Doketizmus<\/strong> (Trpel Kristus ako \u010dlovek?)<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Ver\u0161e ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa.<\/strong> (Ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa v P75, P69, vo Vaticanus a p\u00f4vodnej ruke Sinaiticus).<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Ver\u0161e s\u00fa pr\u00edtomn\u00e9.<\/strong> (Zjavuje sa anjel, Je\u017ei\u0161 pot\u00ed kvapky krvi).<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Hebrejom 2:9<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Podstata z\u00e1stupnej obete a utrpenia<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\">Men\u0161inov\u00fd, no kriticky v\u00fdznamn\u00fd ranej\u0161\u00ed variant: Je\u017ei\u0161 ok\u00fasil smr\u0165 <em>\u201e<strong>bez Boha (choris theou)<\/strong>\u201c<\/em>.<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\">Teologicky uhladen\u00e1 verzia: Je\u017ei\u0161 ok\u00fasil smr\u0165 <em>\u201e<strong>z Bo\u017eej milosti (chariti theou)<\/strong>\u201c<\/em>.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>1. J\u00e1na 5:7-8<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Doktr\u00edna o Najsv\u00e4tej\u0161ej Trojici<\/strong> (Comma Johanneum)<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Text \u00faplne ch\u00fdba.<\/strong> Zmie\u0148uj\u00fa sa len traja pozemsk\u00ed svedkovia: duch, voda a krv.<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Text je pr\u00edtomn\u00fd.<\/strong> <em>\u201eOtec, Slovo a Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd; a t\u00edto traja s\u00fa jedno.\u201c<\/em> (Falo\u0161n\u00fd latinsk\u00fd dodatok).<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Marek 16:9-20<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Fyzick\u00e9 Vzkriesenie Krista<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Ch\u00fdba.<\/strong> Evanjelium n\u00e1hle kon\u010d\u00ed ver\u0161om 16:8 \u00fatekom vydesen\u00fdch \u017eien. Obe k\u00f3dexy nech\u00e1vaj\u00fa pr\u00e1zdne miesto.<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Pr\u00edtomn\u00e9.<\/strong> Doplnen\u00e9 pr\u00edbehy o zjavovan\u00ed sa u\u010den\u00edkom a chytan\u00ed hadov.<\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<tr>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>J\u00e1n 7:53-8:11<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Odpustenie a pastor\u00e1lna etika<\/strong> (Perikopa o cudzolo\u017enici)<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Pr\u00edbeh \u00faplne ch\u00fdba<\/strong> v P66, P75, Vaticanus aj Sinaiticus.<\/td>\r\n<td style=\"text-align: left;\"><strong>Pr\u00edbeh je integr\u00e1lnou s\u00fa\u010das\u0165ou evanjelia.<\/strong><\/td>\r\n<\/tr>\r\n<\/tbody>\r\n<\/table>\r\n<p>Nasleduje h\u013abkov\u00e1 anal\u00fdza a dekon\u0161trukcia t\u00fdchto najkontroverznej\u0161\u00edch pas\u00e1\u017e\u00ed, ktor\u00e1 odha\u013euje, ako bola cirkevn\u00e1 dogmatika krok po kroku budovan\u00e1 na pozmenen\u00fdch textoch.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"1-timotejovi-3-16-mechanick-v-roba-bo-stva-krista\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"1_Timotejovi_3_16_%E2%80%93_Mechanicka_vyroba_bozstva_Krista\"><\/span>1. Timotejovi 3:16 \u2013 Mechanick\u00e1 v\u00fdroba bo\u017estva Krista<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Jedn\u00fdm z najv\u00fdraznej\u0161\u00edch a vizu\u00e1lne najdok\u00e1zate\u013enej\u0161\u00edch pr\u00edkladov, ako neskor\u0161\u00ed pis\u00e1ri dogmaticky posilnili text v prospech absol\u00fatneho bo\u017estva Krista, je sl\u00e1vny kristologick\u00fd hymnus v 1. liste Timotejovi 3:16.<\/p>\r\n<ul>\r\n\t<li><strong>Textus Receptus (Byzantsk\u00fd text):<\/strong> \u201eA vpravde ve\u013ek\u00e9 je tajomstvo pobo\u017enosti: <strong>Boh<\/strong> bol zjaven\u00fd v tele\u201c (<em>\u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2 [Theos] efaner\u00f3th\u00e9 en sarki<\/em>). Toto \u010d\u00edtanie sa stalo neochvejn\u00fdm pilierom trinit\u00e1rnej apologetiky vo\u010di heretikom, ke\u010f\u017ee ako jedno z m\u00e1la miest v Novej zmluve priamo a explicitne naz\u00fdva Je\u017ei\u0161a Bohom [cite: 21].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Alexandrijsk\u00fd text (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus):<\/strong> \u201eA vpravde ve\u013ek\u00e9 je tajomstvo pobo\u017enosti: <strong>On, ktor\u00fd<\/strong> bol zjaven\u00fd v tele\u201c (<em>\u1f4b\u03c2 [Hos] efaner\u00f3th\u00e9 en sarki<\/em>) [cite: 21, 26]. Tento text hovor\u00ed o Je\u017ei\u0161ovi, ale z\u010faleka sa vyh\u00fdba tomu, aby ho explicitne a priamo identifikoval ako Boha samotn\u00e9ho.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<p>Kritick\u00fd rozbor starovekej paleografie odha\u013euje, ako presne k tejto nesmierne d\u00f4le\u017eitej teologickej zmene do\u0161lo. V ranej gr\u00e9ckej unci\u00e1lnej abecede sa z\u00e1jmeno \u201eOn, ktor\u00fd\u201c p\u00ed\u0161e pomocou dvoch p\u00edsmen: <strong>OC<\/strong> (Omikron, Sigma). Slovo \u201eBoh\u201c (<em>Theos<\/em>) patrilo v ranom kres\u0165anstve medzi takzvan\u00e9 <em>nomina sacra<\/em> (posv\u00e4tn\u00e9 men\u00e1), ktor\u00e9 sa zo zbo\u017enosti a pre \u00fasporu miesta povinne skracovali. Slovo Theos sa preto v rukopisoch p\u00edsalo do podoby <strong>\u0398C<\/strong> (Th\u00e9ta, Sigma) s pridanou vodorovnou pre\u010diarkuj\u00facou \u010diarou nad oboma p\u00edsmenami, ktor\u00e1 signalizovala skratku.<\/p>\r\n<p>Z vizu\u00e1lneho h\u013eadiska je rozdiel medzi <strong>OC<\/strong> a <strong>\u0398C<\/strong> minim\u00e1lny \u2013 ide iba o jednu mal\u00fa vodorovn\u00fa \u010diarku vn\u00fatri prv\u00e9ho p\u00edsmena a jednu \u010diarku nad slovom. Niekedy v priebehu stredoveku (alebo dokonca u\u017e po\u010das ran\u00fdch rev\u00edzi\u00ed v obave z arianizmu) sta\u010dilo, aby pr\u00edli\u0161 horliv\u00fd ortodoxn\u00fd pis\u00e1r do p\u00edsmena Omikron (<strong>O<\/strong>) vlo\u017eil mal\u00fa vodorovn\u00fa \u010diarku a nad slovo pridal zna\u010dku skratky. T\u00fdmto jednoduch\u00fdm \u0165ahom brka zmenil oby\u010dajn\u00e9 z\u00e1meno <strong>OC<\/strong> (\u201eOn, ktor\u00fd\u201c) na teologicky v\u00fdbu\u0161n\u00e9 a dogmaticky nepriestreln\u00e9 <strong>\u0398C<\/strong> (\u201eBoh\u201c) [cite: 26].<\/p>\r\n<p>Z\u00e1sah neskor\u0161ieho korektora je mo\u017en\u00e9 fyzicky vidie\u0165 a dok\u00e1za\u0165 priamo na stran\u00e1ch Codex Sinaiticus. P\u00f4vodn\u00e1 ruka (pis\u00e1r zo 4. storo\u010dia) zrete\u013ene nap\u00edsala <em>OC<\/em> (\u201eOn, ktor\u00fd\u201c), no neskor\u0161\u00ed korektor (ozna\u010dovan\u00fd vedcami ako \u21352 alebo Ac) tam hrub\u0161\u00edm atramentom vtla\u010dil \u010diarku, \u010d\u00edm vyrobil <em>\u0398C<\/em> [cite: 26]. Cel\u00fd Byzantsk\u00fd text a modern\u00e9 klasick\u00e9 preklady (ako KJV) tak stavaj\u00fa jeden zo svojich k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00fdch d\u00f4kazov o Kristovom bo\u017estve na oby\u010dajnom pis\u00e1rskom podvode a dodato\u010dnej manipul\u00e1cii s atramentom.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"luk-3-22-adopcionistick-krst-a-systematicky-potla-en-verzia\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Lukas_3_22_%E2%80%93_Adopcionisticky_krst_a_systematicky_potlacena_verzia\"><\/span>Luk\u00e1\u0161 3:22 \u2013 Adopcionistick\u00fd krst a systematicky potla\u010den\u00e1 verzia<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Pri opise k\u013e\u00fa\u010dovej udalosti krstu Je\u017ei\u0161a Krista sa v Luk\u00e1\u0161ovi 3:22 z neba oz\u00fdva Bo\u017e\u00ed hlas. To, \u010do tento hlas presne povedal, je v\u0161ak predmetom prudk\u00e9ho textov\u00e9ho a teologick\u00e9ho sporu.<\/p>\r\n<ul>\r\n\t<li><strong>V\u00e4\u010d\u0161ina dne\u0161n\u00fdch Bibli\u00ed (zastupuj\u00faca Alexandrijsk\u00fd aj Byzantsk\u00fd text):<\/strong> \u201eTy si m\u00f4j milovan\u00fd Syn; v tebe m\u00e1m za\u013e\u00fabenie.\u201c [cite: 31, 33, 34]<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Starobyl\u00fd men\u0161inov\u00fd variant (uchovan\u00fd v Codex Bezae a u ran\u00fdch otcov):<\/strong> \u201eTy si m\u00f4j Syn, <strong>dnes som \u0165a splodil<\/strong>.\u201c [cite: 4, 31, 33, 35].<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<p>Tento dramatick\u00fd rozdiel vo vyjadren\u00ed Boha Otca predstavuje doslova no\u010dn\u00fa moru pre neskor\u0161iu ortodoxn\u00fa christol\u00f3giu, ktor\u00e1 u\u010d\u00ed o odvekej, bezpo\u010diatkovej koexistencii Boha Otca a Boha Syna. Verzia \u201ednes som \u0165a splodil\u201c (\u010do je priamy cit\u00e1t starozmluvn\u00e9ho \u017dalmu 2:7) teologicky extr\u00e9mne silne implikuje <em>adopcionizmus<\/em>. T\u00e1to ranokres\u0165ansk\u00e1 \u201eher\u00e9za\u201c tvrdila, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 nebol pred-existuj\u00faci Boh, ale len mimoriadne spravodliv\u00fd oby\u010dajn\u00fd \u010dlovek, do ktor\u00e9ho pr\u00e1ve pri krste zost\u00fapil Bo\u017e\u00ed Duch a a\u017e v tom \u0161pecifickom momente ho Boh \u201esplodil\u201c, teda adoptoval za svojho jedine\u010dn\u00e9ho Syna [cite: 4, 31].<\/p>\r\n<p>Pod\u013ea v\u00fdskumov Barta Ehrmana a in\u00fdch kritick\u00fdch u\u010dencov, variant \u201ednes som \u0165a splodil\u201c bol s najv\u00e4\u010d\u0161ou pravdepodobnos\u0165ou p\u00f4vodn\u00fdm textom, ktor\u00fd nap\u00edsal autor Luk\u00e1\u0161ovho evanjelia, ktor\u00fd mal odli\u0161n\u00fa teol\u00f3giu ako autor J\u00e1novho evanjelia. Tento fakt mas\u00edvne potvrdzuj\u00fa cit\u00e1ty najstar\u0161\u00edch a najv\u00e1\u017eenej\u0161\u00edch cirkevn\u00fdch otcov z 2. a 3. storo\u010dia \u2013 ran\u00ed autori ako Just\u00edn Mu\u010den\u00edk (ktor\u00fd to cituje vo svojom <em>Dial\u00f3gu s Tryf\u00f3nom<\/em>), Klement Alexandrijsk\u00fd, Hilarius z Poitiers, Metod z Olympu a dokonca aj August\u00edn citovali hlas z neba presne vo forme \u201ednes som \u0165a splodil\u201c [cite: 31, 33, 34, 35].<\/p>\r\n<p>Ke\u010f v\u0161ak v nasleduj\u00facich desa\u0165ro\u010diach cirkevn\u00fd boj proti adopcionizmu naberal na obr\u00e1tkach a ortodoxia za\u010dala striktne presadzova\u0165 doktr\u00ednu o Kristovom odvekom bo\u017estve (spe\u010daten\u00fa nesk\u00f4r v Nik\u00e1ji), tento p\u00f4vodn\u00fd Luk\u00e1\u0161ov ver\u0161 sa stal netolerovate\u013ene nebezpe\u010dn\u00fdm. Ortodoxn\u00ed pis\u00e1ri, dobre si vedom\u00ed toho, ako efekt\u00edvne tento ver\u0161 zneu\u017e\u00edvaj\u00fa adopcionisti ako d\u00f4kaz, ho zo svojich k\u00f3pi\u00ed jednoducho odstr\u00e1nili. P\u00f4vodn\u00fd text prep\u00edsali a harmonizovali ho s paraleln\u00fdm, teologicky ove\u013ea bezpe\u010dnej\u0161\u00edm textom v Marekovom evanjeliu (\u201ev tebe m\u00e1m za\u013e\u00fabenie\u201c) [cite: 4, 30, 31, 34]. P\u00f4vodn\u00e9 \u010d\u00edtanie sa tak zachovalo iba vo vz\u00e1cnom rukopise z 5. storo\u010dia (Codex Bezae) a v dielach ranej patristiky. Cirkevn\u00e1 cenz\u00fara tak v z\u00e1ujme udr\u017eania dogmy o sv\u00e4tej Trojici prep\u00edsala samotn\u00e9 slov\u00e1, ktor\u00e9 \u00fadajne povedal Boh Otec.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"luk-22-43-44-krvav-pot-a-z-fal-boj-proti-doketizmu\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Lukas_22_43-44_%E2%80%93_Krvavy_pot_a_zufaly_boj_proti_doketizmu\"><\/span>Luk\u00e1\u0161 22:43-44 \u2013 Krvav\u00fd pot a z\u00fafal\u00fd boj proti doketizmu<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Sc\u00e9na Je\u017ei\u0161a v Getsemanskej z\u00e1hrade pred jeho zatknut\u00edm patr\u00ed medzi najemot\u00edvnej\u0161ie a naj\u010dastej\u0161ie k\u00e1zan\u00e9 pas\u00e1\u017ee Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona. Zjavuje sa v nej anjel, aby trpiaceho Krista z neba posilnil, a Je\u017ei\u0161, nach\u00e1dzaj\u00faci sa v \u0165a\u017ekej ag\u00f3nii, pot\u00ed na zem obrovsk\u00e9 kvapky krvi. Tieto dva ver\u0161e (Luk\u00e1\u0161 22:43-44) vytv\u00e1raj\u00fa obraz najhlb\u0161ieho \u013eudsk\u00e9ho utrpenia a z\u00fafalstva.<\/p>\r\n<ul>\r\n\t<li><strong>Textus Receptus a Byzantsk\u00fd text (a teda v\u00e4\u010d\u0161ina modern\u00fdch prekladov):<\/strong> Bezv\u00fdhradne obsahuje tieto dva ver\u0161e [cite: 9, 21, 36].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Alexandrijsk\u00fd text a ran\u00e9 papyrusy:<\/strong> Tieto ver\u0161e <strong>\u00faplne ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa<\/strong> v najstar\u0161\u00edch a najcennej\u0161\u00edch svedkoch, o ktor\u00fdch disponujeme. Nenach\u00e1dzaj\u00fa sa v k\u013e\u00fa\u010dovom papyruse P75 (okolo roku 175-225 n. l.), ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa v papyruse P69 (z 3. storo\u010dia) [cite: 8, 37], ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa v p\u00f4vodnej ruke Codex Vaticanus a rovnako ch\u00fdbaj\u00fa aj v p\u00f4vodnej ruke Codex Sinaiticus [cite: 9, 36, 37, 38]. Do Sinaiticu ich vp\u00edsal a\u017e omnoho neskor\u0161\u00ed korektor ozna\u010den\u00fd ako \u21352a, \u010fal\u0161\u00ed korektor \u21352b ich op\u00e4\u0165 zmazal, \u010do ukazuje neut\u00edchaj\u00faci zm\u00e4tok [cite: 8].<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<p>Pre\u010do by tak\u00fdto k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00fd a dramatick\u00fd detail v najstar\u0161\u00edch rukopisoch absentoval? Kritick\u00ed akademici (vr\u00e1tane Kurta Alanda, Brucea Metzgera a Barta Ehrmana) op\u00e4\u0165 aplikuj\u00fa princ\u00edp \u201eortodoxnej korupcie\u201c. V ranom kres\u0165anstve predstavovala obrovsk\u00fa hrozbu skupina zvan\u00e1 doketisti (\u010dasto napojen\u00ed na gnosticizmus). T\u00edto veriaci odmietali my\u0161lienku, \u017ee by sa vzne\u0161en\u00fd, nebesk\u00fd Boh mohol po\u0161kvrni\u0165 hrubou mat\u00e9riou. Tvrdili, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 ako bo\u017esk\u00e1 bytos\u0165 nemohol vo svojej podstate c\u00edti\u0165 boles\u0165, nemohol krv\u00e1ca\u0165 a trpie\u0165, a \u017ee jeho fyzick\u00e9 telo a smr\u0165 boli len akousi bo\u017eskou il\u00faziou, fant\u00f3mom (z gr\u00e9ckeho <em>dokein<\/em> \u2013 javi\u0165 sa) [cite: 9].<\/p>\r\n<p>Tieto n\u00e1zory boli pre formuj\u00facu sa proto-ortodoxn\u00fa cirkev, ktor\u00e1 stavala na integr\u00e1lnej hodnote telesn\u00e9ho utrpenia a obete, neprijate\u013en\u00e9. Aby cirkevn\u00ed predstavitelia jednozna\u010dne a nezvratne dok\u00e1zali, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 bol skuto\u010dn\u00fd \u010dlovek so skuto\u010dnou \u013eudskou boles\u0165ou, telom a krvou, vlo\u017eili (pribli\u017ene v polovici druh\u00e9ho storo\u010dia) do Luk\u00e1\u0161ovho evanjelia tento dramatick\u00fd, no neautentick\u00fd detail o extr\u00e9mnej ag\u00f3nii a krvavom pote. Mal to by\u0165 ultim\u00e1tny anti-doketick\u00fd argument [cite: 8, 9].<\/p>\r\n<p>Z poh\u013eadu liter\u00e1rnej a teologickej kritiky je tento pr\u00eddavok paradoxn\u00fd a hlboko nar\u00fa\u0161a \u0161trukt\u00faru diela. Vlo\u017een\u00edm ag\u00f3nie a krvav\u00e9ho potu neskor\u0161\u00ed pis\u00e1ri \u00faplne zmenili a zradili celkov\u00fa teol\u00f3giu autora Luk\u00e1\u0161ovho evanjelia. Vo v\u0161etk\u00fdch ostatn\u00fdch \u010dastiach svojho diela Luk\u00e1\u0161 toti\u017e konzistentne a z\u00e1merne predstavuje Je\u017ei\u0161a ako absol\u00fatne pokojn\u00e9ho, stopercentne vyrovnan\u00e9ho a hrdinsk\u00e9ho mu\u010den\u00edka, ktor\u00fd v tv\u00e1rou v tv\u00e1r smrti nepoci\u0165uje \u017eiadny strach, nepochybuje, dokonca cestou na kr\u00ed\u017e pokojne pou\u010duje pla\u010d\u00face jeruzalemsk\u00e9 \u017eeny [cite: 8, 9]. Iba v t\u00fdchto dvoch nesk\u00f4r pridan\u00fdch ver\u0161och (43-44) Je\u017ei\u0161 u Luk\u00e1\u0161a ukazuje z\u00fafalstvo a slabos\u0165. T\u00fdmto sa ukazuje, \u017ee v snahe zachr\u00e1ni\u0165 doktr\u00ednu (proti doketistom) cirkev nev\u00e1hala obetova\u0165 konzistenciu a p\u00f4vodn\u00fd z\u00e1mer vlastn\u00e9ho posv\u00e4tn\u00e9ho autora.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"hebrejom-2-9-zomrel-je-i-z-bo-ej-milosti-alebo-zavrhnut-a-bez-boha-\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Hebrejom_2_9_%E2%80%93_Zomrel_Jezis_z_Bozej_milosti_alebo_zavrhnuty_a_%E2%80%9Ebez_Boha%E2%80%9C\"><\/span>Hebrejom 2:9 \u2013 Zomrel Je\u017ei\u0161 z Bo\u017eej milosti alebo zavrhnut\u00fd a \u201ebez Boha\u201c?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>List Hebrejom patr\u00ed k teologicky najzlo\u017eitej\u0161\u00edm textom a vo ver\u0161i 2:9 opisuje samotn\u00fd \u00fa\u010del Je\u017ei\u0161ovej z\u00e1stupnej smrti.<\/p>\r\n<ul>\r\n\t<li><strong>Byzantsk\u00fd aj hlavn\u00fd Alexandrijsk\u00fd pr\u00fad:<\/strong> Text hl\u00e1sa, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 ok\u00fasil smr\u0165 za v\u0161etk\u00fdch \u201ez Bo\u017eej milosti\u201c (<em>chariti theou<\/em>) [cite: 39, 40, 41].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Men\u0161inov\u00fd, kriticky mimoriadne v\u00fdznamn\u00fd variant:<\/strong> Text hovor\u00ed, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 ok\u00fasil smr\u0165 za v\u0161etk\u00fdch \u201e<strong>bez Boha<\/strong>\u201c (<em>choris theou<\/em>) [cite: 39, 40, 41].<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<p>Tento znepokojiv\u00fd variant (<em>choris theou<\/em> &#8211; oddelen\u00fd od Boha) sa fyzicky nach\u00e1dza v gr\u00e9ckych rukopisoch ozna\u010den\u00fdch ako 0243 a 1739, prenikol do mnoh\u00fdch s\u00fdrskych a latinsk\u00fdch prekladov a predov\u0161etk\u00fdm bol bezpe\u010dne zn\u00e1my a citovan\u00fd mnoh\u00fdmi gigantmi ranej patristiky. Explicitne s n\u00edm pracovali Origenes, Ambr\u00f3z, Teodor z Mopsuestie, Hieronym, Vigilius \u010di Fulgentius. Origenes vo svojich dielach dokonca prizn\u00e1va, \u017ee \u010d\u00edtanie \u201ebez Boha\u201c bolo v jeho dobe (za\u010diatok 3. storo\u010dia) be\u017en\u00e9 vo v\u00e4\u010d\u0161ine rukopisov [cite: 10, 39, 42].<\/p>\r\n<p>Ak\u00e9 s\u00fa d\u00f4vody tohto dramatick\u00e9ho rozdielu? Z h\u013eadiska metodiky textovej kritiky je takmer nemo\u017en\u00e9 vysvetli\u0165, pre\u010do by ak\u00fdko\u013evek pravovern\u00fd kres\u0165ansk\u00fd pis\u00e1r zmenil upokojuj\u00face, zbo\u017en\u00e9 a teologicky \u0161tandardn\u00e9 \u010d\u00edtanie \u201ez Bo\u017eej milosti\u201c na provokat\u00edvne a pesimisticky znej\u00face \u201ebez Boha\u201c alebo \u201eoddelen\u00fd od Boha\u201c. Tak\u00e1to zmena by pre pis\u00e1ra ned\u00e1vala zmysel. Obr\u00e1ten\u00fd proces je v\u0161ak ve\u013emi dobre pochopite\u013en\u00fd a pravdepodobn\u00fd. P\u00f4vodn\u00fd autor Listu Hebrejom zrejme nap\u00edsal <em>choris theou<\/em> (\u201ebez Boha\u201c), \u010do malo teologicky kore\u0161pondova\u0165 so z\u00fafal\u00fdm Je\u017ei\u0161ov\u00fdm v\u00fdkrikom opustenosti na kr\u00ed\u017ei, ktor\u00fd zaznamen\u00e1va Marek 15:34: <em>\u201eBo\u017ee m\u00f4j, Bo\u017ee m\u00f4j, pre\u010do si ma opustil?\u201c<\/em> Znamenalo to, \u017ee Kristus musel podst\u00fapi\u0165 dokonal\u00fa smr\u0165, pri ktorej ho Otec \u00faplne opustil a od\u0148al mu svoju ochranu a pr\u00edtomnos\u0165 [cite: 40, 41].<\/p>\r\n<p>Ran\u00ed ortodoxn\u00ed pis\u00e1ri v\u0161ak mohli by\u0165 t\u00fdmto konceptom hlboko teologicky pohor\u0161en\u00ed a zdesen\u00ed. My\u0161lienka, \u017ee bo\u017esk\u00fd Kristus zomieral \u00faplne opusten\u00fd a separovan\u00fd od Bo\u017eej podstaty, bola nesk\u00f4r neprijate\u013en\u00e1. Ke\u010f nesk\u00f4r tzv. nestori\u00e1ni za\u010dali tento ver\u0161 (\u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 zomrel \u201eoddelen\u00fd od Boha\u201c, teda od svojej bo\u017eskej podstaty) vyu\u017e\u00edva\u0165 na obranu svojho delenia Kristov\u00fdch dvoch prirodzenost\u00ed, pre pravovern\u00fa cirkev (najm\u00e4 miafyzitov ako bol Filoxenus) sa tento text stal toxick\u00fdm [cite: 10]. Zmenou jedin\u00e9ho p\u00edsmena v gr\u00e9ckom slove (z <em>choris<\/em> na <em>chariti<\/em>) sa z traumatick\u00e9ho a dogmaticky nebezpe\u010dn\u00e9ho \u201ebez Boha\u201c stalo teologicky bezprobl\u00e9mov\u00e9, uhladen\u00e9 a povzbudiv\u00e9 \u201ez Bo\u017eej milosti\u201c [cite: 10, 39].<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"j-n-5-7-8-comma-johanneum-umel-kon-trukcia-sv-tej-trojice\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Jan_5_7-8_Comma_Johanneum_%E2%80%93_Umela_konstrukcia_Svatej_Trojice\"><\/span>J\u00e1n 5:7-8 (Comma Johanneum) \u2013 Umel\u00e1 kon\u0161trukcia Sv\u00e4tej Trojice<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Jedn\u00fdm z najv\u00e4\u010d\u0161\u00edch historick\u00fdch a textov\u00fdch \u0161kand\u00e1lov v dejin\u00e1ch kres\u0165anstva je v\u0161ak bezpochyby takzvan\u00e1 <em>Comma Johanneum<\/em> (J\u00e1novsk\u00e1 vsuvka) v prvom liste J\u00e1na 5:7-8.<\/p>\r\n<ul>\r\n\t<li><strong>Textus Receptus (KJV, Kralick\u00e1 Biblia):<\/strong> Text s ohromuj\u00facou doktrin\u00e1lnou jasnos\u0165ou vyhlasuje: \u201eLebo traja s\u00fa, ktor\u00ed sved\u010dia na nebi: <strong>Otec, Slovo a Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd; a t\u00edto traja s\u00fa jedno.<\/strong> A traja s\u00fa, ktor\u00ed sved\u010dia na zemi: Duch, voda a krv, a t\u00edto traja s\u00fa v jedno.\u201c<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>V\u0161etky star\u00e9 gr\u00e9cke rukopisy (vr\u00e1tane Papyrov, Sinaiticus a Vaticanus):<\/strong> Trinit\u00e1rna prv\u00e1 veta \u00faplne ch\u00fdba. P\u00f4vodn\u00fd text hovor\u00ed len o troch pozemsk\u00fdch svedkoch: \u201eLebo traja s\u00fa, ktor\u00ed sved\u010dia: Duch a voda a krv; a t\u00edto traja s\u00fa v jedno.\u201c [cite: 7, 21, 36].<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<p>Tento explicitn\u00fd trinit\u00e1rny vzorec je pre kres\u0165ansk\u00fa apologetiku nesmierne l\u00e1kav\u00fd. Je to toti\u017e vlastne jedin\u00e1 pas\u00e1\u017e v celej ob\u0161\u00edrnej Biblii, ktor\u00e1 jasne, ucelene a priam filozoficky presne definuje Najsv\u00e4tej\u0161iu Trojicu ako tri osoby, ktor\u00e9 s\u00fa jedn\u00fdm Bohom. Probl\u00e9mom v\u0161ak je, \u017ee tento text sa nevyskytuje v <strong>\u017eiadnom existuj\u00facom gr\u00e9ckom rukopise pred 14. storo\u010d\u00edm<\/strong> (s v\u00fdnimkou okrajov\u00fdch pozn\u00e1mok z 10. storo\u010dia v \u0161tyroch bezv\u00fdznamn\u00fdch k\u00f3pi\u00e1ch) [cite: 7, 36]. Rovnako ho necitoval \u017eiaden gr\u00e9cky cirkevn\u00fd otec po\u010das storo\u010d\u00ed prudk\u00fdch teologick\u00fdch bojov o povahe Boha (po\u010das sporov s arianizmom), kedy by im pr\u00e1ve tak\u00fdto biblick\u00fd ver\u0161 sl\u00fa\u017eil ako absol\u00fatny a definit\u00edvny argument. Neexistoval toti\u017e.<\/p>\r\n<p>Text bol vykon\u0161truovan\u00fd a pridan\u00fd do latinskej trad\u00edcie (najsk\u00f4r ako okrajov\u00e1 teologick\u00e1 pozn\u00e1mka, nesk\u00f4r vsunut\u00fd priamo do textu), pravdepodobne v severnej Afrike alebo v \u0160panielsku. Ke\u010f Erazmus Rotterdamsk\u00fd vyd\u00e1val v roku 1516 svoje prv\u00e9 kritick\u00e9 vydanie gr\u00e9ckeho textu, celkom spr\u00e1vne t\u00fato vetu vyl\u00fa\u010dil, preto\u017ee ju nena\u0161iel v \u017eiadnom gr\u00e9ckom rukopise. Tlak in\u0161titucion\u00e1lnej katol\u00edckej cirkvi bol v\u0161ak obrovsk\u00fd. Erazmus bol obvinen\u00fd z her\u00e9zy. Pod \u0165archou vyhr\u00e1\u017eok s\u013e\u00fabil, \u017ee text vlo\u017e\u00ed do \u010fal\u0161ieho vydania, ak mu dodaj\u00fa aspo\u0148 jeden gr\u00e9cky rukopis, ktor\u00fd ho obsahuje. Cirkev tak\u00fdto rukopis n\u00e1sledne expresne \u201evyrobila\u201c (Codex Montfortianus z roku 1520), a Erazmus v roku 1522 proti svojmu vedeck\u00e9mu presved\u010deniu text do Textus Receptus implementoval. T\u00fdm zafixoval t\u00fato najv\u00e4\u010d\u0161iu a najsl\u00e1vnej\u0161iu \u201eortodoxn\u00fa falzifik\u00e1ciu\u201c do protestantsk\u00fdch aj katol\u00edckych prekladov Biblie na \u010fal\u0161\u00edch \u0161tyristo rokov. Cirkevn\u00e1 dogma o Trojici, pova\u017eovan\u00e1 za z\u00e1klad sp\u00e1sy, tu bola doslova vytvoren\u00e1 <em>ex post<\/em> vedom\u00fdm fal\u0161ovan\u00edm starovek\u00fdch prame\u0148ov.<\/p>\r\n<h2 id=\"-al-ie-k-ov-vsuvky-a-zmeny-kon-truovanie-evanjeliov-ho-pr-behu\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dalsie_klucove_vsuvky_a_zmeny_Konstruovanie_evanjelioveho_pribehu\"><\/span>\u010eal\u0161ie k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9 vsuvky a zmeny: Kon\u0161truovanie evanjeliov\u00e9ho pr\u00edbehu<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>Ortodoxn\u00e1 korupcia a harmoniz\u00e1cia sa nezastavila len pri abstraktnej systematickej dogmatike, ale priamo zasahovala do narat\u00edvnej \u0161trukt\u00fary a z\u00e1kladn\u00fdch pr\u00edbehov evanjeli\u00ed. Tieto ve\u013ek\u00e9 textov\u00e9 bloky s\u00fa v Byzantskom texte a uctievanom Textus Receptus plne pr\u00edtomn\u00e9, no najstar\u0161ie Alexandrijsk\u00e9 svedectv\u00e1 ich nemilosrdne vylu\u010duj\u00fa. Tieto pr\u00eddavky mali za cie\u013e urobi\u0165 Je\u017ei\u0161a bo\u017eskej\u0161\u00edm, majest\u00e1tnej\u0161\u00edm, a text zrozumite\u013enej\u0161\u00edm a mor\u00e1lnej\u0161\u00edm.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"fikcia-zm-tvychvstania-marek-16-9-20-dlh-z-ver-\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Fikcia_zmrtvychvstania_Marek_16_9-20_Dlhy_zaver\"><\/span>Fikcia zm\u0155tvychvstania: Marek 16:9-20 (Dlh\u00fd z\u00e1ver)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Evanjelium pod\u013ea Mareka, ktor\u00e9 je takmer celou akademickou obcou s istotou pova\u017eovan\u00e9 za to prv\u00e9, najp\u00f4vodnej\u0161ie a najstar\u0161ie zo \u0161tyroch evanjeli\u00ed (od ktor\u00e9ho nesk\u00f4r Mat\u00fa\u0161 a Luk\u00e1\u0161 mas\u00edvne odpisovali) [cite: 22], m\u00e1 vo svojich najstar\u0161\u00edch rukopisoch pre kres\u0165anstvo priam zdrvuj\u00faci probl\u00e9m. V spo\u013eahliv\u00fdch a star\u00fdch k\u00f3dexoch Sinaiticus a Vaticanus kon\u010d\u00ed toto evanjelium n\u00e1hle a podivne ver\u0161om 16:8. V tomto bode \u017eeny utekaj\u00fa od pr\u00e1zdneho hrobu \u201ea nikomu ni\u010d nepovedali, lebo sa b\u00e1li\u201c [cite: 15, 17, 22, 43]. A tu sa text kon\u010d\u00ed. V tomto p\u00f4vodnom a najstar\u0161om zachovanom kres\u0165anskom evanjeliu jeho autor neopisuje v\u00f4bec <strong>\u017eiadne zjavenia vzkriesen\u00e9ho Krista<\/strong>. Neobsahuje \u017eiadne stretnutia s apo\u0161tolmi, \u017eiadne rany na tele, \u017eiadne nanebovst\u00fapenie. Kon\u010d\u00ed sa strachom, panikou a tichom.<\/p>\r\n<p>Neskor\u0161\u00ed kres\u0165ania, zvyknut\u00ed na rozvinut\u00e9 a bohat\u0161ie legendy v in\u00fdch evanjeli\u00e1ch, nemohli znies\u0165, \u017ee by prim\u00e1rne evanjelium kon\u010dilo takto defetisticky, bez triumf\u00e1lneho a konkr\u00e9tneho zm\u0155tvychvstania. Preto k nemu nezn\u00e1mi cirkevn\u00ed editori nesk\u00f4r pripojili dvan\u00e1s\u0165 ver\u0161ov (16:9-20, tzv. dlh\u00fd z\u00e1ver), ktor\u00e9 s\u00fa v podstate ak\u00fdmsi amat\u00e9rskym resum\u00e9 a kompil\u00e1tom povyberan\u00fdm z Luk\u00e1\u0161a a Mat\u00fa\u0161a, ku ktor\u00e9mu pridali bizarnej\u0161ie pr\u00eds\u013euby o tom, \u017ee veriaci bud\u00fa pi\u0165 smrte\u013en\u00fd jed a chyta\u0165 hady bez ujmy [cite: 4, 15, 43].<\/p>\r\n<p>Oba k\u00f3dexy, Sinaiticus aj Vaticanus, s\u00edce tieto podvrhnut\u00e9 ver\u0161e vynech\u00e1vaj\u00fa, no vynech\u00e1vaj\u00fa ich demon\u0161trat\u00edvne \u2013 nech\u00e1vaj\u00fa za ver\u0161om 16:8 nezvy\u010dajne rozsiahly pr\u00e1zdny priestor, \u010di dokonca pr\u00e1zdny st\u013apec [cite: 17]. To dokazuje, \u017ee vzdelan\u00ed pis\u00e1ri v Alexandrii vo \u0161tvrtom storo\u010d\u00ed u\u017e o existencii tohto falo\u0161n\u00e9ho pr\u00eddavku vedeli, poznali ho z in\u00fdch, skorumpovan\u00fdch k\u00f3pi\u00ed, no ako svedomit\u00ed kritick\u00ed editori ho do svojho majstrovsk\u00e9ho diela po zrelej \u00favahe odmietli zaradi\u0165 [cite: 17]. Odstr\u00e1nenie tohto pr\u00eddavku sp\u00f4sobuje neprekonate\u013en\u00e9 teologick\u00e9 probl\u00e9my pre apolog\u00e9tov, ke\u010f\u017ee prim\u00e1rny a najstar\u0161\u00ed historick\u00fd svedok Je\u017ei\u0161ovho \u017eivota (Marek) ml\u010d\u00ed o tom absol\u00fatne najd\u00f4le\u017eitej\u0161om komponente kres\u0165anskej viery \u2013 o poveloch od zjavuj\u00faceho sa vzkriesen\u00e9ho tela.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"perikopa-o-cudzolo-nici-j-n-7-53-8-11\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Perikopa_o_cudzoloznici_Jan_7_53-8_11\"><\/span>Perikopa o cudzolo\u017enici: J\u00e1n 7:53-8:11<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Sn\u00e1\u010f najzn\u00e1mej\u0161\u00ed a psychologicky najpresved\u010divej\u0161\u00ed, mimoriadne dojemn\u00fd pr\u00edbeh o \u017eene prichytenej priamo pri cudzolo\u017estve a o m\u00fadrom Je\u017ei\u0161ovom v\u00fdroku: \u201eKto z v\u00e1s je bez hriechu, nech prv\u00fd hod\u00ed do nej kame\u0148\u201c, je z historick\u00e9ho a textov\u00e9ho h\u013eadiska liter\u00e1rnou fikciou, ktor\u00e1 do textu J\u00e1na nepatr\u00ed. Nenach\u00e1dza sa absol\u00fatne v \u017eiadnom ranom Alexandrijskom rukopise (ch\u00fdba v papyruse P66, P75, a vynech\u00e1vaj\u00fa ho aj majest\u00e1tne k\u00f3dexy Vaticanus a Sinaiticus) [cite: 12, 15, 22, 44].<\/p>\r\n<p>Jazykovedn\u00e1 a \u0161tylistick\u00e1 anal\u00fdza nekompromisne dokazuje, \u017ee text pou\u017e\u00edva odli\u0161n\u00fa slovn\u00fa z\u00e1sobu a nejde o rukopisn\u00fd \u0161t\u00fdl autora J\u00e1novho evanjelia. Tento p\u00fatav\u00fd pr\u00edbeh pravdepodobne koloval najsk\u00f4r ako s\u00fa\u010das\u0165 vo\u013enej \u00fastnej trad\u00edcie a bol vlo\u017een\u00fd do pevn\u00e9ho textu evanjelia ove\u013ea nesk\u00f4r. Pis\u00e1ri s n\u00edm dlho nevedeli nalo\u017ei\u0165, pr\u00edbeh sa obrazne povedan\u00e9 \u201et\u00falal\u201c po rukopisoch a bol vkladan\u00fd na r\u00f4zne miesta, nielen do r\u00f4znych kapitol J\u00e1na, ale niekedy aj \u00faplne inde, dokonca do Luk\u00e1\u0161ovho evanjelia [cite: 13, 36, 45]. Modern\u00e9 kres\u0165anstvo tak stavia ve\u013ek\u00fa \u010das\u0165 svojej liber\u00e1lnej\u0161ej a milosrdnej\u0161ej pastor\u00e1lnej etiky a obrazu o Je\u017ei\u0161ovi na epizodickom texte, ktor\u00fd p\u00f4vodn\u00fd evanjelista nikdy nenap\u00edsal a nepoznal.<\/p>\r\n<h3 id=\"mno-stvo-al-ch-prav-deformuj-cich-teol-giu\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Mnozstvo_dalsich_uprav_deformujucich_teologiu\"><\/span>Mno\u017estvo \u010fal\u0161\u00edch \u00faprav deformuj\u00facich teol\u00f3giu<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p>Naakumulovanie textov\u00fdch odch\u00fdlok v prospech ortodoxie mo\u017eno demon\u0161trova\u0165 na desiatkach in\u00fdch miest:<\/p>\r\n<ul>\r\n\t<li><strong>1. Petra 3:15:<\/strong> K\u00fdm dogmatick\u00fd Textus Receptus \u017eiada kres\u0165anov, aby \u201eposv\u00e4tili <strong>P\u00e1na Boha<\/strong> vo svojich srdciach\u201c, najstar\u0161ie a najv\u00e1\u017eenej\u0161ie Alexandrijsk\u00e9 texty (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, P72) hovoria jednozna\u010dne \u201eposv\u00e4\u0165te <strong>Krista ako P\u00e1na<\/strong>\u201c (<em>Kyrion de ton Christon<\/em>) [cite: 18]. Tieto rozdiely ukazuj\u00fa enormn\u00fa fluktu\u00e1ciu v tom, ako ran\u00e1 cirkev zamie\u0148ala a pren\u00e1\u0161ala tituly vyhraden\u00e9 starozmluvn\u00e9mu stvorite\u013eovi Jahvemu v\u00fdlu\u010dne na postavu Krista.<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Marek 1:1:<\/strong> P\u00f4vodn\u00e1 ruka (p\u00f4vodn\u00fd pis\u00e1r zo 4. storo\u010dia) v Codex Sinaiticus neobsahuje fr\u00e1zu \u201eSyn Bo\u017e\u00ed\u201c vo ver\u0161i \u201eZa\u010diatok evanjelia Je\u017ei\u0161a Krista\u201c. Slov\u00e1 \u201eSyn Bo\u017e\u00ed\u201c boli dop\u00edsan\u00e9 nesk\u00f4r hrub\u0161\u00edm p\u00edsmom len nad riadok, formou interline\u00e1rnej korekcie [cite: 22, 46, 47]. Tento ch\u00fdbaj\u00faci titul poukazuje na to, \u017ee vzne\u0161en\u00e9 dogmatick\u00e9 a kristologick\u00e9 tituly sa na postavu Je\u017ei\u0161a \u201enaba\u013eovali\u201c \u010dasto a\u017e postupne a mechanicky po\u010das procesu prenosu a opisovania textu [cite: 22, 46].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Luk\u00e1\u0161 24:51:<\/strong> V p\u00f4vodnom znen\u00ed Codex Sinaiticus pri opise konca evanjelia ch\u00fdba fr\u00e1za \u201ea bol vznesen\u00fd do neba\u201c (<em>carried up into heaven<\/em>). Je\u017ei\u0161 teda v Sinaiticu iba po\u017eehn\u00e1 apo\u0161tolov a od\u00edde. Toto mas\u00edvne opomenutie znamen\u00e1, \u017ee najstar\u0161\u00ed ucelen\u00fd svedok vynech\u00e1va ak\u00fako\u013evek spr\u00e1vu o fyzickom nanebovst\u00fapen\u00ed Krista v oboch evanjeli\u00e1ch, kde sa tradi\u010dne nach\u00e1dza [cite: 22].<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>2. Petra 3:10:<\/strong> V apokalyptickom opise eschatologick\u00e9ho z\u00e1niku sveta Byzantsk\u00fd text (a teda aj KJV a Textus Receptus) hovor\u00ed, \u017ee zem a diela na nej na konci vekov v obrovskom hluku \u201ezhoria\u201c (<em>katakaisetai<\/em>). Na rozdiel od toho, najstar\u0161ie alexandrijsk\u00e9 rukopisy (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus a in\u00e9) pou\u017e\u00edvaj\u00fa mimoriadne tajomn\u00e9, ba a\u017e alchymistick\u00e9 slovo \u201ebud\u00fa <strong>n\u00e1jden\u00e9 \/ odhalen\u00e9<\/strong>\u201c (<em>heurethesetai<\/em>) [cite: 48, 49, 50, 51]. Pre neskor\u0161\u00edch pis\u00e1rov bolo toto abstraktn\u00e9 slovo (\u201en\u00e1jden\u00e9\u201c) v kontexte horiaceho vesm\u00edru nelogick\u00e9 a frustruj\u00face. Rozhodli sa tak aplikova\u0165 cenz\u00faru vlastn\u00e9ho rozumu a \u0165a\u017ek\u00e9, nevysvetlite\u013en\u00e9 slovo zmenili na trivi\u00e1lne a logickej\u0161ie \u201ezhoria\u201c [cite: 48, 49, 51]. Z poh\u013eadu nezaujatej liter\u00e1rnej kritiky v\u017edy plat\u00ed spom\u00ednan\u00e9 pravidlo <em>lectio difficilior<\/em> \u2013 \u0165a\u017e\u0161ie \u010d\u00edtanie (odhalen\u00e9\/n\u00e1jden\u00e9) b\u00fdva to p\u00f4vodn\u00e9, k\u00fdm to \u013eah\u0161ie a plne zrozumite\u013en\u00e9 (zhoria) je iba produktom neskor\u0161ej uhladzuj\u00facej ruky, vedom\u00fdm falzifik\u00e1tom.<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h2 id=\"imperat-v-mocenskej-trukt-ry-kon-tant-nove-biblie-a-fix-cia-k-nonu\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Imperativ_mocenskej_struktury_Konstantinove_Biblie_a_fixacia_kanonu\"><\/span>Imperat\u00edv mocenskej \u0161trukt\u00fary: Kon\u0161tant\u00ednove Biblie a fix\u00e1cia k\u00e1nonu<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>Jedn\u00fdm z ob\u013e\u00faben\u00fdch ter\u010dov anti-kres\u0165anskej kritiky je nepopierate\u013en\u00e1 rola r\u00edmskej cis\u00e1rskej moci pri formovan\u00ed podoby a obsahu biblick\u00e9ho k\u00e1nonu. Ak\u00e1ko\u013evek sol\u00eddna modern\u00e1 veda pochopite\u013ene odmieta extr\u00e9mne zjednodu\u0161en\u00e9 a kon\u0161pira\u010dn\u00e9 popul\u00e1rne m\u00fdty (mas\u00edvne podporen\u00e9 napr\u00edklad rom\u00e1nom <em>Da Vinciho k\u00f3d<\/em> od Dana Browna alebo stredovek\u00fdmi pseudohistorick\u00fdmi dokumentmi typu <em>Synodicon Vetus<\/em> z 9. storo\u010dia), pod\u013ea ktor\u00fdch biskupi a cis\u00e1r na prvom koncile v Nik\u00e1ji (v roku 325 n. l.) prilo\u017eili zbrane a hlasovan\u00edm, \u010di dokonca z\u00e1zra\u010dn\u00fdm padan\u00edm kn\u00edh zo stola, rozhodli o tom, ak\u00e9 knihy bud\u00fa v Biblii [cite: 32, 52, 53]. V skuto\u010dnosti sa Nik\u00e1jsky koncil zaoberal prioritne obrovskou dogmatickou kr\u00edzou arianizmu a definovan\u00edm podstaty Boha; nerie\u0161il form\u00e1lne udelenie k\u00e1nonickej autority pre konkr\u00e9tny zoznam kn\u00edh Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona [cite: 32, 52, 53].<\/p>\r\n<p>Tento fakt v\u0161ak neznamen\u00e1, \u017ee spojenie svetskej imperi\u00e1lnej r\u00ed\u0161e a posv\u00e4tn\u00e9ho biblick\u00e9ho textu je bezpredmetn\u00e9. Pr\u00e1ve naopak, bolo absol\u00fatne k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9. Ihne\u010f po stabilizovan\u00ed r\u00ed\u0161e, v rokoch 326-327 n. l., vydal cis\u00e1r Kon\u0161tant\u00edn Ve\u013ek\u00fd in\u0161trukcie Eus\u00e9biovi z C\u00e9zarey (prv\u00e9mu ve\u013ek\u00e9mu cirkevn\u00e9mu historikovi a mocn\u00e9mu biskupovi), aby zhotovil presne 50 luxusn\u00fdch, vizu\u00e1lne zjednoten\u00fdch a dokonale remeselne spracovan\u00fdch k\u00f3pi\u00ed Biblie z kvalitn\u00e9ho pergamenu. Tieto mali by\u0165 distribuovan\u00e9 pre bohoslu\u017eby do nov\u00fdch a vplyvn\u00fdch bazil\u00edk v novozalo\u017eenom hlavnom meste, Kon\u0161tant\u00ednopole [cite: 54, 55, 56]. Tischendorf, ako aj \u010fal\u0161\u00ed v\u00fdznamn\u00ed paleografi a biblisti (hoci z\u00e1stancovia Byzantsk\u00e9ho textu proti tomu ostro namietaj\u00fa), pri\u0161li s ve\u013emi silnou a dodnes \u0161iroko akceptovanou te\u00f3riou, \u017ee sl\u00e1vny Codex Sinaiticus, a pravdepodobne aj Codex Vaticanus, s\u00fa priamymi produktmi tohto cis\u00e1rskeho ediktu, teda pre\u017eiv\u0161\u00edmi z\u00e1stupcami sl\u00e1vnych \u201eKon\u0161tant\u00ednov\u00fdch 50 Bibli\u00ed\u201c (oba k\u00f3dexy s\u00fa datovan\u00e9 presne do strednej tretiny 4. storo\u010dia a presne zodpovedaj\u00fa Eus\u00e9biom pop\u00edsan\u00e9mu luxusn\u00e9mu troj- a \u0161tvor-st\u013apcov\u00e9mu kaligrafick\u00e9mu usporiadaniu) [cite: 13, 15, 54, 55].<\/p>\r\n<p>Ak to tak bolo, a tieto dva k\u00f3dexy (reprezentuj\u00face siln\u00fd Alexandrijsk\u00fd pr\u00fad) boli vyprodukovan\u00e9 v mocenskom centre v C\u00e9zarei za cis\u00e1rske dot\u00e1cie, radik\u00e1lne to men\u00ed poh\u013ead na ich form\u00e1t. Tieto k\u00f3dexy t\u00fdm p\u00e1dom nepredstavuj\u00fa \u017eiaden \u201eorganicky \u010dist\u00fd\u201c biblick\u00fd text poch\u00e1dzaj\u00faci priamo z \u013eudu a mu\u010den\u00edkov, ale id\u00faologick\u00fd produkt zhora \u2013 ofici\u00e1lne sponzorovan\u00fa selekciu, ktor\u00e1 bola schv\u00e1len\u00e1 v \u00e9re zrodu byrokratick\u00e9ho r\u00ed\u0161skeho kres\u0165anstva. Obrovsk\u00e1 cis\u00e1rska finan\u010dn\u00e1 a distribu\u010dn\u00e1 invest\u00edcia do tohto fyzick\u00e9ho nosi\u010da nevyhnutne vtla\u010dila zna\u010dku na k\u00e1nonick\u00fd v\u00fdvoj, vytla\u010dila na okraj in\u00e9, men\u0161inov\u00e9 trad\u00edcie a postupne fixovala to, \u010do imperi\u00e1lnym \u0161t\u00e1tom podporovan\u00e1 ortodoxia pova\u017eovala za prijate\u013en\u00e9 a spr\u00e1vne \u010d\u00edtanie [cite: 43, 55].<\/p>\r\n<p>Paradoxne, aj samotn\u00e1 pr\u00edtomnos\u0165 sporn\u00e9ho a nesk\u00f4r odstr\u00e1nen\u00e9ho \u201enek\u00e1nonick\u00e9ho\u201c textu, ak\u00fdm je Pastier Hermov, uv\u00e4znen\u00e9ho priamo v Codex Sinaiticus, jasne dokazuje, \u017ee aj v Kon\u0161tant\u00ednovej dobe silnej fix\u00e1cie bola samotn\u00e1 defin\u00edcia autoritat\u00edvneho Bo\u017eieho slova st\u00e1le teologick\u00fdm, mocensk\u00fdm a politick\u00fdm bojiskom s otvoren\u00fdm koncom [cite: 55, 57]. Dogma o neomylne danom zozname kn\u00edh bola cirkevn\u00fdm dikt\u00e1tom definovan\u00e1 omnoho nesk\u00f4r, ke\u010f sa pluralita n\u00e1zorov a k\u00e1nonov (v Byzancii be\u017ene v obmedzenom rozsahu bez Zjavenia J\u00e1na [cite: 55]) postupne zakazovala ediktami men\u0161\u00edch koncilov.<\/p>\r\n<h2 id=\"z-ver-p-smo-ako-historick-kon-trukt-a-rozklad-inerrancie\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Zaver_Pismo_ako_historicky_konstrukt_a_rozklad_inerrancie\"><\/span>Z\u00e1ver: P\u00edsmo ako historick\u00fd kon\u0161trukt a rozklad inerrancie<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p>Z\u00e1very, ktor\u00e9 objekt\u00edvne plyn\u00fa z hlbokej kritickej anal\u00fdzy a porovnania Alexandrijsk\u00fdch rukopisov (na \u010dele so Sinaiticom a Vaticanom) s neskor\u0161\u00edm stredovek\u00fdm Byzantsk\u00fdm textom a z neho vzi\u0161l\u00fdm Textus Receptus, s\u00fa pre tradi\u010dn\u00fa, fundament\u00e1lnu kres\u0165ansk\u00fa apologetiku priam devasta\u010dn\u00e9 a \u0165a\u017eko obh\u00e1jite\u013en\u00e9 racion\u00e1lnymi argumentmi. Detailn\u00e1 veda o zrode a prenose textu jasne preukazuje, \u017ee gr\u00e9cky Nov\u00fd z\u00e1kon, z ktor\u00e9ho cirkev \u010derp\u00e1 svoju autoritu, ani z\u010faleka nie je monolitick\u00fdm, bo\u017esky nadiktovan\u00fdm a prozrete\u013enos\u0165ou bezchybne chr\u00e1nen\u00fdm dokumentom, ak\u00fdm sa tv\u00e1ri by\u0165 z kazate\u013en\u00edc. Naopak, pred nami le\u017e\u00ed nesmierne stratifikovan\u00fd, \u013eudsk\u00fd text, ktor\u00fd si nesie trval\u00e9 rany a jazvy zo st\u00e1ro\u010d\u00ed teologick\u00fdch vojen, politick\u00fdch machin\u00e1ci\u00ed biskupo, nekompromisnej propagandy a jednoduch\u00fdch, niekedy a\u017e neuverite\u013ene hl\u00fapych pis\u00e1rskych zlyhan\u00ed [cite: 5, 46].<\/p>\r\n<p>Hlavn\u00e9 body dekon\u0161trukcie biblick\u00e9ho narat\u00edvu mo\u017eno zhrn\u00fa\u0165 do nasleduj\u00facich z\u00e1verov:<\/p>\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li><strong>Her\u00e9za ako hnac\u00ed motor ortodoxie:<\/strong> To, \u010do in\u0161titucion\u00e1lna cirkev dnes po celom svete naz\u00fdva \u201enespochybnite\u013enou odvekou pravdou\u201c (\u010di u\u017e ide o absol\u00fatne a ve\u010dn\u00e9 bo\u017estvo Krista bez adopcie, Trojicu ako troch svedkov, mechanizmus integr\u00e1lnej z\u00e1stupnej obete pod patron\u00e1tom Bo\u017eej milosti, alebo o krvav\u00fd pot a ag\u00f3niu potvrdzuj\u00facu Je\u017ei\u0161ovu \u013eudsk\u00fa telesnos\u0165 proti doketistom), nebolo v najstar\u0161ej textovej vrstve pr\u00edtomn\u00e9 v\u00f4bec, alebo len vo ve\u013emi okrajovej a neur\u010ditej forme. Tieto koncepty nie s\u00fa prim\u00e1rnym zjaven\u00edm; boli do biblick\u00e9ho textu postupne a n\u00e1silne ex-post \u201evd\u00fdchnut\u00e9\u201c dogmatick\u00fdmi pis\u00e1rmi, ktor\u00ed ich do rukopisov vlo\u017eili z \u010d\u00edrej hr\u00f4zy, v defenz\u00edvnej panike a obavy pred konkuren\u010dn\u00fdmi heretikmi (ari\u00e1nmi, adopcionistami a doketistami) [cite: 8, 30, 41]. Ortodoxn\u00e1 teol\u00f3gia neud\u00e1vala t\u00f3n Biblii, ale neust\u00e1ly boj proti heretikom prin\u00fatil ortodoxiu k sp\u00e4tn\u00e9mu premazaniu posv\u00e4tnej textovej hist\u00f3rie.<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Dogmatika postaven\u00e1 na vsuvk\u00e1ch a atramente:<\/strong> Doktr\u00edny, ktor\u00e9 po dlh\u00e9 st\u00e1ro\u010dia neomylne definovali hranice ve\u010dnej sp\u00e1sy a plame\u0148ov zatratenia pre oby\u010dajn\u00fdch veriacich (a pre ktor\u00e9 plynula krv na hraniciach), nezriedka stoja v\u00fdhradne na gramatick\u00fdch omyloch alebo vedom\u00fdch pis\u00e1rskych podvodoch. Od nen\u00e1padn\u00e9ho pridania milimetrovej vodorovnej \u010diarky do unci\u00e1ly (z <em>OC<\/em> na <em>\u0398C<\/em> v 1. Tim 3:16), cez bezoh\u013eadn\u00e9 umel\u00e9 vytvorenie a natla\u010denie celej novej klauzuly zn\u00e1mej ako <em>Comma Johanneum<\/em> pre potreby obhajoby Trojice (1. J\u00e1na 5:7), a\u017e po neskor\u0161ie dodato\u010dn\u00e9 liter\u00e1rne vybudovanie cel\u00e9ho sl\u00e1vneho a \u201eist\u00e9ho\u201c triumf\u00e1lneho z\u00e1veru Markovho evanjelia \u2013 to v\u0161etko ukazuje nesmiernu paniku a tvoriv\u00fa \u201eflexibilitu\u201c ranej a stredovekej cirkvi [cite: 15, 21, 26]. Ak by sa dnes form\u00e1lna cirkev a teologick\u00e9 fakulty mali opiera\u0165 striktne a mor\u00e1lne po\u010destne iba o tie najstar\u0161ie a najspo\u013eahlivej\u0161ie Alexandrijsk\u00e9 texty v ich naj\u010distej\u0161ej forme, drviv\u00e1 v\u00e4\u010d\u0161ina ob\u013e\u00faben\u00fdch apologetick\u00fdch zbran\u00ed a pastora\u010dn\u00fdch doj\u00edmav\u00fdch pr\u00edbehov (vr\u00e1tane sc\u00e9ny cudzolo\u017enice, Je\u017ei\u0161ovho potu a ver\u0161ov o viere zo vzkriesenia pri konci Marka) by musela by\u0165 s pln\u00fdm vedom\u00edm bezodkladne z Bibli\u00ed s hanbou vy\u0161krtnut\u00e1.<\/li>\r\n\t<li><strong>Il\u00fazia a tyrania Textus Receptus:<\/strong> Udr\u017eiavanie posv\u00e4tnosti Byzantsk\u00e9ho textu a anglosaskej dogmatiky (s d\u00f4razom na nedotknute\u013enos\u0165 &#8220;King James Version&#8221; \u010di rovnocenn\u00fdch luter\u00e1nskych verzi\u00ed Textus Receptus) zo strany konzervat\u00edvnych kres\u0165ansk\u00fdch fundamentalistov je z h\u013eadiska vedy, logiky a hist\u00f3rie \u00faplne absurdn\u00e9 a klamliv\u00e9 [cite: 19, 20]. Znamen\u00e1 to toti\u017e pov\u00fd\u0161i\u0165, zbo\u017e\u0161ti\u0165 a chr\u00e1ni\u0165 t\u00fa suver\u00e9nne najviac skorumpovan\u00fa, dodato\u010dne teologicky pozmenen\u00fa, najmenej starobyl\u00fa a do m\u0155tva harmonizovan\u00fa verziu textu \u2013 iba preto, \u017ee jej jazyk znie plynulej\u0161ie a jej ideol\u00f3gia mechanicky presne potvrdzuje existuj\u00facu a etablovan\u00fa cirkevn\u00fa doktr\u00ednu, ktor\u00fa veriaci chc\u00fa po\u010du\u0165.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<p>Z\u00e1verom z h\u013eadiska pr\u00edsnej historickej a textovej kritiky mo\u017eno s istotou vyhl\u00e1si\u0165, \u017ee pr\u00e1ve ve\u013ek\u00e9, o\u0161arpan\u00e9 rukopisy ako Codex Sinaiticus a Codex Vaticanus \u2013 napriek v\u0161etk\u00fdm svojim vlastn\u00fdm z\u00e1va\u017en\u00fdm chyb\u00e1m z nedbalosti, napriek tis\u00edckam vp\u00edsan\u00fdch opr\u00e1v a napriek teologicky chaotick\u00e9mu po\u0148atiu kanonick\u00e9ho obsahu z prv\u00fdch storo\u010d\u00ed \u2013 sl\u00fa\u017eia dnes ako jedin\u00e9 a nemilosrdne objekt\u00edvne zrkadlo ranej cirkvi [cite: 13, 23, 24]. V tomto tis\u00edcro\u010dia starom popraskanom textovom zrkadle pri detailnom sk\u00faman\u00ed nevid\u00edme r\u00fddze, dokonal\u00e9 a jednohlasn\u00e9 stopy bo\u017esk\u00e9ho posolstva zhora, ale len hlu\u010dn\u00fa sple\u0165 textov\u00fdch rozporov, politick\u00fdch ob\u00e1v a postupne budovan\u00fdch \u201eortodoxn\u00fdch korupci\u00ed\u201c. Tieto stopy nen\u00e1vratne de\u0161truuj\u00fa samotn\u00fa podstatu presved\u010denia o akejko\u013evek biblickej neomylnosti (<em>inerrancy<\/em>) a presved\u010divo odha\u013euj\u00fa cirkevn\u00fa dogmatiku nie ako transcendentn\u00fa pravdu, ale iba ako sp\u00e4tne, z\u00fafalo a ideologicky vykon\u0161truovan\u00fd soci\u00e1lny, mocensk\u00fd a in\u0161titucion\u00e1lny syst\u00e9m, br\u00e1niaci svoje pre\u017eitie cenz\u00farou vlastn\u00fdch posv\u00e4tn\u00fdch textov.<\/p>\r\n<p><strong>Sources:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<ol>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Textual_variants_in_the_New_Testament\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">wikipedia.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/uasvbible.org\/2023\/06\/17\/the-alexandrian-and-byzantine-text-types-a-comparative-study\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">uasvbible.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.gotquestions.org\/Codex-Sinaiticus-Vaticanus.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">gotquestions.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=M6_mqS2vTuE\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">youtube.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/scribes-who-changed-their-texts-on-purpose\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ehrmanblog.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.bethinking.org\/is-the-bible-reliable\/bart-ehrmans-misquoting-jesus-an-analysis\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">bethinking.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scriptureanalysis.com\/explore-textual-variances-in-bible-translations\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">scriptureanalysis.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/cdn.rts.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/02\/In-Agony-The-Text-Critical-Issue-of-Luke-22.43-44-Hyatt.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">rts.edu<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Luke_22:43%E2%80%9344\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">wikipedia.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.galaxie.com\/article\/bsac171-681-05\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">galaxie.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.worldhistory.org\/article\/1974\/new-testament-text-types\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">worldhistory.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/uasvbible.org\/2023\/06\/01\/understanding-the-codex-sinaiticus-and-codex-vaticanus-a-scholarly-deep-dive-into-ancient-biblical-manuscripts\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">uasvbible.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/biblehub.com\/q\/what_are_codex_sinaiticus_and_vaticanus.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">biblehub.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/crossbible.com\/blog\/was-the-original-bible-corrupted-and-restored-the-critical-text-of-the-new-testament-explained\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">crossbible.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/grokipedia.com\/page\/Comparison_of_codices_Sinaiticus_and_Vaticanus\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">grokipedia.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/christianity.stackexchange.com\/questions\/103613\/why-was-the-byzantine-text-type-written\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">stackexchange.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.hisperfectbride.com\/new-testament-textual-criticism\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">hisperfectbride.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/hermeneutics.stackexchange.com\/questions\/30183\/why-do-some-versions-have-christ-in-1-peter-315-while-others-have-god\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">stackexchange.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.textusreceptusbibles.com\/Is_Textual_Criticism_Relevant\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">textusreceptusbibles.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=Qft5H09K88E\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">youtube.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/christianpublishinghouse.co\/2023\/07\/20\/textual-variants-in-the-book-of-revelation\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">christianpublishinghouse.co<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.biblicalarchaeology.org\/daily\/biblical-topics\/bible-versions-and-translations\/absent-from-codex-sinaiticus-oldest-new-testament\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">biblicalarchaeology.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/uasvbible.org\/2025\/12\/25\/understanding-the-codex-sinaiticus-and-codex-vaticanus-a-deep-dive\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">uasvbible.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/bibleversion.net\/codex-sinaiticus\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">bibleversion.net<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.bible-researcher.com\/faulty.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">bible-researcher.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/uasvbible.org\/2025\/07\/07\/transmissional-errors-in-the-new-testament-a-scholarly-examination-of-scribal-variants\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">uasvbible.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/zooniverseancientlives.wordpress.com\/2013\/05\/06\/scribal-error-in-biblical-manuscripts\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">wordpress.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/uasvbible.org\/2025\/10\/04\/the-role-of-corrections-in-codex-sinaiticus\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">uasvbible.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/283349297_The_Earliest_Corrections_in_Codex_Sinaiticus_A_Test_Case_from_the_Gospel_of_Mark\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">researchgate.net<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/luke-322-what-luke-himself-would-have-written\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ehrmanblog.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"http:\/\/timeandbeing.com\/Application\/GodsNature\/Bible\/Luke3v22.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">timeandbeing.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/ca.thegospelcoalition.org\/article\/what-happened-at-the-council-of-nicaea\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">thegospelcoalition.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1jlxa39\/proof_that_codex_sinaiticus_the_earliest_codex_is\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">reddit.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/AskBibleScholars\/comments\/hahsfb\/which_reading_of_luke_322_is_more_probably_the\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">reddit.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/more-arguments-over-luke-322\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">ehrmanblog.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/evidenceforchristianity.org\/is-it-true-that-luke-2243-44-about-sweat-like-drops-of-blood-was-not-in-the-original-book-of-luke\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">evidenceforchristianity.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/research.dial.uclouvain.be\/server\/api\/core\/bitstreams\/0bc9c7ed-44bf-4c7b-a8ee-3197dcbda935\/content\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">uclouvain.be<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/biblehub.com\/q\/Why_is_Luke_22_43_missing_in_some_texts.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">biblehub.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/hermeneutics.stackexchange.com\/questions\/25427\/what-is-the-manuscript-evidence-for-the-reading-apart-from-god-in-hebrews-29\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">stackexchange.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.walkingwithgiants.net\/bible\/troublesome-texts\/heb-29-apart-from-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">walkingwithgiants.net<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/lordjesuschristreigns.blog\/2025\/09\/27\/hebrews-29-textual-variant-did-jesus-die-by-the-grace-of-god-or-apart-from-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">lordjesuschristreigns.blog<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"http:\/\/evangelicaltextualcriticism.blogspot.com\/2006\/05\/evidence-in-hebrews-29.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">blogspot.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.quora.com\/Is-it-plausible-Constantine-destroyed-early-New-Testament-manuscripts-to-assert-control-over-his-empire-through-editing-the-NT-as-the-NT-and-Constantine-mention-much-of-swords-and-war-the-opposite-of-peaceful-Jewish\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">quora.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/jesusismysavior.medium.com\/the-corrupt-manuscripts-of-the-modern-bible-versions-4d2029e0517b\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">medium.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.alisachildersblog.com\/blog\/3-textual-variants-every-christian-should-know-about\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">alisachildersblog.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.reviewofreligions.org\/1466\/the-corruption-of-the-text-of-the-new-testament\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">reviewofreligions.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/purebibleforum.com\/index.php?threads\/verses-omitted-from-sinaiticus.5545\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">purebibleforum.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/petergoeman.com\/burn-exposed-2-peter-310\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">petergoeman.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/spotlightontheword.com\/what-does-2-peter-310-really-mean-a-textual-analysis-of-burned-up-vs-disclosed\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">spotlightontheword.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/tukampendatastore.blob.core.windows.net\/neocalvinism\/allofliferedeemed\/Wolters\/AMW19872Peter3.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">windows.net<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/isnt-there-a-textual-variation-in-ii-peter-310\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">lavistachurchofchrist.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.quora.com\/Was-the-Bible-really-changed-at-the-Council-of-Nicaea\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">quora.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=zPeJOIakvi8\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">youtube.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Fifty_Bibles_of_Constantine\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">wikipedia.org<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/byustudies.byu.edu\/article\/constantines-bible-politics-and-the-making-of-the-new-testament\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">byu.edu<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.historyofinformation.com\/detail.php?id=1855\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">historyofinformation.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n\t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.scriptureanalysis.com\/codex-sinaiticus-ancient-biblical-manuscript\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">scriptureanalysis.com<\/a><\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<h2 style=\"margin: 0 0 4px 0; line-height: 1.25; font-size: 1.6em;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Codex_Sinaiticus_vs_text_Byzantskeho_typu_V_com_lisia_co_sa_tyka_argumentov_potvrdenia_bozstva_Krista_V_ktorych_versoch_su_rozdiely\"><\/span>Codex Sinaiticus vs text Byzantsk\u00e9ho typu. V \u010dom l\u00ed\u0161ia \u010do sa t\u00fdka argumentov potvrdenia bo\u017estva Krista? V ktor\u00fdch ver\u0161och s\u00fa rozdiely?<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Porovnanie&nbsp;<strong>Codexu Sinaiticus<\/strong>&nbsp;(ktor\u00fd reprezentuje star\u0161\u00ed&nbsp;alexandrijsk\u00fd textov\u00fd typ&nbsp;zo 4. storo\u010dia)[<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/God_manifested_in_the_flesh\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/hermeneutics.stackexchange.com\/questions\/49106\/whats-this-variant-in-the-codex-sinaiticus-of-john-118\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2<\/a>] a&nbsp;<strong>textu Byzantsk\u00e9ho typu<\/strong>&nbsp;(ktor\u00fd predstavuje neskor\u0161\u00ed,&nbsp;v\u00e4\u010d\u0161inov\u00fd text&nbsp;a bol z\u00e1kladom pre Textus Receptus a star\u0161ie preklady)[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.quora.com\/What-is-the-historical-background-behind-the-translation-of-he-versus-God-in-1-Timothy-3-16-and-how-did-this-affect-early-Christian-beliefs\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">3<\/a>] je jednou z k\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00fdch t\u00e9m biblickej textovej kritiky.<\/p>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Bo\u017estvo Krista: Silnej\u0161ie vyjadrenia m\u00e1 Byzantsk\u00fd text, no v jednom ver\u0161i m\u00e1 zasa silnej\u0161ie svedectvo Codex Sinaiticus[<a href=\"https:\/\/confessionalbibliology.com\/2020\/05\/26\/doctrinal-significance-of-john-118\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"http:\/\/www.christianteenforums.com\/index.php?\/topic\/68486-the-only-begotten-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Rozdiely s\u00favisia najm\u00e4 s t\u00fdm, \u017ee byzantsk\u00ed prepisovatelia mali tendenciu text teologicky vyjas\u0148ova\u0165 a harmonizova\u0165[<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/God_manifested_in_the_flesh\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1<\/a>], zatia\u013e \u010do alexandrijsk\u00fd text (Sinaiticus) \u010dasto zachoval star\u0161iu, zlo\u017eitej\u0161iu a menej \u201eu\u010desan\u00fa\u201c podobu[<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/God_manifested_in_the_flesh\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1tmyaxc\/the_bible_is_corrupted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<h3 style=\"margin: 16px 0 2px 0; font-size: 1.3em;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Klucove_verse_a_ich_rozdiely\"><\/span>K\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00e9 ver\u0161e a ich rozdiely:<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 10px 0 2px 0; font-size: 1.1em;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"1_Jan_1_18_Jednorodeny_Syn_vs_Jednorodeny_Boh\"><\/span>1. J\u00e1n 1:18 (Jednoroden\u00fd Syn vs. Jednoroden\u00fd Boh)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">V tomto mimoriadne d\u00f4le\u017eitom ver\u0161i je situ\u00e1cia opa\u010dn\u00e1.<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Byzantsk\u00fd text:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eBoha nikto nikdy nevidel; jednoroden\u00fd&nbsp;<strong>Syn<\/strong>, ktor\u00fd je v lone Otcovom, ten ho vyrozpr\u00e1val.\u201c (gr.&nbsp;monogen\u00e9s huios)[<a href=\"https:\/\/confessionalbibliology.com\/2020\/05\/26\/doctrinal-significance-of-john-118\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"http:\/\/www.christianteenforums.com\/index.php?\/topic\/68486-the-only-begotten-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Codex Sinaiticus:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eBoha nikto nikdy nevidel; jednoroden\u00fd&nbsp;<strong>Boh<\/strong>, ktor\u00fd je v lone Otcovom, ten ho vyrozpr\u00e1val.\u201c (gr.&nbsp;monogen\u00e9s theos)[<a href=\"https:\/\/confessionalbibliology.com\/2020\/05\/26\/doctrinal-significance-of-john-118\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"http:\/\/www.christianteenforums.com\/index.php?\/topic\/68486-the-only-begotten-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Dopad na argument\u00e1ciu:<\/strong>&nbsp;<strong>V tomto pr\u00edpade poskytuje ove\u013ea silnej\u0161\u00ed argument pre bo\u017estvo Krista Codex Sinaiticus.<\/strong>&nbsp;Ozna\u010denie Je\u017ei\u0161a ako \u201ejednoroden\u00e9ho Boha\u201c je jedn\u00fdm z najsilnej\u0161\u00edch vyhl\u00e1sen\u00ed o jeho bo\u017eskej podstate v celom Novom z\u00e1kone[<a href=\"https:\/\/confessionalbibliology.com\/2020\/05\/26\/doctrinal-significance-of-john-118\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"http:\/\/www.christianteenforums.com\/index.php?\/topic\/68486-the-only-begotten-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>]. Byzantsk\u00fd text tu pou\u017e\u00edva tradi\u010dnej\u0161\u00ed a menej kontroverzn\u00fd titul \u201eSyn\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/confessionalbibliology.com\/2020\/05\/26\/doctrinal-significance-of-john-118\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"http:\/\/www.christianteenforums.com\/index.php?\/topic\/68486-the-only-begotten-god\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>].<br \/>\r\n<span style=\"background-color: #ffff00;\"><strong>Spr\u00e1vna interpret\u00e1cia tohto ver\u0161a Biblie:<\/strong> Alternat\u00edvny, rovnako spr\u00e1vny preklad slova \u03bc\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u1f75\u03c2 [monogen\u00e9s] (jednoroden\u00fd) je \u201e<strong>jedin\u00fd\u201c<\/strong>.<\/span><br \/>\r\n<span style=\"background-color: #ffff00;\"> Doslovn\u00fd preklad je nasledovn\u00fd.<\/span><br \/>\r\n<span style=\"background-color: #ffff00;\"> <strong>Jedin\u00fd Boh v lone Otca, ten priniesol zves\u0165.<br \/>\r\n<\/strong>Ak zoberieme do \u00favahy tento preklad, nevid\u00edme tam \u017eiadne spojenie s Kristom, hovor\u00ed sa len o Bohu Otcovi. Vtedaj\u0161iemu origin\u00e1lnemu pis\u00e1rovi Biblie sa nepodarilo skon\u0161truova\u0165 vetu naj\u0161\u0165astnej\u0161ie a p\u00f4sob\u00ed nezrozumite\u013ene a nelogicky&nbsp; \u2013 takto nezrozumite\u013en\u00fdch ver\u0161ov v Biblii m\u00e1te desiatky tis\u00edc. Pri silnej snahe preklada\u0165 nezrozumite\u013en\u00e9 ver\u0161e viac zrozumite\u013ene sa prekladatelia Biblie ju prekladaj\u00fa ve\u013emi vo\u013ene a to najm\u00e4 v prospech Bo\u017estva Krista \u010d\u00edm sa dop\u00fa\u0161\u0165aj\u00fa manipul\u00e1cie.<\/span><\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0; font-size: 1.1em;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"2_Matus_24_36_Vseveducnost_a_synovstvo_Jezisa\"><\/span>2. Mat\u00fa\u0161 24:36 (V\u0161eved\u00facnos\u0165 a synovstvo Je\u017ei\u0161a)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Tento ver\u0161 sa t\u00fdka Kristovej v\u0161eved\u00facnosti v kontexte konca sveta.<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Byzantsk\u00fd text:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eNo o tom dni a o tej hodine nevie nikto, ani nebesk\u00ed anjeli, jedine m\u00f4j Otec.\u201c (vynech\u00e1va slov\u00e1 \u201eani Syn\u201c)[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1tmyaxc\/the_bible_is_corrupted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/forwhatsaiththescriptures.org\/2020\/09\/30\/neither-the-son-belong-matthew-24-36\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">8<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Codex Sinaiticus:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eNo o tom dni a o tej hodine nevie nikto, ani nebesk\u00ed anjeli,&nbsp;<strong>ani Syn<\/strong>, jedine m\u00f4j Otec.\u201c (obsahuje gr\u00e9cke&nbsp;oude ho huios)[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1tmyaxc\/the_bible_is_corrupted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/hermeneutics.stackexchange.com\/questions\/2229\/why-do-different-english-translations-differ-on-matthew-2436\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">9<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Dopad na argument\u00e1ciu:<\/strong>&nbsp;Textov\u00ed kritici sa domnievaj\u00fa, \u017ee byzantsk\u00ed kopisti \u00famyselne vypustili slov\u00e1 \u201eani Syn\u201c, aby chr\u00e1nili dogmu o Kristovej bo\u017eskej v\u0161eved\u00facnosti[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1tmyaxc\/the_bible_is_corrupted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/purebibleforum.com\/index.php?threads\/matthew-24-36-alexandrian-inclusion-of-nor-the-son.5121\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">10<\/a>]. Pre ran\u00fdch kres\u0165anov toti\u017e bolo \u0165a\u017ek\u00e9 zos\u00faladi\u0165 to, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 je plnohodnotn\u00fd Boh, s t\u00fdm, \u017ee by nevedel hodinu svojho n\u00e1vratu (\u010do v minulosti vyu\u017e\u00edvali napr. ari\u00e1ni pri spochyb\u0148ovan\u00ed jeho bo\u017estva)[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1tmyaxc\/the_bible_is_corrupted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/purebibleforum.com\/index.php?threads\/matthew-24-36-alexandrian-inclusion-of-nor-the-son.5121\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">10<\/a>]. Sinaiticus toto zlo\u017eitej\u0161ie \u010d\u00edtanie zachoval[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1tmyaxc\/the_bible_is_corrupted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/brill.com\/display\/book\/edcoll\/9789004300026\/B9789004300026_010.xml\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">11<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0; font-size: 1.1em;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"3_Jan_9_35_Syn_Bozi_vs_Syn_cloveka\"><\/span>3. J\u00e1n 9:35 (Syn Bo\u017e\u00ed vs. Syn \u010dloveka)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Ke\u010f sa uzdraven\u00fd slepec od narodenia stret\u00e1va s Je\u017ei\u0161om.<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Byzantsk\u00fd text:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eVer\u00ed\u0161 v&nbsp;<strong>Syna Bo\u017eieho<\/strong>?\u201c (gr.&nbsp;tou theou)[<a href=\"https:\/\/community.logos.com\/discussion\/128039\/tip-of-the-day-from-the-blogs-using-the-church-fathers-manuscripts-and-critical-apparatus-think\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">12<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Codex Sinaiticus:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eVer\u00ed\u0161 v&nbsp;<strong>Syna \u010dloveka<\/strong>?\u201c (gr.&nbsp;tou anthropou).<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Dopad na argument\u00e1ciu:<\/strong>&nbsp;Byzantsk\u00fd text op\u00e4\u0165 explicitne potvrdzuje Je\u017ei\u0161ovo bo\u017esk\u00e9 synovstvo[<a href=\"https:\/\/community.logos.com\/discussion\/128039\/tip-of-the-day-from-the-blogs-using-the-church-fathers-manuscripts-and-critical-apparatus-think\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">12<\/a>]. K\u00f3dex Sinaiticus pou\u017e\u00edva titul \u201eSyn \u010dloveka\u201c, ktor\u00fd je s\u00edce mesi\u00e1\u0161sky (pod\u013ea knihy proroka Daniela), ale nie je tak priamo\u010diaro bo\u017esk\u00fd ako titul \u201eSyn Bo\u017e\u00ed\u201c.<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0; font-size: 1.1em;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"4_Lukas_24_51-52_Nanebovstupenie_a_klananie_sa_Jezisovi\"><\/span>4. Luk\u00e1\u0161 24:51-52 (Nanebovst\u00fapenie a kla\u0148anie sa Je\u017ei\u0161ovi)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Z\u00e1ver Luk\u00e1\u0161ovho evanjelia opisuje odchod Je\u017ei\u0161a[<a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/does-luke-flat-out-contradict-himself\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Byzantsk\u00fd text:<\/strong>&nbsp;\u201eA stalo sa, ke\u010f ich \u017eehnal, \u017ee sa vzdialil od nich a&nbsp;<strong>vzn\u00e1\u0161al sa do neba. Oni sa mu kla\u0148ali<\/strong>&nbsp;a s ve\u013ekou rados\u0165ou sa vr\u00e1tili do Jeruzalema&#8230;\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/does-luke-flat-out-contradict-himself\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1p5nqxk\/textual_theological_messiness_of_luke_245153\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">14<\/a>]<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Codex Sinaiticus (p\u00f4vodn\u00fd pis\u00e1r):<\/strong>&nbsp;Vynech\u00e1va pas\u00e1\u017e o nanebovst\u00fapen\u00ed a kla\u0148an\u00ed sa[<a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/does-luke-flat-out-contradict-himself\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1p5nqxk\/textual_theological_messiness_of_luke_245153\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">14<\/a>]. Text p\u00f4vodne znel len: \u201eA stalo sa, ke\u010f ich \u017eehnal, vzdialil sa od nich. A oni sa s ve\u013ekou rados\u0165ou vr\u00e1tili&#8230;\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/does-luke-flat-out-contradict-himself\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1p5nqxk\/textual_theological_messiness_of_luke_245153\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">14<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/codex-sinaiticus\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">15<\/a>]&nbsp;(Slov\u00e1 o nanebovst\u00fapen\u00ed a kla\u0148an\u00ed boli do k\u00f3dexu doplnen\u00e9 a\u017e neskor\u0161\u00edmi korektormi).<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 6px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Dopad na argument\u00e1ciu:<\/strong>&nbsp;Byzantsk\u00fd text posil\u0148uje bo\u017esk\u00fd charakter sc\u00e9ny \u2013 Je\u017ei\u0161ovi patr\u00ed poklona (gr.&nbsp;proskynesis&nbsp;\u2013 uctievanie, ktor\u00e9 patr\u00ed v\u00fdhradne Bohu) a odch\u00e1dza vidite\u013ene do neba[<a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/does-luke-flat-out-contradict-himself\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1p5nqxk\/textual_theological_messiness_of_luke_245153\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">14<\/a>]. V p\u00f4vodnej alexandrijskej verzii Sinaiticusu t\u00e1to sc\u00e9na uctievania ch\u00fdba[<a href=\"https:\/\/ehrmanblog.org\/does-luke-flat-out-contradict-himself\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.reddit.com\/r\/DebateReligion\/comments\/1p5nqxk\/textual_theological_messiness_of_luke_245153\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">14<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h2 style=\"margin: 0 0 4px 0; line-height: 1.25;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"List_Hermasov_pastier_bol_sucast_starsich_Biblii_ako_napriklad_Codex_Sinaiticus_silne_spochybnuje_bozstvo_Krista\"><\/span>List Hermasov pastier bol s\u00fa\u010das\u0165 star\u0161\u00edch Bibli\u00ed ako napr\u00edklad Codex Sinaiticus, silne spochyb\u0148uje bo\u017estvo Krista<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Hermasov pastier<\/strong> (Pastor Hermae, \u010dasto len Pastier) je v\u00fdznamn\u00fd ranokres\u0165ansk\u00fd apokalyptick\u00fd spis z prvej polovice 2. storo\u010dia, ktor\u00fd patr\u00ed do zbierky spisov apo\u0161tolsk\u00fdch Otcov[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.freegospeltracts.net\/3rd-book-of-hermas-similitudes\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1<\/a>][<a href=\"http:\/\/www.zoe.sk\/pub\/doc\/theologos\/p_de_deo_creatore.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">2<\/a>]. V ranej cirkvi sa te\u0161il obrovskej \u00facte a niektor\u00ed cirkevn\u00ed otcovia (ako Irenej alebo Origenes) ho dokonca pova\u017eovali za in\u0161pirovan\u00e9 P\u00edsmo[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.freegospeltracts.net\/3rd-book-of-hermas-similitudes\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">1<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.emanuel.ro\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Perichoresis-17.1-2-.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">3<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Z h\u013eadiska <strong>christol\u00f3gie<\/strong> je v\u0161ak tento spis mimoriadne kontroverzn\u00fd[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>]. Vykazuje toti\u017e znaky tzv. <strong>adopcionizmu<\/strong> (n\u00e1zor, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 bol len \u010dlovek, ktor\u00e9ho Boh nesk\u00f4r adoptoval za svojho Syna) alebo <strong>pneumatickej (duchovnej) christol\u00f3gie<\/strong> (kde sa predexistuj\u00faci Bo\u017e\u00ed Syn stoto\u017e\u0148uje s Duchom Sv\u00e4t\u00fdm, nie s Logom)[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.researchgate.net\/publication\/332256805_Trinitarianism_In_Didache_Barnabas_and_the_Shepherd_Sketchy_Scant_or_Scandalous\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">7<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<h3 style=\"margin: 20px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"I_Citaty_o_Kristovi_ako_o_%E2%80%9EBozom_sluzobnikovi%E2%80%9C_sluha_sluzobnik\"><\/span>I. Cit\u00e1ty o Kristovi ako o \u201eBo\u017eom slu\u017eobn\u00edkovi\u201c (sluha \/ slu\u017eobn\u00edk)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Tieto vyjadrenia sa nach\u00e1dzaj\u00fa v <strong>5. Podobenstve (Similitude 5)<\/strong>, ktor\u00e9 je postaven\u00e9 na aleg\u00f3rii o P\u00e1novi vinice (Boh), jeho milovanom Synovi (Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd) a vernom <strong>slu\u017eobn\u00edkovi (Je\u017ei\u0161ovi)<\/strong>[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">V gr\u00e9ckom origin\u00e1li sa pou\u017e\u00edva slovo <strong>\u03b4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2<\/strong> (doulos \u2013 sluha\/otrok), v latinskom preklade <strong>servus<\/strong>[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/core\/books\/abs\/god-slavery-and-early-christianity\/introduction\/DB32F0D1CB8ED504624065DB16568E87\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">8<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/etheses.bham.ac.uk\/id\/eprint\/151\/1\/Gaston08MPhil.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">9<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"1_Explicitne_stotoznenie_Sluzobnika_so_Synom_Bozim_Sim_552\"><\/span>1. Explicitn\u00e9 stoto\u017enenie Slu\u017eobn\u00edka so Synom Bo\u017e\u00edm (Sim. 5.5.2)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Ke\u010f pastier vysvet\u013euje Hermasovi v\u00fdznam podobenstva o vinici, hovor\u00ed:<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Slovensky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e&#8230;a ten <strong>slu\u017eobn\u00edk je Syn Bo\u017e\u00ed<\/strong>.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Anglicky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e&#8230;and the <strong>servant is the Son of God<\/strong>.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Latinsky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e&#8230;servus autem Filius Dei est.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"2_Hermasova_otazka_o_podobe_sluhu_Sim_554\"><\/span>2. Hermasova ot\u00e1zka o podobe sluhu (Sim. 5.5.4)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Hermasa t\u00e1to podoba m\u00e4tie a p\u00fdta sa pastiera:<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Slovensky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201ePre\u010do je v\u0161ak v tomto podobenstve Syn Bo\u017e\u00ed postaven\u00fd do <strong>podoby slu\u017eobn\u00edka<\/strong>?\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Anglicky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201eBut why, sir, is the Son of God placed in the parable in the <strong>form of a servant<\/strong>?\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Latinsky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201eCur autem, inquam, domine, Filius Dei in servi forma ponitur?\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"3_Odpoved_pastiera_o_moci_Syna_Sim_561\"><\/span>3. Odpove\u010f pastiera o moci Syna (Sim. 5.6.1)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 6px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Pastier mu na to odpoved\u00e1:<\/p>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Slovensky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201ePo\u010d\u00favaj,\u201c povedal: \u201eSyn Bo\u017e\u00ed nie je v <strong>podobe slu\u017eobn\u00edka<\/strong>, ale je postaven\u00fd do ve\u013ekej moci a panstva.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Anglicky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201eHear,\u201c he said: \u201ethe Son of God is not in the <strong>form of a servant<\/strong>, but is placed in great power and lordship.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Latinsky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201eAudi, inquit: Filius Dei non est in servi forma, sed in magna potestate et imperio constitutus est.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h3 style=\"margin: 20px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"II_Pasaze_spochybnujuce_bozstvo_a_preexistenciu_Jezisa_Krista\"><\/span>II. Pas\u00e1\u017ee spochyb\u0148uj\u00face bo\u017estvo a preexistenciu Je\u017ei\u0161a Krista<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Najkontroverznej\u0161ie pas\u00e1\u017ee celej knihy sa nach\u00e1dzaj\u00fa v <strong>5. Podobenstve, 6. kapitole, odsekoch 5 a\u017e 7<\/strong> (Sim. 5.6.5-7 \/ Sim. 59.5-7)[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/dokumen.pub\/experiencing-the-shepherd-of-hermas-9783110780741-9783110779547-d-1363156.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">10<\/a>]. Tieto ver\u0161e s\u00fa hlavn\u00fdm argumentom pre tvrdenie, \u017ee Hermas zast\u00e1val <strong>adopcionistick\u00fa christol\u00f3giu<\/strong>[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jamesclarke.co\/storage\/extracts\/shepherd-of-hermas-intro.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">11<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Pod\u013ea tejto teol\u00f3gie <strong>predexistuj\u00facou bo\u017eskou bytos\u0165ou nebol Je\u017ei\u0161 (Slovo), ale Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd<\/strong>[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>]. Je\u017ei\u0161 bol len \u010dist\u00e9 \u013eudsk\u00e9 telo (sarx), ktor\u00e9 si Boh vyvolil, aby v \u0148om tento Duch preb\u00fdval[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/dokumen.pub\/the-center-and-the-source-second-century-incarnational-christology-and-early-catholic-christianity-9781463237271-s-4505132.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">12<\/a>]. Ke\u010f\u017ee toto \u013eudsk\u00e9 telo sl\u00fa\u017eilo Duchu dokonale, Boh ho po vzkriesen\u00ed adoptoval za svojho Syna a spolo\u010dn\u00edka Ducha Sv\u00e4t\u00e9ho[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/dokumen.pub\/the-center-and-the-source-second-century-incarnational-christology-and-early-catholic-christianity-9781463237271-s-4505132.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">12<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Klucovy_citat_o_%E2%80%9Etele_a_Duchu%E2%80%9C_Sim_565-7\"><\/span>K\u013e\u00fa\u010dov\u00fd cit\u00e1t o \u201etele a Duchu\u201c (Sim. 5.6.5-7):<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Slovensky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e<strong>Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd, ktor\u00fd predexistoval, ktor\u00fd stvoril v\u0161etko stvorenie, Boh nechal preb\u00fdva\u0165 v tele, ktor\u00e9 si vyvolil.<\/strong> Toto telo, v ktorom preb\u00fdval Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd, dokonale sl\u00fa\u017eilo Duchu, kr\u00e1\u010daj\u00fac vo sv\u00e4tosti a \u010distote, bez ak\u00e9hoko\u013evek po\u0161kvrnenia Ducha&#8230; Ke\u010f\u017ee (telo\/Je\u017ei\u0161) \u017eilo tak vzne\u0161ene a \u010disto, pracovalo a spolupracovalo s Duchom&#8230; <strong>Boh ho prijal ako partnera (spolo\u010dn\u00edka) s Duchom Sv\u00e4t\u00fdm<\/strong>.\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/svetkrestanstva.postoj.sk\/47877\/hermasov-pastier\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">13<\/a>]<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Anglicky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e<strong>The Holy, pre-existent Spirit, that created every creature, God made to dwell in flesh, which He chose.<\/strong> This flesh, accordingly, in which the Holy Spirit dwelt, was nobly subject to that Spirit, walking religiously and chastely, in no respect defiling the Spirit&#8230; and having in everything acted vigorously and courageously along with the Holy Spirit, <strong>He assumed it as a partner with it [the Spirit]<\/strong>.\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.newadvent.org\/fathers\/02013.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">14<\/a>]<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Latinsky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201eSpiritum Sanctum, qui praeexistit, qui creavit omnem creaturam, Deus habitare fecit in carne, quam voluit. Haec ergo caro, in qua habitavit Spiritus Sanctus, bene servivit ipsi Spiritui, in sanctitate et castitate incedens, in nullo maculans Spiritum&#8230; assumpsit eam sociam cum Spiritu Sancto.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\"><strong>Zhrnutie argumentu proti bo\u017estvu Je\u017ei\u0161a:<\/strong><br \/>\r\nTento text hovor\u00ed, \u017ee Je\u017ei\u0161 (telo) nebol ve\u010dn\u00fdm Bohom[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/dokumen.pub\/the-center-and-the-source-second-century-incarnational-christology-and-early-catholic-christianity-9781463237271-s-4505132.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">12<\/a>]. Bol len stvoren\u00fdm \u013eudsk\u00fdm n\u00e1strojom, ktor\u00fd si Boh vyvolil pre preb\u00fdvanie Ducha[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>]. Svoje \u201ebo\u017estvo\u201c a postavenie Syna si musel Je\u017ei\u0161 najprv <strong>zasl\u00fa\u017ei\u0165<\/strong> svojou dokonalou poslu\u0161nos\u0165ou a \u010distotou na Zemi, za \u010do bol n\u00e1sledne odmenen\u00fd (adoptovan\u00fd)[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/dokumen.pub\/experiencing-the-shepherd-of-hermas-9783110780741-9783110779547-d-1363156.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">10<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dalsi_citat_stotoznujuci_Ducha_so_Synom_Sim_911\"><\/span>\u010eal\u0161\u00ed cit\u00e1t stoto\u017e\u0148uj\u00faci Ducha so Synom (Sim. 9.1.1):<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Slovensky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e&#8230;Duch Sv\u00e4t\u00fd, ktor\u00fd s tebou hovoril v podobe Cirkvi; <strong>lebo tento Duch je Syn Bo\u017e\u00ed<\/strong>.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Anglicky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e&#8230;the Holy Spirit, which spoke with you in the form of the Church, <strong>for that Spirit is the Son of God<\/strong>.\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">15<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.emanuel.ro\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Perichoresis-17.1-2-.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">16<\/a>]<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Latinsky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e&#8230;Spiritus Sanctus, qui loquutus est tecum in effigie Ecclesiae; ille enim Spiritus Filius Dei est.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h3 style=\"margin: 20px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"III_Teologicke_pnutie_a_kontradikcia_v_texte_Similitude_9\"><\/span>III. Teologick\u00e9 pnutie a kontradikcia v texte (Similitude 9)<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Zauj\u00edmavos\u0165ou a ve\u013ek\u00fdm christologick\u00fdm r\u00e9busom Hermasovho pastiera je, \u017ee autor na inom mieste knihy uv\u00e1dza vyjadrenie, ktor\u00e9 naopak <strong>silne podporuje preexistenciu Bo\u017eieho Syna<\/strong> pred stvoren\u00edm sveta[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">5<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/historicalchristian.faith\/hebrews\/1\/all\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">17<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Toto pnutie v texte (kde 5. Podobenstvo u\u010d\u00ed adopcionizmus, ale 9. Podobenstvo u\u010d\u00ed ve\u010dn\u00fa preexistenciu) viedlo historick\u00fdch kritikov k z\u00e1veru, \u017ee kniha mohla by\u0165 nap\u00edsan\u00e1 viacer\u00fdmi autormi alebo nesk\u00f4r upravovan\u00e1[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.jamesclarke.co\/storage\/extracts\/shepherd-of-hermas-intro.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">11<\/a>].<\/p>\r\n<h4 style=\"margin: 12px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Citat_podporujuci_preexistenciu_Syna_Sim_9122\"><\/span>Cit\u00e1t podporuj\u00faci preexistenciu Syna (Sim. 9.12.2):<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h4>\r\n<ul style=\"margin: 4px 0; padding-left: 18px;\">\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Slovensky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e<strong>Syn Bo\u017e\u00ed je naozaj star\u0161\u00ed ako cel\u00e9 jeho stvorenie<\/strong>, tak\u017ee bol Otcov\u00fdm radcom pri jeho stvorite\u013eskom diele.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Anglicky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201e<strong>The Son of God is indeed more ancient than all His creation<\/strong>, so that He was a fellow-councilor with the Father in His work of creation.\u201c[<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">15<\/a>]<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n\t<li style=\"margin: 0 0 8px 0; padding: 0;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0 0 2px 0;\"><strong>Latinsky:<\/strong><\/p>\r\n<blockquote style=\"margin: 2px 0 2px 12px; padding: 0 0 0 8px; border-left: 2px solid #ddd; font-style: italic;\">\r\n<p style=\"margin: 0;\">\u201eFilius quidem Dei omni creatura antiquior est, ita ut in consilio Patri suo adfuerit ad condendam creaturam.\u201c<\/p>\r\n<\/blockquote>\r\n<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h3 style=\"margin: 20px 0 2px 0;\"><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Zaver\"><\/span>Z\u00e1ver<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\r\n<p style=\"margin: 2px 0 8px 0; line-height: 1.35;\">Hermasov pastier je jedine\u010dn\u00fdm svedectvom ran\u00e9ho kres\u0165anstva, v ktorom sa ortodoxn\u00e1 teol\u00f3gia e\u0161te len formovala. Ver\u0161e v <strong>Sim. 5.6.5-7<\/strong> predstavuj\u00fa najsilnej\u0161\u00ed mimobiblick\u00fd argument pre z\u00e1stancov ran\u00e9ho adopcionizmu (Dynamic Monarchianism), preto\u017ee explicitne opisuj\u00fa Je\u017ei\u0161a ako \u013eudsk\u00e9 telo, ktor\u00e9 bolo za svoju \u010distotu a spolupr\u00e1cu s preexistuj\u00facim Duchom adoptovan\u00e9 za partnera a Syna Bo\u017eieho[<a href=\"https:\/\/garrettham.com\/shepherd-of-hermas\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">4<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/39194338\/The_Shepherd_of_Hermas_Androgyny_Adoptionism_and_Monotheism_As_Exegetical_Keys\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">6<\/a>][<a href=\"https:\/\/dokumen.pub\/the-center-and-the-source-second-century-incarnational-christology-and-early-catholic-christianity-9781463237271-s-4505132.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">12<\/a>].<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\u00davod: M\u00fdtus o neomylnom zachovan\u00ed biblick\u00e9ho textu a il\u00fazia jedinej pravdy V prostred\u00ed tradi\u010dnej kres\u0165anskej apologetiky a in\u0161titucion\u00e1lnej cirkevnej dogmatiky prevl\u00e1da hlboko zakorenen\u00fd narat\u00edv o prozrete\u013enostnom, bezchybnom a priam z\u00e1zra\u010dnom zachovan\u00ed textu Nov\u00e9ho z\u00e1kona. Tento narat\u00edv, nevyhnutn\u00fd pre udr\u017eanie autority cirkvi, predpoklad\u00e1, \u017ee texty, ktor\u00e9 dnes veriaci \u010d\u00edtaj\u00fa, s\u00fa vern\u00fdmi, takmer dokonal\u00fdmi k\u00f3piami p\u00f4vodn\u00fdch autografov, &#8230; <a title=\"Vedeck\u00e9 d\u00f4kazy, \u017ee cirkev manipulovala Bibliu. Star\u0161ie a mlad\u0161ie rukopisy sa l\u00ed\u0161ia v tom, \u010di je Kristus Boh\" class=\"read-more\" href=\"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/sk\/dokaz-ze-cirkev-manipulovala-bibliu-starsie-a-mladsie-rukopisy-sa-lisia-v-tom-ci-je-kristus-boh\/\" aria-label=\"Pre\u010d\u00edtajte si viac o Vedeck\u00e9 d\u00f4kazy, \u017ee cirkev manipulovala Bibliu. Star\u0161ie a mlad\u0161ie rukopisy sa l\u00ed\u0161ia v tom, \u010di je Kristus Boh\">\u010c\u00edta\u0165 viac<\/a>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3758","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-krestanstvo"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3758","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3758"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3758\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3789,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3758\/revisions\/3789"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3758"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3758"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/filozofia.nett.to\/krestanstvo\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3758"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}