I am not going to do your homework for you. If you want to discuss Pickering, read his book.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Biblical errancy.
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
- Status
Is he regarded as being reputable in textual criticism circles?
37818
Well-Known Member
That does not answer my question. And why would a KJVO think we did?
BTW all copies of the written word of God came down from an original autograph which we no long have.
37818
Well-Known Member
The following is my understanding:
He is a board member of "The Center for the Study and Preservation of the Majority Text."
He is a PhD and now the Director of this.
We also do not have any that were directly copied off the originals, correct?
37818
Well-Known Member
So? That does not change the fact that what copies we have are descendants from an origen autograph.
I was just addressing those in the KJVO thta seem to be asserting that we do have in the TR direct copy linked to the originals themselves!
37818
Well-Known Member
At issue is the identity of the word of God in regard to the New Testament original text.
All of the current accepted Greek texts are an accurate representation of the Originals though!
37818
Well-Known Member
No. Luke 4:4. A case in point.
Do you see the TR as being the only valid Greek text to use then?
37818
Well-Known Member
No. Because what has been called the TR is not in and of itself an inerrant compilation.
The enemy has attacked the word of God since the beginning (Genesis 3:1). And today the Christian New Testament is being attacked from all sides. Among those who are for the KJV, TR, Majority text, and the critical text methods. Each claiming their method better identifies the inerrant texts. Do I have the definitive answer? Maybe not. But I do know we who believe God's inerrant word need to stand for that.
God made promises regarding His word. Deuteronomy 8:3. Proverbs 30:5-6. Isaiah 55:11. Psalms 119:89. Matthew 5:18. 2 Timothy 3:16-17. And others.
the answer to which Greek text can be considered to be the word of God to us would be all, as would the Kjv/Nkjv/Nas/Esv etc!
37818
Well-Known Member
The same Greek text, but translated differently with a another meaning. One meaning would not be true. Two different readings of a Greek text, one would be God's word and the other not, as to that word.
ESV "before" and KJV, NKJV, NASB "from." Revelation 13:8.
ESV, NASB "God" and KJV, NKJV "Son." John 1:18.
KJV "on me", NKJV "in Me" and ESV, NASB omits. John 6:47.
37818
Well-Known Member
No. Where evidence is to the contrary.
NONE of them are identical to the original text, so we can have some minor disagreements!
So you would see the times to correct the TR than?
I believe God allowed the Autographa to vanish so they wouldn't become icons of worship in the manner the "Holy Grail" did in the past. But I alst trust God to have preserved His word to this day in the manner HE chose. Thus, I trust Him to have caused His word to be translated into the language He caused me to learn. (This applies to everyone else as well. He has made His word available to almost everyone.)
37818
Well-Known Member
Yes. But the problem is where there is one true and one false statement. While it is true, for example, being "beloved" of God and "sanctified" of God, only one reading is the inerrant word, the other is an error in the text (Jude 1:1).
Since no single Greek text though would be 100% accurate, would not all of them be the very word of god to us to use for study and translation though still?
- Status