Original Autographs Only

s^p,

OK. And what was that supposed to prove?

Do you contest the fact that the original autographs were without error? And do you believe that these autographs have been passed down, without error? So, which of the 5000+ Greek manuscripts is the right one? Sorry, but the TR/KJV is not a choice...since the TR is a conglomeration of a few manuscripts and some reverse-translated Latin Vulgate.

As to your "trains of thought":
1. True. The existance of 5000+ different manuscripts vouches for this.

2. Possibly true. One of the multitude of manuscripts (possibly one not yet discovered) could be an exact replica of the originals.

3. No hard evidence to back up this claim. It ranks right down there with saying the TR is an exact replica of the originals...

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Trotter,

Of those 5,000+ manuscripts you reference, which manuscripts do you consider to be in error?

Are they in error throughout the NT or just in places?

In Him

 

Although it is true that no two extant manuscripts agree 100%, could it not be possible that one extant fragment does accurately match the originals?

 

Some people cannot accept the fact that God has preserved His word AS HE HAS CHOSEN.

Does anyone here doubt that God could have preserved the originals as easily as He has preserved the Jews' national identity...IF HE HAD SO CHOSEN?

It appears He has NOT chosen to have preserved the originals, or at least allowed any of them to have been discovered yet. Therefore we have no real basis from which to pick-n-choose from among the ancient Scriptural ms when no evidence of obvious forgery ir inventiveness exists.

For those who swear that the Masoretic Texts are the only valid OT texts, we remind them that what JESUS HIMSELF read aloud in Luke 4:16-21 was NOT from the MT. Nor were many of the other OT quotes found in the NT. So much for One-versionism.

 

I believe something else. I believe textual errors do not detract from being the "perfect" word of God, because I believe there are two issues, not one: there is the ink on the paper, and there is the message that ink can convey to a reader. Mistakes in the ink does not have to necessarily result a mistake in the message one can extract from that ink. A perfect message can be obtained from imperfect ink.

Thus I can accept multiple versions and translations as the "perfect word of God", even though they differ textually. The "original manuscripts" are only of interest to me when examining/discussing the textual aspect of the issue, which is secondary to the message aspect.

 

El_Guero wrote:

Which manuscripts? Manuscripts are men's best guesses. Each and every one has some degree of error.

Is God's word complete and without error? Absolutely. I can pick up any of dozens and know that it is.

Are you confused? I'm not.

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Interesting question, as it is possible that a manuscript could read exactly as the original (inspired document) manuscripts did. This is merely hypothetical, since we know that this question belies a simple truth: we don't have the original (inspired document) manuscripts to compare them to. Harumph.... Even further than this, no one can assume that God had preserved the text of the OT or NT exactly as the original (inspired document) manuscripts had read. Unfortunately for those who insist on the notion of 'perfect' preservation, one cannot assume that God did in fact perfectly preserve the OT or NT text exactly as the original (inspired document) manuscripts had read in any text-type or textual edition such as the Textus Receptus or the UBS4th edition of the Greek NT. It's simple as that!

 

Sure, but which one and how would you know? And what about the parts of the NT not included in that fragment?

 

It is generally thought when Paul dictated a letter to a church or churches that the amanuensis may have made mistakes that Paul corrected by crossing a line through the individual letter that needed to be changed and the correct letter written above it. By the change of one letter the tense can be changed in some words.

 

If God inspired "the perfect originals", is it too difficult for him to "inspire perfect copies"?

 

Nope, not at all. But the trick is to figure out which one is the real McCoy.

Hint: It's not one of those compiled by men...

In Christ,
Trotter

 

Of course not.

But what we have are lots of copies, and no two of them are the same. Every single one is different from every other one. So apparently, even though God could have inspired copies that were exactly the same as the original, he didn't chose to work that way. Or if he did, he didn't tell us where (or which one) it is.

All translations, including the KJV, are translated from texts that were made by picking and choosing various readings from different copies. Somebody (or somebodies) made decisions as to which particular readings out of whatever various copies they were using were most likely to be the original reading, and then they compiled those selected readings into one text to translate from.

 

I believe the statement made in the SOF of this board:

I. The Scriptures

The Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired and is God's revelation of Himself to man. It is a perfect treasure of divine instruction. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter. Therefore, all Scripture is totally true and trustworthy. It reveals the principles by which God judges us, and therefore is, and will remain to the end of the world, the true center of Christian union, and the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and religious opinions should be tried. All Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine revelation.

Exodus 24:4; Deuteronomy 4:1-2; 17:19; Joshua 8:34; Psalms 19:7-10; 119:11,89,105,140; Isaiah 34:16; 40:8; Jeremiah 15:16; 36:1-32; Matthew 5:17-18; 22:29; Luke 21:33; 24:44-46; John 5:39; 16:13-15; 17:17; Acts 2:16ff.; 17:11; Romans 15:4; 16:25-26; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Hebrews 1:1-2; 4:12; 1 Peter 1:25; 2 Peter 1:19-21

I further believe that each faithful translation contains
the Holy Scriptures. And the best of these is the
Christian Standard Bible (Holman, 2003) [HCSB].

 

For all you "Modern Versionists" and "Original Onlyists" in here I offer a little extracurricular reading without additional comment for your consideration:

http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/resource/whathappens.htm

Greg Sr.

P.S.I doubt it will change your minds...but I love you all in Christ regardless!

 

OK. I'll bite.

Do you believe that the KJV is the PERFECTLY preserved Word of God down to the last "jot and tittle"?

 

RJ...don't bite....just nibble..lol.
I believe that the KJV is the book that God has chosen to preserve for our generation of english speaking people.I also believe He has protected it thru the years....and YES...I know it has undergone some updating of words such as spelling changes from the 1611 to the present.I personally don't have any problem with that.The verses still read the same from what I have seen and in that I beleive it is word-perfect.As for the "jots and tittles"I just can't make a case for that one way or the other so I know I will suffer the derision of most of the MV'ers in here.I'm just going to stick to the Book I have cause I believe that's the one the Lord intends me to have,hold,and use.As I've said in past posts...I think the big issue in my own life is getting enough of THAT BOOK hidden within MY OWN heart so that the Holy Spirit can do His blessed work in me to make me a reflection of my Lord Jesus Christ to this sad and needy lost world we all live in.I want to bear fruit for the Master and that is both a frustration to me and a challenge that I am aware of each and every day.All I do know of history is that God has mightily BLESSED that old Book and I think I would be safe in saying that we'll not see that kind of spiritual POWER come out of ANY of the modern "works" that are on the shelves of todays christian bookstores.The Word of God(and I think it is the KJ Bible)has God's stamp of approval on it.It has borne MUCH fruit.It will continue to do so long after the others have been "superceded" and "shelved" in favor of yet newer and more "updated" "versions"....but then maybe the Saviour will put and end to all this "controversy" by coming again real soon.I hope so!

God Bless You,
Greg Sr.

P.S. Yes...I know..I didn't address or "answer" the issue.I'm just gonna stay with what I believe.I don't think I can go wrong doing that.