Textual Criticism?

I do not think their is a bible scholar that would say we have the whole bible as written. What we have is the best text that we can produce. The differences between the Byz & CT text does not cause any doctrine to be called into question.

If comparative trivialities, such as changes of order, the insertion or omission of an article with proper names, and the like, are set aside, the words in our opinion still subject to doubt can hardly amount to more than a thousandth part of the whole New Testament. (B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort, The New Testament in Greek, New York: MacMillan, 1957, p. 565)

For over four-fifths of the New Testament, the Greek text is considered 100% certain, regardless of which text-type might be favored by any critic. This undisputed bulk of the text reflects a common pre-existing archetype (the autograph), which has universal critical acceptance.
Note...that most of the variant readings found in manuscripts of other text-types are trivial or untranslatable. Only about 400-600 variant readings seriously affect the translational sense of any passage in the entire New Testament. (Maurice A. Robinson, William Pierpoint, The New Testament In The Original Greek According To The Byzantine/Majority Text Form, Atlanta, The Original Word Publishers, 1991, p. xvi. and xvii)

Church historian Phillip Schaff estimated that of the four hundred variants that have affected the sense of the passages in the New Testament, only fifty of these were actually important (Phillip Schaff, Companion to the Greek New Testament and the English Version, 1877, p. 177).

On the whole it must be admitted that statements about the text of the New Testament whether by amateurs or by specialists, have far too rarely reflected an overall perspective. All too frequently the focus has been on variants found in particular manuscripts or editions. This is true for even the most fundamental aspects of textual criticism; when identifying the text type of a manuscript it is all too easy to overlook the fact that the Byzantine Imperial text and the Alexandrian Egyptian text, to take two examples that in theory are diametrically opposed to each other, actually exhibit a remarkable degree of agreement, perhaps as much as 80 percent! Textual critics themselves, and New Testament specialists even more so, not to mention laypersons, tend to be fascinated by differences and to forget how many of them are due to chance or normal scribal tendencies, and how rarely significant variants occur—yielding to the common danger of failing to see the forest for the trees. (Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament, 1987, p. 28)

 

Given that general agreement, we can have confidence that the Scriptures we study are “God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work.” 2 Timothy 3:16 LSB

Rob

 

Excellent! Thank you for the conversation, and the videos!

 

I agree, but, their continuation of repeating the same things over and over is not only monotonous, it's beyond belief!

 

Both sides have brought forth some good arguments and the videos. But, with that being said, you're correct...this has become more than beyond belief...This is on reason people hate these "conversations." They become very counterproductive and antagonistic.