The same rules don’t apply

Were the oldest manuscripts that we have preserved?

 

Your analogy is weak. The KJV that I use is not anywhere near the same as the one sanctioned by King James. I can't even read the original. I bet you can't either.

 

There's a problem with your analogy since every copy we have differs,
Which one (of the many thousands) did God preserve?

Why do translators use as many different manuscripts as possible to confirm their texts.

I guess they follow the axon: "Cut once, measure twice"

Rob

 

Please remain on topic. The topic here is dealing with Greek manuscripts, not English translations.

The problem is that until the TR was compiled there was no one volume of the NT. It existed in a collection of almost 5000 manuscripts, none of which had 100% agreement.

The team which gave us the marvellous KJT of the scriptures were wise enough not to be bound to the man-made compilation of the TR, but referenced many other manuscripts, primarily of the Byzantine family, as well.

 

As much as I am tempted not to comment on this, I am going to do it anyway.

Not if you know what you are doing. No woodworker, even an amateur one, believes this to be true. The only people who have this problem are people who don't know what they are doing.

Whenever you are going to use an analogy, you should know both sides of the analogy.

Notice the inherent contradiction. If "this fact applies when ever anything is copied repeatedly" then it applies to the Bible. If it doesn't apply to the Bible, then it is not a fact applying to "whenever anything is copied repeatedly."

You see, the nature of "fact" is that it is always true, given the circumstances. (Look it up.) If it isn't always true, given the circumstances, then it isn't by definition a fact. Of course words and their meanings have never been important to those of the KJVO persuasion, which is why they are of the KJVO persuasion. But the truth is that while you can believe a lot of things, using "fact" in this way is illegitimate given commonly accepted meanings of the word.

In reality, this type of argument illustrates just how unsupportable your position is. You are reaching desperately to try to make this analogy work, in hopes of gaining some traction for your position. But it doesn't work because it forces a falsity on the first side of the analogy, and misdefines a word in the second part. Thus, your conclusion is inherently self-contradictory and illogical.

Your argumentative basis is incorrect, and whatever conclusion you draw about the reliability of manuscripts is foundationally suspect.

 

Fine, if you want to believe it is the KJV then select a revision -1611-1769 and/or an edition - Oxford, Cambridge, Nelson and use it exclusively.

HankD

 

Of course it is not only plausible; it is factual. Consider the question this way: "Since God is in control, is it plausible that he would have allowed sin?" We have an obvious answer to that that answers your other question.

You see, the effects of sin are seen all over in a broken world. Copying is not different.

None.

No, of course being told this does not make it a fact. But if it accurately describes reality, then it is fact whether we have been told it or not, and whether we believe it. You see, facts do not depend on being believed or being repeated. Facts are facts when they describe the true state of affairs.

By looking at them.

Of course. People who actually deal in Greek language and manuscripts have no axe to grind, unlike most KJVOs. They simply say what is true. It is a conspiracy of miraculous proportions if it was kept quiet that there are two who are exactly alike.

Classic non sequitur as well as a misunderstanding. The point of "every word" is the totality of God's revelation. We are to live by what God has revealed. Remember that was said in the context of Satan's temptation. Jesus is invoking the totality of revelation as the basis of life. He is not saying anything about preservation there.

Furthermore demanding that God must do something to satisfy your mind is very problematic. If God had intended to preserve an "exact" copy of His word for us, then he would have done so. The fact is that he did not, at least in such a way that we can recognize what that is. God has instead provided a multitude of witnesses to his word that all must believe.

 

I don't believe every word in a copy of scripture is "inspired" as we use that word.

The whole of scripture is "inspired". In this sense I have called my kjv the "inspired word of God."I am not saying that the kjv is perfect in every word or even every phrase. In the same sense, I may use any modern translation, and develop the word of God by the whole message and not by an isolated verse or play on words.

Remember, even Koine Greek was the common language of the day, spoken and not written by most. We can have the same differences that we have in English as it is spoken and written in the various cultures.

Cheers,

Jim

 

It is thought by some conservative scholars that some of the original manuscripts had mistakes as they were dictated and then correct some words by crossing out the wrong letter and writing the correct one above it. Some words do not sound all that much different.