Answers For Questions

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by Martin, Jun 25, 2005.

  1. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Seven questions for MV-ers:

    You said:
    1. What is the scriptural support-alone for only having 66 books in the Bible?

    ==The Old Testament is supported and quoted by the Lord Jesus Himself as authoritative (see Matt 5:17-20, Lk 24:44-49, etc). As for the New Testament? The Apostle Paul's writings and teachings are endorsed by the other apostles and Peter as Scripture (2Pet 3:14-16). Not only this but the books agree with each other doctrinally, and historically. The other "writings" often have doctrinal or historical errors and therefore cannot be inspired (since God is truth).
    _____________________________________

    You said:
    2. Was the pure, inspired, preserved words of God in existance between the time the original autographs were destroyed and before the AV 1769 was published?

    ==The Word of God has never been "destroyed". The autographs were carefully copied, etc, etc, etc. Errors (etc) did slip into the text over time. However God has seen to it that these errors be taken out. Today our translations, including the KJV, are about 98-99% faithful to the autographs. This can be known through a careful study of the texts and manuscripts. The KJV is not, at any point, the first or final english translation.
    ______________________________________

    You said:
    3. If so, where were they specifically, and in what form were they?

    ==Various greek manuscripts. As for which "school" of texts/manuscripts is to be favored? That is up to the individual student. However, either way, it is totally untextual to claim the KJV is the final and only faithful english translation.
    __________________________________

    You said:
    5. Do you currently have in your posession "scripture"?

    ==Yes. I am not saying that the KJV is not Scripture, it is. However these modern translations, yes the KJV is a modern translation, are just that: translations. There is never to be a perfect, one-for-one, translation from greek to english. Not only that there are textual varients that must be considered (though very minor in nature). Inspiration while technically only applying to the autographs can, in a non-technical way, be applied to faithful translations.
    ____________________________

    You said:
    6. Was there, at any time before the AV1769, a single volume of the NT containing the pure, inspired, preserved words of God?


    ==The autographs. I reject your claim that 1769 (or 1611) are benchmark years in Biblical history. See above.
    __________________________________

    You said:
    7. Is there today, anywhere, a single volume of the NT containing the pure, inspired, preserved words of God?

    ==Do you mean 100% identical to the autographs?

    Not unless the autographs were put in codex form and have survived somewhere. All translations and copies contain some textual variance (no matter how minor). That is why I keep stressing that our english translations are about 98-99% correct (ie..like the autographs). See above.

    Martin.

    <edited to remove a members name from the title in accordance with BB rules>

    [ June 26, 2005, 04:59 PM: Message edited by: C4K ]
     
  2. Sounddoctrine04

    Sounddoctrine04
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Martin, please be more careful, taking in account the qualifiers (eg "only" and "autographs" and "single volume") before forming your response. Other than that, you did a pretty good job.
     
  3. StefanM

    StefanM
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    6,418
    Likes Received:
    72
    It seems that Martin intended the use of his qualifiers. He's not KJVO.
     
  4. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==I was careful in what terms I used where. Could you explain further?

    Martin.
     

Share This Page

Loading...