Original Autographs Only

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by saul^paul, Jan 6, 2005.

  1. saul^paul

    saul^paul
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    It seems all i see is attacks on the KJVO crowd on this forum section cant we balance it out by discussing the differences in the Original Autographs Only crowd.

    Im sure there is more than 3 different trains of thought on the Original Autographs Only, this is just for starters.

    1. Those that believe Original Autographs are the only perfect word of God and the later copies contain errors.

    2. Those that believe Original Autographs can be copied and still be as perfect as the Originals.

    3. Those that believe the manuscripts that where found at a later date Vaticanus & Sinaiticus / Dead Sea Scrolls are considered part of the Original Autographs
     
  2. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    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
     
  3. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    God inspired the perfect originals. They were without any error (addition, omission, etc).

    God has preserved those perfect originals, but no SINGLE copy is complete and accurate. Yet compiling them together, we can get a blend that is reflective of those originals.

    No copy - no family of copies or single copy from 200 CE to 1200 CE is perfect.
     
  4. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    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
     
  5. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    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?
     
  6. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,574
    Likes Received:
    10
    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.
     
  7. natters

    natters
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  8. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    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
     
  9. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.... :confused: 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! :cool:
     
  10. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure, but which one and how would you know? And what about the parts of the NT not included in that fragment?
     
  11. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    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.
     
  12. Wes Outwest

    Wes Outwest
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,400
    Likes Received:
    0
    If God inspired "the perfect originals", is it too difficult for him to "inspire perfect copies"?
     
  13. Trotter

    Trotter
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/6412.jpg>

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    4,815
    Likes Received:
    0
    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
     
  14. russell55

    russell55
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    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.
     
  15. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    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].
     
  16. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
  17. rjprince

    rjprince
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK. I'll bite.

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

    saul^paul
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2003
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought to find this rather amusing.

    Me personaly, i am going to cast my lots on the "Majority Text" seeing the majority of the 5,000+ manuscripts where used versus the minority "W & H"


    Trotter,

    Im not trying to prove anything just wanted to see the other views expressed from those that believe in the Originals Only.
     
  19. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,079
    Likes Received:
    103
    Not Will Kinney again!
     
  20. Gregory Perry Sr.

    Gregory Perry Sr.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,993
    Likes Received:
    0
    ;) 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. [​IMG] [​IMG]

    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. ;)
     

Share This Page

Loading...