Providential Preservation

Discussion in '2005 Archive' started by LRL71, Feb 24, 2005.

?

Providential Preservation

  1. #1) The Bible is silent about providential preservation and is therefore not a biblical doctrine.

    14.8%
  2. #2) The Bible is silent about providential preservation, but God's hand in preserving the text of th

    63.0%
  3. #3) The Bible has passages that lend support for providential preservation of the text of the Bible,

    14.8%
  4. #4) The Bible has passages that support providential preservation in which the text of the Bible was

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. #5) The Bible teaches providential preservation, where the text of the Bible was preserved perfectly

    7.4%
  6. #6) The Bible teaches that providential preservation was kept perfect in a text-type or group of man

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    This topic is a discussion about the various views of 'providential preservation', and please feel free to vote in this poll!

    The question before you now is this: What is the closest assessment of your views on providential preservation of the text of the Bible?
     
  2. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    The reason why I started this poll is to gather information from all those who troll/poll/post/toast on the BV/T forum, and to have a 'civil' discussion about providential preservation. I've included a number system similar to that of the KJVO number system to identify oneself in the discussion to follow.

    I chose #3 as representative of my personal views about providential preservation.

    Later on, I will post my own thoughts as to why I believe that the KJV-only teachings about providential preservation are not biblical, but for now, I'll sit back and see who posts what here on the Great Providential Preservation Poll! [​IMG]
     
  3. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,121
    Likes Received:
    319
    I can't find my view in the list.

    So here it is:

    The Bible teaches providential preservation.

    The Bible teaches how: A cooperative venture between God and man (the Jews).

    Translations are the preserved and inspired Word of God by derivation from the original language texts.

    Human scribal and/or typo errors have crept into the transmitted texts of both apographs and translations.

    Personally I choose the Byzantine type texts represented by the Scrivener 1894 TR as being the most accurate restoration of the NT autographs and the benChayyim Masoretic for the OT.

    Personally I view these texts as virtually perfect reproductions of the Word of God but leave room for improvement of these eclectic texts based on solid historic evidences and reasonable theories.

    For the reason that God gave the NT in "koine", I use the several MVs in Standard English of the 19-21st Centuries in "finding the sense of the Scriptures".

    I also remember that those brethren here that follow the W&H theories are just as sincere in their expectations of perfection of the Word of God as I am.


    HankD
     
  4. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^^^^

    I'd say that you are a #4, which is the closest to your position, but that's my guess. Thanks, HankD for your comments! [​IMG]
     
  5. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    For those who aren't able to view the poll questions, they are these in a selection of six possible views:

    #1) The Bible is silent about providential preservation and is therefore not a biblical doctrine.
    #2) The Bible is silent about providential preservation, but God's hand in preserving the text of the Bible can be observed through history and archaeology.
    #3) The Bible has passages that lend support for providential preservation of the text of the Bible, but is silent about how God preserved it.
    #4) The Bible has passages that support providential preservation in which the text of the Bible was kept perfect, but cannot lend support for any text-type or group of manuscripts.
    #5) The Bible teaches providential preservation, where the text of the Bible was preserved perfectly, and God preserved His Word in a text-type or group of manuscripts (such as the Textus Receptus), but not into a translation of that text-type.
    #6) The Bible teaches that providential preservation was kept perfect in a text-type or group of manuscripts, and that a specific translation (such as the King James Version) contains the perfect Word of God. 12% (1)


    So far, the poll results are:

    8 posters have answered the poll.
    12% for #1
    0% for #2
    50% for #3
    25% for #4
    0% for #5
    12% for #6
     
  6. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    At this time, 11 posters have answered the poll.

    #1 - 1 vote (9%)
    #2 - 0 votes (0%)
    #3 - 6 votes (55%)
    #4 - 3 votes (27%)
    #5 - 0 votes (0%)
    #6 - 1 vote (9%)
     
  7. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    16 posters have answered the poll.

    #1 - 1 vote (6%)
    #2 - 1 vote (6%)
    #3 - 9 votes (54%)
    #4 - 3 votes (19%)
    #5 - 0 votes (0%)
    #6 - 2 votes (12%)

    No comments from the peanut gallery???

    HankD made some good comments about preservation, although I would be of a differing opinion about which text type I would support as being closer to the originals (I believe the critical eclectic texts are closer-- like the UBS4th and N/A 27th). But, as both HankD and I would agree, this is only our respective opinions about the text-types generally.

    Is there someone from a KJV-only perspective with comments about their beliefs in 'providential preservation'?? Please post something!! :confused:

    Thanks for the votes, everyone. If you haven't voted yet, go to the top and make it count!
     
  8. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    providential preservation is what?
     
  9. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the six 'answers' to the question, one's own views of 'providential preservation' refer to how God preserved the text of the Bible throughout history.

    If you aren't aware of the King James Only controversy, you might not be aware of the importance of this issue.
     
  10. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks ... still not certain how providential preservation should apply to God's Word, but I will live with my ignorance.
     
  11. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    Results so far.....

    18 total votes.

    #1 - 2 votes (11%)
    #2 - 1 vote (6%)
    #3 - 10 votes (56%)
    #4 - 3 votes (17%)
    #5 - 0 votes (0%)
    #6 - 2 votes (11%)

    Thanks for voting! [​IMG]
     
  12. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    As of 2/27/2005 at 22:30, the results so far:

    #1 - 2 votes (11%)
    #2 - 1 vote (5%)
    #3 - 11 votes (58%)
    #4 - 3 votes (16%)
    #5 - 0 votes (0%)
    #6 - 2 votes (11%)

    19 total votes counted.

    Hey, if YOU haven't voted, please do so! [​IMG]
     
  13. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    I voted #4, although probably would have been safer #3.

    God promised to preserve His Word. Greek/Hebrew.

    Not one text type, certainly not in English! That is h******** (can't use that word or the Administration will jump on me!) [​IMG] [​IMG]

    For the two who voted that God DID preserve a certain text/English, I would ask for a verse to support that.

    Is it too much to ask for a verse to support such a doctrine?
     
  14. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    ^^^

    Thank you for your vote of #4, Dr. Bob. Even here in Florida, your vote is counted!! [​IMG]

    I'd like to see that nebulous Bible verse that supports a 'perfectly providentially preserved pickle version'.... and not some re-hashed KJV-only 'interpretation' of Psalm 12:5-7 again. :rolleyes:
     
  15. LRL71

    LRL71
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2002
    Messages:
    580
    Likes Received:
    0
    Vote tally so far.....

    21 total votes.

    #1 - 2 votes (10%)
    #2 - 1 vote (5%)
    #3 - 12 votes (57%)
    #4 - 4 votes (19%)
    #5 - 0 votes (0%)
    #6 - 2 votes (10%)

    No discussion?? If not, then the poll will continue on....... into obscurity!
     
  16. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    I voted three. It was a toss-up between 3 and 4. BTW Its not a chad. Its a vote.

    ----------------------------
    Two votes for number six.

    I have the same question.

    Where is the verse?
     
  17. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    I don't remember if I voted 3 or 4.
     
  18. 4His_glory

    4His_glory
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    I voted #3 as it seems the majority of those who have voted thus far have. That is good to see!
     
  19. Phillip

    Phillip
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2001
    Messages:
    6,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. Bob and I are still waiting for a verse from a number six voter. Anybody want to volunteer?
     
  20. robycop3

    robycop3
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2000
    Messages:
    7,573
    Likes Received:
    10
    I voted #3 because I've read at least eleven BVs cover-to-cover, including maps & concordances, and have NEVER seen one hint of Scripture supporting ANY one-versionism. In fact, the OT quotes found in the NT suggest that at least TWO versions were in use in Jesus' time-or, the Masoretic Texts are not true reps of the originals.
     

Share This Page

Loading...