Has God preserved the original language of the Bible?

I happen to believe the TR is the more accurate text.

In fact, I treat the Masoretic and Scrivener texts as the true reconstruction of the originals.

However it is a faith decision.

Presumably that is your reason as well.

But, many also sincerely believe that God has corrected the existing text by a comparison of all the currently known texts resulting in the CT.

With this reasoning: If the AD1611 was "perfect" yet needed 200 plus years of correction , why then balk at the further corrections of Wescott and Hort (presuming them to be correct in their theories).

Winman you need to know (and understand) that whatever the case, no brother or sister says to themselves "well, today I will deceive myself and study a text in which words are "added to" or from which words are "taken away".

Some are very adamant and sincere about what they believe is a "smoothed" and "amended" text of the Byzantine scribal Tradition of adding to God's word.

I don't believe they did "add" or "smooth out" the text, but that is my own choice based upon my own convictions.

Why not occasionally state your case and reasons without ad hominems (direct or oblique) and/or returning "railing for railing" and let it be?

I repeat, everyone here is genuinely interested in a complete and total restoration of God's word down to the "jots and tittles".

But since we don't have the originals we must each make what we consider an informed faith decision and there are legitimate reasons on both sides of the issue.

It is easy for us (on both sides) to label legitimate reasons as "ploys" without any thought process.

HankD