Splitting Hairs?

Maybe you haven't noticed this is a debate forum?

As for a ms having thousands of more differences than another ms and both being faithful - those differences can be very minor, like the spelling of names and places. None of it affects doctrine.

If you don't want to split hairs, this forum is probably not for you, although I don't think all threads here are like that.

 

Some people are great at giving some people posting directions whilst they bust in on other threads without thought for the thread theme....

Some just fight for fight's sake.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Well, yes, people can get emotional all over the BB! I don't find it interesting though; I find it exasperating, even when I'm getting emotional! :laugh:

 

I for one do not believe that all mss are copied equally.

That is why textual criticism is important.

That said, two different manuscripts could in face have differences and yet be more or less equal in their faithfulness to the original.

One could simply have mistakes in a different place than the other but the sum of mistakes could be similar.

 

As aforementioned, the whole process of textual criticism is a great field to study. Have you read any good books on the modern use of textual criticism? Just curious.

It is the Bible afterall. Some people tend to get worked up about. Notice what happens when you ask about inerrancy...

Oh I think textual criticism is deeply important. Is it on the same level of spiritual importance as leading people to Christ? No, but it sure helps to know that we have a terrifically reliable, reconstructed text to use when doing so. :thumbs:

In our age that is so defined by the quest for "scientific" certainty (as if we can acheive it) there is something important about using proper methods to formulate a text from archeological evidences. The atheists and doubters questioned the Bible and asked for evidences...the theological community has responded with vigor. I think that is rather important too. :saint:

 

Seeing as how none of us were there when these ancient mss were made, how can any of us say with any authority how accurate or inaccurate any of them are? I simply TRUST GOD to have presented His word to us in the forms HE has chosen. And nowhere in His word does He limit Himself to just one version that didn't exist at that time.

 

Textual criticism is very interesting, and is indeed a science. Most editions of Greek and Hebrew Testaments have a "textual apparatus" at the bottom of each page listing variants from the main text (the main text will be whatever the editors thought was the preferred reading).

The task of the exegete is to weigh the external evidence (i.e., the manuscript support for a particular reading) with the internal evidence (i.e., which reading best fits into the context of the passage, compares with parallel passages where there may be no manuscript disputes, etc.).

One thing that I have always liked about the NKJV editions published by Nelson is that most editions list the variants of the Critical Text and the Majority Text from the Textus Receptus. Although this is greatly simplified from having a textual apparatus, it at least gives the reader an idea of some of the more common variant readings.

 

Hello Thermodynamics

I don’t think I have spoken to you before.

You said.......

Not really.

You went on to mention, how winning the lost, is more important.
(But how can you win the lost, when your in doubt about God’s Word

Jesus said.........
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” John 5:24

You will notice here, that one must be exposed to “God’s Word”, to get saved.

[attack on Bible snipped]

 

Yet you doubt God's word is God's word in any translation except one of the KJVs. How can you win the lost when you're in doubt about God's word?

True - one must be exposed to God's word in order to be saved. But there's no scripture anywhere in any translation that says someone must be exposed to one particular Bible translation in order to be saved. The notion that there's only one legitimate word of God in English is man-made and anti-scriptural.

The NKJV, the NASB, the NIV, the ESV and a host of other modern translations are God's word just as much as the KJVs. BTW, stilllearning, which KJV is the perfect one? Is it the original 1611? Or is it one of the Cambridge KJVs? Or maybe one of the Oxford KJVs? They're all different. If it's possible to have only one English translation that's the perfect and inerrant word of God, then which KJVs do you disqualify as being the word of God?

If you accept the differences in the KJVs and claim they're all equally the word of God, then why don't you accept the differences in the modern translations? Why do you deny modern translations are the word of God?

 

AMEN! A very common error when coming across the phrase "word of God" (or even the term "word") in Scripture is to automatically assume that it is referring to the 'Bible' (written revelation).

 

Splitting Hares?

According to the code of making sacrifices (read the first five books of the Old Testament): certain larger clean animals (ox, sheep, goat) is to be split into two parts for proper burnt offering. Smaller animals (dove) are burn whole.

The hare (rabbit) is an unclean animal. To split a hare is to make gross errors on the importance of things:

1. you are not supposed to sacrifice unclean animals
2. you are not supposed to make a small animal into a large animal

But hey, nobody believes my trailer around here, eh?

 

Jesus also said John 5:24 (NKJV) "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. "

Also, John 5:24 Greek New testament (Wescott-Hort)
" αμην αμην λεγω υμιν οτι ο τον λογον μου ακουων και πιστευων τω πεμψαντι με εχει ζωην αιωνιον και εις κρισιν ουκ ερχεται αλλα μεταβεβηκεν εκ του θανατου εις την ζωην"


I believe all these versions and more! God is good :thumbs:

 

Ed you are a cheeky fellow.:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: You are also an outstanding student of God's Holy Word.

 

Hello Keith M

You reminded me of the value of the NKJV, the NASB, the NIV, the ESV;

And I started to correct you, and ask you to read my response again more closely:

But then I saw, that the part of my response, where I said that, had been edited out.
--------------------------------------------------
I agree, that the KJV, isn’t the only Bible, that can bring people to Christ.

 

Hi Thermodynamics

You asked a question, that has been asked several times before, all over the net......

The perfect Word of God, are those accurate copies of the original, that the KJV was translated from.

But I go ahead and extend that “perfection” over to the KJV, because of God’s promise to me(as a believer), that He was going to preserve His Word for me.
--------------------------------------------------
So, the answer to your question, would be the 1611;

Although I am glad to have an edition, with the spelling errors, having been mostly corrected.

 

I appreciate a clear answer. You are the first one to admit that the words 'of God' should have been left out of 1 John 5v12.

1611 - Hee that hath the Sonne, hath life; and hee that hath not the Sonne, hath not life.

All later editions - He that hath the Son hath life: and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.