No mistakes at all? They are identical to the original manuscripts?
From what I specified, I believe so. But I am not perfect, either, so...
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
From what I specified, I believe so. But I am not perfect, either, so...
So you could be wrong. Maybe there are copyist errors. I've never heard, that I can recall, anyone claim there were none. But, if there are copyist errors, no matter how small they may be, I guess you would have to throw out the whole thing!
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
So you could be wrong. Maybe there are copyist errors. I've never heard, that I can recall, anyone claim there were none. But, if there are copyist errors, no matter how small they may be, I guess you would have to throw out the whole thing!
I believe there were copyist errors in the ENGLISH translations. But they're obvious, like EASTER in Acts. I guess that is a translation issue, though. And, no, I do not throw it out.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Oh. I would have called those translation errors, but OK.
So, back to the TR and the MT: do you believe that they both are exact, word-for-word copies of each and every one of the original manuscripts?
One has to know the nature of the TR. It is a work of gaining the NT text from several Gr. MSS. So the question does not fit. MT is much simpler, and yes to the MT.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
One has to know the nature of the TR. It is a work of gaining the NT text from several Gr. MSS. So the question does not fit. MT is much simpler, and yes to the MT.
What do you mean by "the question does not fit"?
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
I realize that there are variations and differences in translations.....and i also realize that some are better than others. However i believe that what has been delivered to us is the Infallible Word of God, and that it is our responsibility to "rightly divide the Word"
Sure there are things and scriptures that need research to have a better understanding, but when we start questioning the Flood, sun standing still, etc...we might as well throw the whole thing out....we can strive to understand it better but to selectively discount portions of the Bible is a slippery slope that ends in apostasy.
Deadeye, one question for you. The current Bible we possess was mass distributed starting in the early 1800's, as modern day printing presses had not been invented yet. This means, mankind as a whole never had a "Bible".
So, how did mankind in the context of all time conceive God and His will before the Bible became a part of mainstay reading by the common people?
I believe we are guilty of drawing vain conclusions by stating we will fall into apostasy without a Bible, when humanity as a whole on this Planet never even knew what a Bible was.
One has to know the nature of the TR. It is a work of gaining the NT text from several Gr. MSS. So the question does not fit. MT is much simpler, and yes to the MT.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy
What do you mean by "the question does not fit"?
Bump for Blume.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Come on, Timmy. lol. These agnostic hijackings are getting a bit much. lol
Read THE KING JAMES VERSION DEFENDED, as noted before.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Linear Mode
