Quote:
Originally Posted by armourbearer  First, why should I be obliged to bring forth examples of variation where you yourself have recognised variants in the TR tradition, and Scrivener's work itself testifies of the need to clarify which form of the TR was employed by the translators of the AV? Supposing I came to the conclusion that Scrivener's TR provides the original reading, does that make it impossible to conclude that I have arrived at that decision by an exact discrimination of all the evidence which can be sifted? If so, then obviously there is prejudice from your side of the debate which refuses to examine the evidence in the remote possibility that the TR might be correct.
Secondly, this issue requires such a large induction of particulars that it is useless raising one or two readings which may or may not favour one textual theory over another. Such is the complexity of the different lines of evidence that one or two readings might count against a textual theory and yet the theory still stand on the basis of cumulative evidence.
Thirdly, Scrivener's work is deservedly entitled to be regarded as a piece of sound scholarship; your belittling of that scholarship either shows ignorance of his work or just plain ignorance. |
The above was un-called-for. I did not belittle the level of scholarship in Scrivener's work. In fact, I have a very high regard for Scrivener. However, you are starting to reveal more about your position, and I believe it is showing some holes.
Scrivener created a new edition of the Greek NT that approximated the KJV English translation. This was a very interesting work and also very important for those who know and love the KJV.
However.......
we are talking about the original Greek and Hebrew texts, and how God has preserved them through the ages. If you elevate the KJV to the level of God's endorsement of exemplifying his "pure" maintenance of his word, on what basis do you do so? In other words, the NIV is a translation with wide acceptance today. If you eventually argue for the ultimate correctness of the Scrivener "TR" because you like the KJV, why can't I do something similar with the NIV?
It is very telling that the conversation has shifted from Greek NT manuscripts and printed editions, over to an English translation. This kind of thing should not really happen in a discussion on textual criticism.