Quote:
|
in the main God preserved the accurate reading of the autographs in the Byzantine tradition; in some minute particulars, where the Byz lost the true reading,
|
Quote:
|
Now consider the problem from God's point of view.
|
Quote:
|
If I were to say we always go by the majority of manuscripts, or even the majority within the Bzy majority, then your charge would have weight; but that is not my method. I say we go by the Byz in the main, but infrequently, in certain cases, the Lord sovereignly breaks method in lieu of a wisdom above man’s wisdom and methods. You may not appreciate this, but it is consistent.
|
At least with Rob I can understand where he's coming from, although I disagree. He says that God preserved His Word in various manuscripts of the Byzantine tradition, and in those few places where the TR differs from any existing Byzantine text it would be acceptable to change the TR in those few places. This leaves honest debate open. He's willing to change the TR if necessary.
But with you, Steve, you seem to be saying that there was a act of inspiration where the Holy Spirit worked through the hands of the King James translators to restore God's pure Word. And you base this on the belief that you are able to
Quote:
|
consider the problem from God's point of view
|
How can you debate this? Rob is saying "if this word isn't found in any Byzantine text, scholars of good will and character, under the auspices of an ecclesiastical body, can change it".
You seem to be saying "If a word in the TR isn't found in any existing Byzantine text it doesn't matter, since something miraculous happened while the King James Bible was being translated, and we should accept by faith that the Holy Spirit directed the translation of the King James Bible and in addition to faith we should all accept this because of Greek dying out in Egypt".