"TCassidy,
Well Have a good Day I will make room for others here, Thank you.
And God Bless
What we are seeing friend, is the most prominent attitude today when looking at the text-type.
Fact: The Alexandrian text type is older than the Byzantine. But, by the same token, older does not make better. You can find the Byzantine text type around the 2nd to 3rd century.
Fact: The Byzantine text out numbers the Alexandrian text type by a margin of 3 to 1. Nearly 80 to 85% of Greek MSS are of the Byzantine text type. With Caesarian/Western texts and one or two more comprising the rest. And here again, just because numbers are in the Byzantine favor, does not make them 100% correct either.
One would think that because of conditions in which most Alexandrian texts were kept, mostly dry, less humid areas like N. Africa, they would number more than Byzantine because those conditions were prime for papyrus/parchments. But its just not the case. What we find is that the Byzantine do indeed out number the Alexandrian. But in admitting that, one also must, absolutely must acknowledge that around the 3rd to 4th century, the "scribes/copyists" ceased writing in the Alexandrian style. Perhaps it was because of "Christian" influences from Rome and Constantinople. But what is clear is there was a definite shift from Alexandrian to Byzantine around the 4th to 5th century.
The most recent versions to be put out, and the most recent revisions hit in the mid to late 1970's.
Few influences are seen from the aspect of "textual criticism". And that is what just blows my mind.
From 1881, onwards, there has been virtually no serious work done in "textual criticism". From 1881 to 1959, textual criticism was a dead subject. Then enter Ernest Cowell and Ernest Tune. Together, they introduced a "new" method of textual criticism which became known as "Quantitative Method of Textual Criticism". Instead of just proceeding as it had from the last 60-70 years, instead of using the "triple readings" they used "multiple readings" instead of just grouping them together in classes that they resembled. At any rate, this opened a new way of researching the Greek MSS. And in 1966, enter Gordon Fee and the p66 and p75. What is known for sure, and it is verifiable and provable, is that by close examination of variants, and other passages, counting, multiple readings, etc, Gordon Fee proved 100% that the early Alexandrian Texts, namely the Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were reliable when compared with the Gospel of John. Regardless of anybodies opinion, without a doubt, they were reliable codices.
What do we know now?
We know that when Erasmus began his work, he had 6 or 7 Greek MSS. Along with certain Catholic versions and lexiconaries.
And up until 1604, there were perhaps only a hundred Greek MSS known to exist. And while sincere, the KJ Translators made very little use of them. Instead, they relied on previous versions as I showed.
After 1611, textual criticism was a developing science, and it was constantly being developed and re-defined over the subsequent years until 1881 when Westcott and Hort rocked the Christian world and their backing of the Alexandrian text.
What we know today is that there are over 5300 know Greek MSS of the New Testament. Fragments, papyrus, parchments, vellum. Now I admit it would be a very daunting task. But, what is needed to day is a serious study of all Greek MSS. I know it would be a very daunting task, lasting perhaps 20-30 years. Buy isn't God's word worth it?
Why should we as Christians, be forced to stand at a stand still because some people believe that God "preserved" His word in a version that is over 400 years old now? And why would God only preserve it from a scriptural standpoint, in an as yet "future" unknown English tongue? How can one stand up and honestly say that in 1611, with only 53 pieces of material, and without consulting the Greek, a group of "well intending men" got it absolutely 100% correct?
What it boils down to, and it reminds me of a scene from the movie "Midnight Express". Billy Hayes in the movie ends up in the insane ward, and after some time, walks counter to established rule around a pole.
The same principle applies here, except here, the KJV is being heralded as the accepted rule, and not the Greek language from which God's word in the New Testament comes to us. And if you challenge the established rule, well, you know what I am saying. And when somebody like me takes the time to look back at the Greek, and check it against the "KJV", you have seen what happens.
With all sincerity, what is the message of the scriptures? Salvation through faith in the finished work of the Saviour who lived a sinless life, died on a cross with our sins upon Himself, resurrected, and waiting for the command from His Father to come get His children.
Can one honestly say that THAT message is missing from every single version of the Bible ever printed EXCEPT the King James "Authorized" version?
Give me a break.
God Bless
Till all are one.
