Replies

What exactly is "corrupt" about the oldest Bibles that's not found in those produced on later versions of "received text?" The whole Bible is one big human corruption—additins, delitions, word swapapings, erasures, changes, scribal errors, you name it. We are not even close to anything that resembles a "received text," and the Erasmus's book by that name and its KJV deirvative are about as far out on the periphery as it gets.

Codex Alexandrinus is a hybrid. It's still "christianzied" compared to earlier Codices, and therefore less reliable.

The Jews were faithful to preserve the Hebrew scriptures entrusted to them. What happened to you Greeks????

You know, kosta, these are the Greek scriptures that you are talking about here -- the scriptures that God entrusted to the Greek Church, that they were supposed to preserve, maintain, and protect from corruption. You are saying that the Greek Church failed and were not up to the task.

If the Greek Orthodox could not be trusted with the scriptures entrusted to them, then what makes you think that any of those other things that the Greek Orthodox do and proclaim are not also corrupted????

Your words are not a condemnation of the Greek scriptures but a condemnation of the Eastern Orthodox Church entrusted with those scriptures -- if in fact you are correct. If the scriptures passed from Greek Orthodox hands to the West were not reliable, then the Greek Orthodox are not reliable. Would you like another chance at the question???

If the scriptures passed from Greek Orthodox hands to the West were not reliable, then the Greek Orthodox are not reliable. Would you like another chance at the question??? The Alexandrian text-type is also Greek. What makes the Byzantine text-type "the" Greek version? If the West is using an unreliable source, then that's their problem. It seems that God has been gracious enough to give us something else to compare them to and, through textual criticism, arrive at the most reliable version. But the West refuses to acknowledge that perhapsthey received the unrleiable version.

As far as the Apostolic Church is concerned, it makes very little difference which version. We use Gosple readings that tell us how Christ lived, and how we should live. To me there is very little value in being a Christinan when it comes to alleged God-ordered slaughter of Canaanites. But what chirst taught us is of utmost importance in our daily life and how we act in similar situations (hopefully by imitating Christ).

The exact version only becomes important when cherry-pciking verses for one's own agenda, as is the the case and the cause of endless fragmentation of Christainity. The Bible is inherently corurpted by human hand, error, deletions and additions, and is as such untrustworthy because we don't have a single originaldocument to comapre it to.