No fundamental doctrine of the Christian faith rests on a disputed reading. Constant references to mistakes and divergencies of reading, such as the plan of this book necessitates, might give rise to the doubt whether the substance, as well as the language, of the Bible is not open to question. It cannot be too strongly asserted that in substance, the text of the Bible is certain. Especially is this the case with the New Testament. The number of manuscripts of the New Testament, of early translations of it, and of quotations from it in the oldest writers of the Church is so large that it is practically certain that the true reading of every doubtful passage is preserved in some one or other of these ancient authorities. This can be said of no other ancient book in the world. Scholars are satisfied that they possess substantially the true text of the principal Greek and Roman writers whose works have come down to us, of Sophocles, of Thucydides, of Cicero, of Virgil, yet our knowledge of their writings depends on a mere handful of manuscripts, whereas the manuscripts of the New Testament are counted by hundreds, and even thousands. (Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, Frederic G. Kenyon, 10-11)
Please see http://blogforthelordjesusreferenceshelf.com/2014/06/13/scholarly-attestation-that-the-new-testament-we-read-is-what-was-originally-written/
3 comments:
Bart Ehrman doesn't see it as reliable in his latest blog or book, from what I understand.
That's correct, Philip. But this issue resembles other matters in the scholarly world: those who study the ancient manuscripts are split concerning their reliability. However, many textual critics have echoed Kenyon's sentiments. Daniel Wallace, Ben Witherington, Gleason Archer and others have all declared that the Bible we now possess is reliable.
See https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2014/09/archer-demonstrates-that-old-testament.html
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2014/09/paul-wegner-views-old-testament-as.html
I agree with them as well, because I have seen the bibles effects on my life personally.
I don't agree with Ehrman because his line of reasoning is faulty. Won't go into that at this time. But we know the bible is the inspired word of God even today.
Post a Comment