Yuku free message boards

I'm sorry I don't have the book in front of me, but that information I got from David Ewert, president of a Mennonite College, the name of the book "From Tables of Stone...". As soon as I get back home I can send you the proper bibliography and the exact quote.

Would you care to give me your sources for your claim that the Greek Fathers did [adopt the Byz. Stand] and that the Latin ones didn't? What Latin Father post 4th century besides Fulgentius quoted Alexandrian?

In fact, Raniac, I don't judge what kind of person you are. But you accused me of refusing to answer you. Out of all people on this board I am one of the very few about whom that charge is false. And to set the record straight about revisionistic nonsense, some of you claim the KJV is not the standard English Bible (the NIV sells more nowadays), some claim it attacked some earlier standard (usually the Geneva) like modern CT Bibles attacked it, some claim it never was the standard (usually pretending occasional intellectual dissent was significant), and then there is you (and others), who recognize the FACT that the KJV was indeed the standard English Bible but claim it was not due to popularity but force (whether brute or devious), and therefore pretend the KJV has no real authority over you. Those claims, that the Geneva was outlawed or your specific claim that the KJV was the only one printed and offered to the public, are indeed nonsense.

Now as for a changing standard, I have indeed explained that while change occurs, and must occur, and has occurred since the original documents, and many of these changes are called "inspired" by NT writers quoting them, the change is very limited. In fact, standardization resists change. The possibility for a FALSE reading to become standardized into the text is almost nil. Continual textual decisions done by myriad comparisons over the centuries establishes the text. That is why Alexandrian copies are so varied and Byzantine so uniform, because standardization resists change. Standardization IS evidence, contrary to the concept of modern textual criticism, which dismisses historical standardizations, pretends these conscientious textual decisions made by professional scribes over millenia mean nothing, and seeks to reconstruct the original text using scarce and highly varied mss from one remote location (Egypt) whose climate and history were propitious to preservation of ms materials. The FACT that these readings were REJECTED by Christians during the 4th century and onward is of no account to someone who has rejected the concept of a STANDARD AUTHORITY given by GOD. If you do not understand that where ALL BIBLES AGREE, that is God's word, then you will be willing to correct ALL EXISTING BIBLES on the basis of one remote recently discovered ms. This is tantamount to saying God's word does not exist, and "inerrancy" is blather for fools.