TRUTH about Speaking in Tongues - JOHN MACARTHUR

[mondar]

W & H have gotten a bad rap over the years. You're ok with them?

I used the W & H because it is available online. At home I often use the NA26. I am aware that Nestle and both Alands based some of their work on W & H. However, there have been a lot of important manuscript discoveries since W & H.

I will give you a little hint of my thinking... but would not argue the point. I think we have the autographs somewhere among the variants. The problem is of course which variant. Our problem is not that we only have 97% of what the autographs said, but we probably have 103% of what the autographs said. Make any sense?

Its off topic, but I am up for hearing your opinion.

 

[cyberjosh]

I will give you a little hint of my thinking... but would not argue the point. I think we have the autographs somewhere among the variants. The problem is of course which variant. Our problem is not that we only have 97% of what the autographs said, but we probably have 103% of what the autographs said. Make any sense?

Its off topic, but I am up for hearing your opinion.

That's interesting. I've never quite thought of it like that before. Something to ponder on.

P.S. Also anyone into early manuscript tradition would do well to look into Old Latin manuscripts. They are the earliest (that I know of) non-Greek manuscripts of the New Testament and some date around the turn of the century (100 AD). They of course have quite a few variants amongst themselves too however.

~Josh