Monday, March 12, 2018

Debunking The Egyptian Corruption Argument

  • How King James Version Only Advocates Reason:
          -Members of the King James Version Only Movement commonly argue that since a number of the Greek manuscripts which form the basis of our modern Bible translations originated in Alexandria, Egypt, and because there were men who defended heretical views such as Origin who inhabited this city, that these English translations are inevitably corrupt due to the alleged transmission of textual perversions present in the Greek texts.
  • Refuting The Allegation Of Corruption In The Alexandrian Manuscripts:
          -The underlying problem with this line of argumentation is that it is simply fictional in nature; made up. The concept of an Alexandrian cult is mythical. There were people who held to orthodox theology in every corner of the early church, just as there were people who upheld heterodox theological views. Furthermore, the area from which the Byzantine manuscripts were produced, Antioch, was once infested with the heresy of Arianism, which maintained that Jesus Christ was a created being. Athanasias, the Patriarch of Alexandria, vigorously upheld the deity of Christ. All of this took place in the third century. 
          -Even if we were to grant the premises of this KJV only Egyptian corruption argument as being valid, it nevertheless remains that the Lord is sovereign over all creation. God can do whatever He pleases. Christ was taken from Israel as an infant to Egypt to escape the infanticide campaign set forth by Herod. Apollos, a man from Alexandria, Egypt, was "mighty in the Scriptures" (Acts 18:24). So, if Egypt is meant to be a category representing Satan, then that would be true for the rest of the world. In that case, this KJV only argument would be self-defeating because there would be no place safe enough for God to preserve His Word on earth. Sin has defiled the entirety of God's creation. Moreover, He used unbelieving Jews to accurately preserve the Old Testament.
          -If the same exegetical principles are applied to each of the known New Testament manuscript families, then we will inevitably reach the same doctrinal conclusions. In other words, the Alexandrian, Byzantine, and Western manuscript families reflect the same deposit of faith delievered by the apostles. The New Testament reads over ninety percent of the time identically in each manuscript family, with most textual variances bearing no significance and relevance. Not one endangers the veracity of Christian claims. The New Testament documents alone are almost one hundred percent textually pure. It is preserved in a quantity of manuscript evidence. The three manuscript families will inevitably have similarities because they were ultimately derived from the same original source. Ironically, both King James Version only advocates and apostate liberals advance the same logic regarding the nature of manuscripts to reach their verdicts. Both grossly exaggerate the nature and extent of textual differences. 
          -While King James Version only advocates contend that older does not mean better, the truth of the matter is that newer does not mean better. New Testament manuscripts were produced fairly quickly after the timing the originals were penned, which also means that heretics did not have time to deceive people by producing counterfeits. Copies were produced in mass amounts, which would lead heretics to exposure. Heretics were publicly rebuked by orthodox members of the Christian church. Notice that many of the cults which arose in the eighteen hundreds used the King James Version as their primary text.

1 comment:

  1. One of the problems with the KJVO claim about "Alexandrian" manuscripts is that modern translations don't use just "Alexandrian" manuscripts, rather they use all sorts of manuscripts to make an eclectic manuscript using all the best evidence, which means they also consult the T.R.!