Hey there Joe,
Originally Posted by TheForgiven
Glad you found time from your busy academic schedule to stop by. Are you still acing all your classes?
In my studies I found that the Byzantine text family (to which the TR belongs) often showed patterns that fit the pattern of the Wheel and the Isaiah-Bible Correlation that are missing in the Alexandrian family. For example, consider these two verses. They are are only two verses in the KJV that contain the phrase "that ye may know and believe":
Isaiah 43:10 Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me.If we look at the LXX, we find the highlighted phrase is letter-for-letter identical to what we find in the TR of John 10:38. It appears no where else in the Greek Bible. And why is this significant? John is the 43rd book, so Bible Book 43, Chapter 10 corresponds to Isaiah 43:10. The 2D point representing the verse in Isaiah is a projection of the 3D point representing the verse in John! Here's a picture from my article on Isaiah 43 to help you understand:
John 10:37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
This projection is missing in the Alexandrian documents, and the curious thing is that the reason the link is broken is because the Alexandrian text of John 10:38 replaces the word "believe" with the word "know" (gnosis) and that's the very reason you have to reject those texts! Very curious indeed. The Alexandrian text basically says "that ye may know and understand."
Things like this made me partial to that family of texts, of course.
But on the other hand, almost all the arguments I've seen by the KJV Only and TR Only crowd are really really weak, and many are just plain stupid and wrong. So I've never felt inclined in that direction.
And there are many problems with the LXX. Some verses were obviously messed up. But then, others seem better than in the MT. So it's a mixed bag. I don't think either should be considered authoritative. We just have to learn to live with ambiguity I guess. That's what I've been going through for some time. I've got a mountain of evidence supporting the Bible and I have a mountain of evidence as to why I can't believe it. Paradox!