Wallace and White

The Claim That the Bible Existed Before 1611

It's true, then what could you give them before the year 1611? Well, let's remember this. There's always been a time when there was not a Bible prior to the finishing of the Old Testament text. You could say well there was no Bible because it wasn't completed prior to the finishing the you know 90 AD prior to the finishing of the New Testament text you could say well there was no Bible.

So, you know, what do you do? Well, you could say that for today then couldn't you? Well, I believe that I'm of the new new NIV or the new new American Standard there is no complete Bible. Well, that's what that may be what's being inferred.

I don't think they're saying that well I think the one who's saying that that we have a perfect Bible in the King. Absolutely. Absolutely. So what did people have for the first 1600 years of the church?

The Byzantine Text, the Textus Receptus, and Manuscript Variation

The Byzantine text is not identical with the King James. It's not identical with the TR. None of the Byzantine manuscripts are identical with each other. There's at least six to ten. Oh, that's true, but we're not arguing the same thing you are.

There's at least six to ten variations per chapter for even the closest two manuscripts we have right? So who's got the Word of God who's got the perfect Word of God got it right here. What'd you have before 1611?

I wasn't there. Oh, so it doesn't matter. No, what I'm saying is that is not a provisional. You could have found what God wants you have in the traditional manuscripts in the English not exactly like that.

Absolutely, but prior to 1611 the the versions that were out were either those of one man Say Tyndale or one group say the Geneva or the bishops. One of the things I try to point out is that the Bible is not a literary work of art.

The Purpose of Bible Translation and the Common Man

It is made for combat. It is made for the man in the street the common man when King James Authorized the translation not the use in the church, but the authorized the translation of the King James Bible.

It was not to be used in the church. It was to be given to the common man. There were you still haven't answered my question. What was the perfect word before 1611? Was it Tyndale's? Was that perfect?

No. We may not we may not. We may not know. There is no perfect word until 1611. We have some promise. Okay, we may have that promise which I would dispute. But if you do, why is that promise fulfilled in the King James Bible?

Does it say that in Psalm and the word is preserved the King James Bible? No, in fact, I'm going to say this put the King James against the NIV numeric standard new King James and Every one of them will lose except the King James on what basis on several one of it is one of them.

The King James Bible, Preservation, and the Erasmus Argument

Is that the King James Bible has been used by God far more than any of these others, you know, one of the things You're gonna say sales is success that's typical American man is never sales. The success sales is success.

That's what.

Against Erasmus. The. The very same argument that you're now presenting Erasmus's opponents said. Look Erasmus. The Vulgate has been used for 1 ,100 years. God has blessed this text, but it wasn't you.

Why were they used. But why were they wrong. And you're not mean unused? Why were the church published them? You can do. The point is sir.

Why if that argument was wrong against Erasmus, is it now right for you to use it for the King James? All right. Hold on. We're gonna take.