[Steven Avery]

Hi Folks,

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

Steven wrote: "The King Jame Bible Preface is referencing the transmission and preservation being primarily accomplished through the Hebrew and Greek. This should not and can not be seen as the end of their understanding of autograph languages."

What would give authority to the preserved Hebrew

Again, there were actually at least two languages involved.in the Tanach (OT) preservation, Hebrew and Aramaic.

Originally Posted by bibleprotector

or the preserved Greek unless it is because the Autographs were also written in those langauges?

The authority was vested providentially in the Reformation Bible, ordained by God to gather the words of God into one full and complete and pure and perfect unit. (And Matthew has properly expressed this as part of a process of 'scattering and gathering'.) While also incidentally exposing and defeating the flaws within the Vulgate of the RCC. As I explained above, this was *not* an authority based only on the precise Greek historical extant manuscripts at 1611 or today. (The Latin texts especially played a significant role in the historical transmission and preservation.) The modernist attempt to present and utilize the (Majority/Byzantine) "Greek NT" result in flawed and deficient texts.

It is a major gap in our exposition if we try to present or even intimate an uninterrupted Greek-language transmission from the autographs to the King James Bible. And such uninterrupted one-language transmission would be the only situation where the language of a "Greek original" of ALL the NT would be relevant.

The authority of the word of God is not dependent on the language that Paul or Peter or Mark or Jude orally spoke to an amanuensis or in which the actual letters are penned and transmitted. Multiple languages can be used, multiple language copies can be "originally" penned and languages other than Greek can a part of the process.

One irony (and this is one purpose of Herb Evan's article) is that if we put an unscriptural emphasis on "the Greek" -- the opponents of the King James Bible understandably use that as a wedge to attack our Bible. They claim that all translational authority into English or any other language would be both derivative and inferior. While this is a false claim, it is largely based on the idea that we should be searching for and identifying some "Greek autographs" and using that ethereal text as our base text of perfection.

Since I am largely repeating myself in this post, I will try to avoid doing that again.

Shalom,
Steven