View Single Post
  #88  
Old 05-03-2008, 09:39 AM
MDOC
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bibleprotector View Post
Well, not as far as meaning is not changed, but the issue at stake is the very jots and tittles of the Scripture. While "Geba" or "Gaba" obviously are the same place, no one is going to have a different doctrine if they believed "Gaba" in 1611 or 1769. However, if we say that these things do not matter, then other things more important can be excused, and eventually (in the extreme) we would accept "Yahweh" over "Jehovah".
Mat 5:17-20
(17) Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
(18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
(19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
(20) For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.


Well, the jot (Greek, iota) and tittle (keraia) refer to Hebrew language usage of letters and vowels, respectively (in fact, the Greek "iota" is of Hebrew origin). Change one of them, and you change the the OT context.

It's rather interesting that you bring "Yahweh" into this context. There's a long history spanning many centuries as to how "Yahweh" became "Jehovah." It is exactly this reason that name spellings aren't important, although not directly related as to the extent of the change in the name of God.

Originally, the Hebrew language didn't have "tittles," i.e., no vowels; the Hebrew language was a consonantal language. Vowels were spoken, but not written. The tittles were added long after the time of Christ, not before--invented by the Massoretic scribes about the latter half of the first millennium A.D. to augment the Hebrew language with a system of vowels.

This means the reference to the "jot" and "tittle" is to the "law and prophets" contained in the OT, not the written OT itself. In the light of the ref's immediate context, this makes perfect sense.

Do you understand the import of what I'm saying here? It wipes out your basic premise regarding the underlying reason (or rationale) for "protecting" the KJV from "textual corruption." Instead,the direct application of this verse is to the fulfillment of prophecy, and that's the proper exegesis of the passages, even though verse 18 can be mechanically and physically applied to the Levites' upkeep of the OT during those days.

This would have the same analogy as the plate and cup being clean on the outside, but inwardly it is full of extortion, excess, ravening, and wickedness (Matt 23:25-26, Luke 11:39). Outside: textual purity. Inside: santification through the word.

Therefore, the issue at stake is not textual preservation. Although the Levites first were given the oracles of God for its upkeep, it's God's prerogative to preserve it because He lives forever.