Hello John,
As Taylor indicated, it is the "if / then fallacy" you have indulged in with your question. But to get to the "nature of [your] question", which is
upon what basis do the TR-preferred (TR-P) assert "it is the text which they see God's providence and preservation in at that point in history"?
You state in a sort of rhetorical question re what you think the TR-preferred affirm,
"it is not the content of the TR that is the main issue (e.g they do not choose the TR because it has the longer and larger text), but because it is the text which they see God's providence and preservation in at that point in history."
This reduces the issue to an almost arbitrary conclusion by the TR-P based on mere historical phenomena—
excluding the content of the text—whereas in fact it is the intact nature of the text
and the historical situation the Reformers found themselves in.
What the Reformers chose were the Byzantine Greek mss, along with some few readings in other versions that had been expunged from the Byz yet deemed original, over against the mss used by Rome's effort to overturn the Reformer's doctrine of Sola Scriptura.
How the Reformers / TR-preferred formulated this is seen in the WCF at 1.8:
The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them...
But
how, and
what, was “kept pure in all ages”? — 1) an entire and intact Greek NT? And that throughout the church age till printing came to be? I don’t think so. 2) Or the pure READINGS of the autographs kept in various Greek mss, and then compiled in an authoritative edition, and then printed? Which edition would that be? I know of none. 3) Or the pure READINGS of the Greek autographs kept in various mss—mostly the Traditional (Byzantine) Greek, but a very few kept in other versions due to attacks and mutilations on the Greek—and then put into print in the Greek Textus Receptus editions (known to and used by the Westminster divines), having also been put into the English, Dutch, and other translations? I hold to the third option. There is not a reconstruction of the text here, but a
keeping of it intact.
This way the WCF / 1689 are not made to bear the burden of asserting there was an entire and intact NT extant throughout the church age before the Reformation, but rather the authentic
readings of the entire Greek NT were “by [God’s] singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages” — not a one of them, not even a word, ultimately was corrupted, or lost, and “fell to the ground”, but instead kept intact and pure — despite attacks on certain passages, and words. This was actually manifested in God’s providential preservation at the time of the Reformation, when He also re-established Biblical doctrine at the commencement of the Protestant era.
Looking at the alternative, with regard to the
content of the TR text's rival, which would be the Alexandrian or Critical Text: were the Reformers, as though they were ignorant and not up-to-speed and—ultimately—wrong in their stand against Rome in using the Hebrew MT and Greek TR to undergird their doctrine of Sola Scriptura? In fact, the primary exemplars—although the NA 28 and the UBS 4 are purportedly eclectic texts—remain Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, and the ongoing critical editions in our day
are supervised by the Vatican for the purpose of producing Rome-approved ecumenical Bibles. That seems not to faze in the least some Reformed folks. I also attach (below) photo of a page from the Introduction to the Nestle-Aland Greek NT 27th Ed on this contemporary connection to the Vatican.
So the issue, John, is complex and at the same time simple: The Reformers were well-informed and wise as regards the differences between the TR and it's Romish rival, and so are we in these days.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jerusalemblade/25183960248/
P.S. I couldn't figure out how to simply post the photo on this post—can anyone help me to do that?
