... because we do not have the NT and LXX autographs we do not know whether they contained the YHWH in some form or not.
Then I have presented the arguments I think would illuminate the issue. ...
FACT
1: All the known LXX fragments up to 50 CE has YHWH or IAO. FACT
2: The LXX manuscripts from the second century CE has KS. FACT
3: Someone deleted the name of God from the LXX manuscripts between 50 CE and the second century CE.
This led to a corrupted text.
4. The NT manuscripts from the second century CE contain KS,
as do the LXX manuscripts.
REASONING 1: The letters KS were not in the NT autographs (no one has argued in favor of that),
and this shows that the NT text has been changed.
But we do not know what was written in quotes from the Tanakh where YHWH was found in the quotes.
REASONING 2: Because what was substituted by KS in the LXX was YHWH,
it is likely that what was substituted in the NT was YHWH as well.
Corroborating this likeliness is that the Tanakh says that YHWH should be used as God's name for ever. If there still is something to which I have not responded regarding manuscript data, please tell me what it is.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.