Hi, again Williamjordan,
You may not opt to answer this and expect it you would not because it's a time waster. Just review some of your comments and I would only look at some that are necessary.
For 1 Corinthians 10:9, this is what I believe. I believe that 1 Cor. 10:9 favors the KJB reading in both the external base on the science of textual criticism and internal evidence itslef.
Accordingly, Caroll D. Osburn’s data has by far more detailed than any other apparatus: in support of Χριστόν, Osburn listed P46
, D, E, F, G, K, L, Ψ 056 0142 0151 and 489 minuscules (including 1 6 18 35 69 88 131 205 209 323 330 424 440 451 489 517 547 614 618 629 630 796 910 945 999 1241 1242 1243 1245 1270 1315 1353 1424 1448 1505 1611 1646 1734 1738 1739 1827 1852 1854 1881 1891 1912 1982 1984 2125 2200 2400 2412 2492 2495), numerous Old Latin witnesses including itar, b, d, dem, e, f, g, o, x, z and the Vulgate, the Peshitta, the main text of the Harklean Syriac, the Sahidic version, and the Bohairic version.
Κύριον, meanwhile, is supported by À B C P 0150 33 43 104 181 255vid 256 263 326 365 436 1175 2110 2127 2464 and 22 other minuscules, and the margin of the Harklean Syriac, the Armenian version, and the Ethiopic version.
To summarize in accordance with the canon of textual criticism, the KJB reading has surmountable weighty evidence and numerous witnesses. It is the reading of the oldest manuscript; it is the reading of the most manuscripts (by far); it is the reading of the most diverse array of manuscripts.
But as said I always go to the text itself as my strongest evidence and no one can beat the word of God as put its context.
Many English versions say “Neither” which is to introduce us to mentioned alternatives. Paul addressed and discussed with the Church of Corinth what happened in the past as an example of not following what the Israelites did. When Paul refers to the OT example he used “God” as in v. 5, now “neither” is about to address these believers not to tempt him (Christ), as in the Old Testament did tempt God.
So not only the external evidence favored the KJB reading but most importantly the internal evidence.
Well, am not trying to prove “God as Lord” but rather the direct “Lord God” in 1 Peter 3:15. The evidence of late origin that according to the canon of textual criticism carries a little weight but this is not true to me since even if it is of late origin if it’s true to the faithful copies of the original then the earliest could not be the correct reading. “Witnesses are to be weighted not counted” is a subjective axiom since the number is the most ordinary ingredient of weight and even the ordinary human witness requires this element and cannot be cast away.
Of course, I do believe that the best apparatus would still be the context as what the scripture says in 1 Cor. 2:13 of “comparing spiritual things with spiritual”. The external is not above the internal evidence. In your argument, “Christ as Lord” is the correct reading over “Lord God” for KJB reading but the association of KJB is much clearer in Isaiah 8. You may don’t even realize the ever-changing critical text as a whole is in error in this particular text. The critical text is not identical to “Christ is the Lord”. for “Christ” should not only be likened to the Lord by the word “as” which you are defending which may denote a comparison of higher quality but not identical quality. Here are examples used by Peter for the word “as” in a proverbial sense:
1 Peter 1:19 “as of a lamb” is not a literal lamb
1 Peter 1:24 “as grass” is obviously not a literal grass
1 Peter 2:2 “as newborn babes” not literal babies but spiritual babies
1 Peter 2:5 “as lively stones” where the stone is not literally used.
“as sheep” or “as a roaring lion” are instances of not a literal rendering and likewise of “Christ as Lord”
Btw, as a side note to what you have posted that using the critical text or argument can win your way to JW but I just keep smiling as this approach, would not win your case. I can simply use the English KJB using the “comparing spiritual things with spiritual” approach and that is simpler. In fact, the JW used the critical text of their New Testament.