However, for arguments sake, lets say you have your few lines of Matthew from about 66 CE. What do then do with that? Do you agree that Matthew was not written by Matthew, but anonymously. Or that those few lines don't prove that the later writings are accurate?
What hard evidence can you offer to suggest that I should accept your line of reasoning?
The physical evidence indicates that our current versions of the Bibles do not stray far from the earliest Manuscripts and all available evidence indicates these earliest Manuscripts have not undergone any significant revisions or redaction. This is my claim.
While there are numerous examples where fringe sects dramatically altered scripture for there own use, these writings were not ever accepted by the Christian population as a whole. If you compare the scraps of early writings from the first and early second century with the nearly complete writings from 150-200 AD and then again with the Codex from 325 AD with modern texts the differences are very few. Early in this thread you implied otherwise. Do you agree that these writings show very little variation?
