My Point is this:
IF there really were actual, physical, hand-written manuscripts by Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul in existence THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN PRESERVED.
They would be an extraordinary defense against corrupt texts!
There AREN'T any.
This cannot be an oversight in view of the official Roman passion for documentation and reverence for holy relics.
The truth is, comparing every Jesus tale, saying, proverb, story with every other one must have been a NIGHTMARE!
How would you reconcile so many variations, version, testaments, contradictory eye-witness accounts?
Which "books" were the most disputed?
3. Second peter,
4. Second and Third John
Think about THAT for just a moment! Imagine current belief, doctrine and understanding of Christianity if those 5 books were excluded from the very beginning.
What is my point??
The very existence of an OFFICIAL BIBLE (even with the power of Rome behind it) was extraordinarily difficult to bring about.
The purpose of such a Bible was to settle disputes. It just created fights! Religious internecine epic battles!
Christianity kept shifting, changing, disputing, struggling to define its central story, meaning and future.
The Roman Church---at some point in history---had to make an executive decision.
HERE IS MY SURMISE as to what that decision was.
1. Shift the focus away from proving things by citing scripture.
2. Make the MAJESTY of Church Pronouncement (Authority) the be-all and end-all.
3. Once the Church ruled on matters--it was settled in Heaven!
As long as evidence in the form of a purported hand-written version of Jesus' teachings or Apostolic saying existed for human eyes to research and compare---ARGUMENTS, DISPUTES AND CONTROVERSY would split the Church into factions.
An executive decision was made to get rid of the evidence!
I think all the original writings (IF THERE WERE ANY) were destroyed on purpose.
The Majesterium of the Church became more important than having church members reading and arguing and deciding for themselves!
This is the main reason translators of existing Scripture (John Wycliffe, for example) were dealt with brutally and severly. It would shift the focus of common people away from Church Authority and place it in the hands of ordinary people would would start arguing and dividing into factions all over again.
THIS IS WHY THE GOVERNING BODY of Jehovah's Witnesses has placed ITSELF in the forefront of the religion!
The same problem is being "solved". Since 1975 the arguments over dates, policies and interpretations threatened to split and breakdown the Witness work. Just as the Roman Catholic church shifted away from each person or group thinking for themselves based on scripture---the Governing Body of the Watchtower has substituted Majesterium for scholarship.
That's my view!
That is why I asked the question.