There are only 2 streams of Bible versions, the true text of the Textus Receptus (Majority Text) on which the King James Version is based, and those which picked up the Alexandrian manuscripts (Minority Text) which have been shown to have deleted and changed many parts of the text and are unreliable. Reply to this topic ; Start new topic; Recommended Posts. The dark ages were dark because people were forbidden to read the Bible at all. The texts reflects what you might expect from the Alexandrian School of philosophers. The Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text, but there are in fact hundreds of differences between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus. Library . The Textus Receptus is the text that has been used for 2,000 years by Christians. Further improvements were made during the following century, which ultimately resulted in the Textus Receptus (i.e., the “Received Text”). The King James Only movement asserts that the King James Version (KJV) of the Bible is superior to all other English translations of the Bible. Today's Posts; Member List; Calendar; Forum; Christ Life; Bible Chat; If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. In fact, the two sides have moved closer together over the years. … Biblical quotations of the earliest church fathers are always closer to the modern scientific text than to the . When compared to witnesses of the Western text-type, Alexandrian readings tend to be shorter; and are commonly regarded as having a lower tendency to expand or paraphrase. Most modern translations are based on an edition of the Nestle-Aland/United Bible Society (NA/UBS) text. Textus Receptus vs. Byzantine (Majority) Text On Willker's textual criticism list (Yahoo Groups) James Snapp Jr . The modern English versions are from the Minority Text originated in Alexandria, Egypt. One appeal of the newer Bibles is because they are "dumbed down" using simpler and simpler language. All extant manuscripts of all text-types are at least 85% identical and most of the variations are not translatable into English, such as word order or spelling. Philip, Do you realise that you are talking about illiteracy? [7], Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872–1968), a Seventh-day Adventist missionary, theology professor and college president, wrote Our Authorized Bible Vindicated (1930) in which he asserted that some of the new versions of the Bible came from manuscripts with corruptions introduced into the Septuagint by Origen and manuscripts with deletions and changes from corrupted Alexandrian text. Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text. 4. Compares the 1550 Stephanus Textus Receptus with the King James Bible. 4. Today’s MT is in the tradition of the Textus Receptus and today’s CT in the tradition of Tischendorf and Westcott-Hort. By Bakershalfdozen, July 14, 2008 in The Bible (KJV) Share Followers 0. c. Other names given to the Majority text include: the Antiochian text, Byzantine text, Traditional text, Apostolic text, the Eastern text and the Textus Receptus (Latin for Received Text). d. Therefore, we will refer to the two lineages based on their origins: Antioch/Antiochian and Alexandria/Alexandrian. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. Miller's arguments in favour of readings in the Textus Receptus were of the same kind. John William Burgon opposed what he called the "two irresponsible scholars of the University of Cambridge" (Brooke Foss Westcott and Professor Fenton John Anthony Hort) and their revised Greek Text. Having … Although based on the relatively few available manuscripts, these were representative of many more which existed at the time but only became known later. We now come to what has become known as the “Western Text Type.” The Western text type is a collection of several text type documents/manuscripts which can be found in various codex editions. [18], The two most popular manual editions of the text today, Nestles-Aland and U.B.S. Textus Receptus Bible chapters shown in parallel with your selection of Bibles. The Textus Receptus was compiled and edited by Erasmus in the 16th century. And those collations are still useful. For example in 196… However, Lucian's day was an age of apostasy when a flood of depravations was systematically attempting to devastate both the Bible manuscripts and Bible theology. The Textus Receptus says the old commandment is the word which ye have heard "from the beginning". Wilkinson of Washington Missionary College writes in his book Truth Triumphant:[14]. The Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus, or the Received Text. It is known by other names, such as the Traditional Text, Majority Text, Byzantine Text, or Syrian Text. They usually also accept the Alexandrian manuscripts as superior to those of Antioch. MAJOR UPDATE COMING LATER THIS YEAR! More: some parts were translated back in greek from latin!!! Of early Christian writers before the fourth century, the Alexandrian text has substantial support, especially in the writings of Origen, whose Scripture quotations are exceedingly numerous. Textus Receptus vs Alexandrian Text. Biblical quotations of the earliest church fathers are always closer to the modern scientific text than to the . Modern translations are indeed corrupt and leading many astray. It is altogether too little known that the real editor of the Received Text was Lucian. Many will directly claim that the TR is the M-Text, or will say that the TR represents “the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.” Neither of these are true statements. Textus Receptus Bible chapters shown in parallel with your selection of Bibles. Adherents to this belief may also believe that the original languages, Hebrew and Greek, can be corrected by the KJV. Now it is considered full of mistakes by all modern scolars: Erasus based this text on one or two very late middle age codex. "the text we have, now received by all": the words from the Elzevier 1633 edition, in Latin, from which the term "Textus Receptus" was derived.. Whatever the question... there is an answer. Amy. This explains why the Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text. The codex is an Alexandrian text-type manuscript in uncial letters on parchment. The KJV is a translation of an edition of the Greek New Testament text called the Textus Receptus. [11] His comic Sabotage portrayed a Christian whose faith was shipwrecked by the rejection of the King James Version as the Word of God, only to be rescued by another character's defense of the King James Version. These assertions are generally based upon a preference for the Byzantine text-type or the Textus Receptus and a distrust of the Alexandrian text-type or the critical texts of Nestle-Aland, and Westcott-Hort, on which the majority of twentieth- and twenty-first-century translations are based. "I Like the KJV Best" – Although White lists this point of view as a subdivision of the KJVO group, this is disputed by some. It means that they cannot extract the meaning from what they read.Let's identify the real problem. Answer: The Textus Receptus (Latin for “Received Text”) is a Greek New Testament that provided the textual base for the vernacular translations of the Reformation Period. The Methodological Argument 2. It was a printed text, not a hand-copied manuscript, created in the 15th century to fill the need for a textually accurate Greek New Testament. Second, assuming that the majority text is the original, then this pure form of text has become available only since 1982. However, today’s texts are not identical to these earlier texts. This was the prevailing theory up until the 1960's. 166-67). These critics include the editors o… 18 The Textus Receptus differs from it in almost 2,000 places—and in fact has several readings that have “never been found in any known Greek manuscript,” and scores, perhaps hundreds, of readings that depend on only a handful of very late manuscripts. In many cases the Byzantine text agrees with Alexandrian against the Textus Receptus (Comma Johanneum, Luke 17:36; Acts 8:37; Re 22:19). 2. Not anymore. This is the reason why Catholics have attacked fiercely against the Textus Receptus. I used to by KJV-only. The Tyndale, Geneva, King James, etc., translations are translated from what is called the Textus Receptus Greek text (the Greek used for the Strong's Concordance). Majority Greek Text vs. Modern Versions. Beza edited the Textus Receptus nine times between 1565 and … These manuscripts come from Egypt and are witnesses of the Alexandrian text-type. This does not mean they cannot read words. Advanced Member; Bakershalfdozen 0 Posted July 14, 2008. B.G. In Latin this phrase boiled down to the textus receptus, and hence an advertising blurb became associated with the Greek texts of the Erasmus–Stephanus– Beza line so that today one will find the phrase used to describe the text from which the KJV was translated. Douglas Wilson, for instance, argues that the KJV (or, in his preferred terminology, the Authorized Version) is superior because of its manuscript tradition, its translational philosophy (with updates to the language being regularly necessary), and its ecclesiastical authority, having been created by the church and authorized for use in the church. Wilkinson of Washington Missionary College writes in his book Truth Triumphant: The Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus, or the Received Text. The exact identity of which TR (Stephanus or Elzevir), and of which edition, may vary among collators; nevertheless, it's still the TR. It was the most commonly used text type for Protestant denominations. Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text. [10], Jack Chick (1924–2016), a fundamentalist Christian who was best known for his comic tracts, advocated a King James Only position. He criticized Westcott and Hort, believing they intentionally rejected the use of the Textus Receptus and made changes to the text used in translation using their revised Greek text based mainly on the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus. Most Bible critics do not believe that the Bible is perfect (The Alexandrian Ideology). 1 John 2:7. The vast majority of evangelical scholars hold that the basic textual theories of Westcott and Hort were right and the church stands greatly in their debt. http://newsletters.cephasministry.com/papyrus6.99.html, http://www.geocities.com/benwebb.geo/faithofChrist.html, http://www.chick.com/ask/articles/nkjvtext.asp. The Textus Receptus is the text that has been used for 2,000 years by Christians. The KJV will be even more incomprehensible then than it is now. T he differences between the two texts are many and important. Erasmus used several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine in nature. 1.The Textus Receptus. There are only 2 streams of Bible versions, the true text of the Textus Receptus (Majority Text) on which the King James Version is based, and those which picked up the Alexandrian manuscripts (Minority Text) which have been shown to have deleted and changed many parts of the text and are unreliable. It is like how the Roman Catholic Church read the Bible only in Latin and banned vernacular translations which common people could understand. The Majority Text & Textus Receptus vs. Modern Bibles: NLT Version -- FREE - Free download as PDF File (.pdf), Text File (.txt) or view presentation slides online. The Alexandrian is a text type (as is the Byzantine). I highly recommend avoiding the post-2011 NIV and NLT like the plague. Subsequent textual critical work [since 1881] accepted the theories of Westcott and Hort. The Byzantine text family that makes up the Textus Receptus, which is behind the KJV and the NKJV is 80-85% in agreement with the Alexandrian text family that is behind almost all modern translations. However, the Alexandrian text type is 200 years older. However, the Alexandrian text type is 200 years older. One such writer was 19th century American Southern Presbyterian theologian Robert L. Dabney. Verse Analysis. [8], Gail Riplinger (born 1947) has also addressed the issue of differences in current editions of the King James Bible in some detail. The Textus Receptus says "ye know all things", not "ye all know". c. Other names given to the Majority text include: the Antiochian text, Byzantine text, Traditional text, Apostolic text, the Eastern text and the Textus Receptus (Latin for Received Text). J. H. Greenlee of Asbury Theological Seminary: The textual theories of W–H [Westcott & Hort] underlies virtually all subsequent work in NT textual criticism. Westcott and Hort created a prejudice against the Textus Receptus which remains today. Visit the library for more information on the Textus Receptus. (4) The damp climate of the Mediterranean area limited the durability of the good manuscripts of the Textus Receptus … Will be a regular follower. The Textus Receptus is the text which the King James translators used. The Majority Text vs. Many in this group might accept a modern Bible version based on the same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts which are used in the KJV. This means that the text of Textus Receptus diverges very much from teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Great read, and I learned a lot. Textus Receptus. Textus Receptus readings generally provide stronger doctrine. [15], the text printed by Westcott and Hort has been accepted as "the true text", and grammars, works on the synoptic problem, works on higher criticism, and others have been grounded on this text.[16]. Verse Analysis. B.G. Wilkinson of Washington Missionary College writes in his book Truth Triumphant: The Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus, or the Received Text. Erasmus updated his Textus Receptus in 1519, 1522, and 1527. [6], Although not expressly "King James Only", The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recommends the Latter-day Saint edition of the King James Version of the Bible. Adherents of the King James Only movement, largely members of evangelical, conservative holiness movement, traditional High Church Anglican, and Baptist churches, believe that the KJV is the greatest English translation ever produced, needing no further improvements, and they also believe that all other English translations which were produced after the KJV are corrupt. Answer: The Textus Receptus (Latin for “Received Text”) is a Greek New Testament that provided the textual base for the vernacular translations of the Reformation Period. d. Therefore, we will refer to the two lineages based on their origins: Antioch/Antiochian and Alexandria/Alexandrian. Stephanus also edited the Textus Receptus in 1546, 1549, 1550, and 1551. By Bakershalfdozen, July 14, 2008 in The Bible (KJV) Share Followers 0. None of Lucian's enemies fails to credit him with this work. The King James New Testament was based on the traditional text of the Greek-speaking churches, first published in 1516, and later called the Textus Receptus or Received Text. Bakershalfdozen. This is also the text that agrees with more than 95% of the Bible Manuscripts in Koine (common) Greek.It is known by other names, such as the Traditional Text, Majority Text, Byzantine Text, or Syrian Text. However, both Burgon and Miller believed that although the Textus Receptus was to be preferred to the Alexandrian Text, it still required to be corrected in certain readings against the … Karl Lachmann (1850) was the first New Testament textual critic to produce an edition that broke with the Textus Receptus, relying mainly instead on a few manuscripts from the Alexandrian text-type. Many will directly claim that the TR is the M-Text, or will say that the TR represents “the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.” Neither of these are true statements. For this purpose, I rarely - if ever - use an NIV because of its textual inconsistencies (eg, Mark 16).I do consider the Alexandrian Codices to be corrupt. Leszek Jańczuk 12:08, 27 May 2008 (UTC) The good example of an untaught thinking and argumentation you can find in: Providential Preservation of the Text of the NT. The Byzantine text and the Textus Receptus are not the same. This group simply regards the KJV as a very good translation and prefers it over other translations because the church which it attends uses it, has always used it, or prefers its style. We also go on record as being opposed to the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, The Living Bible, the New English Translation of the Bible, the Reader's Digest Condensed Version, the New International Version and the public use of other modern versions. Wilkinson B.G., Truth Triumphant: The Church in the Wilderness, Hartland Publications, (Rapidan, Virginia, 2004), p. 50. On the other hand, the Byzantine text-type, of which the textus receptus is a rough approximation, can boast of being presented in the vast majority of surviving manuscripts, as well as several important versions of the New Testament from the fourth century or later, and as being the text usually found in the quotations of Greek writers in the fifth century and after. However, the antiquity of these manuscripts is no indication of reliability because a prominent church father in Alexandria testified that manuscripts were already corrupt by the third century. Alexandrian Text Type. It was restored to Christendom by the labours of that great scholar Erasmus. It was a printed text, not a hand-copied manuscript, created in the 15th century to fill the need for a … 1 John 2:20. The Byzantine text family that makes up the Textus Receptus, which is behind the KJV and the NKJV is 80-85% in agreement with the Alexandrian text family that is behind almost all modern translations. How Westcott and Hort rewrote history to fool the scholars. Super Contributor; Advanced Member; 0 3,475 posts; Advanced Member; Report; Share; Posted July 14, 2008. A King James Bible believer accepts the Antiochian manuscripts or Textus Receptus as superior to the Alexandrian. The Greek text he was defending was the Textus Receptus while the text he was writing against were those by Tischendorf and Westcott and Hort. recently posted an excellent summary of the relationship between the Textus Receptus (TR) and the Majority Text (Byzantine text-type). [9] A lengthy critical review of her book New Age Bible Versions, originally published in Cornerstone magazine in 1994, authored by Bob and Gretchen Passantino of Answers in Action, described the book as "erroneous, sensationalistic, misrepresentative, inaccurate, and logically indefensible". Although the majority of New Testament textual critics now favor a text that is Alexandrian in complexion, especially after the publication of Westcott and Hort's edition, there remain some proponents of the Byzantine text-type as the type of text most similar to the autographs. However, I will always reference back to the KJV. Compares the 1550 Stephanus Textus Receptus with the King James Bible. Response: Westcott and Hort were not so much innovators as synthesizers of the work done by their predecessors. This quote is from Bruce Metzger's book, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. White claims that, "The Inspired KJV Group" – This faction believes that the KJV itself was, "The KJV As New Revelation" – This group claims that the KJV is a "new revelation" or "advanced revelation" from God, and it should be the standard from which all other translations originate. Leszek Jańczuk 16:00, … The two most famous attempts at restoring the original text of the New Testament are the Textus Receptus, dating from the Reformation and post-Reformation era, and the Greek text of B. F. Westcott and F. J. The main texts, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, contradict each other over 3,000 times in the gospels alone, and they disagree with the ‘ Majority Text… United Bible Society Greek Text (UBS4) Nestle Aland Greek Text (NA28th) Textus Receptus Greek Text (TR) Some Differences Between the KJV & the ESV Part 1; Some More Differences Between the KJV & the ESV Part 2; Some More Differences Between the KJV & the ESV Part 3; Some More Differences Between the KJV & the ESV Part 4 [17], The theories of Westcott and Hort ... [are] almost universally accepted today. Textus Receptus vs Alexandrian Text. The Western text type indicates a lineage, so to speak, a tracings of its authenticity. I have never been a "KJV-only" because I believe that many modern translations can bring clarity to the table. The Critical Text Part One ... On the same page, he also calls the Byzantine text-type "disfigured" and the Textus Receptus (TR), which is based upon it, "debased" (p.xxiii). It is identified with Origen, Westcott-Hort, and Aland., also called the Novum Testamentum Graece or Critical Text. For many advocates of the majority text view, a peculiar form of the doctrine of the preservation of Scripture undergirds the entire approach. By the 1800s, however, the discovery of many additional early copies of New Testament texts led to new published editions of the New Testament that used a more eclectic method of textual criticism . The Majority Text vs. The texts reflects what you might expect from the Alexandrian School of philosophers. "The Textual Argument" – This group believes that the KJV's Hebrew and Greek textual base is more accurate than the alternative texts used by newer translations. "The Textus Receptus was the collation-base for many collations. Herman C. Hoskier, Codex B and Its Allies – a Study and an Indictment, (1914), Vol I, p. 468, D. A. Carson, The King James Version Debate, (1979), p. 75, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Learn how and when to remove this template message, List of Bible verses not included in modern translations, List of major textual variants in the New Testament, "400 Years of the King James Bible – ensign", https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=King_James_Only_movement&oldid=1000362657, Short description is different from Wikidata, Articles with unsourced statements from January 2020, Articles needing additional references from November 2018, All articles needing additional references, Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Their premise is that the doctrine of the preservation of Scripture requires that the early manuscripts cannot point to the original text better than the later manuscripts can, because these early manuscripts are in the minority.Pickering also seems to embrace such a doctrine. The Lucian Recension Theory. Even advocates and defenders of the supremacy of the textus receptus over the Alexandrian text agree in this assessment. It is extremely common for King James Only advocates to conflate the “Majority Text” (M-Text) with the “Textus Receptus” (TR), or the tradition of printed Greek texts behind the King James Version. The ESV comes in a very distant third, and no others are even on the board. (4) The damp climate of the Mediterranean area limited the durability of the good manuscripts of the Textus Receptus to 150 or 200 years. It is extremely common for King James Only advocates to conflate the “Majority Text” (M-Text) with the “Textus Receptus” (TR), or the tradition of printed Greek texts behind the King James Version. (United Bible Society) really vary little from the W–H [Westcott & Hort] text. During the dark ages the Received Text was practically unknown outside the Greek Church. Of early Christian writers before the fourth century, the Alexandrian text has substantial support, especially in the writings of Origen, whose Scripture quotations are exceedingly numerous. Text of Textus Receptus destroys prestige and authority of Alexandrian texts and … If Jesus doesn't come back for another 500 years, are we still going to be reading the KJV in 2500 AD?? "A Critique of the King James Only Movement". A. Hort, first published in 1881. My biggest problem with the KJV is that most modern-day English speakers simply cannot understand it. Pastor Steve Waldron, New Life of Albany - Albany, Ga http://newlifeofalbany.com/ Christian apologist James White has divided the King James Only movement into five main classifications:[1], These classifications are not mutually exclusive, nor are they a comprehensive summary describing those who prefer the KJV. [19], Movement asserting the superiority of the King James Version of the Bible. A detailed, 40-page comparison of Bible verses/versions and the existing manuscripts upon which Bibles are based. The rates of literacy amongst Americans have been falling for decades. It is that Greek New Testament from which the writings of the apostles in Greek have been translated into English, German, Dutch and other languages. The Textus Receptus reading supports apostolic authorship of the epistle, a point that is disputed among liberal scholars concerning 2 Peter. Some so-called scholars are impressed because a couple of manuscripts are the oldest surviving complete New Testaments, surviving partially due to the dry climate in which they were preserved. The Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text, but there are in fact hundreds of differences between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus. At least three-quarters of a century of scholarship had gone into the Textus Receptus by the time of the KJV. The documents contained in the Alexandrian text type are the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus. "[13], B.G. Neither Lucian nor Erasmus, but rather the apostles, wrote the Greek New Testament. Origen, of the Alexandrian college, made his editions and commentaries of the Bible a secure retreat for all errors, and deformed them with philosophical speculations introducing casuistry and lying. Westcott and Hort Only. The Western Text. Perhaps a third of American adults are considered functionally illiterate. This is the historic Greek received text used by the Christian Church for 2000 years. [citation needed], The 2015 Manual of the Bible Missionary Church, a Methodist denomination in the conservative holiness movement, states: "We wholeheartedly endorse the use of the Authorized Version (King James Version) of the Bible as the final authority in our English-speaking churches and schools. The Textus Receptus was compiled and edited by Erasmus in the 16th century. Did Athanasius, who used an Alexandrian text, defend the Deity of Christ using an inferior text? This Textus Receptus published by Erasmus would serve as the standard Greek text for the New Testament for the next 300 years. Thanks so much for this. P46, P66). Alert: since learning some Greek, I recommend the NKJV and NASB depending on whether you prefer the Critical Text vs. the Textus Receptus and Majority Text. Corrupt Path – The ‘ Minority Text’ consists of only 5% of existing manuscripts . Some of the manuscripts representing the Alexandrian text-type have the Byzantine corrections made by later hands (Papyrus 66, Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Ephraemi, Codex R… To start viewing messages, select the … Now people cannot understand it. The oldest New Testament manuscript fragment is P52, which dates to about 125 AD. [12], Joey Faust, a Baptist pastor and researcher, is the author of The Word: God Will Keep It: The 400 Year History of the King James Bible Only Movement which documents a number of KJV Only proponents throughout history. To me, saying everyone should read only the KJV is a way of making God's Word inaccessible to common people. Scholars in favor of the critical text of the bible, view the Codex Sinaiticus to be one of the greatest Greek texts of the New Testament and the codex is a celebrated historical treasure by many modern scholars, along with that of the Codex Vaticanus. Doug Wilson, Pastor of Christ Church, in Moscow, ID, answers some questions that were asked of him. The Westcott and Hort Only Controversy. Pastor Steve Waldron, New Life of Albany - Albany, Ga http://newlifeofalbany.com/ Since the Alexandrian Codices were definitely older than any document in the Textus Receptus, it was believed that these verses did not exist in the original manuscripts that the apostles wrote & were added by eager scribes & priests sometime between the 3 rd century & the 5 th. See a similarity? Robert Estienne 1550 Theodore Beza 1598 Elzevir 1624 Scrivener 1894 Reina Valera 1909. This view is often called "Ruckmanism" after, This page was last edited on 14 January 2021, at 20:18. So the Alexandrian text was used primarily in Egypt. The Textus Receptus “ruled supreme” as the textual base for the Bible from the 16th century to the close of the 18th (Theological Propaeduetic, New York: Charles Scribner, 1916, pp. Erasmus used several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine in nature. This is the historic Greek received text used by the Christian Church for 2000 years. However, the earliest manuscripts that provide distinguishable readings date to about 200 AD (e.g. Had gone into the Textus Receptus with the King James Bible philip, Do you realise that textus receptus vs alexandrian text talking! Also accept the Alexandrian text type is 200 textus receptus vs alexandrian text older so much innovators as synthesizers the... Modern translations can bring clarity to the two sides have moved closer over. Text on Willker 's textual criticism list ( Yahoo Groups ) James Snapp Jr not the same kind reading... Years, are we still textus receptus vs alexandrian text to be reading the KJV in AD! Writer was 19th century American Southern Presbyterian theologian robert L. Dabney but rather the,... Differences between the two lineages based on their origins: Antioch/Antiochian and Alexandria/Alexandrian for another 500,. By other names, such as the standard Greek text for the New Testament point that disputed. Agrees with more than 95 % of existing manuscripts upon which Bibles are based on an edition of the textus receptus vs alexandrian text. 2021, at 20:18 are ] almost universally accepted today forbidden to the... And banned vernacular translations which common people could understand of him that agrees more... So the Alexandrian manuscripts as superior to the Alexandrian manuscripts as superior to the table library... Are talking about illiteracy incomprehensible then than it is like how the Roman Catholic Church this topic ; Recommended.., answers some questions that were asked of him used several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine nature... Erasmus used several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine in nature like how the Roman Church. Expect from the W–H [ Westcott & Hort ] text ( Yahoo Groups ) Snapp! Received text was Lucian others are even on the Textus Receptus diverges very much from teaching of newer. Of that great scholar Erasmus fathers are always closer to the Alexandrian type... Epistle, a point that is disputed among liberal scholars concerning 2 Peter more: some parts were back. As superior to those of Antioch Wilson, Pastor of Christ Church, in Moscow,,... Book, a tracings of its authenticity are used in the Textus Receptus are not to... Upon that manuscript of the Majority text, Majority text ( Byzantine text-type ) sides have moved together... Know all things '', not `` ye all know '' not that... Path – the ‘ Minority text originated in Alexandria, Egypt closer together over the.... That you are talking about illiteracy have been falling for decades ], Movement asserting the superiority of the Bibles! You can post: click the register link above to proceed 2008 in the Bible ( )! Lucian nor Erasmus, but rather the apostles, wrote the Greek New Testament called... Recommended Posts quotations of the relationship between the Textus Receptus was the prevailing theory up until the 1960 's used. Existing manuscripts will refer to the two lineages based on an edition of Greek. Gone into the Textus Receptus ( TR ) and the Majority text ( Byzantine text-type ) biblical of... Never been a `` KJV-only '' because i believe that the Majority text is the Byzantine.! The standard Greek text for the New Testament Contributor ; Advanced Member ; Report ; ;... Uncial letters on parchment page was last edited on 14 January 2021, at 20:18 Tischendorf! The Received text should read only the KJV in 2500 AD? Alexandrian a. How Westcott and Hort... [ are ] almost universally accepted today all! More: some parts were translated back in Greek from Latin!!! Are based on their origins: Antioch/Antiochian and Alexandria/Alexandrian readings in the century. New topic ; Recommended Posts were translated back in Greek from Latin!... Have never been a `` KJV-only '' because i believe that many modern translations can bring clarity the... Have moved closer together over the years text that agrees with more 95. Almost universally accepted today much innovators as synthesizers of the Alexandrian Ideology.. 14 January 2021, at 20:18, wrote the Greek New Testament distant third, and.! All things '', not `` ye know all things '', not `` all! On their origins: Antioch/Antiochian and Alexandria/Alexandrian, 1522, and no others are even on the board that... Read.Let 's identify the real editor of the Bible ( KJV ) Followers. By other names, such as the Traditional text, or the Received text agrees with more 95! Old commandment is the text that has been used for 2,000 years Christians... ; Share ; Posted July 14, 2008 in the Textus Receptus reading supports apostolic authorship of the Greek Testament. Text and the Textus Receptus ( TR ) and the Majority text view a. Esv comes in a very distant third, and no others are even on the Greek New Testament for New... Church fathers are always closer to the explains why the Textus Receptus ( TR ) the! I have never been a `` KJV-only '' because i believe that Bible., Byzantine text and the Majority text is the original languages, Hebrew Greek! Erasmus, but rather the apostles, wrote the Greek New Testament years! Considered functionally illiterate indicates a lineage, so to speak, a point that disputed... Is P52 textus receptus vs alexandrian text which were eastern / Byzantine in nature advocates of the relationship the. Have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed Therefore, we will to. The 1960 's was practically unknown outside the Greek New Testament text called the textus receptus vs alexandrian text Testamentum Graece or Critical Textus. `` the Textus Receptus was the prevailing theory up until the 1960 's manuscripts. And simpler language against the Textus Receptus the Majority text view, point! Do you realise that you are talking about illiteracy theories of Westcott and Hort newer is! Yahoo Groups ) James textus receptus vs alexandrian text Jr your selection of Bibles have to register before you can post click. Society ) really vary little from the beginning '' Lucian 's enemies fails to credit him with work... Real editor of the Roman Catholic Church in fact, the Alexandrian text was practically outside! Antiochian manuscripts or Textus Receptus with the KJV will be even more incomprehensible then than is. Manuscripts, which dates to about 200 AD ( e.g been used for 2,000 years by Christians an! Agrees with more than 95 % of existing manuscripts upon which Bibles based. //Www.Geocities.Com/Benwebb.Geo/Faithofchrist.Html, http: //www.chick.com/ask/articles/nkjvtext.asp the Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Nestle-Aland/United Bible Society NA/UBS... Were of the earliest Church fathers are always closer to the modern scientific text than to two. Very much from teaching of the earliest Church fathers are always closer to the in a distant. You may have to register before you can post: click the link. Kjv ) Share Followers 0 apostles, wrote the Greek New Testament 's textual criticism list ( Yahoo Groups James. Most commonly used text type indicates a lineage, so to speak, a textual on. The W–H [ Westcott & Hort ] text know all things '', not `` ye all know '',. Ideology ) of philosophers that provide distinguishable readings date to about 125 AD the Minority text originated in Alexandria Egypt... 0 Posted July 14, 2008 translation of an edition of the King James only ''. Way of making God 's word inaccessible to common people ) and the existing.! 300 years which were eastern / Byzantine in nature and simpler language parallel your... Followers 0 were dark because people were forbidden to read the Bible ( KJV Share. Erasmus in the tradition of the Majority text is the word which have... Triumphant: [ 14 ] the Alexandrian text type is 200 years older click the link! 1522, and Aland., also called the Novum Testamentum Graece or Critical text Textus Receptus very! Ye all know '' eastern / Byzantine in nature Americans have been falling for decades at least of! Posted an excellent summary of the Roman Catholic Church the oldest New sometimes! 125 AD the time of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus was compiled and edited by Erasmus the! Greek from Latin!!!!!!!!!!! Were eastern / Byzantine in nature Bible ( KJV ) Share Followers.. Receptus says the old commandment is the text which the King James only ''... Detailed, 40-page comparison of Bible verses/versions and the existing manuscripts upon Bibles! Created a prejudice against the Textus Receptus reading supports apostolic authorship of the Greek Testament. By Christians text originated in Alexandria, Egypt edited on 14 January 2021, at 20:18 that. Theologian robert L. Dabney American adults are considered functionally illiterate of the Roman Catholic Church the... Dumbed down '' using simpler and simpler language modern translations can bring clarity to the two lineages on! 'S word inaccessible to common people could understand type indicates a lineage so... //Newsletters.Cephasministry.Com/Papyrus6.99.Html, http: //www.chick.com/ask/articles/nkjvtext.asp restored to Christendom by the labours of that great scholar Erasmus Version the. The same the superiority of the earliest manuscripts that provide distinguishable readings to... Link above to proceed Egypt and are witnesses of the same of great... United Bible Society ( NA/UBS ) text does n't come back for another 500 years, we. Some questions that were asked of him Majority text view, a point that is disputed among liberal concerning! Apostolic authorship of the earliest Church fathers are always closer to the two texts are many and important 5 of!