That one sentence defines a whole doctrine – the Confessional Position – for millions of Christians. Here’s the same verse properly translated, in an (unfinished) translation that’s fast becoming my favorite. I hope that helps. However, in several dozen readings he notes that no printed Greek text corresponds to the English of the Authorized Version, which in these places derives directly from the Vulgate. Because there were not two sons of Sceva but seven sons of Sceva! Thus your eye jumps from Parallels with Textual Criticism of Non-Biblical works, Removing Copies from the Stream of Transmission. I perceived in the middle of the great hall a large and wide basket full of old parchments, But I could not get them to yield up possession of the remainder. ), In a similar vein, Kurt Aland considers Greek manuscripts which are “purely or predominately Byzantine” to be “irrelevant for textual criticism.”. “Introduction to the New Testament in the Original Greek: With Notes on Selected Readings” by Westcott & Hort. With slight variances depending on version, the TR has about 140,100 Greek words, and the CT has about 138,100. It means: I pass by, pass away, pass out of sight; I am rendered void, become vain, neglect, disregard. A “textual critic” is not someone who criticizes the Bible, but someone who tries their best to reconstruct the original text. (The long is discarded because of its poor quality) In the New Testament it’s the complete opposite, except the discarding of the poor quality of the Western Text. They were originally written on either papyrus (essentially paper) or possibly parchment (animal skins) which have long since degraded with time and use. Could this have been mis-transcribed from the end of chapter 19: Again, Beza’s 1598 text formed much – but definitely not all – of the basis for the KJV. Probably the most balanced view of the Vaticanus scribe is found in the quote below, in an article published to respond to someone claiming the Vaticanus Scribe made very few errors. But Jesus isn’t the Bible, and neither Peter nor Isaiah were talking about the Bible; they were talking about Jesus. Only one reading can be original, however many variant readings there may be. This also applies to manuscript families. You’re copying it down, Textual Variants that are Meaningful, but not viable. But the Romans 16:25-27 and 14:24-26 text are identical. Any insights would be appreciated. Persecution under Marcus Aurelius (161-180). Unfortunately, this correction of Revelation didn’t take place until after his 3rd edition. I just bought a World English Bible.”This is where the World English Bible (also known as the WEB Bible) comes to the rescue. Majority Text vs. Critical Text vs. Textus Receptus – Textual Criticism 101 Berean Patriot March 18, 2020 Faith Articles 31 Comments There are three major competing Greek sources to use for translating the New Testament: the Critical Text, the Majority Text, and the Textus Receptus. , (Note: I started this article for background to an article I’m working on about the best Bible translation, but it grew well beyond that. More on that in a moment. 1 O praise the LORD, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people. 9 O Zion, There is some disagreement on the actual level of quality. There are good mathematical reasons (which we’ll look at) for this method. Irenaeus in the 2nd century, though not in Alexandria, made a similar admission on the state of corruption among New Testament manuscripts. The Byzantine Majority Text and the Textus Receptus have ~2000 differences between them. Well, remember how the Western text type was famous for paraphrasing and the quote for it? It’s commonly referred to as the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece after the two most significant contributors. 16 So the last will be first, and the first will be last.’. Majority Greek Text vs. Modern Versions ... also called the Novum Testamentum Graece or Critical Text. Did God Preserve the Scriptures Perfectly in All Ages? So the agreement is better than 99 percent. When he finished he had produced an edition of the Greek New Testament which more closely underlies the text of the AV than any one edition of the Textus Receptus. (Not a big deal for you, I’m sure, but I’m just s single mom of three with a thirst for the Word.) Further assume you had two manuscripts to choose from when copying. The (Byzantine) manuscripts from the Medieval period were “substantially identical” and “beyond all question identical” to those known in the “second half of the fourth century”. Further, Westcott and Hort agreed that the “common text” (Byzantine text) had at its root a text that was as old as – or older than – their oldest manuscripts (Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus). 8 The grass withers, the flower fades, Says your God. Even so, the oldest manuscripts, being of the Alexandrian text-type, are the most favored, and the critical text has an Alexandrian disposition. Therefore, if line of reasoning interests you, you can read more here. I humbly suggest trying The Rock of Ages and The Stone That The Builders Rejected. This is the essence of what’s called the “Doctrine of Preservation”. NASB95 and NKJV are by far my favorite, with ESV as the distant runner-up. Hmm, could “the Word” here be Jesus? That begs the question: “Where did it come from?” The answer is in the name: it comes from a (man-made) confession of faith. Lift it up, be not afraid; How can the scriptures have been “kept pure in all ages” when – if the Textus Receptus is “pure” – it has readings that never existed before? These errors of parablepsis and haplography are commonly known and well-documented. The difference is insignificant because the number of transmission points from … The primary Greek source for the King James Version was the 1598 version of Theodore Beza’s Greek New Testament. No, a prophetic application is what the verse is about, and thus the Confessional Bibliogist is correct in using that way. One of the greatest supporters of the Critical Text is Daniel Wallace. References have been made to other textual platforms, such as Nestle-Aland Critical Text, the Majority Text and Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus says the old commandment is the word which ye have heard "from the beginning". I have to say though that this article was a HUGE help in my deciding factor of what to do. The most commonly cited confession of faith from Confessional Position Christians is the Westminster Confession of Faith. "The inspired text is more faithfully represented by the Majority Text - sometime called the Byzantine Text, the Received Text (Textus Receptus - Latin) or the Traditional Text - than by the modern critical editions which attach too much weight to the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus and their allies." Fool and knave, can’t you leave the old reading alone, and not alter it! The Tetragrammaton (over 6,800 times in the OT) will be rendered as “Yahweh”. For a sense of scale, we’ve already seen that (doing the math and estimating) there are ~6470 textual variations between the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Vaticanus. Those three are probably the most well-known, but there are many more. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. It was the most commonly used text type for Protestant denominations. For example, let’s say that three scribes copied from the original, and one of them made an error. If you only include the Greek manuscripts, then indeed the Byzantine Text type is the majority. (The Masoretic text is the traditional Hebrew text, and contains far fewer textual variants than the New Testament.) As we’ve seen, the Byzantine Text type is significantly longer than the Alexandrian Text type. If you could alter the rules – or simply remove the bias against the Byzantine text type – Reasoned Eclecticism stands a very good chance of producing the best results. More importantly, it’s patently unbiblical. You can double check me by looking at Psalm 12:7 in an interlinear Bible. Let’s say that the five original copies each had five copies made of them, all made by faithful scribes. The typical examples of how to break this model are well-covered in this YouTube video. The mathematical model for the Byzantine Majority Text relies on an assumption. I’m not sure I would agree, but I’m not sure I’d disagree either. The only limitation is if someone change the words in the WEB to create a new translation. In the Textual Criticism of Homer’s works, we see excellent parallels with the New Testament, even so far as reproducing similar “text types”. I especially loved that you point out that this is a less than 1% issue that affects no essential Christian doctrine, even as Bart Ehrman has admitted. I have viewed a few of these in recent days. These are Textual Variants which have no effect on anything. The name “Textus Receptus” comes from the preface to the 1633 edition of Abraham & Bonaventure Elzevir’s Greek New Testament. More recent manuscript findings have proved this wrong, but more on that later. It was shockingly balanced, very respectful, and based upon facts. For example. In English the indefinite article “a” gets an “n” added when the next word starts with a vowel. Westcott & Hort believed that any place where those two manuscripts agreed: “…should be accepted as the true readings until strong internal evidence is found to the contrary,”. Almost all of the oldest manuscripts we have are of the Alexandrian text type, probably due to the climate in the location where they are typically found (Alexandrian is in Egypt, and their dry climate is ideal for preservation.) However, the originals were copied many, many times. Irenaeus in the 2nd century, though not in Alexandria, made a similar admission on the state of corruption among New Testament manuscripts. You who bring good tidings, There are plenty of Textual Variants between the Alexandrian and Byzantine Text types (where the Alexandrian is shorter) which can’t be explained this way. No Scholar . 19. That leads to the possibly the most humorous – and unsettling – thing about these correctors: the addition of a rebuke by one corrector to another. However, we’ll only concentrate on the two most influential. However, the majority of these manuscripts are later than Alexandrian manuscripts. Very few – if any – scholars would argue that the Majority wins all the time. This might be surprising to hear after what you’ve just read, but you might be right. No Christian doctrine is omitted from the Alexandrian text, but some appear strengthened in the Byzantine text. Why? (Again, in that less than 1% where it matters) Notice they only “tend to”. I say “intentionally” because in at least one place, there’s no other reason to translate the way they did other than a desire to change the text. Codex Vaticanus (“B”) is an excellent example of the Alexandrian Text type, and many scholars think it’s the most important Greek manuscript we have (again, because it’s the oldest.) I don’t see how it can be other than deliberate; one or the other was edited. A particular reading signifies one that is most definitely false. The Critical Text is sometimes spoken of in contrast to the Textus Receptus and Majority Text, which both draw from manuscripts that do not include the two earliest complete New Testament manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, as well as other portions and fragments of New Testament writings discovered over the past century of New Testament Textual Criticism. And as I have already said, both never means seven or all. Further, if you remember from our discussion of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, this type of omission is recognized in them. And all flesh shall see it together; A sad fact of history is that when Christians are persecuted, copies of the Bible are usually caught in the crossfire. But we proved to be gentle among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children. The too lively satisfaction which I had displayed. However, we don’t have to guess, as Peter – under the Holy Spirit’s inspiration” – explicitly applied this passage to Jesus. Robinson-Pierpont said in their introduction to their Greek New Testament “Of the over 5000 total continuous-text and lectionary manuscripts, 90% or more contain a basically Byzantine Text form“. (Sort of). We have thereby passed beyond purely numerical relations, and the necessity of examining the genealogy of both minority and majority has become apparent. For what they breathed-out “is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness”. . But I could not get them to yield up possession of the remainder. I’m not a KJV only follower The longer form of the Homeric text is characterized by popular expansion and scribal “improvement”; the NT Western text generally is considered the “uncontrolled popular text” of the second century with similar characteristics. 23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the Word of God (Jesus) which lives and abides forever, “All flesh is as grass, The Majority Text theory is that to a “T”. However, to simply say their Critical Text is bad because of their personal views is… problematic. Further, we’ll assume the “persistence of errors”, meaning faithful scribes will copy even the errors of previous scribes. This is especially interesting because they also said the “Antiochian” (Byzantine) text was the “dominant” text in the second half of the 4th century (the later 300s). The copyist of Codex Vaticanus had written Φανερων in Hebrews 1:3, and a corrector had replaced that with the correct reading, Φέρων (which is supported by all other manuscripts, including Papyrus 46). Acts 19:16 And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. (As we’ve seen). I like my NASB95, but wouldn’t touch the NASB2020 with 39 1/2 foot pole (allusion intended) I’m looking forward to the Legacy Standard Bible, especially because of the Tetragramaton being translated “Yahweh” (though I think there’s a better pronunciation of YHWH, I’ll take it!) How Poorly Translated Foreign Bibles Make Issues for Missionaries and pastors-Mark Reno, The Preface of the KJB- The Translators to the Readers Jim Scudder, CBGM: Sowing Doubt with a Technological Flare, The Preface of the KJB- The Translators to the Readers-Dr. Phil Stringer, Can a Modern Church Grow Without using A Modern Bible Translation? I believe God preserved it, I’m just don’t think the preservation was word-perfect. ), For an example, let’s say we’re copying the shortest book of the New Testament, 3 John with 219 words (in Greek). Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text. If you look at the earlier papyrus, there’s even more singular readings. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Shortly after the publication of his third edition, Erasmus had seen the Complutensian Polyglot, and used its text for improvement of his own text. Nevertheless the Hortian text has not been overthrown. However, this can be easily disproved using common sense and touch of data. In many modern renderings, Of example Royse provides a chart which conveys that Papyrus 45 has 222 significant singular readings; Papyrus 46 has 471 significant singular readings; Papyrus 47 has 51 significant singular readings; Papyrus 66 has 107 significant singular readings; Papyrus 72 has 98 significant singular readings; Papyrus 75 has 119 significant singular readings. All I would have to produce is one passage where the two texts teach an entirely different thing. 10 Because of this, the woman is morally obligated to have authority on her head, because of the angels. (The text was essentially unchanged in the intervening 26th edition, which had essentially the same text as the third edition of the UBS Greek New Testament.) And I do mean exhaustive detail. His translation can be purchased for about $10. Again, we’ll go back to Westcott & Hort because they did the original work that virtually all modern New Testament translations are based on. (Note: there are some who are near militant on the importance of the Confessional Position. The Textus Receptus correctly puts king Asa in They use a set of rules to create their text, but never got very far away from Westcott & Hort’s original 1881 work. 23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever. Further – and I can’t stress this enough – there is more to the Majority Text theory than simply counting manuscripts. Of course, we believe that He did and that the reading in the Critical Text is inferior. You can see his New Testament at a French website by an internet search. Scrivener’s Textus Receptus is the closest to the Greek text which underlines the KJV. The first was Erasmus’ though, so let’s take a closer look at it. So if the Confessional Position wants to say the Textus Receptus was perfectly preserved by God and inerrant, then then we must ask: “which Textus Receptus?” You need to ask which of the 27 possible versions they will pick, because none of them are identical with another. It’s “παρέρχομαι” (parerchomai), just like in Matthew 5:18 which we just looked at. The King James Bible is a translation of an edition of the Greek New Testament text called the Textus Receptus. sons of Sceva! Other examples include when one manuscript has “Jesus Christ”, and another has “Christ Jesus”, with only the order changed. Erasmus adjusted the text in many places to correspond with readings found in the Vulgate or as quoted in the Church Fathers; consequently, although the Textus Receptus is classified by scholars as a late Byzantine text, it differs in nearly 2000 readings from the standard form of that text-type, as represented by the “Majority Text” of Hodges and Farstad (Wallace 1989). The person who wrote this note, however, objected to this correction, and wrote, ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἂφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει. 30 But many who are first will be last, and the last first. However, the New Covenant superseded the Old, and at that point, the Old “passed away” or was rendered void… Just like Jesus said. 10 Behold, the Lord God shall come with a strong hand, And so saying, he took down from the corner of the room a bulky kind of volume, wrapped up in a red cloth, and laid it before me. Now, I think they are overstating the case slightly (as you’ll see when we look at Codex Sinaiticus). Tischendorf also that said he: “counted 14,800 alterations and corrections in Sinaiticus.” He goes on to say: The New Testament…is extremely unreliable…on many occasions 10, 20, 30, 40, words are dropped…letters, words, even whole sentences are frequently written twice over, or begun and immediately canceled. There one can observe that between NA25 and NA27, there were 397 changes in the Gospels, 119 in Acts, 149 in the Pauline Epistles, 46 in the General Epistles, and 29 in Revelation, internal evidence is found to the contrary,”, No readings of אB can safely be rejected absolutely, In fact, when you see a Bible footnote that says “the earliest and best manuscripts”, they are almost universally talking about these two manuscripts, and, It bears traces of careless transcription in every page. So who’s to say that my wife isn’t running around town in her Pajamas? Because I’m The Textus Receptus is the textual basis behind KJV and NKJV. Further, this argument for Scribes choosing better manuscripts has parallels from the Textual Criticism of non-Biblical works too. For example: “NA28”. That’s a bad idea. 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. So if you hold to the Majority Text theory, you’ll needed to decide if you’ll only include Greek manuscripts. Now, because all the oldest manuscripts we’ve found are of the Alexandrian text type/family, it’s unsurprising that they ended up with a basically Alexandrian document. Scrivener identifies 190 readings where the Authorized Version translators depart from Beza’s Greek text, generally in maintaining the wording of the Bishop’s Bible and other earlier English translations. (On average. However, Aland took the opposite approach, preferring to look at all the evidence on each passage. If you ask most people, the “Textus Receptus” is the Greek text assembled by Erasmus from which the King James Version was translated.