There are 7956 verses in the New Testament. Internal criteria (the context of the passage, its style and vocabulary, the theological environment of the author, etc.) Inerrancy, the modern Critical Text, and the question of which edition of the Textus Receptus is Perfect. Now, that could be a good thing if you believe Westcott & Hort did a good job originally. If you’d like to read a longer treatment of this topic, I highly recommend this article. I think you are grossly mistaken about the WEB’s translation of 1 Cor 11:10. It was a combination of primarily Westcott & Hott’s work, along with two other Greek New Testaments. 6 The voice said, “Cry out!” It was not until 1881 that two Cambridge scholars, B. F. Westcott and F. J. Not perfect by any stretch (especially in Revelation) but very good. Besides the obvious problem with saying that God “must” do something, there’s no basis for that assertion besides a few man-made creeds. I’m honestly not sure why it’s dismissed so easily. Not perfect by any stretch and it definitely has mistakes, but very good overall. That’s both amazing and very scary. There’s a certain sense where this is true, but in practice it simply doesn’t matter. Yeah, that’s a lot; so here’s a picture to make sense of it. (Or that other manuscripts were destroyed, which we’ll look at more in a minute.). It’s not as simple as simply “counting noses” as its critics say. This is our sample text The Majority Text vs. However, their original work is still with us. RT - the Received Text (Textus Receptus; the Traditional Text) - used for the King James Bible, over 5,000 Scripture portions, all consistent.. CT - the Critical Text (corrupted) - contrived by modern liberal scholars, mainly from four ancient manuscripts that had been set aside due to their doctrinal omissions and errors. word “text” to the second, We have 5000+ manuscripts of the New Testament, though many are smaller fragments. truth as a body of ethical or religious knowledge, 1516 (Erasmus 1st Novum Instrumentum omne), 1522 (Erasmus 3rd Novum Testamentum omne), 1550 (Robert Estienne (Stephanus) 3rd – Editio Regia. She reproves the angels of Satan declaring that she will submit to the authority of God, even though they did not. I am so glad I sat down and read this all the way through! These errors alone account for hundreds of differences between the Alexandrian and Byzantine Text types. My wife didn’t sleep very well last night so she’s still in bed…  or is she? According to Textus Receptus Bibles (.com), there are no less than 27 different versions of the Textus Receptus! Most often, they are simple scribal errors. Further, this can happen in smaller increments too. (3) In "Hodges versus Hodges" five points were noted: (a) The statistical demons… In fact, the most common type of Textual Variant is spelling differences, often a single letter. As soon as the numbers of a minority exceed what can be explained by accidental coincidence, … their agreement … can only be explained on genealogical grounds. There is some disagreement on the actual level of quality. 140–52). The Scriptures were not corrupted before Christ’s time, for then Christ would not have sent the Jews to them. (As we’ve seen). Very few – if any – scholars would argue that the Majority wins all the time. They will typically only use the King James Bible (KJV) or New King James Bible (NKJV) as an English translation, but some will only accept the KJV. I’m planning to get an LSB when it comes out, and I too am looking forward to it. If so, you’ll need a good reason to exclude the various versions. It’s close-ish, but the actual path was slightly more convoluted than that. The longer reading is found in the Majority Text, but not in the Critical text. The Muslims destroyed Biblical manuscripts as a matter of course, meaning very few manuscripts survived from the regions they controlled. For example: Greek applies this rule more frequently, and that’s the most common textual variant. And that’s not all the singular readings. So in the “text types” of Homer, you have: Among scholars, there’s little doubt that the “medium” text type of Homer is the original, while the short is the result of “scholarly revision”. I agree with you regarding English translations as well. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. He put the universal Catholic epistles before Paul’s so the beginning and ending letters of all of the epistles would form a mathematical pattern. In the end, the greatest strength of the Critical Text is also its greatest weakness: man’s involvement. Did God Preserve the Scriptures Perfectly in All Ages? The WEB reads like a smooth ASV in the New Testament. This isn’t altogether uncommon with ancient manuscripts, but it does mean some places represent a 1th or 1tth century version, not a 4th century version. For she has received from the Lord’s hand In fact, it’s usually the first place I look for answers on questions relating to Textual Variants. However, He never promised to preserve them perfectly and to assert that He did is to put words in God’s mouth. (Majority Text advocates will say this is the most likely scenario.). Despite the strong support we’ve just seen, the Majority Text theory does have some significant weaknesses. I suppose we could debate what would constitute a “real difference”. Reply to this topic; Start new topic; Recommended Posts. You’re welcome, and I’m glad it blessed you. The foundational premise for the Confessional Position is quite different than the other two theories. Second, this is Matthew 24; nearly the entire chapter is prophecy. Now, let’s look at the arguments against the Majority Text. Estienne’s New Testament is remarkably similar to Erasmus’ Greek New Testament, but Estienne claimed he didn’t use Erasmus’ work as a source. 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. 1 “Comfort, yes, comfort My people!” Can you state the ‘one very important verse that will lead some into sin’ that is in the WEB bible. 20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you. I’m writing this paragraph very early in the morning. Why Some Evangelicals Prefer the 'Textus Receptus' Over the Critical Text 5:00PM EDT 4/18/2017 James F. Linzey and Verna M. Linzey First quarto of King James Bible, which was translated from the "Textus Receptus." 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“. The authority (the symbol) is placed over her own head because of the angels. Long = characterized by Scribal “improvement” and expansion. That’s a ~1.4% variation, which is still fairly significant. everything between them, (NKJV or NASB, though the ESV barely eeks out an “acceptable” rating if you find the other two are too hard to understand.). Messianic prophecies are out of context! 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. These comprise over 75% of all textual variants, which means over 75% of textual variants have no effect on anything whatsoever. Get up into the high mountain; Their approach is to take all the manuscripts we have, and find which Textual Variant has support among the majority of manuscripts, and given that reading priority. The fact that the Byzantine Text type dominates the manuscript copies is proof of disproportionate copying. It’s simplicity itself, but under-girding that simplicity is profound sophistication. However, the King James Translators used the 1525-1525 Masoretic Text by Daniel Bomberg as the basis for the Old Testament. Thank you for creating an such a well constructed article. Therefore, roughly 4 out of every 5 verses (81.3%) in one manuscript disagrees in at least one place in the other. Part 2 focuses more on the actual methodology. And every mountain and hill brought low; 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. “8 For man didn’t come from woman, but woman from man. Further, they didn’t include any Western or Byzantine readings on purpose. The original rules set down by Westcott &Hort aren’t consulted terribly often anymore. But is the shorter reading more probable? In this system, Codex Vaticanus is also called manuscript “B”, and Codex Sinaiticus is also called manuscript “א” (aleph, which is the first letter of the Hebrew alphabet). The Critical text would invariably argue the point saying something like, “Well, you cant really know what the original manuscript written by the pen of Luke said”. contains the word text The following is regarding the Alexandrian text type manuscripts. The manuscript’s finder Tischendorf – who reckoned it as the greatest find of his life – said the following: On nearly every page of the manuscript there are corrections and revisions, done by 10 different people. Further, understanding how these rules work and their place in Bible history will help you understand the modern Critical Text. What a stretch! Or to put it another way: The Majority Text method within textual criticism could be called the “democratic” method. An Introduction to Textual Criticism: Part 8–“Traditional Text” Positions: Textus Receptus and Majority Text Only Colin Smith , April 19, 2008 August 27, 2011 , Textual Issues Those who hold to the view that only the King James Version of the Bible is the normative text of the church cannot be considered among rational, textual scholars. 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. It’s worth noting that Codex Sinaiticus is far longer than 130 pages. The following quote is from the Trinitarian Bible Society, who publishes the “Textus Receptus”, “The AV [Authorized Version, i.e. This position takes its name from where it starts: a “confession of faith”. Persecution under Diocletian and Galerius (303-324). These errors of parablepsis and haplography are commonly known and well-documented. The word that’s highlighted is Hebrew word “אֱמוּנָה” (emunah). The King James Bible is a translation of an edition of the Greek New Testament text called the Textus Receptus. Further, it means all the manuscript findings of the last 140+ years are given very little consideration in modern Bibles. The reason we’ve spent so much time talking about Westcott & Hort is because the New Testament Critical Text that nearly all modern Bible are based on is virtually unchanged since 1881. These two documents are rather flawed, especially Sinaiticus. Further, many of those differences are too subtle to even translate. It was a printed text, not a hand-copied manuscript, created in the 15th century to fill the need for a … Jesus Himself said it was fulfilled when he said “It is finished” on the cross. Now you have five copies in five different locations, but no original. As a result, there are parts of Revelation in the KJV/NKJV not supported by a single Greek manuscript. To be sure that’s not politically correct, but that’s what the passage is saying and the Bible is very consistent on this. They have several verses they use to support this (which we’ll look at in a moment). Whether you count Bible translations based on the Critical Text vs Bible translations based on the Majority Text; or copies of the Greek Majority Text vs the Greek Critical Text, the Critical Text becomes the clear winner. This makes it sound like women should not be under male authority, instead of saying they are morally obligated to be under male authority because of why they were created. Thank you for this wonderful, well informed article. If you were working from an NASB or NKJV, you might have some luck. He also checked these manuscripts for particular readings, or readings that are found ONLY in that manuscript. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. In the end, the entire Confessional Position can be boiled down to a single question: This is the issue for the Confessional Position. The Moral of David & Goliath Isn’t What You’ve Been Taught, Why “Lusting” in Matthew 5:27-28 Doesn’t Make All Men Adulterers, The “Great Commission” in Matthew 28:19 is NOT What You’ve Been Taught, Does 1 Corinthians 11 Require Women To Wear “Head Coverings”. The problem was Westcott & Hort’s application of the theory. 21 who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. A glance at the transcription will show just how common these corrections are. Now that you understand the three text types/families, we’ll move onto discussing the most popular of the three theories. I am wondering why you say that it is a matter of “less than 1% of the New Testament.” I’ve found this information in various books: They were left unused, so they lasted longer. You who bring good tidings, This video covers a subject that can be strongly debated among some Christians. The Textus Receptus is a 16th century Greek New Testament on which the King James Bible is based (in the New Testament). By this, they mean that God wouldn’t allow the true version of the Scriptures to be replaced with a corrupt version of the scriptures. His translation can be purchased for about $10. Now, let’s look at how they compare to each other, and how much they agree with each other. It is a corruption of the text. 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.”, G. W. Anderson and D. E. Anderson, “The Received Text: A Brief Look at the Textus Receptus.” (Trinitarian Bible Society, 1999). That alone changes things a lot. Why would Peter suddenly be talking about the Bible? Secondly, in every place where “ampheteros” is used in the Textus Receptus, the King James translators rendered it as “both” in English. The fact that they share a unique characteristic makes it more likely they came from the same general area. A poor translation can obscure many things about the original language, making it difficult to know. Codex Sinaiticus takes its name from where it was found: at the base of Mount Sinai. He examined eighteen editions of the Textus Receptus to find the correct Greek rendering, and made the changes to his Greek text. Also, it seems to me that the Critical Text differs from the TR in most of the passages that refer to the deity of Christ. In fact, this Textual Variant (movable Nu) is the single most common Textual Variant. Aland rule #6: Furthermore, manuscripts should be weighed, not counted, and the peculiar traits of each manuscript should be duly considered. Source: The New Westminster Dictionary of the Bible. 23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever. Again, the Westcott & Hort Critical Text is the grandfather of nearly all modern Bibles, KJV and NKJV excepted. GNB NET NRSV, Great explanations of Varying The “Confessional” Position, or “Textus Receptus Only”. We’ll assume two scribes copy correctly and one incorrectly. Another argument that I have seen is some sort of Greek gymnastics saying basically, “Yes, there were seven sons of Sceva but only two were there that day”. Granted, unlike some of my brethren, I fully accept that the enduring words of God preserved in English can also be found in most translations, even the those that are Critical Text products… but as one cannot separate the promise God made Abe from the word that Abe believed on, one cannot separate THE Word from the words of God that have occasioned and compelled our faith in Christ having done and doing what God said He would. There definitely are places in the Textus Receptus that are wrong. But Jesus isn’t the Bible, and neither Peter nor Isaiah were talking about the Bible; they were talking about Jesus. Therefore, they had the saying “the shorter reading is the more probable reading.”. The WEB’s “over her own head” betrays a feminist bent by the translators, and looking at some of the their footnotes in other places confirms this bias. 2. doúlos (127 times in the NT) will be consistently rendered as “slave”. The Textus Receptus is the textual basis behind KJV and NKJV. Answer: The Critical Text is a Greek text of the New Testament that draws from a group of ancient Greek manuscripts and their variants in an attempt to preserve the most accurate wording possible. The only limitation is if someone change the words in the WEB to create a new translation. Even if you don’t hold to the Confessional Position, you might think the Textus Receptus is the best/most accurate edition of the New Testament. Obviously they were different and didn’t always agree. Likewise, the footnotes betray a liberal bias. Any casual reading of the passage would lead you to believe all seven were there that day. ( ‘a symbol of ‘ and ‘her’ are supplied and not in the original but states the obvious that the head covering is a symbol and that it is placed on the woman’s (her) head. However, there’s another problem that’s far more practical. It is a great Bible for reading and study too and i am thoroughly enjoying it. And all flesh shall see it together; , (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. There’s a Textual Variant on the word “gentle”. With thousands of differences, how could anyone ever think that the differences would not make a real difference? And I do mean exhaustive detail. I highly recommend avoiding the post-2011 NIV and NLT like the plague.). Given its long history of transmission with very little change and the common sense idea that scribes will choose better manuscripts, I think that makes sense. Every other modern translation I’m aware of – including the NASB – uses the Masoretic text also. Presumably the scribes didn’t keep the errors because they recognized them as errors. You could translate it “will by no means be voided from the law“. The WEB translation reads: For this cause the woman ought to have authority over her own head, because of the angels. We have four nearly complete Uncial manuscripts dating from before the year 1000. The King James Version is taken from the Textus Receptus while the American Standard Version is taken from the Critical Text. Hopefully you found it useful, complete, and you now have a good understanding of Textual Criticism. This is a big difference. (2) The Page 290 Majority Text, differing from the critical text in over 6,500 places, has over 650 readings shorter than the critical text; such readings call out for an exhaustive evaluation. King James Only advocates often rhetorically equate the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus tradition on which the KJV was based, but this is not an accurate equation. I hope that helps. Personally, I would say the Textus Receptus is overall a very good document. a lot of times. In a similar vein, Kurt Aland considers Greek manuscripts which are "purely or predominately Byzantine" to be "IRRELEVANT for textual criticism." You can see where they get it, but it’s such a stretch. The Western text type is different from the other textual families mostly because of its “love of paraphrase”. Textus Receptus readings generally provide stronger doctrine. That might seem like a lot, but remember the New Testament is just shy of 140,000 words (in Greek). Typically, these variants are found only in a single manuscript, or in a small group of manuscripts from one small part of the world. which is every-thing in red. Says your God. For simplicity’s sake, let’s assume the letter went to five churches, and then is accidentally destroyed. The typical examples of how to break this model are well-covered in this YouTube video. (One of the major places they differ is in The Johannine Comma of 1 John 5:7-8, and there’s an article about whether it was added or removed right here on Berean Patriot. Between these extremes, a “medium” or “vulgate” text exists, which resisted both the popular expansions and the critical revisions; this text continued in much the same form from the early period into the minuscule era. It’s so well known, it’s often just called “Westcott & Hort”. The single most common textual variant is called a “moveable Nu“, with “Nu” being the Greek letter which sounds like our “N”. Thus, the theory goes that in most any given time span, the readings in a majority of manuscripts are most likely to reflect the original. The fact is, the Critical text says “both” where is shouldn’t! Further, the NASB uses a modern reprint of the exact same text underlying the KJV. “Codex Alexandrius is a very interesting manuscript in that in the Gospels, it’s a Byzantine text largely, which means it agrees with the majority of manuscripts most of the time. There’s no proof of that, but it’s possible. Surely the people are grass. This results in a text that aligns extremely closely with the text the church has used since the mid-1st century, and it has changed very little in that time. 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”. 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. Again, Westcott and Hort were mistaken as nearly all major textual variants had appeared before the year 200. It’s far more likely that the sentence was there as a not-so-subtle marketing tactic. The reading that explains the existence of other readings should be preferred. I like the no copyright, but I wouldn’t quote it or use it. Does it matter much if Paul wrote “a owl” vs “an “owl”? In later editions, Erasmus adjusted his text of the last six verses of Revelation in several places once he could consult complete Greek manuscripts. “Reasoned Eclecticism” or the “Critical Text” Theory. Because the word means both. The main source for Beza’s New Testament was Robert Estienne’s 1550 Greek New Testament. I haven’t spent much time researching it though, so it’s merely an “at a glance” opinion. I’ve been studying on my own for quite sometime and read cover to cover various translations but could never understand the debate. Scrivener’s Textus Receptus is the closest to the Greek text which underlines the KJV. This is also recorded in Mark 13:31 and Luke 21:33, but we’ll look at the Matthew version because it’s more commonly cited. 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. the KJV], Scrivener in his reconstructed and edited text used as his starting point the Beza edition of 1598, identifying the places where the English text had different readings from the Greek. They began speaking Latin, and thus moved away from Greek scriptures and into Latin translations. Or perhaps you’d use all of three, using the combination to correct the few small variants between them. 1 Corinthians 11:8-10 (WEB) 7 The grass withers, the flower fades, For example, let’s say that three scribes copied from the original, and one of them made an error. However, that doesn’t mean it was a good thing. For many are called, but few chosen.”, Matthew 20:16 New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised (NRSVA) On page 78 of The King James Only Controversy, author James White states:   “Once a variant reading appears in a manuscript, it doesn’t simply go away. The Elzevir 1633 text promised just that in their marketing. On the afternoon of this day I was taking a walk with the steward of the convent in the neighbourhood, and as we returned, towards sunset, he begged me to take some refreshment with him in his cell. While translations aren’t very useful for deciding the exact wording of Greek, they can be very useful in deciding if certain words, phrases, and/or verses were included. There remains a persistent bias against the Byzantine Text type in the Critical text, which is very unfortunate. Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text Textus Receptus vs. Critical Text. Now, let’s look at Isaiah 40 in greater context, and you’ll see it’s clearly a Messianic passage. Further, such a text appears to prevail in the larger quantity of copies in Homer, Hippocrates, and the NT tradition. 10 Because of this, the woman is morally obligated to have authority on her head, because of the angels. It was the most commonly used text type for Protestant denominations. Many claim it was “found in the trash” while other claim it was carefully preserved by monks. He writes in Church History (VIII:2): “All these things were fulfilled in us, when we saw with our own eyes the houses of prayer thrown down to the very foundations, and the Divine and Sacred Scriptures committed to the flames in the midst of the market-places, and the shepherds of the churches basely hidden here and there, and some of them captured ignominiously, and mocked by their enemies. However, that not necessarily the case. 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,”. Well, it was Westcott & Hort who said of the Western text: “Words and even clauses are changed, omitted, and inserted with surprising freedom, wherever it seemed that the meaning could be brought out with greater force and definiteness.”  Therefore, it shouldn’t be surprising that they basically ignored the Western text type. It typically suppresses the deity of Christ and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, turning the Bible into a social gospel. The Bible: 66 books vs 73 and Why (the “Apocrypha” Explained), Lobegott Friedrich Constantin (von) Tischendorf, You can read Tischendorf’s entire account of finding it – in his own words – here. A transmissional approach to textual criticism is not unparalleled. This is particularly interesting when one turns to the Editionum Differentiae (Appendix III) in the 27th edition of NTG, which lists (among other things) the differences between NA27 and NA25. It definitely has flaws (which we’ll discuss later), but it also has some significant strengths. (Matthew 3:3, Mark 1:3, Luke 3:4-6, John 1:23)  Luke also applies verses 4-5 to the Messianic age. Erasmus originally assembled his Greek text based on 7 Greek manuscripts and published it in 1516 as the “Novum Instrumentum omne“. James Snapp Jr. wrote a rebuttal to Wallace’s article in four parts. I gave it a look and was far from impressed. Those copies were copied, which were copied, which were copied, which were…. However, one could certainly make the case that the Textus Receptus is overall the best Greek New Testament out there. However, the picture changes if you include translations into other languages. If you do, the Majority Text would look radically different than the mostly pure Byzantine Majority Text that currently comprises the Majority Text. It’s by no means an ironclad argument, but I would’ve been remiss if we didn’t talk about it here. 6Documented Discrepancies between the Majority Text/Textus Receptus6 and the Critical Text Editions Underlying Modern Bible Versions: HCSB (2nd Edition) By EDWARD E. SCOTT This notated comparison document serves to clearly identify and clarify some of the documented differences—here in 105 selected verses/passages—existing between the King James … (Note: there are some who are near militant on the importance of the Confessional Position. Lift up your voice with strength, The Greek word kephalē has two meanings: 1 (primary meaning) the part of the body called the head; 2 (symbolic meaning) the chief, master or lord. More recent manuscript findings have proved this wrong, but more on that later. Textual criticism The idea that Scribes chose to copy better manuscripts makes perfect sense. Throughout Europe the Elzevir editions came to occupy a place of honor, and their text was employed as the standard one for commentary and collation.