Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
14,282
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + Line 28:
Line 28: + − The text of the TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine]] reading. Most modern scholars believe the [[Critical Text]], which follows an [[Alexandrian Text|Alexandrian]] reading, to be superior. The Byzantine text is thought to be a recension of Alexandrian and Western manuscripts, possibly done by Lucian of Antioch around 300. The Western text is known from Codex Bezae. It was quoted in writing of the Church Fathers as early as the third century.+ − − Line 37:
Line 36: − + − + − +
no edit summary
'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," was a [[Greek]] text of the [[New Testament]] that was used by [[Reformation]]-era translators. The earliest edition was published by [[Erasmus]] in 1516. The [[King James Version]] is based a 1526 translation by [[William Tyndale]]. Tyndale used the third edition of Erasmus's work, published in 1521.
'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," was a [[Greek]] text of the [[New Testament]] that was used by [[Reformation]]-era translators. The earliest edition was published by [[Erasmus]] in 1516. The [[King James Version]] is based on a 1598 edition by [[Theodore Bezae]]. Bezae used the final Erasmus text of 1535 and added footnotes with alternative readings.<ref>"[https://deeperstudy.blogspot.com/2007/10/steve-i-have-been-trying-to-find-which.html Beza's 1598]"</ref>
The name ''Textus Receptus'' is from a Latin phrase used in the preface of a 1624 edition by Bonaventure Elzevir: ''Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum.'' (So [the reader] has the text which all now receive.)<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 253.</ref>
The name ''Textus Receptus'' is from a Latin phrase used in the preface of a 1624 edition by Bonaventure Elzevir: ''Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum.'' (So [the reader] has the text which all now receive.)<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 253.</ref>
==The text==
==The text==
TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine]] reading. Most modern scholars believe the [[Critical Text]], which follows an [[Alexandrian Text|Alexandrian]] reading, to be superior. The Byzantine text is thought to be a recension of various Alexandrian and Western manuscripts, possibly done by Lucian of Antioch around 300. The Western text was known from [[Codex Bezae]]. It was quoted in the writing of the Church Fathers as early as the third century.
In 1720, Richard Bentley proposed that TR be replaced with a Greek text based on ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'', a fifth century manuscript.<ref>Bentley, Richard, ''Proposals for a New Edition of the Greek Testament'', 1720.</ref> In the early 19th century, Karl Lachmann developed a methodology which allowed a critic to determine which manuscript variants are likely to be closer to the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types. In 1850, he published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Brooke Westcott and F. J. A. Hort published a critical text based on ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library, and ''Codex Alexandrinus.''
In 1720, Richard Bentley proposed that TR be replaced with a Greek text based on ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'', a fifth century manuscript.<ref>Bentley, Richard, ''Proposals for a New Edition of the Greek Testament'', 1720.</ref> In the early 19th century, Karl Lachmann developed a methodology which allowed a critic to determine which manuscript variants are likely to be closer to the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types. In 1850, he published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a critical text based on ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library, and ''Codex Alexandrinus.''
According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on later manuscripts. Manuscripts wore out over time and had to be copied by hand to preserve their text. Late manuscripts are likely to be the product of multiple copying cycles, each one with the potential to introduce errors.
According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on later manuscripts. Manuscripts wore out over time and had to be copied by hand to preserve their text. Late manuscripts are likely to be the product of multiple copying cycles, each one with the potential to introduce errors.
Supporters of the TR, notably the [[KJV Only]] movement, counter that these codices survived because Christians knew them to be defective and therefore did not use them. Good manuscripts would be used and copied more and would therefore wear out more quickly.<ref>For more on reasons older manuscripts may not be more reliable. See [http://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/Document/Are_Older_Manuscripts_More_Reliable ''Are older manuscripts more reliable?''] at Textus Receptus Bibles.</ref>
Supporters of the TR, notably the [[KJV Only]] movement, counter that these codices survived because Christians knew them to be defective and therefore did not use them. Good manuscripts would be used and copied more and would therefore wear out more quickly.<ref>For more on reasons older manuscripts may not be more reliable. See [http://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/Document/Are_Older_Manuscripts_More_Reliable ''Are older manuscripts more reliable?''] at Textus Receptus Bibles.</ref>
The Magdalen Papyrus, papyrus 64, dates to AD 66, making it the oldest New Testament fragment. It has not been classified by text type. The Chester Beatty Papyri, papyri 45, 46, and 66, date to the third century. They are classified as Alexandrian. The Peshitta of the second century and a Gothic translation that dates to 350 are of the Western type.
The Magdalen Papyrus, papyrus 64, dates to AD 66, making it the oldest New Testament fragment. It has not been classified by text type. The oldest examples of Alexandrian text are papyrus 46, or Chester Beatty II, and papyrus 66, or Bodmer II. P46 contains the Pauline epistles while P66 contains the Gospel of John. These manuscripts date from around AD 200.<ref>Metzger, Bruce, (1994) ''A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament''. "With the acquisition, however, of the Bodmer Papyri, particularly P66 and P75, both copied about the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, evidence is now available that the Alexandrian type of text goes back to an archetype that must be dated early in the second century." P75 has since been redated to a later period.</ref>
The Bodmer papyri, papyrus 66 and papyrus 75, were long viewed as among the most important New Testament manuscripts, proof that the Alexandrian text type predated other varieties.<ref>Metzger, Bruce, (1994) ''A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament''. "With the acquisition, however, of the Bodmer Papyri, particularly P66 and P75, both copied about the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, evidence is now available that the Alexandrian type of text goes back to an archetype that must be dated early in the second century.</ref> More recently, this early dating has been questioned. The text of Bodmer is so close to Vaticanus that a century-long gap between the two is now considered unlikely.<ref>[https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-topics/new-testament/dating-the-oldest-new-testament-christian-manuscripts/ Dating the Oldest New Testament Christian Manuscripts]," ''Biblical Archealogy Review,'' August 16, 2021.</ref>
The Peshitta of the second century and a Gothic translation that dates to 350 are of the Western type.
Alexandrinus, a fifth century manuscript used in the Critical Text, is Byzantine in the gospels. This is the oldest known manuscript with Byzantine text.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>
Alexandrinus, a fifth century manuscript used in the Critical Text, is Byzantine in the gospels. It dates from about AD 400. It is the oldest known manuscript with Byzantine text.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>
There are almost 6,000 differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, while there are only 7,959 verses in the New Testament.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>
There are almost 6,000 differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, while there are only 7,959 verses in the New Testament.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>