Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
14,282
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + Line 13:
Line 13: − − In 1720, Richard Bentley proposed that TR be replaced with a Greek text based on ''Alexandrinus''.<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 ''Alexandrinus.'' Line 38:
Line 36: − + + + + + + + Line 44:
Line 48: − − Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New Revised Standard Version]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Critical Text.
add footnote, reorder
[[File:Textus Receptus by Erasmus.jpeg|thumb|The last page of the 1516 edition of Textus Receptus by Erasmus. A Latin translation by Erasmus is on the right.]]'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," was a [[Greek]] text of the [[New Testament]] that was used by translators of the [[Reformation]] era. The earliest edition was published by [[Erasmus]] in 1516 in [[Basel]]. It was based on manuscripts available locally. Erasmus made numerous corrections in succeeding editions. For the fourth edition, he consulted the ''Complutensian Polyglot Bible,'' which is based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican Library in Rome. Erasmus published a fifth and final edition in 1536.
[[File:Textus Receptus by Erasmus.jpeg|thumb|The last page of the 1516 edition of Textus Receptus by Erasmus. A Latin translation by Erasmus is on the right.]]'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," was a [[Greek]] text of the [[New Testament]] that was used by translators of the [[Reformation]] era. The earliest edition was published by [[Erasmus]] in 1516 in [[Basel]]. It was based on manuscripts available locally. Erasmus made numerous corrections in succeeding editions. For the fourth edition, he consulted the ''Complutensian Polyglot Bible,'' which is based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican Library in Rome. Erasmus published a fifth and final edition in 1536.
The classic edition of TR is the ''Editio Regia'' of 1550 by Robert Stephanus. The Greek is based on the later editions by Erasmus. Stephanus added footnotes with alternative readings from other manuscripts. The [[King James Version]] is based on a 1598 edition by [[Theodore Beza]]. Beza reprinted the Greek text and footnotes from ''Editio Regia'' and added a Latin translation of his own.<ref>"[https://deeperstudy.blogspot.com/2007/10/steve-i-have-been-trying-to-find-which.html Beza's 1598]"</ref>
The classic edition of TR is the ''Editio Regia'' of 1550 by Robert Stephanus. The Greek is based on the later editions by Erasmus. Stephanus added footnotes with alternative readings from other manuscripts. The [[King James Version]] is based on a 1598 edition by [[Theodore Beza]]. Beza reprinted the Greek text and footnotes from ''Editio Regia'' and added a Latin translation of his own.<ref name="Greek">"[https://deeperstudy.blogspot.com/2007/10/steve-i-have-been-trying-to-find-which.html Greek Text Behind the King James (Authorised Version)]"</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 Byzantine text is thought to be a recension of various Alexandrian and Western manuscripts, possibly done by Lucian of Antioch around 290. Wulfila's translation to Gothic, made around 350, may be based on a Greek manuscript of the Byzantine type. Another early translation that appears to be based on the Byzantine text is the Peshitta, which dates to the early fifth century. In the late fourth century, church father [[John Chrysostom]] quoted at length from the Byzantine text. The gospels in ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'' feature Byzantine text. This codex dates to about AD 400. The Byzantine text became standard by the eighth century and accounts for 95 percent of surviving New Testament manuscripts.<ref>Andrews, Edward D., "[https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2019/09/07/lucian-of-antioch-c-240-312-c-e-the-path-to-the-byzantine-text/ Lucian of Antioch (c. 240-312 C.E.): the Path to the Byzantine Text]," Christian Publishing House.</ref>
The Byzantine text is thought to be a recension of various Alexandrian and Western manuscripts, possibly done by Lucian of Antioch around 290. Wulfila's translation to Gothic, made around 350, may be based on a Greek manuscript of the Byzantine type. Another early translation that appears to be based on the Byzantine text is the Peshitta, which dates to the early fifth century. In the late fourth century, church father [[John Chrysostom]] quoted at length from the Byzantine text. The gospels in ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'' feature Byzantine text. This codex dates to about AD 400. The Byzantine text became standard by the eighth century and accounts for 95 percent of surviving New Testament manuscripts.<ref>Andrews, Edward D., "[https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2019/09/07/lucian-of-antioch-c-240-312-c-e-the-path-to-the-byzantine-text/ Lucian of Antioch (c. 240-312 C.E.): the Path to the Byzantine Text]," Christian Publishing House.</ref>
== Erasmus ==
== Erasmus ==
== Later editions ==
== Later editions ==
In 1550 Robert Stephanus produced a beautifully printed edition that added footnotes containing text from the Bezae and Regius codices. This is considered the classic edition of TR and is referred to as ''Editio Regia'' (royal edition). In 1551, Stephanus added a verse numbering system that is still used in modern Bibles. As for the text itself, Stephanus did little to improve on what Erasmus published. The KJV translators consulted a 1598 reprint of ''Edito Regia'' by Theodore Beza as well as several other editions. The ''Scrivener New Testament'' (1894) reconstructs the underlying Greek text they used.
In 1550 Robert Stephanus produced a beautifully printed edition that added footnotes containing text from the Bezae and Regius codices. This is considered the classic edition of TR and is referred to as ''Editio Regia'' (royal edition). In 1551, Stephanus added a verse numbering system that is still used in modern Bibles. As for the text itself, Stephanus did little to improve on what Erasmus published.
The KJV translators consulted a 1598 reprint of ''Edito Regia'' by Theodore Beza as well as several other editions. The ''Scrivener New Testament'' (1894) reconstructs the underlying Greek text they used. Scrivener found only 190 verses where the KJV did not correspond to Beza text.<ref name="Greek"/>
In 1720, Richard Bentley proposed that TR be replaced with a Greek text based on ''Alexandrinus''.<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, B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort published a critical text based on ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library, and ''Alexandrinus.''
Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New Revised Standard Version]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Critical Text.
== For and against ==
== For and against ==
Supporters of 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 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>
==References==
==References==