Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Authorized Version

2017-11-19T21:08:17Z

Ambassador2: Fixing double redirect

#REDIRECT [[King James Bible]]

King James Bible

2017-11-19T20:37:14Z

Ambassador2: A couple additions

[[Image:800px-Crop Book of Isaiah 2006-06-06.jpg|thumb|200px|right]]
The '''King James Version''' (also called the '''Authorized Version''', or, in older texts, '''the English Bible''', '''our English Bible''', and sometimes the '''She Bible''') of the [[Bible]] is a poetic masterpiece that has profoundly influenced the [[English|English-speaking]] world ever since its publication more than 400 years ago. It was the culmination of seven years of work (1604-1611) by about fifty English scholars and around twenty [[Church of England]] [[bishops]], as authorized by King [[James I of England]]. The result was It was not the first English translation ([[William Tyndale]] had previously [[translation|translated]] the Bible into English, and much of the Authorized Version was taken from Tyndale's version) nor was it the most accurate (some modern translations benefit from better, more [[conservative]] sources). Debate exists concerning the accuracy of the translation. But the King James Version of the Bible was the most majestic and it has inspired English literature from [[Herman Melville]] to [[Henry Wadsworth Longfellow]] to the [[Martin Luther King, Jr.|Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.]]

For example, many cite Rev. Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech without acknowledging its source in the translation of ''[[Book of Isaiah|Isaiah]] 40:4'':

:"I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together."

The King James translators described it as "Newly Translated out of the Original tongues."<ref>The actual title-page inscription is "The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall tongues: & with the former Translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesties Special Commandment. Appointed to be read in Churches. "</ref> The King James Version of the [[Old Testament]] was based on the Hebrew [[Masoretic text]], codified in the Middle Ages. The [[New Testament]] was primarily based on Greek texts predating the [[Latin Vulgate]]. The translators explicitly acknowledged making use of previous English translations, however, and the [[Catholic Encyclopedia]] describes it as being essentially the Bishops' Bible, corrected by comparison with the Hebrew and Greek texts.<ref>[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02141a.htm The Authorized Version], Catholic Encyclopedia</ref> F. H. A. Scrivener, however, notes many passages which correspond to the Latin Vulgate rather than the Greek.<ref>F. H. A. Scrivener, ''The New Testament in Greek according to the Text Followed in the Authorized Version''. Cambridge: University Press, 1881; The appendix on pages 655-6 gives a list of the passages corresponding exactly with the Latin version against the Greek.</ref> The King James Version is freely and fully available for searching online.<ref>http://www.bartleby.com/108/</ref>

A recent attempt to "update" the King James Version was the New King James Version, which most notably modernized pronouns such as "thou" and verb forms such as "art". Keeping "thou"s, however, is helpful, since it clarifies whether the speaker is addressing one or multiple people, a distinction modern English no longer makes. The NKJV has been called a "transition Bible."

Some Christians believe that the original Authorized Version of the King James Bible is the only acceptable English translation of the Bible.<ref>http://www.isitso.org/guide/kjvonly.html</ref> This is referred to by some Christians, especially those who do not hold to this viewpoint, as the "KJV-only movement," while internally, these Christians call themselves "Bible Believers." On the other side of the debate, many Christians avoid the King James Bible because of its archaic language, advances in scholarship's understanding of ancient languages, and discovery of (arguably <ref>[http://rosetta.reltech.org/TC/vol06/Robinson2001.html Maurice A. Robinson, ''New Testament Textual Criticism: The Case for Byzantine Priority'']</ref>) more reliable manuscripts. Note that the King James Bible uses British spellings like "favour" rather than "favor" (Acts 2:47).

The King James Version uses a total vocabulary of only about 8,000 words.<ref>See [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words]].</ref> In contrast the [[English Standard Version]], published nearly four centuries later in 2001, draws upon a larger English vocabulary that developed in the interim and uses nearly 14,000 different words.

Although the NIV is the bestselling Bible today, a study found that the AV is more likely to be read than the NIV by a 5:1 ratio.<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 105.</ref>

== Issues ==

The King James Version used italics to indicate words that had no exact equivalent in the original text, but had been supplied by the translators for various reasons, usually to make the text read properly in English. Modern style is to use italics for emphasis, and their different use in the King James Version can be misleading to modern readers. Many modern editions of the King James Version omit the italicization.

The King James Version does not use quotation marks to designate spoken words because the English language had not yet developed quotation marks as standard usage. Also note that the Bible often does not quote verbatim, and thus quotation marks in modern versions may be misleading.

The King James Version uses "that" rather than "who" to refer to people, which is incorrect (and dehumanizing) grammar today.

The King James Version uses "king" and "kingdom" hundreds of times in translating the New Testament, even though there were no real kings at the time of Christ or now. In James 2:8 there is a reference to "royal law" and the King James Version makes numerous other references to "royal". But the King James Version was commission by King James during a period of the powerful English monarchy, and King James promoted the divine right of kings.

The King James Version frequently and repetitively uses "and" (and also "but") to begin a sentence. For example, seven straight verses—Luke 4:11-17—begin with the word "and"; ten straight verses—Luke 4:58-67—also begin with the word "and", and perhaps more than half of the verses in the entire Gospel of Luke use that now-disfavored beginning. The King James Version also frequently uses "behold", which is poetic but seems archaic today. One of its most common words is "spake" (archaic form of "spoke"), which it uses 644 times.

Like Shakespeare, who wrote his plays shortly before the [[KJV]] was written, they use the archaic "anon" to mean "very soon." See, e.g., Mark 1:30.

The King James Version does not make full use of the possessive form, instead often spelling things out in wordy and cumbersome form rather than using an apostrophe "s". See, for example, the cumbersome lack of the possessive at Luke 5:33: "And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink?" The KJV also fails to make full use of the variety of punctuation available, such as avoiding the exclamation point.<ref>Note, however, that the KJV does use both the possessive and the exclamation point in chapter 6 of the Gospel of Luke.</ref>

The King James Version contains some arguably feminist language, such as "prophetess" (Luke 2:36)<ref>though it refers to a rebellious Jezebel women in Rev. 2:20 as such</ref> and gender neutral language for "man" (see, e.g., Luke 3:4; Luke 3:16; Mark 9:17)<ref>where gender specific language is absent.</ref> Also, the KJV uses "children of God" perhaps as a gender neutral version of "Godly men," with some seeing that neutralizing the gender has the effect of inserting a connotation of submission that might be more characteristic of Islam than Christianity. Modern versions picked up on this, and use "children of God" far more pervasively than the KJV did. In Luke 4:34, the KJV refers to "Holy One of God" rather than "Holy Son of God." On the contrary, certain modern versions have changed most male references for gender neutral references, and have been criticized for such.

The King James Version translators did not have access to earlier ancient manuscripts that were discovered in the 1800s. As a result, the King James Version includes passages that are not in the earliest ancient manuscripts. Instead, the AV is based on the majority of the manuscripts, which agree extremely well, as opposed to modern versions, which are based upon some few older manuscripts which disagree greatly between themselves. The oldest manuscript fragment, dated to A.D. 66, agrees with the reading used by the AV.[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=home&action=submitsearch&f_submit=Search&f_context_any=any&section=bible&f_search_type=bible&f_keyword_any=Matthew+26:22]

The translators were predominantly literary types, such as poets, without much input from scientific types who might have recommended some wording having more physical connotations, or linguistic scholars who could point out the details of scientific terminology. For example, "owph" is translated as "fowl" rather than the linguistically and scientifically correct "winged creature."

Some of the key terminology in the KJV is archaic today. For example, the KJV refers repeated to "Esaias", and many readers may not understand that as a reference to "Isaiah".

The "archaic" language in the KJV is sometimes more understandable than in other versions. Gail Riplinger discovered a "hidden dictionary" in the KJV that would enhance one's vocabulary by reading it. The King James Bible also contains a "code" that other versions don't. For example, "word of God" is found seven times and "Most High", seven times. Shiloh (the capital of Israel before Jerusalem), meaning "Messiah", is found 33 times, the age at which Jesus died. Shiloh was destroyed. If one adds the 33 times Shiloh is mentioned to the 667 times Jerusalem is mentioned in the Old Testament, one gets 700 times the capital of Israel is mentioned in the Old Testament. Jerusalem is mentioned 144 times in the NT, as in the 144,000 of Revelation. This is not so in modern versions.

==Translation==
The KJV was translated at the order of King James by a team of Bible-believing Christians, in contrast to the NIV, for example, which had homosexuals on its translation team, who removed the word "sodomy" from the Bible. The KJV translators consulted six previous English versions, in fulfillment of Psalm 12:6. The translation process lasted seven years, ending in 1611.

54 scholars were assigned to the project, but 47 participated more than the others, all highly qualified. Among them were Dr. John Bois, who, according to his biographer, was reading through the Hebrew Old Testament at only five years old. He was an expert in all forms of Greek, and compiled one of the largest Greek libraries ever. Lancelot Andrews, a leader of the Old Testament translators, was fluent in 15 modern languages, as well as Greek, Hebrew, and the cognate biblical languages. Dr. Andrew Downes spent 40 years as Regius Professor of Greek at Oxford University. Sir Henry Saville was a scientist and Bible scholar. Dr. John Harding was Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University. Edward Lively was Regius Professorof Hebrew at Cambridge. Dr. William Bedwell was an expert in Arabic, Latin, and Persian, and prepared lexicons in these languages and in biblical languages.<ref>Henry Morris Study Bible, Appendix 21, page 2147</ref>

If at any time the translators were unsure of how to translate something, they would send word out to all the learned men of England for aid.
==References==
<references/>

==External links==

*[http://www.ebible.org/bible/kjv/ An online version of the King James Bible]
*[http://www.biblicalproportions.com/modules/ol_bible/ Another online version of the King James Bible]
*[http://www.biblestudytools.com/kjv/ King James Bible at BibleStudyTools.com]
*[http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=9&lang=2 King James version at BibleGateway]
*[http://samgipp.com/historybook/ An Understandable History of the Bible by Dr. Sam Gipp]
*[http://samgipp.com/answerbook/ The Answer Book by Dr. Sam Gipp]

== See also ==
*[[Disputed Biblical Translations]]
*[[Essay: The superiority of the King James Bible: Looking through!]]

{{Bible Versions}}

[[Category:Bible Versions]]
[[Category:British History]]

Authorized Version

2017-11-19T20:23:06Z

Ambassador2: Redirect to KJV

#REDIRECT [[King James Version]]

LXX

2017-11-19T20:21:16Z

Ambassador2: Redirect-> Septuagint

#REDIRECT [[Septuagint]]

Masoretic Text

2017-11-19T20:19:57Z

Ambassador2: Corrected and greatly extended article. Basically wrote the whole thing.

The '''Masoretic Text''' (also spelled '''Massoretic''') is the [[Hebrew]] version of the [[Old Testament]] traditionally used by [[Jews]] and [[Protestants]]. It's name is derived from the Hebrew ''masora'', after the marginal notes added by the ''Masoretes'', Jewish scribes and scholars of the Middle Ages.<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 112-113.</ref> Scholars generally agree that the Masoretic Text became the standard authoritative Old Testament around AD 100.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 115.</ref>

==Textual Support==
Before the 20th century, the oldest extant Hebrew Old Testament MSS were from the 9th century. In the mid-20th century, the discovery of the [[Dead Sea Scrolls]], among others, changed this.

The majority of the biblical texts among the Dead Sea Scrolls (which date from the 3rd century BC to about 68 AD) agree with the Masoretic Text. For example, the two Isaiah Scrolls found in Cave 1 (1QIsa.''a'' and 1QIsa.''b'') are nearly identical to the Masoretic Text manuscripts of the 9th century.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 133.</ref>

MSS dated at 132-135 AD were found in 1951 South of Qumran. These were exclusively Masoretic, unlike at Qumran, where a minority of manuscripts were Proto-Septuagint or Proto-Samaritan.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 134.</ref>

At Masada, fourteen exclusively Masoretic scrolls were found, dating to AD 74 or earlier.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 134.</ref>

The fact that the Hebrew text was preserved so long with virtually no change may be attributed to the meticulous nature of the Jewish scribes. The scribes would follow certain strict rules in copying. For example, the number of words and letters in a document would be counted. If the number did not match what it should have been, the document was discarded.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 110.</ref>

==Use of the Masoretic Text==
The Hebrew text is the primary basis for Old Testaments today, although modern translators also look at the [[LXX]], for example. The Hebrew text was the traditional text used by Protestants and Jews. [[Catholics]] once used Jerome's Vulgate, but now use the Masoretic. The [[Eastern Orthodox]] Church continues to use the Septuagint.

The [[Authorized Version]] used Daniel Bomberg's edition of the Jacob ben Chayyim Text. Modern translations use Kittel's ''Biblia Hebraica''.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 114.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

==See also==
* [[Textus Receptus]]
* [[Septuagint]]

[[Category:Old Testament]]

New Revised Standard Version

2017-11-18T18:07:13Z

Ambassador2: The NSRV incorrectly translates the MT

The '''New Revised Standard Version''' is an update of the [[Revised Standard Version]] that was released in 1989. Although it is the Bible translation preferred by academics and scholars, it has not gained acceptance among either evangelicals or Catholics. The publisher describes NRSV's perspective as "ecumenical" rather than Christian.

The copyright is owned by the [[liberal]] National Council of Churches. The translators modernized the language and added gender-neutral language.

''The New Oxford Annotated Bible'' (2010) is based on NRSV. The annotations in this edition reflect the views of academic scholars and often conflict with traditional Christian and fundamentalist views.

NRSV's most controversial passage is {{bibleverse|Isaiah|7:14}}: "Look, the young woman is with child and shall bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel." Here NRSV incorrectly translates the Masoretic text.<ref>The only proper translation of עַלְמָה here is "virgin." See [http://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/Strongs/23007014/H5959] and [http://www.kjvtoday.com/home/virgin-or-young-woman-in-isaiah-714]</ref> The Masoretics were Jewish scholars who compiled a Hebrew version of the Old Testament about AD 700. In the time of Jesus and the apostles, scripture was commonly read in Greek. The Greek version of the passage, quoted in {{bibleverse|Matthew|1:23}}, describes the young woman described as a virgin.

To address evangelical objections, the NCC licensed the text of RSV to Crossway Publishers, which produced the [[English Standard Version]] in 2001.

==Notes==
{{reflist}}

{{Bible Versions}}

Textus Receptus

2017-11-18T17:55:43Z

Ambassador2: Replacing an external link with a better one

'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," refers to the Greek text of the New Testament that was used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611, as well as by other Reformation-era translators. This includes [[William Tyndale]] and [[Martin Luther]]. The earliest edition was put together by Erasmus in 1516. The name comes from a Latin phrase in the preface of Bonaventure Elzevir's popular 1624 edition of the TR: ''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> Until the 19th century, the TR was the only Greek New Testament text used by Protestant scholars. Dr. Kurt Aland, who worked on the Critical Text, wrote:
:Finally it is undisputed that from the 16th to the 18th century orthodoxy's doctrine of verbal inspiration assumed this Textus Receptus. It was the only Greek text they knew, and they regarded it as the 'original text.'<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12; citing Kurt Aland, "The Text of the Church," ''Trinity Journal'', Fall (1987): 131.</ref>

==Erasmus==
Erasmus, a Dutch Catholic, published the first edition of TR in Basel in 1516. Erasmus had produced a new Latin translation of the New Testament. He added a Greek text to his book as an afterthought, a tool to support his Latin translation. It was put together hurriedly, and on the basis of whatever manuscripts happened to be available locally in Basel. Yet this text struck a chord with a reading public hungry for access to the original. Erasmus used the following manuscripts to produce the first edition of TR:

:*Codex 1eap — This 12th century miniscule contains the entire New Testament except Revelation. It is the only TR manuscript not of the Byzantine type. Erasmus made little use of it as he believed it to be corrupt.
:*Codex 1r — A 12th century miniscule of Revelation.
:*Codex 2e — A 12th century miniscule of the Gospels.
:*Codex 2ap — A 12th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 4ap — A 15th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 7p — An 11th miniscule of the epistles.
:*Codex 817 — A 15th century miniscule of the Gospels.<ref>Combs, William W., "[http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF Erasmus and Textus Receptus]", ''Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal'', Spring 1996.</ref>

The Gospels were taken directly from Codex 2e, Acts and epistles from 2ap, and Revelation from 1r. Where these manuscripts had gaps, back-translations from the [[Vulgate]] were used. In fact, 2e and 2ap were sent directly to the printer for typesetting. Erasmus’ handwritten annotations can be seen between the lines, although the printer often ignored these. 1r could not be treated this way because it mixes text and annotation. Erasmus separated these by referring to the Vulgate. As a result of this haphazard process, there were numerous typographical errors in the first edition.

Some 400 corrections were made for the second edition (1519). Erasmus obtained access to 3eap, a nearly complete New Testament text. But there is no indication that he made much use of it. Many readers criticized the first two editions of TR because they lacked the [[Johannine Comma]] found in Latin manuscripts that circulated at the time.<ref>"the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." ({{bibleverse|1|John|5:7–8|NKJV}}).</ref> This trinitarian passage is rarely seen in Greek manuscripts of any period.<ref>"It is found in only four Greek manuscripts, none earlier than the 14th century. 4 other Greek mss. offer it as a margin note. The remaining Greek mss., numbering in the hundreds, do not include it." ("[http://www.tektonics.org/af/comma.php The Comma of 1 John 5:7].")</ref> Erasmus added it to the third edition (1522), citing Codex 61. This was a recently produced manuscript, possibly produced in response to TR. Although Erasmus was skeptical of this manuscript, he thought it wiser to reverse himself. For the 1527 edition, Erasmus made extensive revisions based on the ''Complutensian Polyglot'', a text edited by Jiménez de Cisneros and based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican library. A final edition was published in 1535.

==Later texts==
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.

==The Text==

The text of the TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine]] reading. While most modern scholars believe the [[Critical Text]] (which follows an [[Alexandrian Text|Alexandrian]] reading) to be superior, some do not. Notable among the scholarly defenders of the TR were Edward Hills and Dean John Burgon. Defenders of the [[Byzantine Text]], which is similar, include F.H.A. Scrivener and Wilbur Pickering.

According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on late 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. 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 of textual criticism which allows a critic to determine which manuscript variants are most likely to be from the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types and in 1850 published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a critical text based on two fourth century manuscripts of the Alexandrian type, ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', then recently discovered, and ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library.

Supporters of the TR would reply that Codex's A, B, and Aleph likely survived so long 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 away 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> Furthermore, it is not true that the TR lacks ancient support. The Chester Beatty Papyri (P45, P46, & P66) date to the 2nd century or earlier, and contain Byzantine readings mixed with Alexandrian readings. The Magdalen Papyrus (P64) is considered by some to be the oldest known manuscript (from before AD 66), and variants within it support the Byzantine Text with no support for the Alexandrian Text.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12.</ref> Early translations like the Peshitta (2nd century) and Gothic (approximately 350 AD) are Byzantine.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref> Alexandrinus (Codex A), a 5th century manuscript which is one of the three main manuscripts used by the Critical Text, is Byzantine in the Gospels.

There are almost 6000 differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, while there are only 7959 verses in the New Testament.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>

Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while most modern versions like the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New Revised Standard Version]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Critical Text.

==References==
{{Reflist|1}}

== See also ==
*[[Codex Sinaiticus]]
*[[Codex Vaticanus]]
*[[King James only]]
*[[Byzantine Text]]
*[[Critical Text]]
*[[Alexandrian Text]]

==External links==
*Textus Receptus Bibles, MSS, and information at [http://www.textusreceptusbibles.com/ TextusReceptusBibles.com]
*[http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Main_Page The Textus Receptus Wiki]
*[http://www.tbsbibles.org/ Trinitarian Bible Society]

[[Category:New Testament]]

Textus Receptus

2017-11-18T17:53:15Z

Ambassador2: New footnote

'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," refers to the Greek text of the New Testament that was used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611, as well as by other Reformation-era translators. This includes [[William Tyndale]] and [[Martin Luther]]. The earliest edition was put together by Erasmus in 1516. The name comes from a Latin phrase in the preface of Bonaventure Elzevir's popular 1624 edition of the TR: ''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> Until the 19th century, the TR was the only Greek New Testament text used by Protestant scholars. Dr. Kurt Aland, who worked on the Critical Text, wrote:
:Finally it is undisputed that from the 16th to the 18th century orthodoxy's doctrine of verbal inspiration assumed this Textus Receptus. It was the only Greek text they knew, and they regarded it as the 'original text.'<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12; citing Kurt Aland, "The Text of the Church," ''Trinity Journal'', Fall (1987): 131.</ref>

==Erasmus==
Erasmus, a Dutch Catholic, published the first edition of TR in Basel in 1516. Erasmus had produced a new Latin translation of the New Testament. He added a Greek text to his book as an afterthought, a tool to support his Latin translation. It was put together hurriedly, and on the basis of whatever manuscripts happened to be available locally in Basel. Yet this text struck a chord with a reading public hungry for access to the original. Erasmus used the following manuscripts to produce the first edition of TR:

:*Codex 1eap — This 12th century miniscule contains the entire New Testament except Revelation. It is the only TR manuscript not of the Byzantine type. Erasmus made little use of it as he believed it to be corrupt.
:*Codex 1r — A 12th century miniscule of Revelation.
:*Codex 2e — A 12th century miniscule of the Gospels.
:*Codex 2ap — A 12th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 4ap — A 15th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 7p — An 11th miniscule of the epistles.
:*Codex 817 — A 15th century miniscule of the Gospels.<ref>Combs, William W., "[http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF Erasmus and Textus Receptus]", ''Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal'', Spring 1996.</ref>

The Gospels were taken directly from Codex 2e, Acts and epistles from 2ap, and Revelation from 1r. Where these manuscripts had gaps, back-translations from the [[Vulgate]] were used. In fact, 2e and 2ap were sent directly to the printer for typesetting. Erasmus’ handwritten annotations can be seen between the lines, although the printer often ignored these. 1r could not be treated this way because it mixes text and annotation. Erasmus separated these by referring to the Vulgate. As a result of this haphazard process, there were numerous typographical errors in the first edition.

Some 400 corrections were made for the second edition (1519). Erasmus obtained access to 3eap, a nearly complete New Testament text. But there is no indication that he made much use of it. Many readers criticized the first two editions of TR because they lacked the [[Johannine Comma]] found in Latin manuscripts that circulated at the time.<ref>"the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." ({{bibleverse|1|John|5:7–8|NKJV}}).</ref> This trinitarian passage is rarely seen in Greek manuscripts of any period.<ref>"It is found in only four Greek manuscripts, none earlier than the 14th century. 4 other Greek mss. offer it as a margin note. The remaining Greek mss., numbering in the hundreds, do not include it." ("[http://www.tektonics.org/af/comma.php The Comma of 1 John 5:7].")</ref> Erasmus added it to the third edition (1522), citing Codex 61. This was a recently produced manuscript, possibly produced in response to TR. Although Erasmus was skeptical of this manuscript, he thought it wiser to reverse himself. For the 1527 edition, Erasmus made extensive revisions based on the ''Complutensian Polyglot'', a text edited by Jiménez de Cisneros and based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican library. A final edition was published in 1535.

==Later texts==
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.

==The Text==

The text of the TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine]] reading. While most modern scholars believe the [[Critical Text]] (which follows an [[Alexandrian Text|Alexandrian]] reading) to be superior, some do not. Notable among the scholarly defenders of the TR were Edward Hills and Dean John Burgon. Defenders of the [[Byzantine Text]], which is similar, include F.H.A. Scrivener and Wilbur Pickering.

According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on late 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. 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 of textual criticism which allows a critic to determine which manuscript variants are most likely to be from the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types and in 1850 published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a critical text based on two fourth century manuscripts of the Alexandrian type, ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', then recently discovered, and ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library.

Supporters of the TR would reply that Codex's A, B, and Aleph likely survived so long 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 away 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> Furthermore, it is not true that the TR lacks ancient support. The Chester Beatty Papyri (P45, P46, & P66) date to the 2nd century or earlier, and contain Byzantine readings mixed with Alexandrian readings. The Magdalen Papyrus (P64) is considered by some to be the oldest known manuscript (from before AD 66), and variants within it support the Byzantine Text with no support for the Alexandrian Text.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12.</ref> Early translations like the Peshitta (2nd century) and Gothic (approximately 350 AD) are Byzantine.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref> Alexandrinus (Codex A), a 5th century manuscript which is one of the three main manuscripts used by the Critical Text, is Byzantine in the Gospels.

There are almost 6000 differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, while there are only 7959 verses in the New Testament.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>

Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while most modern versions like the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New Revised Standard Version]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Critical Text.

==References==
{{Reflist|1}}

== See also ==
*[[Codex Sinaiticus]]
*[[Codex Vaticanus]]
*[[King James only]]
*[[Byzantine Text]]
*[[Critical Text]]
*[[Alexandrian Text]]

==External links==
Several Greeks texts can be found at [http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=70 Bible Gateway], including the ''Scrivener New Testament'', a reconstruction of the text used by the KJV translators.
*[http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Main_Page The Textus Receptus Wiki]
*[http://www.tbsbibles.org/ Trinitarian Bible Society]

[[Category:New Testament]]

Libertarianism

2017-11-18T02:00:40Z

Ambassador2: Christian libertarians are represented by the [http://libertarianchristians.com/ Libertarian Christian Institute]

'''Libertarianism''' is a [[Political Philosophy|political philosophy]] that believes in minimizing or entirely eliminating government interventionism in many aspects of life including economic, personal, and in foreign policy matters. Libertarians tend to oppose legal restrictions on social behavior that doesn't affect anybody else. The [[French]] [[term]] of ''[[Laissez faire|Laissez-Faire]]'', or ''let us do'', is a term that describes some aspects of the libertarian belief.<ref>"Libertarians are neither. Unlike Liberals or Conservatives, Libertarians advocate a high degree of both personal and economic liberty. For example, Libertarians advocate freedom in economic matters, so we're in favor of lowering taxes, slashing bureaucratic regulation of business, and charitable -- rather than government -- welfare. But Libertarians are also socially tolerant. We won't demand laws or restrictions on other people who we may not agree because of personal actions or lifestyles.

Think of us as a group of people with a "live and let live" mentality and a balanced checkbook." [http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml]</ref> Libertarianism tends to emphasize a form of individual ''liberty'', and tends to support rights of private property.

The first systematic libertarian was [[Herbert Spencer]] (1820-1903), an English political philosopher whose books such as ''The Man Versus the State'' (1884) had a major impact in Europe and America in the late 19th century.<ref>Chris Matthew Sciabarra, "The First Libertarian," ''Liberty'' (Aug 1999) [http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/essays/spencer.htm online]</ref> The chief American representative was [[Yale]] professor [[William Graham Sumner]].

[[Ronald Reagan]] stated in 1975, "I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism....The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is....Now, I can’t say that I will agree with all the things that the present group who call themselves Libertarians in the sense of a party say, because I think that like in any political movement there are shades, and there are libertarians who are almost over at the point of wanting no government at all or anarchy. I believe there are legitimate government functions. There is a legitimate need in an orderly society for some government to maintain freedom or we will have tyranny by individuals."<ref>see [http://www.reason.com/news/show/29318.html "Inside Ronald Reagan: A Reason Interview" (July 1975)]</ref>

In the United States, libertarians are typically fiscally conservative and socially liberal using the common US meanings of liberal and conservative. A faction of libertarians exist in the GOP, and are typically more ardent than other members of the GOP in keeping the principle of fiscal sanity and are less willing to "sell out" those principles for political expediency. They support an isolationist foreign policy and are to the left of most Democrats on social and foreign policy issues. The foremost libertarian figure in the GOP is former long-time Congressman [[Ron Paul]].
== Libertarian Philosophy ==

Libertarianism is best summed up in the Non-Aggression Principle, which states that government (or "private police agencies" in the anarcho-capitalist variant) should only exist to protect life, liberty, and property from force and fraud.

Libertarianism is closely related to liberalism, if this word is interpreted according to its original meaning of [[classical liberal]]ism. Libertarians in America tend to be [[liberal]] on social issues but [[conservative]] on economic issues. Libertarians generally oppose government regulation of drugs, prostitution, and marriage (including bans of [[same-sex marriage]]). The Libertarian Party officially supports legalized [[abortion]], however, libertarians themselves are divided on the issue, since government protection from force depends on the personhood of the unborn baby (or fetus). However, libertarians are uniformly opposed to government funding for abortions (such as through [[Planned Parenthood]]). Furthermore, they oppose restrictions on [[pornography]]. However, they also oppose [[universal health care]], [[taxes]] and the [[welfare state]]. They are strong supporters of [[school choice]], and oppose continuing the [[public school]] system. Some libertarians support [[school vouchers]], while others are skeptical due to the issue of government influence over [[private education]].

Libertarians support an expansive view of liberty as the proper basis for organizing civil society. They tend to define liberty as the freedom to do whatever one wishes up to the point that one's behavior begins to interfere with another's person or property through coercive means. At the point of interference, each party would become subject to certain principled rules for adjudicating disputes, generally accepting that one who has demonstrated a proven lack of respect for the rights of others should be subject to sanctions, including possible constraints on their freedom. They believe that liberty is the right of every individual.

Libertarians generally defend the ideal of freedom from the perspective of how little one is constrained by authority, i.e., how much one is allowed to do (also referred to as negative liberty). This ideal is distinguished from a view of freedom focused on how much one is able to do (also called positive liberty).

=== Libertarianism and irreligion/religion ===

''See also:'' [[Atheism and politics]]

According to Murray N. Rothbard, who writes for the [[Ludwig von Mises Institute]], most libertarians at the present time are [[Atheism|atheists]].<ref>[https://mises.org/library/myth-and-truth-about-libertarianism Myth and Truth About Libertarianism], Mises Daily</ref> [[Ayn Rand]] was a libertarian and atheist.

Rothbard also declares:
{{cquote|There are many libertarians who are theists, Jewish or Christian. Among the classical-liberal forebears of modern libertarianism in a more religious age there were a myriad of Christians: from John Lilburne, [[Roger Williams]], Anne Hutchinson, and [[John Locke]] in the 17th century, down to Cobden and Bright, [[Frédéric Bastiat]] and the French laissez-faire liberals, and the great [[John Dalberg-Acton, 1st Baron Acton|Lord Acton]].<ref>[https://mises.org/library/myth-and-truth-about-libertarianism Myth and Truth About Libertarianism], Mises Daily</ref>}}

Both [[Ron Paul]] and [[Rand Paul]] are religious libertarians. Christian libertarians are represented by the [http://libertarianchristians.com/ Libertarian Christian Institute].

== Libertarian Factions ==

Libertarians tend to use the word "libertarian" (small "l") to refer to the philosophy, and "Libertarian" (capital "L") to refer to the party. Thus, more libertarians exist than members of the [[Libertarian Party]]. Two general factions exist in the libertarian movement. The first are those libertarians who apply the principles of right to person and property to an absolute. They believe that no person, group, or government is above the right to violate these two things. They thus believe that government itself is illegitimate because it violates person and property. These libertarians subscribe to [[anarcho-capitalism]], as first named by [[Murray N. Rothbard]]. They believe that law and security can be handled by private means in the free market. The other faction believes in a very limited government. They are often referred to as [[Minarchism|minarchists]]. Libertarian minarchists want the state to only enforce law and order but generally nothing else. [[Ayn Rand]] was a minarchist.

Libertarians tend to view liberalism as a philosophy advocating less government interference in private morality and more government control of business, and view conservatism as a philosophy advocating more government interference in private morality and less government control of business, while they view libertarianism as advocating less government control in all areas. However, there have been fusionist attempts to mix libertarianism and with social conservatism. This is noted in particular by [[paleolibertarianism|paleolibertarians]]. They believe that social conservatism is a natural entity in a free society, but do not believe that it can be enforced by state interventionism. For instance, they may personally oppose [[homosexuality]], but advocate for [[marriage privatization]] rather than believing that government should sanction "marriage" exclusively between a man and a woman.

Outside the United States, the term "libertarian" refers to [[Anarchism|left-wing anarchism]].

== Libertarian Thought in America ==

While there are libertarian factions within the [[Democratic]] and [[Republican]] [[parties]], neither party is particularly well aligned with libertarian thought. While the Republican Party sometimes adopts libertarian-sounding rhetoric of small government in economic affairs, many libertarians see it as being a force that has increased government interventionism in these affairs. Libertarians generally, for example, are opposed to the [[USA PATRIOT Act]], which they believe increases government power and removes protections on the liberty and privacy of the public. Most conservatives, on the other hand, view it as a necessary government program and believe security to be more important than personal liberty and privacy. Libertarians point out that such a view contradicts those of the founding fathers, such as Benjamin Franklin, who summarized it most eloquently, "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Libertarians are also generally opposed to the [[Iraq War]], unlike the majority of conservatives.

While all libertarians agree in general on the principles of the desirability of maximizing individual liberty and avoiding excessive government interference with the operation of the free market, individual libertarians have opinions that differ wildly within these general principles.

The libertarian movement generally praises the [[United States Constitution]], regarding it as the proper scope of the national government. They believe that the Democratic and Republican parties have overstepped constitutional limits. Anarcho-capitalist libertarians, on the other hand, view the implementation of the constitution as the very reason the national government is the size it is today.

== Notable Libertarians ==
Libertarian-oriented writers include [[Frédéric Bastiat]], [[William Leggett]], [[John Stuart Mill]], [[Henry David Thoreau]], [[Lysander Spooner]], [[Herbert Spencer]], [[William Graham Sumner]], [[Carl Menger]], [[Ludwig von Mises]], Rose Wilder Lane, [[Albert Jay Nock]], [[Henry Hazlett]], and [[Isabel Paterson]]. Science fiction writers; [[L. Neil Smith]], [[J. Neil Schulman]], and [[Brad Linaweaver]]. Several popular financial writers including [[Harry Browne]] and [[Howard J. Ruff]]. Browne would later run for President, twice, on the Libertarian Party ticket. Ruff declared his political philosophy as libertarian but as a socially conservative [[Mormon]] made an exception on issues like abortion and prostitution, where he disagreed with the libertarian view. Nobel Laureate economists [[Milton Friedman]], [[F.A. Hayek]], [[Ronald Coase]], Gary Becker, James Buchanan, [[George Stigler]], and Vernon Smith. Humorist [[Dave Barry]], actor/comedian [[Drew Carey]], actor [[Denis Leary]], former MTV VJ [[Lisa "Kennedy" Montgomery]], actor [[Kurt Russell]], investigative reporter [[John Stossel]], and the late rocker [[Frank Zappa]] have all referred to themselves as being aligned with or openly supporting the Libertarian Party. Many Republican congressmen and senators hold libertarian positions, such as [[Walter B. Jones]], [[Rand Paul]], and [[Justin Amash]].

The most influential libertarian of the 20th century was [[Milton Friedman]] (1912-2006), a leader of the [[Chicago School of Economics]].

*[[Glenn Beck]], political commentator, describes himself as a libertarian.
*[[Ed Clark]], the Libertarian Party's 1980 nominee for President. Clark obtained the highest popular vote percentage to date for a Libertarian candidate.
*[[Barry Goldwater]], Republican presidential nominee in 1964 often described himself as libertarian, although whether or not this was true has been disputed by conservatives.
*[[Robert A. Heinlein]], science fiction author, whose 1966 novel ''The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress'' was an influence on the movement.
*[[Karl Hess]], speechwriter for [[Barry Goldwater]] credited with penning Goldwater's famous 1964 statement "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice". Hess later became a major figure in the Libertarian Party.
*[[Gary Johnson]], businessman, former Governor of New Mexico (as a Republican), and 2012 and 2016 Libertarian Party nominee.
*[[Alex Jones]], radio host and activist, describes himself as a libertarian.
*[[Samuel Edward Konkin III]], a significant figure in 1970s libertarianism, whose influence waned considerably after the rise of the Libertarian Party as he opposed political parties and voting as being against libertarian principles. He proposed instead a purely marketplace-based route to a free society, such as [[tax resistance]] and doing business "off the books".
*[[Robert LeFevre]], significant in promoting libertarian philosophy in the 1950s and 1960s before it was a well-defined movement, with his "Freedom School" seminars on political and economic philosophy.
*[[Mario J. Lucero]] and [[Isabel Ruiz Lucero]], the cofounders of [[Heaven Sent Gaming]].
*[[Trey Parker]] and [[Matt Stone]], the creators of [[South Park]], proclaimed that they are libertarians. South Park is vulgar, supports evolution, and sometimes attacks social conservative positions like religion. However, they also make fun of liberals' positions such as political correctness, environmentalism and atheism.<ref>[http://www.reason.com/news/show/116787.html] Parker and Stone, Reason Magazine</ref> The phrases "South Park Conservative" (the name of a book) and "South Park Republican" are used to describe the followers of these beliefs.
*[[Ron Paul]], Republican congressman from Texas, 1988 Libertarian Party and 2008 & 2012 Republican Party presidential candidate. Ron Paul is considered to be of the Constitutionalist and [[paleolibertarianism|paleolibertarian]] schools of libertarian thought.
*[[Penn and Teller]], stage magicians turned libertarian evangelists preaching [[atheism]] and promoting libertarian philosophies, including controversial positions such as legalization of prostitution and drugs in their Showtime series, which sports a name that cannot for reasons of good taste be expressed here.
*The novelist [[Ayn Rand]] advocated a philosophy of ''Objectivism'', embodying some libertarian thought, although differing from libertarianism in many ways. Some of her novels, such as ''Atlas Shrugged'', have become icons of some people in the libertarian movement, while others find her materialism and atheism incompatible with moral ethics and natural rights and law.
*[[Murray N. Rothbard]] was nicknamed "Mr. Libertarian." He brought to life the anarcho-capitalist movement. Rothbard was an economist of the [[Austrian School of Economics|Austrian School]].
*The Canadian rock band [[Rush]], which has been together since 1968, often explores libertarian themes in their lyrics, like in "Free Will", "Tom Sawyer" and "Something for Nothing". Drummer and Lyricist [[Neil Peart]] claims to be a "left leaning libertarian.",<ref>[http://www.theadvocates.org/celebrities/neil-peart.html]</ref>
*The psychiatrist [[Thomas Szasz]], opponent of the therapeutic state and compulsory mental institutionalization.
*[[David D. Friedman]], author of ''The Machinery Of Freedom''—the foundational book of Libertarian Capitalistic ideas from an economic perspective. He is an Economist, Professor at University Of Chicago, and the son of Milton Friedman.

== See also ==
* [[Herbert Spencer]]
* [[Democratic Freedom Caucus]]
* [[Republican Liberty Caucus]]
* [[Libertarian Party of Canada]]

==Further reading==
* Boaz, David. '' The Libertarian Reader: Classic and Contemporary Writings from Lao Tzu to Milton Friedman'' (1998) [http://www.amazon.com/Libertarian-Reader-Contemporary-Writings-Friedman/dp/0684847671/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223323253&sr=8-18 excerpt and text search]
* Doherty, Brian. ''Radicals for Capitalism: A Freewheeling History of the Modern American Libertarian Movement'' (2008) [http://www.amazon.com/Radicals-Capitalism-Freewheeling-American-Libertarian/dp/1586485725/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259466101&sr=1-2 excerpt and text search]
* Hamowy, Ronald, ed. ''The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism'' (Sage, 2008), 644pp, sponsored by the Cato Institute; [http://www.sage-ereference.com/PublicBrowse.html Online at some academic libraries] also [http://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC&dq=intitle:Encyclopedia+intitle:of+intitle:Libertarianism&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&num=30&as_brr=0 excerpt and text search]
* Murray, Charles. ''What It Means to Be a Libertarian'' (1997) [http://www.amazon.com/What-Means-Libertarian-Charles-Murray/dp/0767900391/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223322878&sr=8-16 excerpt and text search]
* Tilman, Rick. ''Ideology and Utopia in the Social Philosophy of the Libertarian Economists'' (2001) [http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Libertarian-Economists-Contributions-Economics/dp/0313315582/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223322878&sr=8-5 excerpt and text search]

== References ==
{{reflist|1}}

== External links ==
* [http://www.faqs.org/faqs/libertarian/faq/ Libertarian FAQ]
* [http://dmoz.org/Society/Politics/Liberalism/Libertarianism/ Open Directory libertarian links ]
* [http://chelm.freeyellow.com/black_index.html Black Libertarians]
* [http://libertarianwiki.org/Main_Page Libertarian Wiki]
* [http://www.l4l.org/ Libertarians for Life]
* [http://www.independent.org/ The Independent Institute]
* [http://www.mises.org/ Ludwig von Mises Institute]
* [http://www.fee.org/ Foundation for Economic Education]
* [http://www.cato.org/ Cato Institute]
* [http://reason.org/ Reason Foundation]
* [http://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/dispassionate-assessment-libertarians A Dispassionate Assessment of Libertarians], by [[Russell Kirk]], [[Heritage Foundation]]
[[Category:Capitalism]]
[[Category:Libertarianism]]
[[Category:Tax Revolts]]
[[Category:Pro Second Amendment]]
[[Category:Anti-Communism]]

Codex Sinaiticus

2017-11-18T01:43:38Z

Ambassador2: Additions in footnotes.

[[Image:Sinaiticus.jpg|right]]
The '''Codex Sinaiticus''' is a 4th century, Greek manuscript of the [[Old Testament]] and [[New Testament]]. The oldest complete [[Bible]]s are the [[Codex Vaticanus]] and the Codex Sinaiticus.

These two texts, though they comprise the oldest complete New Testaments,<ref>Although Codex W is usually dated as 4th-5th century, it was found in the ruins of a 2nd century city, suggesting it is at least that old. See, for example, Pickering, ''God Has Preserved His Text'', 31. Furthermore, there is controversy over whether Sinaiticus is a forgery or not. See Cooper, ''The Forging of Codex Sinaiticus.''</ref> were written hundreds of years after the oldest extant manuscripts. Accordingly, virtually all modern translations of the Bible use the older manuscripts. Only the [[English Revised Version]] and [[American Standard Version]], each written around 1900, used the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus.

The website for the Codex Sinaiticus claims that is the oldest substantial book to survive from Antiquity.<ref>http://www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/</ref>

:: ''Dates from the mid fourth century and originally included both Old and [[New Testament]]s plus the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas, all in [[Greek]]. It was found in [[Egypt]], in a monastery library on the slopes of [[Mount Sinai]] (St. Catherine's Monastery), by Constantin von Tischendorf in 1859, and brought to St. Petersburg. In 1933, it was sold to the [[British Museum]] in [[London]] where it currently resides.''

The Codex Sinaiticus is the oldest complete Bible to go online.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4739369.stm</ref>

In 1975, the [[monk]]s of St. Catherine discovered many parchment fragments. Among these fragments were twelve missing leaves from the Codex Sinaiticus.

For many reasons, many consider Sinaiticus to be a fake. These reasons include a darkening of the pages between two times the Sinaiticus was seen, and the fact that a man came out to say that he had created the Sinaiticus himself.<ref>Documentary: "Tares Among the Wheat," by Chris Pinto</ref><ref>[[David Daniels]], "Modern Bibles Built on a Faulty Foundation," [[Chick Publications]], http://www.chick.com/m/articles/bibles-built-on-a-faulty-foundation.asp</ref>
== References ==

<references/>

== See also ==

*[[The Gospels]]
*[[Dead Sea Scrolls]]
*[[John Rylands Fragment]]
*[[Textus Receptus]]
*[[Codex Vaticanus]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.biblefacts.org/history/oldtext.html N.T. Ancient Manuscripts]
*[http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04085a.htm Codex Sinaiticus] Catholic Encyclopedia.

[[Category:Biblical Documents]]

Traditional Text

2017-11-18T01:25:48Z

Ambassador2: Redirect-->Byzantine Text

#REDIRECT [[Byzantine Text]]

Byzantine Text

2017-11-18T01:24:05Z

Ambassador2: New article

The '''Byzantine Text''', also called the '''Traditional''' or '''Syriac Text''', is a New Testament text-type.<ref>It is also sometimes called, mistakenly, the Majority Text, because it so closely matches such. In reality, the Majority text is a reading based upon the majority consensus of all NT Greek manuscripts. There are currently two editions of it: ''The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text'' (Nelson, 1985) by Hodges and Farstad, and ''The New Testament in the Original Greek According to the Byzantine/Majority Textform'' (Original Word Publishers, 1991) by Robinson, Pierpoint, and McBrayer. Given that these editions use manuscripts thought to be representative of the majority, rather than the actual majority, they do not necessarily reflect the true Majority Text. </ref> It is named after the Byzantine Empire, because it was transmitted mainly by Byzantine monks. There are more manuscripts of this text type than of the other three (Alexandrian, Western, and Caeserean) combined.<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Texts to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 9.</ref>

While the [[Textus Receptus]], upon which many older Bible versions were based (notably the [[Authorized Version]]), is a Byzantine Text, the [[Critical Text]] behind most modern Bibles is an [[Alexandrian Text]]. Most modern scholars consider the Alexandrian Text to be closer to the original, although some defend the Byzantine Text, and some, more specifically, defend the TR.

==See Also==
*[[Alexandrian Text]]
*[[Textus Receptus]]

==Notes==
{{reflist}}

Textus Receptus

2017-11-18T00:06:06Z

Ambassador2: Typo

'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," refers to the Greek text of the New Testament that was used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611, as well as by other Reformation-era translators. This includes [[William Tyndale]] and [[Martin Luther]]. The earliest edition was put together by Erasmus in 1516. The name comes from a Latin phrase in the preface of Bonaventure Elzevir's popular 1624 edition of the TR: ''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> Until the 19th century, the TR was the only Greek New Testament text used by Protestant scholars. Dr. Kurt Aland, who worked on the Critical Text, wrote:
:Finally it is undisputed that from the 16th to the 18th century orthodoxy's doctrine of verbal inspiration assumed this Textus Receptus. It was the only Greek text they knew, and they regarded it as the 'original text.'<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12; citing Kurt Aland, "The Text of the Church," ''Trinity Journal'', Fall (1987): 131.</ref>

==Erasmus==
Erasmus, a Dutch Catholic, published the first edition of TR in Basel in 1516. Erasmus had produced a new Latin translation of the New Testament. He added a Greek text to his book as an afterthought, a tool to support his Latin translation. It was put together hurriedly, and on the basis of whatever manuscripts happened to be available locally in Basel. Yet this text struck a chord with a reading public hungry for access to the original. Erasmus used the following manuscripts to produce the first edition of TR:

:*Codex 1eap — This 12th century miniscule contains the entire New Testament except Revelation. It is the only TR manuscript not of the Byzantine type. Erasmus made little use of it as he believed it to be corrupt.
:*Codex 1r — A 12th century miniscule of Revelation.
:*Codex 2e — A 12th century miniscule of the Gospels.
:*Codex 2ap — A 12th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 4ap — A 15th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 7p — An 11th miniscule of the epistles.
:*Codex 817 — A 15th century miniscule of the Gospels.<ref>Combs, William W., "[http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF Erasmus and Textus Receptus]", ''Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal'', Spring 1996.</ref>

The Gospels were taken directly from Codex 2e, Acts and epistles from 2ap, and Revelation from 1r. Where these manuscripts had gaps, back-translations from the [[Vulgate]] were used. In fact, 2e and 2ap were sent directly to the printer for typesetting. Erasmus’ handwritten annotations can be seen between the lines, although the printer often ignored these. 1r could not be treated this way because it mixes text and annotation. Erasmus separated these by referring to the Vulgate. As a result of this haphazard process, there were numerous typographical errors in the first edition.

Some 400 corrections were made for the second edition (1519). Erasmus obtained access to 3eap, a nearly complete New Testament text. But there is no indication that he made much use of it. Many readers criticized the first two editions of TR because they lacked the [[Johannine Comma]] found in Latin manuscripts that circulated at the time.<ref>"the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." ({{bibleverse|1|John|5:7–8|NKJV}}).</ref> This trinitarian passage is rarely seen in Greek manuscripts of any period.<ref>"It is found in only four Greek manuscripts, none earlier than the 14th century. 4 other Greek mss. offer it as a margin note. The remaining Greek mss., numbering in the hundreds, do not include it." ("[http://www.tektonics.org/af/comma.php The Comma of 1 John 5:7].")</ref> Erasmus added it to the third edition (1522), citing Codex 61. This was a recently produced manuscript, possibly produced in response to TR. Although Erasmus was skeptical of this manuscript, he thought it wiser to reverse himself. For the 1527 edition, Erasmus made extensive revisions based on the ''Complutensian Polyglot'', a text edited by Jiménez de Cisneros and based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican library. A final edition was published in 1535.

==Later texts==
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.

==The Text==

The text of the TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine]] reading. While most modern scholars believe the [[Critical Text]] (which follows an [[Alexandrian Text|Alexandrian]] reading) to be superior, some do not. Notable among the scholarly defenders of the TR were Edward Hills and Dean John Burgon. Defenders of the [[Byzantine Text]], which is similar, include F.H.A. Scrivener and Wilbur Pickering.

According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on late 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. 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 of textual criticism which allows a critic to determine which manuscript variants are most likely to be from the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types and in 1850 published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a critical text based on two fourth century manuscripts of the Alexandrian type, ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', then recently discovered, and ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library.

Supporters of the TR would reply that Codex's A, B, and Aleph likely survived so long 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 away more quickly. Furthermore, it is not true that the TR lacks ancient support. The Chester Beatty Papyri (P45, P46, & P66) date to the 2nd century or earlier, and contain Byzantine readings mixed with Alexandrian readings. The Magdalen Papyrus (P64) is considered by some to be the oldest known manuscript (from before AD 66), and variants within it support the Byzantine Text with no support for the Alexandrian Text.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12.</ref> Early translations like the Peshitta (2nd century) and Gothic (approximately 350 AD) are Byzantine.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref> Alexandrinus (Codex A), a 5th century manuscript which is one of the three main manuscripts used by the Critical Text, is Byzantine in the Gospels.

There are almost 6000 differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, while there are only 7959 verses in the New Testament.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>

Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while most modern versions like the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New Revised Standard Version]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Critical Text.

==References==
{{Reflist|1}}

== See also ==
*[[Codex Sinaiticus]]
*[[Codex Vaticanus]]
*[[King James only]]
*[[Byzantine Text]]
*[[Critical Text]]
*[[Alexandrian Text]]

==External links==
Several Greeks texts can be found at [http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=70 Bible Gateway], including the ''Scrivener New Testament'', a reconstruction of the text used by the KJV translators.
*[http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Main_Page The Textus Receptus Wiki]
*[http://www.tbsbibles.org/ Trinitarian Bible Society]

[[Category:New Testament]]

Textus Receptus

2017-11-18T00:02:52Z

Ambassador2: New info, corrections, etc.

'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," refers to the Greek text of the New Testament that was used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611, as well as by other Reformation-era translators. This includes [[William Tyndale]] and [[Martin Luther]]. The earliest edition was put together by Erasmus in 1516. The name comes from a Latin phrase in the preface of Bonaventure Elzevir's popular 1624 edition of the TR: ''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> Until the 19th century, the TR was the only Greek New Testament text used by Protestant scholars. Dr. Kurt Aland, who worked on the Critical Text, wrote:
:Finally it is undisputed that from the 16th to the 18th century orthodoxy's doctrine of verbal inspiration assumed this Textus Receptus. It was the only Greek text they knew, and they regarded it as the 'original text.'<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12; citing Kurt Aland, "The Text of the Church," ''Trinity Journal'', Fall (1987): 131.</ref>

==Erasmus==
Erasmus, a Dutch Catholic, published the first edition of TR in Basel in 1516. Erasmus had produced a new Latin translation of the New Testament. He added a Greek text to his book as an afterthought, a tool to support his Latin translation. It was put together hurriedly, and on the basis of whatever manuscripts happened to be available locally in Basel. Yet this text struck a chord with a reading public hungry for access to the original. Erasmus used the following manuscripts to produce the first edition of TR:

:*Codex 1eap — This 12th century miniscule contains the entire New Testament except Revelation. It is the only TR manuscript not of the Byzantine type. Erasmus made little use of it as he believed it to be corrupt.
:*Codex 1r — A 12th century miniscule of Revelation.
:*Codex 2e — A 12th century miniscule of the Gospels.
:*Codex 2ap — A 12th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 4ap — A 15th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 7p — An 11th miniscule of the epistles.
:*Codex 817 — A 15th century miniscule of the Gospels.<ref>Combs, William W., "[http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF Erasmus and Textus Receptus]", ''Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal'', Spring 1996.</ref>

The Gospels were taken directly from Codex 2e, Acts and epistles from 2ap, and Revelation from 1r. Where these manuscripts had gaps, back-translations from the [[Vulgate]] were used. In fact, 2e and 2ap were sent directly to the printer for typesetting. Erasmus’ handwritten annotations can be seen between the lines, although the printer often ignored these. 1r could not be treated this way because it mixes text and annotation. Erasmus separated these by referring to the Vulgate. As a result of this haphazard process, there were numerous typographical errors in the first edition.

Some 400 corrections were made for the second edition (1519). Erasmus obtained access to 3eap, a nearly complete New Testament text. But there is no indication that he made much use of it. Many readers criticized the first two editions of TR because they lacked the [[Johannine Comma]] found in Latin manuscripts that circulated at the time.<ref>"the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." ({{bibleverse|1|John|5:7–8|NKJV}}).</ref> This trinitarian passage is rarely seen in Greek manuscripts of any period.<ref>"It is found in only four Greek manuscripts, none earlier than the 14th century. 4 other Greek mss. offer it as a margin note. The remaining Greek mss., numbering in the hundreds, do not include it." ("[http://www.tektonics.org/af/comma.php The Comma of 1 John 5:7].")</ref> Erasmus added it to the third edition (1522), citing Codex 61. This was a recently produced manuscript, possibly produced in response to TR. Although Erasmus was skeptical of this manuscript, he thought it wiser to reverse himself. For the 1527 edition, Erasmus made extensive revisions based on the ''Complutensian Polyglot'', a text edited by Jiménez de Cisneros and based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican library. A final edition was published in 1535.

==Later texts==
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.

==The Text==

The text of the TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine]] reading. While most modern scholars believe the [[Critical Text]] (which follows an [[Alexandrian Text|Alexandrian]] reading) to be superior, some do not. Notable among the scholarly defenders of the TR were Edward Hills and Dean John Burgon. Defenders of the [[Byzantine Text]], which is similar, include F.H.A. Scrivener and Wilbur Pickering.

According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on late 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. 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 of textual criticism which allows a critic to determine which manuscript variants are most likely to be from the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types and in 1850 published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a critical text based on two fourth century manuscripts of the Alexandrian type, ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', then recently discovered, and ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library.

Supporters of the TR would reply that Codex's A, B, and Aleph likely survived so long 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 away more quickly. Furthermore, it is not true that the TR lacks ancient support. The Chester Beatty Papyri (P45, P46, & P66) date to the 2nd century or earlier, and contain Byzantine readings mixed with Alexandrian readings. The Magdalen Papyrus (P64) is considered by some to be the oldest known manuscript (from before AD 66), and variants within it support the Byzantine Text with no support for the Alexandrian Text.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 12.</ref> Early translations like the Peshitta (2nd century) and Gothic (approximately 350 AD) are Byzantine.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref> Alexandrinus (Codex A), a 5th century manuscript which is one of the three main manuscripts used by the Critical Text, is Byzantine in the Gospels.

There are almost 6000 differences between the Textus Receptus and the Critical Text, while there are only 7959 verses in the New Testament.<ref>Holland, ''Crowned With Glory'', 13.</ref>

Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while most modern versions like the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], [[New Revised Standard Version]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Critical Text.

==References==
{{Reflist|1}}

== See also ==
*[[Codex Sinaiticus]]
*[[Codex Vaticanus]]
*[[King James only]]
*[[Byzantine Text]]
*[[Critical Text]]
*[[Alexandrian Text]]

==External links==
Several Greeks texts can be found at [http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=70 Bible Gateway], including the ''Scrivener New Testament'', a reconstruction of the text used by the KJV translators.
*[textus-receptus.com The Textus Receptus Wiki]
*[http://www.tbsbibles.org/ Trinitarian Bible Society]

[[Category:New Testament]]

Talk:Textus Receptus

2017-11-10T02:14:36Z

Ambassador2: Reply

==Johannine Comma==
The Johannine Comma appears almost exclusively in Latin manuscripts, not in Greek. "It is found in only four Greek manuscripts, none earlier than the 14th century. 4 other Greek mss. offer it as a margin note. The remaining Greek mss., numbering in the hundreds, do not include it." ("[http://www.tektonics.org/af/comma.php The Comma of 1 John 5:7]") Moreover, it is not in the earliest Latin translations, including Jerome's Vulgate. It is first mention by Priscillian, a Latin writer of the fourth century. John was written in Greek, so early Greek manuscripts such as Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are considered to be the most authoritative witnesses. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:23, 4 November 2017 (EDT)

Some of the information above is not true. See [http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Comma_Johanneum ''Comma Johanneum'' at the Textus Receptus Wiki]. You say it is not in the Vulgate, when it is in fact in over 90% of Vulgate MSS. You say it was first quoted by Priscillian (4th century), but it was also quoted by Cyprian (3rd century) and possibly Tertullian (200 AD). You say it isn't found in ancient versions, even though it was in the Waldensians' Bible, and likely the Old Latin Vulgate (given that the Vulgate was based upon it). [https://sites.google.com/site/kjvtoday/home/the-father-the-word-and-the-holy-ghost-in-1-john-57#TOC-Like-the-Vulgate-the-Syriac-Peshitta-has-a-trace-of-the-Comma There are also traces of it in the Syriac Peshitta]. You say it is only in eight Greek MSS, but Dr. Floyd Nolan Jones writes:
: "As of 1997, the following cursive manuscripts are known to include the passage:
: 34, 88 (margin) 99, 105, 110, 162, 173, 181, 190, 193, 219, 220, 221, 298, 429, 629 (margin) 635, 636, and 918.
: Thus the list of Greek mss known to contain the "Comma" is not long, but it is longer (and growing) than many of us would have believed.
: It was part of the text of a 2nd century Old Latin Bible. It is found in "r", a 5th century Old Latin manuscript,
: and in a confession of faith drawn up by Eusebius, Bishop of Carthage, in 484."
We can add to this the excluded evidence. For example, [https://sites.google.com/site/kjvtoday/home/the-father-the-word-and-the-holy-ghost-in-1-john-57#TOC-Internal-evidence the fact that the internal consistency of the text requires the Comma]. Furthermore, the comments added to the article saying that the TR is unreliable are not the opinions of everyone. They are the opinions of the majority of scholars, but, in my opinion, are not warranted (see for example Pickering, ''[http://www.prunch.org/documentation/ENGLISH/004-Objective_Authority_Of_The_Biblical_Text/The%20Identity%20of%20the%20New%20Testament%20Text%20IV.pdf The Identity of the New Testament Text]''). I will change the article to reflect both sides of the argument. --[[User:Ambassador2|Ambassador2]] ([[User talk:Ambassador2|talk]]) 13:33, 7 November 2017 (EST)
::I removed the section about early Latin from the article. It's not relevant to the story. I got the tidbit about Priscillian from ''New Catholic Encyclopedia''. Isn't that a better source than the Textus Receptus wiki? The scholarly and religious authorities overwhelmingly support the critical/Alexandrian text. There are certainly people who prefer KJV or NKJV, but that has more to do with the literary qualities of 16th century English than with text issues. NKJV doesn't admit to following TR. According to the preface, it is a translation of the "majority text." If that was true, it wouldn't include the Comma at all. I checked out the TR wiki and I must say that I have some issues. Dividing manuscripts into TR and Westcott-Hort types is not the way scholars in this field do it. Many of these manuscripts are not even in Greek. There should be some explanation of who made these classifications and on what basis. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 22:48, 8 November 2017 (EST)
:::I can find you better documented sources if you want. Yes, the scholars are majoritarily on the side of the Alexandrian text, but there are dissenters (notable examples being Dr. Wilbur Pickering and Dean John Burgon). Truth isn't decided by vote, and I find the arguments of the TR side superior. Thus, I believe that the article should reflect both sides, though admitting that most scholars support the Alexandrian. Many support the Authorized Version (including myself) for multiple reasons. Accurate translation and superior underlying text are the foremost reasons. As for the NKJV, its English is modern, not early modern like the AV, so I don't see why you say people adhere to it for its English. The NKJV mostly follows the TR (being a revision of the AV) but sometimes departs. Similarly, in the OT it uses the Masoratic text (though I believe it uses ''Biblica Hebraica'' rather than ''Ben Chayyim'') but sometimes departs, following the LXX, for example. For these reasons and others I don't endorse the NKJV. In short, it is mainly TR but not completely. As for the TR Wiki, I only found it about a week ago, and have some problems with it too, the main one being that footnotes (when used) don't seem to reference anything. I'll try to fix it up, myself. I'll also fix up this article, in a non-biased way.--[[User:Ambassador2|Ambassador2]] ([[User talk:Ambassador2|talk]]) 21:14, 9 November 2017 (EST)

Talk:Textus Receptus

2017-11-07T18:33:09Z

Ambassador2: Small mistakes

Talk:Textus Receptus

2017-11-07T18:31:20Z

Ambassador2: It is not true that the Johannine Comma is missing in the Vulgate, etc

Textus Receptus

2017-10-31T22:54:12Z

Ambassador2: Corrected a falsity

'''Textus Receptus''', or "received text," refers to the Greek text of the New Testament that was used by the translators of the [[King James Version]] in 1611, as well as by other Reformation-era translators. This includes [[William Tyndale]] and [[Martin Luther]]. The earliest edition was put together by Erasmus in 1516. The name comes from a Latin inscription found in an edition published in 1633: ''Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum.'' (So [the reader] has the text which all now receive.)<ref>Bruce Metzger has described this inscription as an advertizing blurb.</ref>

==Erasmus==
Erasmus, a Dutch Catholic, published the first edition of TR in Basel in 1516. Erasmus had produced a new Latin translation of the New Testament. He added a Greek text to his book as an afterthought, a tool to support his Latin translation. It was put together hurriedly, and on the basis of whatever manuscripts happened to be available locally in Basel. Yet this text struck a chord with a reading public hungry for access to the original. Erasmus used the following manuscripts to produce the first edition of TR:

:*Codex 1eap — This 12th century miniscule contains the entire New Testament except Revelation. It is the only TR manuscript not of the Byzantine type. Erasmus made little use of it as he believed it to be corrupt.
:*Codex 1r — A 12th century miniscule of Revelation.
:*Codex 2e — A 12th century miniscule of the Gospels.
:*Codex 2ap — A 12th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 4ap — A 15th century miniscule of Acts and the epistles.
:*Codex 7p — An 11th miniscule of the epistles.
:*Codex 817 — A 15th century miniscule of the Gospels.<ref>Combs, William W., "[http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF Erasmus and Textus Receptus]", ''Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal'', Spring 1996.</ref>

The Gospels were taken directly from Codex 2e, Acts and epistles from 2ap, and Revelation from 1r. Where these manuscripts had gaps, back-translations from the [[Vulgate]] were used. In fact, 2e and 2ap were sent directly to the printer for typesetting. Erasmus’ handwritten annotations can be seen between the lines, although the printer often ignored these. 1r could not be treated this way because it mixes text and annotation. Erasmus separated these by referring to the Vulgate. As a result of this haphazard process, there were numerous typographical errors in the first edition.

Some 400 corrections were made for the second edition (1519). Erasmus obtained access to 3eap, a nearly complete New Testament text. But there is no indication that he made much use of it. Many readers criticized the first two editions of TR because they lacked the [[Johannine Comma]] found in the Vulgate.<ref>"the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one." ({{bibleverse|1|John|5:7–8|NKJV}}). Despite the Trinitarian controversy, no fourth century writer cites this passage. This suggests that it was not considered part of scripture at that time. Note from another editor: the preceding fact [http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_1jo5_7.html#_ftn1 is false]. It was cited by Cyprian (3rd century) and Priscillian (4th century), for example.</ref> Erasmus added it to the third edition (1522), citing Codex 61. This was a recently produced manuscript, and it was probably produced in response to TR. Although Erasmus was skeptical of this manuscript, he thought it wiser to reverse himself. For the 1527 edition, Erasmus made extensive revisions based on the ''Complutensian Polyglot'', a text edited by Jiménez de Cisneros and based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican library. A final edition was published in 1535.

==Later texts==
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. Since Stephanus had access to a significantly wider range of primary sources, this suggested that the Erasmus text was already being treated with undue reverence. The KJV translators consulted the 1550 ''Edito Regia'', a 1598 reprint by Theodore Beza, and several other editions. The ''Scrivener New Testament'' reconstructs the underlying Greek text they used.

When the text of ''Codex Alexandrinus'', a fifth century manuscript, was published in 1786, scholars noticed that it is significantly different than TR, which is based on 12th century manuscripts. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a revised Greek text based on ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'' and ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', both fourth century manuscripts of the same text type as ''Alexandrinus''.

Among modern translations, the [[New King James Version]] uses TR, while the [[New International Version]], the [[New American Standard Bible]], and the [[English Standard Version]] use the Alexandrian text.

==References==
{{Reflist|1}}

== See also ==
*[[Codex Sinaiticus]]
*[[Codex Vaticanus]]

==External links==
Several Greeks texts can be found at [http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=70 Bible Gateway], including the ''Scrivener New Testament'', a reconstruction of the text used by the KJV translators.

[[Category:New Testament]]

King James Only

2017-10-17T01:37:26Z

Ambassador2:

'''King James Only''' is a movement that promotes the superiority of the [[King James Version]] of the Bible. It is a common view among Fundamentalist Christians in the U.S., especially the [[Independent Baptist]]s.

The KJO view was articulated by Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872–1968), a Seventh-day Adventist missionary, in the book ''Our Authorized Bible Vindicated'' (1930). This book was plagerized by Jasper James Ray (1955) and by [[Peter Ruckman]] (1964). In 1970, Wilkinson's writing was republished in ''Which Bible?'' (1970), properly attributed this time. This book is a collection of essays edited by David Otis Fuller. Fuller added numerous footnotes to correct errors and misunderstandings in the Wilkinson text, some of which involve basic matters of church history.<ref>Kutilek, Doug, "[http://www.kjvonly.org/doug/kutilek_wilkinson_incred.htm Wilkinson's Incredible Errors]", ''Baptist Biblical Heritage'', Vol. I, No. 3; Fall, 1990. Fuller presents the footnotes as if they were written by Wilkinson, so Wilkinson's lack of expertise is not as apparent in the 1970 edition as it was in earlier editions.</ref> Several major Bible translations appeared in the early 1970s, making Fuller's treatment topical. Fuller's book got far more attention than earlier works on this subject. It is considered responsible for kicking off KJO as a movement.

KJO authors claim that ''[[Textus Receptus]]'', the Greek text used by KJV, is a more reliable text than the so-called Alexandrian text that is used by modern translations. TR was edited by Erasmus in 16th century and is based on several 12th century Byzantine manuscripts.

Modern translations are based on ''[[Codex Vaticanius]]'' and ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', both fourth century manuscripts. These two manuscripts are said to be "Alexandrian" because they have same type of text as ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'', a fifth century manuscript. (No one knows where they were produced.) In 1881, B.F. Westcott (1825-1903) and F.J.A. Hort produced a "Critical Text" based on these two manuscripts.<ref>Modern Bible translations are based on Greek texts edited by [http://www.nestle-aland.com Nestle Aland] and the [http://www.unitedbiblesocieties.org United Bible Societies]. These are similar to Westcott-Hort, but take into account manuscripts and papyrus fragments that were discovered later.</ref> Westcott and Hort figure prominently in KJO demonology, where the "Westcott and Hort Only" movement is denounced.<ref>Stringer, Dr. Phil, "[http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/wh-only.htm The Westcott and Hort Only Controversy]"</ref>

== Opponents of the King James Only Movement ==

As with all religious movements, the King James Only movement has its own share of opponents. Dr. John Rice, editor of ''[[The Sword of the Lord]]'' publishing company and opponent to the King James Only movement, wrote:

<blockquote>
And now to have many, many common and rather ignorant people - more women than men -- writing that Westcott and Hort, St. Augustine, any Catholic who had any part in the translation, anybody who now raises a question about the proper wording of some passage in the King James, are perverts or modernists or hypocrites or ignorant fools (much of the language which they got from Dr. [Peter Ruckman]), is a sorry business, and you and I will be answerable to God if we develop that kind of attitude among common Christians.

I do not want to grow a generation of Christians, who, if you show them that the word "Easter" in Acts 12:4 of the King James Version is not the proper translation but it ought to be "passover," as is true, will decide that we have no Bible, there is no authority in the Bible. To have anybody making such weighty decisions on an immature judgment about a word or two is not right, and I do not want to put a burden on common people that they must assume a scholarship they do not have, in order to understand the Bible.<ref>"[http://www.kjvonly.org/bob/ross_rice_reply_to_fuller.htm Dr. John R. Rice's reply to Dr. David Otis Fuller on the KJV]", ''The Sword of the Lord'', November 28, 1975</ref>
</blockquote>

Rice died in 1980 and ''The Sword of the Lord'' now supports the King James Only Movement. However, the publication is no longer influential.

Bob Jones University, an Independent Baptist university in South Carolina, has the following statement on its site:
<blockquote>
"Bob Jones University does not hold to a King James Only position...we have never taken the position that there can be only one good translation in the English language."<ref>"[http://www.bju.edu/about/what-we-believe/translation.php Statement about Bible Translations]", Bob Jones University.</ref>
</blockquote>

The ''New King James Version'' (1982) was a Bible translation similar to the King James Version, but without the Elizabethan "thee" and "thou" language. Unlike other modern translations, it is translated from TR rather than from the Critical Text. It includes numerous footnotes that give alternative readings and explain which reading comes from which text.

==Supporters of the Movement==
Prominent supporters include:

*[[Chick Publications]] (more specifically, [[Jack Chick]] and [[David Daniels]])
*[[Sam Gipp]]
*[[Peter Ruckman]]
*[[Gail Riplinger]]
*[[Kent Hovind]]
*[[D.A. Waite]]
*[[Edward Hills]]

==References==
{{Reflist|1}}

==Further reading==
*Carson, D. A., ''The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism'', Baker Book House Company (1979).
* John Ankerberg, John Weldon, ''Facts on King James Only Debate'', Harvest House, (2010).
*Ruckman, Peter, ''The Alexandrian Cult'', Bible Baptist Bookstore (1978-1981)
*White, James R., ''The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations'', Bethany House, (2009).
*Wilkinson, George Wilkinson, ''A Review of or Objections to 'Our Authorized Bible Vindicated''' (2000).
*Holland, Thomas,''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (2000).
*McElroy, Jack,''Which Bible Would Jesus Use? The Bible Version Controversy Explained and Resolved'', McElroy Publishing (2013, 2015).

==External links==
*[http://www.kjvonly.org The King James Only Resource Center] "Dedicated to the defense of the Bible as originally written."
*[http://tiny.cc/kjo-debate KJO Debate at TheologyOnline.com] with never before publicized photos of translators notes from a 1602 Bishops' Bible
*[http://av1611.com/kjbp/ The King James Bible Page]
*[http://www.biblebelievers.com/BibleVersions.html "Bible Versions" Page at BibleBelievers.com]

[[Category:Bible Study]]

User talk:Ambassador2

2017-10-17T01:31:10Z

Ambassador2: Reply to David B4

== Old account ==

Hi, 
sorry you had to make a new account to resolve this issue! If you add an e-mail address to your new account, you should be able to recover your password for this account later using that e-mail account if needed. Would you like me to more your old user page to this user account? Users visiting your old user page would by default be redirected to this one, although this could be changed or disabled easily. --[[User:DavidB4|David B]] ([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]]) 21:08, 16 October 2017 (EDT)

Hi DavidB4,
No thanks. I think I'll leave all my old stuff on my old page. I did enter my email this time (not making that mistake again). Thanks anyway!
--[[User:Ambassador2|Ambassador2]] ([[User talk:Ambassador2|talk]]) 21:31, 16 October 2017 (EDT)

User:Ambassador2

2017-10-17T00:37:57Z

Ambassador2: Created page with "I'm the same as Ambassador. I forgot my password, and couldn't access my account, so I had to create this one."

I'm the same as [[User:Ambassador|Ambassador]]. I forgot my password, and couldn't access my account, so I had to create this one.