Changes

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.

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.

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. In 1850, Lachmann published a Greek New Testament based on this methodology. This work was based on ''Alexandrinus'' and other manuscripts of the same text type, thus implementing Bentley's proposal. 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''.

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 text types and in 1850 published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. The publication of ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', a fourth century manuscript, in 1869 dramatically confirmed Lachmann's approach. In 1881, Westcott and Hort published a critical text based on ''Sinaiticus'' as well as ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', another fourth century manuscript of the Alexandrian type.

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.

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.