Changes

38 bytes removed ,  23:47, November 10, 2017
Line 10: Line 10:  
Modern translations are based on ''Codex Vaticanus'' 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. In 1881, B.F. Westcott (1825-1903) and F.J.A. Hort produced a "Critical Text" based on these two manuscripts. 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> 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.
 
Modern translations are based on ''Codex Vaticanus'' 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. In 1881, B.F. Westcott (1825-1903) and F.J.A. Hort produced a "Critical Text" based on these two manuscripts. 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> 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.
   −
The ''New King James Version'' (1982) is a response to the text-based arguments of KJO writers. This translation is based on the King James Version, but with the language partly modernized. The preface, however, denies that NKJV is a revision of KJV. Instead, it claims that the work is a fresh translation of the "majority text," i.e. the text of the majority of surviving manuscripts. This text theory, otherwise unsupported in Biblical scholarship, was developed after lawyers for Thomas Nelson Publishers told the editors they would not be able to copyright a revision of KJV. As the majority of surviving Greek manuscripts are late Byzantine, a majority text would presumably be similar to Textus Receptus.
+
The ''New King James Version'' (1982) is a response to the text-based arguments of KJO writers. This translation is based on the King James Version, but with the language partly modernized. The preface, however, denies that NKJV is a revision of KJV. Instead, it claims that the work is a fresh translation of the "majority text," i.e. the text of the majority of surviving manuscripts. This justification was developed after lawyers for Thomas Nelson Publishers told the editors they would not be able to copyright a revision of KJV. As the majority of surviving Greek manuscripts are of the late Byzantine text type, the majority text is quite similar to Textus Receptus.
    
== Criticism ==
 
== Criticism ==
Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
14,282

edits