| | 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. | | 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. | + | 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> | | 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> |