Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit
14,282
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Line 27:
Line 40: − ==Development of the text==+ − TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine text]]. Most modern scholars believe that the [[Alexandrian text]] is closer to the original. The Protestant acceptance of the Textus Receptus was primarily an acceptance of the authority of a Greek translation rather than the Latin [[Vulgate]] preferred by the [[Roman Catholic Church]]. − − The oldest examples of Alexandrian text are Papyrus 46, or Chester Beatty II, and Papyrus 66, or Bodmer II. P46 contains the Pauline epistles while P66 contains the Gospel of John. Both manuscripts date from about AD 200.<ref>Metzger, Bruce, (1994) ''A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament''. "With the acquisition, however, of the Bodmer Papyri, particularly P66 and P75, both copied about the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, evidence is now available that the Alexandrian type of text goes back to an archetype that must be dated early in the second century." P75 has since been redated to a later period.</ref> − − The Western text may have developed somewhat later. The earliest witnesses are quotes from the third century provided by church fathers, including [[Cyprian]], [[Tertullian]], and [[Irenaeus]]. The most representative example of Western text is [[Codex Bezae]], which dates to about 400. − − The Byzantine text is thought to be a recension of various Alexandrian and Western manuscripts, possibly done by Lucian of Antioch around 290. Wulfila's translation to Gothic, made around 350, may be based on a Greek manuscript of the Byzantine type. Another early translation that appears to be based on the Byzantine text is the Peshitta, which dates to the early fifth century. In the late fourth century, church father [[John Chrysostom]] quoted at length from the Byzantine text. The gospels in ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'' feature Byzantine text. This codex dates to about AD 400. The Byzantine text became standard by the eighth century and accounts for 95 percent of surviving New Testament manuscripts.<ref>Andrews, Edward D., "[https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2019/09/07/lucian-of-antioch-c-240-312-c-e-the-path-to-the-byzantine-text/ Lucian of Antioch (c. 240-312 C.E.): the Path to the Byzantine Text]," Christian Publishing House.</ref> − − In 1720, Richard Bentley proposed that TR be replaced with a Greek text based on ''Alexandrinus''.<ref>Bentley, Richard, ''Proposals for a New Edition of the Greek Testament'', 1720.</ref> In the early 19th century, Karl Lachmann developed a methodology which allowed a critic to determine which manuscript variants are likely to be closer to the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types. In 1850, he published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Brooke Westcott and F. J. A. Hort published a critical text based on ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library, and ''Alexandrinus.'' − −
reoder for chronology
[[File:Textus Receptus by Erasmus.jpeg|thumb|The last page of the 1516 edition of Textus Receptus by Erasmus. A Latin translation by Erasmus is on the right.]]'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," was a [[Greek]] text of the [[New Testament]] that was used by [[Reformation]]-era translators. The earliest edition was published by [[Erasmus]] in 1516. The [[King James Version]] is based on a 1598 edition by Theodore Bezae. Bezae used the final Erasmus text of 1535 and added footnotes with alternative readings.<ref>"[https://deeperstudy.blogspot.com/2007/10/steve-i-have-been-trying-to-find-which.html Beza's 1598]"</ref>
[[File:Textus Receptus by Erasmus.jpeg|thumb|The last page of the 1516 edition of Textus Receptus by Erasmus. A Latin translation by Erasmus is on the right.]]'''Textus Receptus''', or "Received Text," was a [[Greek]] text of the [[New Testament]] that was used by translators of the [[Reformation]] era. The earliest edition was published by [[Erasmus]] in 1516 in Basel. It was based on manuscripts available locally. Erasmus made numerous corrections in succeeding editions. For the fourth edition, he consulted the ''Complutensian Polyglot Bible,'' which is based on manuscripts kept at the Vatican Library in Rome. Erasmus published a fifth and final edition in 1536.
The classic edition of TR is the ''Editio Regia'' of 1550 by Stephanus. The Greek is based on the later editions by Erasmus. Stephanus added footnotes with alternative readings from other manuscripts. The [[King James Version]] is based on a 1598 edition by [[Theodore Beza]]. Beza reprinted the Greek text and footnotes from ''Editio Regia'' and added a Latin translation of his own.<ref>"[https://deeperstudy.blogspot.com/2007/10/steve-i-have-been-trying-to-find-which.html Beza's 1598]"</ref>
The name ''Textus Receptus'' is from a Latin phrase used in the preface of a 1624 edition by Bonaventure Elzevir: ''Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum.'' (So [the reader] has the text which all now receive.)<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 253.</ref>
The name ''Textus Receptus'' is from a Latin phrase used in the preface of a 1624 edition by Bonaventure Elzevir: ''Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum.'' (So [the reader] has the text which all now receive.)<ref>Thomas Holland, ''Crowned With Glory: The Bible from Ancient Text to Authorized Version'' (Lincoln, NE: Writers Club Press, 2000), 253.</ref>
==Development of the text==
TR follows a [[Byzantine Text|Byzantine text]]. Most modern scholars believe that the [[Alexandrian text]] is closer to the original. The Protestant acceptance of the Textus Receptus was primarily an acceptance of the authority of a Greek translation rather than the Latin [[Vulgate]] preferred by the [[Roman Catholic Church]].
The oldest examples of Alexandrian text are Papyrus 46, or Chester Beatty II, and Papyrus 66, or Bodmer II. P46 contains the Pauline epistles while P66 contains the Gospel of John. Both manuscripts date from about AD 200.<ref>Metzger, Bruce, (1994) ''A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament''. "With the acquisition, however, of the Bodmer Papyri, particularly P66 and P75, both copied about the end of the second or the beginning of the third century, evidence is now available that the Alexandrian type of text goes back to an archetype that must be dated early in the second century." P75 has since been redated to a later period.</ref>
The Western text may have developed somewhat later. The earliest witnesses are quotes from the third century provided by church fathers, including [[Cyprian]], [[Tertullian]], and [[Irenaeus]]. The most representative example of Western text is [[Codex Bezae]], which dates to about 400.
The Byzantine text is thought to be a recension of various Alexandrian and Western manuscripts, possibly done by Lucian of Antioch around 290. Wulfila's translation to Gothic, made around 350, may be based on a Greek manuscript of the Byzantine type. Another early translation that appears to be based on the Byzantine text is the Peshitta, which dates to the early fifth century. In the late fourth century, church father [[John Chrysostom]] quoted at length from the Byzantine text. The gospels in ''[[Codex Alexandrinus]]'' feature Byzantine text. This codex dates to about AD 400. The Byzantine text became standard by the eighth century and accounts for 95 percent of surviving New Testament manuscripts.<ref>Andrews, Edward D., "[https://christianpublishinghouse.co/2019/09/07/lucian-of-antioch-c-240-312-c-e-the-path-to-the-byzantine-text/ Lucian of Antioch (c. 240-312 C.E.): the Path to the Byzantine Text]," Christian Publishing House.</ref>
In 1720, Richard Bentley proposed that TR be replaced with a Greek text based on ''Alexandrinus''.<ref>Bentley, Richard, ''Proposals for a New Edition of the Greek Testament'', 1720.</ref> In the early 19th century, Karl Lachmann developed a methodology which allowed a critic to determine which manuscript variants are likely to be closer to the original. He assigned manuscripts to various text types. In 1850, he published a Greek New Testament based on manuscripts of the Alexandrian type. In 1881, Brooke Westcott and F. J. A. Hort published a critical text based on ''[[Codex Sinaiticus]]'', ''[[Codex Vaticanus]]'', a manuscript in the Vatican Library, and ''Alexandrinus.''
==Erasmus==
==Erasmus==
In 1550 Robert Stephanus produced a beautifully printed edition that added footnotes containing text from the Bezae and Regius codices. This is considered the classic edition of TR and is referred to as ''Editio Regia'' (royal edition). In 1551, Stephanus added a verse numbering system that is still used in modern Bibles. As for the text itself, Stephanus did little to improve on what Erasmus published. The KJV translators consulted a 1598 reprint of ''Edito Regia'' by Theodore Beza as well as several other editions. The ''Scrivener New Testament'' (1894) reconstructs the underlying Greek text they used.
In 1550 Robert Stephanus produced a beautifully printed edition that added footnotes containing text from the Bezae and Regius codices. This is considered the classic edition of TR and is referred to as ''Editio Regia'' (royal edition). In 1551, Stephanus added a verse numbering system that is still used in modern Bibles. As for the text itself, Stephanus did little to improve on what Erasmus published. The KJV translators consulted a 1598 reprint of ''Edito Regia'' by Theodore Beza as well as several other editions. The ''Scrivener New Testament'' (1894) reconstructs the underlying Greek text they used.
== For and against ==
==For and against==
According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on later 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.
According to supporters of the Critical Text, the TR is defective because it is based on later 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.