Ad
related to: textus receptus vs majority text
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Textus Receptus (Latin: "received text") is the succession of printed Greek New Testament texts starting with Erasmus' Novum Instrumentum omne (1516) and including the editions of Stephanus, Beza, the Elzevir house, Colinaeus and Scrivener.
Textual critic and biblical scholar Karl Lachmann was the first scholar to produce an edition that broke with the Textus Receptus, ignoring previous printings and basing his text on ancient sources, therefore discounting the mass of late Byzantine manuscripts and the Textus Receptus.
It springs from, and to some extent endorses, the Majority Text methodology that takes the numerically most common readings from all New Testament manuscripts: most manuscripts are Byzantine text therefore the Majority Text is Byzantine. The Majority Text is distinguished from the view of those who advocate the Textus Receptus (TR) as, although ...
It underlies the Textus Receptus used for most Reformation-era translations of the New Testament. The "Majority Text" methodology effectively produces a Byzantine text-type, because Byzantine manuscripts are the most common and consistent. [1] Bible translations relying on the Textus Receptus: KJV, NKJV, Tyndale, Coverdale, Geneva, Bishops ...
Byz: Stephanus Textus Receptus 1550, Scrivener's Textus Receptus 1894, RP Byzantine Majority Text 2005, Greek Orthodox Church [9] καὶ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτούς (and [he] said to them) – Western text-type: D it [8] ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς (but he, answering them, said) – (C vid) E [8] Acts 1:10
He was an advocate of the Byzantine text (majority text) over more modern manuscripts as a source for Bible translations. He was the first to distinguish the Textus Receptus from the Byzantine text. Scrivener compared the Textus Receptus with the editions of Stephanus (1550), Theodore Beza (1565), and Elzevier (1633) and enumerated all the ...
However, Hodges considered that the Majority Text "corrects" the Received Text (Byzantine priority), and this view is generally distinguished from the views of the Textus Receptus advocates. [5] "Textus Receptus Only"/"Received Text Only" – This group holds the position that the traditional Greek texts represented in the Textus Receptus were ...
The Executive Editor of the NKJV, Arthur L. Farstad, addressed textual concerns in a book explaining the NKJV translation philosophy. [7] He defended the Majority Text (also called the Byzantine text-type) and claimed that the Textus Receptus is inferior to the Majority Text, but he noted (p. 114) that the NKJV references significant discrepancies among text types in its marginal notes: "None ...