Ad
related to: is textus receptus accurate
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.
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 ...
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.
The Byzantine priority theory has been also critiqued by advocates of the primacy of the Textus Receptus. Such critiques generally focus on the rejection of the strong doctrine of the providential preservation of the scripture by Byzantine priorists, who instead follow a textual-critical method. [ 23 ]
Most scholars view uncial text as the most accurate; however, a few authors, such as New Testament scholar Maurice A. Robinson, [1] linguist Wilbur Pickering, [2] Arthur Farstad and Zane C. Hodges, claim that the minuscule texts (the Byzantine text-type) more accurately reflect the "autographs" or original texts than an eclectic text like NA28 ...
However, despite defending the Authorised Version and the Textus Receptus, both Burgon and Miller believed that although the Textus Receptus was to be preferred to the Alexandrian Text, it still required to be corrected in certain readings against the manuscript tradition of the Byzantine text (thus advocating the Byzantine priority theory). [12]
Erasmus' editions started what became known as the Textus Receptus ("received text") Greek family which was the basis for most Western non-Catholic vernacular translations for the subsequent 350 years, until the new recensions of Westcott and Hort [67] (1881 and after) and Eberhard Nestle (1898 and after.) His annotations continued to be ...
Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort. Westcott and Hort distinguished four text types in their studies. The most recent is the Syrian, or Byzantine text-type (eastern), of which the newest example is the Textus Receptus and thus from the critical text view is less likely reliable.