[b-greek] Re: Greekless TR Passages

From: Rodney J. Decker (rdecker@bbc.edu)
Date: Mon Sep 11 2000 - 16:48:09 EDT

>I would be appreciative if someone would be kind enough to provide me
>with a list of those passages in the TR which are not supported by any
>Greek manuscript evidence at all. Many thanks.

To the original question (changing "passages" to "readings," since not all
involve an entire verse):

Acts 9:6
1 Jn. 5:7-8
Rev. 17:4; 22:16, 17 (3x), 18, 19, 21

(cf. Metzger, *Text of the NT,* p. 100, para. 1-2 and n. 1; also smry.
stmt. on p. 106)

To the secondary question:

Technically, Erasmus did *not* use the "TR." He did use a half dozen (and
only that) MSS which were all of the Byzantine/Majority text type. His was
the first printed Greek testament (1516). Altogether Erasmus published 5
editions of his text.

There were several dozen other editions in the subsequent years, including
the Completensian Polyglot (printed 1514/published 1522) and a number of
"unauthorized" printings of Erasmus' text. Also editions by Robert
Estienne (= Stephanus; at least 5 eds.) and Beza (basically 4 editions,
though tech. 10).

The term "Textus Receptus" did not originate until it appeared in a
publisher's "PR blurb" in 1633: the 2d edition published by Bonaventure and
Abraham Elzevir (text taken from Bezae's 1565 ed.) claimed to be "the text
now received by all" (in Latin: "Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus
receptum: in quo nihil immutatum aut corruptum damus").

The KJV translators used primarily Beza's editions of 1588 and 1598.
Technically, they did not use the "TR" as that designation did not even
exist in 1611.

All of these texts were of the Byzantine type and differences between any
of them are relatively minor. There have been a number of "TR"s published
since that time, including the Oxford edition of 1825. Scrivner also
published a Greek text that is basically a "reverse engineered" TR--he
printed a basic TR text but changed it wherever necessary to reflect the
choices made by the KJV translators.

The "TR" is not synonymous with "Majority text" (or "Byzantine text"), but
is a small subset of that larger text type. The Hodges & Farstad edition is
one attempt at a "critical" edition of the Maj. txt., as is the odd edition
by Robinson & Pierpont. And they both disagree significantly with each other.

For reading, see Metzger's standard introduction, *The Text of the NT* or
the vol. by the Alands (same title as Metzger). Also of interest is D A
Carson's, *The KJV Debate: A Plea for Realism.* Well written and accessible
for those without a graduate degree in NT.

Rodney J. Decker, Th.D. Baptist Bible Seminary
Assoc. Prof./NT PO Box 800, Clarks Summit, PA 18411
rdecker@bbc.edu http://faculty.bbc.edu/rdecker/
The *Resources for NT Study* site is accessible at:

B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:35 EDT