Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: kosta50; Dr. Eckleburg; Uncle Chip
Are you saying that Tyndale did not use the corrupt Textus Receptus that eventually resulted in the KJV?

Is that why recent edition of Nestles had to backtrack and put back into its text many TR readings?

The TR is the pure textual line, and any edition (Erasmus, Eliezer, Beza etc) is better then any and every edition of the Critical Text.

We know that by the Bible that comes from each text and the fruit that they bear.

11,109 posted on 02/26/2007 2:11:39 AM PST by fortheDeclaration (For what saith the scripture? (Rom.4:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11082 | View Replies ]


To: fortheDeclaration; Dr. Eckleburg; Uncle Chip
Is that why recent edition of Nestles had to backtrack and put back into its text many TR readings?

Textus Receptus is based on unreliable sources of the Byzantine-type text, contains flaws and errors of judgment.

I have no idea which portions of Nestles edition had to revised, and what those revisions included, but Alexandrian-type text is the preferred source of modern-day scholars because it is less 'doctored.'

My point is that despite the evidence to the contrary, the offspirng of TR (such as the KJV) persist in keeping Comma Johanneum and Erasmus's own retro-translated (Latin to Greek) section of the Revelation, among other things.

11,112 posted on 02/26/2007 4:09:25 AM PST by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11109 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson