[aruanan]

Furthermore, if we wanted a translation of the OT that was commonly used up to and including the time of Jesus, we would have a translation from the Septuagint, not from the Masoretic text. When Jesus was quoting the OT, he was quoting the Septuagint. Because new Jewish Christians were so adept at using the Septuagint to proselytize, Jewish leaders abandoned it and adopted the Hebrew OT.

And the older Greek NT texts were much better than the so-called Textus Receptus, which was, in part, invented by translating the Vulgate back into Greek, creating words that did not appear in koine Greek. In fact, the phrase "textus receptus" was an advertising blurb for a Greek NT that was hastily cobbled together out of late miniscule manuscripts, parts of the Vulgate, whatever Erasmus could get his hands on as quickly as he could to beat others to publication. The so-called "textus receptus" did not exist before it was crafted by Erasmus. It went on to underlie many different translations into other languages which is why, for example, the standard Spanish translation, the Reina-Valera, was so close to the KJV in the NT--both came from Erasmus's creation.

[wagglebee]

Excellent post.

The YOPIOS crowd cannot seem to grasp the simple FACT that the KJV is based almost entirely on the Textus Receptus and even a little bit from the Vulgate.

They seem to ignore the FACT that the Textus Receptus was translated by Erasmus using Greek minuscules that mainly date from the 12th and 13th centuries (I don't believe that any of them were older than the 11th century) and that Erasmus used the Vulgate wherever necessary to "fill in the blanks."

They also ignore the FACT that Erasmus was a CATHOLIC PRIEST who strongly rejected the Reformation.

The simple FACT is that the Textus Receptus, Douay-Rheims AND the KJV are all little more than translations of the Vulgate (the KJV and Douay-Rheims Bible are far more similar to each other than either is to any modern Protestant or Catholic translation). When Saint Jerome translated the Vulgate he had the advantage of having access to Greek and Hebrew manuscripts that no longer exist (the YOPIOS crowd would love to claim there is some sort of conspiracy to destroy manuscripts, but the truth is that parchment cracks and deteriorates over time) and this means that it is almost certainly the best translation.

[Iscool]

And the older Greek NT texts were much better than the so-called Textus Receptus, which was, in part, invented by translating the Vulgate back into Greek, creating words that did not appear in koine Greek. In fact, the phrase "textus receptus" was an advertising blurb for a Greek NT that was hastily cobbled together out of late miniscule manuscripts, parts of the Vulgate, whatever Erasmus could get his hands on as quickly as he could to beat others to publication. The so-called "textus receptus" did not exist before it was crafted by Erasmus. It went on to underlie many different translations into other languages which is why, for example, the standard Spanish translation, the Reina-Valera, was so close to the KJV in the NT--both came from Erasmus's creation.

That doesn't correlate with any history of Erasmus or the Textus Receptus that I've ever read...