Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueridge reformer  It's a pity the reformers didn't have this "superior test" to work with while they were pumping out those spurious translations. just my 
As for me, I'll stick with the TR. |
The Reformers did not deal with this subject if at all because they were not, by and large, aware of the scope of the problem (they also had bigger fish to fry at the time
). Having ANY edition of the Greek text commonly available was a new revolution thanks to the printing press. (not to mention how the printing press also assured uniformity of all the copies in any given edition which would further cloud the scope of the issue of textual varients in the manuscripts).
It was not until the later part of the 1600s that the textual issue with the manuscripts began to come to light more broadly through the works of men like Dr John Fell (Bishop of Oxford) and John Mill (Queen's College, Oxford). Mill's edition of the Greek New Testament in particular caused a stir because he also included an apparatus that revealed many of variants (and these mostly varients with the Byzantine Text Form itself!).
As more scholars became aware of the problem, scholarship began to develop that would address it and seek to aid us in comprehending the best readings.