Quote:
Originally Posted by Presbyterian Deacon  Quote:
Originally Posted by AV1611 Whilst the main body is based on the TR it contains the deviant readings in footnotes so I am unable to see how it can lay claim to being TR. Quote: |
Originally Posted by NKJV Preface the editors decided to retain the traditional text in the body of the New Testament and to indicate major Critical and Majority Text variant readings in the footnotes. Although these variations are duly indicated in the footnotes of the present edition, it is most important to emphasize that fully eighty-five percent of the New Testament text is the same in the Textus Receptus, the Alexandrian Text, and the Majority Text. | New King James Version |
It is TR precisely because they keep those deviant readings in footnotes, and do not insert tham in the text. That is what makes it TR. Isn't it? |
I agree. We don't consider footnotes as part of God's Word.
We might forget that the section headings are also not God's Word, but that's another issue.
