Quote:
Originally Posted by Contra_Mundum 
The truth is that there is, despite all the heavy breathing, an extraordinarily reliable text of this ancient book, no matter how many introductions of "errata" one can cobble. Nothing, absolutely nothing else in the world is comparable. So where we as humans end up disagreeing about whether the word has a missing letter, objectively we typically have little trouble agreeing on the inspired meaning of that sentence.
|
The basic point is well-taken. There is much agreement even between the TR and CT. However, it seems that CT folk tend to underplay the real differences that do exist. Recognizing that different statistics are sometimes given, we can do some evaluation. This from an article in the Quarterly Review:
The Greek text underlying the New Testament in modern versions is approximately 2,500 words shorter than the Greek text underlying the New Testament in the Authorised Version. This is nearly 2% of the whole. It is the equivalent of removing 1 and 2 Peter from the Bible. The total number of word differences (chiefly omissions, additions and substitutions) between these two texts is approximately 10,000 or nearly 7% of the whole.
While many of these differences are minor, over 1,500 affect the meaning of the text and nearly 500 of these substantially affect the meaning. Biblical doctrine is at stake. "Which Version: Does it Really Matter" by Rev. David Blunt, Quarterly Review 577 (October-December 2006)
This is worth being concerned about in my book. And if I lost my King James, I would buy another one
