History of KJV and TR

bookslover · #81 (**permalink**) 02-22-2007, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerusalem Blade

One would think it reasonable that such an overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts – over 90% of the 5,000+ extant mss, lectionary readings, etc – represented that text form commonly used by the people of God, and was due to their coming from a common source albeit in widely diverse geographical areas, meaning the original apostolic writings.

Here's the part I don't understand, Steve. Since, as you say, 90% of the extant 5,000+ manuscripts "represent the text form commonly used by the people of God," in other words, 90% of all the manuscripts we have say the same thing, then why do the KJV-only folks say that only those manuscripts from which the AV is derived are "the true text of the Bible"?

Why do they get to claim that only they have the Word of God? How come the ESV guys (like me) don't get to say the same?

Jerusalem Blade · #82 (**permalink**) 02-23-2007, 10:04 AM

Richard Z.,

These 90% are what is called the Traditional or Majority or Byzantine textform, in contradistinction to the Critical textform, which is not Byzantine but Alexandrian. There is a distinction between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus of the AV, and this difference consists primarily in the additions to the Byzantine of certain readings missing from it but present in some Latin mss, including the Latin Vulgate (and other versions), such as “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16, 1 John 5:7, and some others. The AV folks say that certain readings were expunged from the Byzantine manuscripts during the period (roughly 335 to 385 A.D.) the Arian party was in control of both the Greek Church and Empire; one might imagine what the JWs or Unitarians would do were they in the same positions of authority. There are historical accounts of the Arians persecuting and torturing the orthodox believers to get them to recant owning Christ as God; if they would do this to flesh & souls, what would they do to paper?

At any rate, the AVers say that the Lord providentially preserved these missing readings by taking them from the Latin mss of the West where the persecuting authorities of the East had far less effect – first through the pen of Erasmus, and then the other Reformation editors.

The ESV guys can say they have the Word of God, only the text has some mutilations in it (I mean essentially omissions, and some changes). There are some honorable and godly people, such as Dr. James White, who take strong exception to my view (and the MT view as well), though a weak point in his presentation is that the texts (the Critical and Eclectic texts) as well as the different English translations that come from them often differ among themselves.

The woman through whom the Lord converted me to Himself used a Lamsa Pesh-itta (to avoid the censoring software!) version, and I think she told me it was because that was the Bible Oral Roberts was using! A pastor in NYC I love and who has profoundly changed and enriched my walk with Christ uses the NIV, and I think is now changing to the ESV. When men and women cleave to the Word of God they have in a good conscience God blesses them, and makes them a blessing to others, despite our small differences as regards the versions.

For those who have problems with the language of the KJV, and the few errors in the NKJV, I would recommend Jay Green’s Modern King James Version.

There are godlier men than I who use the ESV, and whom God uses more than me, because of their better hearts.

Early on in my walk, coming as I did out of the 60’s counter-culture, drugs, and occult stuff, I saw quickly that for me to withstand Satan I would need certainty of mind as regards the reliability and authenticity of His Scripture. It was a close combat for many years, and I had to know my sword and shield would hold in the fray. That’s the furnace I was forged in. And it was the Doctrines of Grace which enabled me to stand before my God, in His power and grace, not trusting in myself. Though it was years before I took to heart the things in this previous sentence.

Hope this clarifies somewhat, Richard.

Steve

CDM · #83 (**permalink**) 02-23-2007, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerusalem Blade

Richard Z.,

These 90% are what is called the Traditional or Majority or Byzantine textform, in contradistinction to the Critical textform, which is not Byzantine but Alexandrian. There is a distinction between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus of the AV, and this difference consists primarily in the additions to the Byzantine of certain readings missing from it but present in some Latin mss, including the Latin Vulgate (and other versions), such as “God” in 1 Timothy 3:16, 1 John 5:7, and some others. The AV folks say that certain readings were expunged from the Byzantine manuscripts during the period (roughly 335 to 385 A.D.) the Arian party was in control of both the Greek Church and Empire; one might imagine what the JWs or Unitarians would do were they in the same positions of authority. There are historical accounts of the Arians persecuting and torturing the orthodox believers to get them to recant owning Christ as God; if they would do this to flesh & souls, what would they do to paper?

At any rate, the AVers say that the Lord providentially preserved these missing readings by taking them from the Latin mss of the West where the persecuting authorities of the East had far less effect – first through the pen of Erasmus, and then the other Reformation editors.

The ESV guys can say they have the Word of God, only the text has some mutilations in it (I mean essentially omissions, and some changes). There are some honorable and godly people, such as Dr. James White, who take strong exception to my view (and the MT view as well), though a weak point in his presentation is that the texts (the Critical and Eclectic texts) as well as the different English translations that come from them often differ among themselves.

The woman through whom the Lord converted me to Himself used a Lamsa Pesh-itta (to avoid the censoring software!) version, and I think she told me it was because that was the Bible Oral Roberts was using! A pastor in NYC I love and who has profoundly changed and enriched my walk with Christ uses the NIV, and I think is now changing to the ESV. When men and women cleave to the Word of God they have in a good conscience God blesses them, and makes them a blessing to others, despite our small differences as regards the versions.

For those who have problems with the language of the KJV, and the few errors in the NKJV, I would recommend Jay Green’s Modern King James Version.

There are godlier men than I who use the ESV, and whom God uses more than me, because of their better hearts.

Early on in my walk, coming as I did out of the 60’s counter-culture, drugs, and occult stuff, I saw quickly that for me to withstand Satan I would need certainty of mind as regards the reliability and authenticity of His Scripture. It was a close combat for many years, and I had to know my sword and shield would hold in the fray. That’s the furnace I was forged in. And it was the Doctrines of Grace which enabled me to stand before my God, in His power and grace, not trusting in myself. Though it was years before I took to heart the things in this previous sentence.

Hope this clarifies somewhat, Richard.

Steve

Steve, I am especially looking forward to your input on the thread I just created here.

bookslover · #84 (**permalink**) 02-24-2007, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerusalem Blade

There are godlier men than I who use the ESV, and whom God uses more than me, because of their better hearts.

I appreciate your humility here, but just remember that, ultimately, they don't have "better" hearts than you. In and of ourselves, we're all nothing more than filthy sinners. God chose you, and them, and me for exactly the same reason: out of His sovereign electing love; and for exactly the same purpose: glorifying Him and enjoying Him forever. If it weren't for the magnificent doctrines of grace, all of us would be rotting in Hell forever. Also, I don't think God uses some people more than others; I think it's better to say that God uses some people differently than others. We are all given our places to work in the Lord's vineyard but in the end, since it's all for His glory, it's ultimately not a matter of "more" or "better". We're all just bondservants.

We've all got the same goal, brother - and it's all of grace!

Jerusalem Blade · #85 (**permalink**) 02-25-2007, 04:30 PM

Richard,

That's a bit too egalitarian for my taste. You are right at setting the baseline for human behavior low: "we're all nothing more than filthy sinners". Yet how we respond to and use the grace given us varies: some produce fruit "an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty" (Matt 13:23). I do not think it depends on gifts, but on heart. The work of some will be found "wood, hay, stubble," and that due to motive, diligence, and love or lack thereof.

Paul tells us to "each esteem other better than themselves" (Phil 2:3), and I do not think he's just talking religious "fluff". I can see that my wife's character is better than my own in certain areas, and I try to yield to her at such times.

Are not some bondservants more faithful than others? I call "sovereignitis" that malaise which belittles human responsibility due to our knowledge of God's overriding sovereignty. An accurate assessment of human behavior discerns a full spectrum of diligence, proper motive, and self-sacrificing love.

Some hearts are better than others. It grieves me that mine is as bad as it is. That's not humility, but inescapable accuracy....and yet, I am loved notwithstanding. As Tim Keller is wont to say, "We are more wicked than we ever dared to think, and -- simultaneously -- more loved than we ever dared to hope." Such love is transforming.

Maybe, Richard, it's that you're around some really godly folks, and this influences your view. Or maybe this is what R.C. Sproul means with his expression, "judgment of charity."

Steve

Mathetes · #86 (**permalink**) 02-26-2007, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by I follow Jesus

I think if one follows a logical thread of Providence and Preservation the only conclusion is that the AV is the Word of God in English.

Except that you could use the same argument to conclude that the NASB or the ESV is the Word of God in English.