Partial compilation of Textual Criticism threads and posts.

Not open for further replies.

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Professor
In the absence of the blogs of old where one could collect links to significant threads, I'd like to post here for reference some previous textual threads (I'll be doing the same for Baptism and misc material, and eschatology).

Jerusalem Blade's textual posts (a partial compilation)
(7865 Views on the old blog)

I’ve been looking for and collecting these for a while, and am posting them as I recently said I would, for the benefit of those who would like to see a mostly irenic and scholarly presentation of the TR / AV position. I say “mostly irenic” as in some of my earlier postings I was less irenic than now. Irenic does not mean I am softening my position, but rather softening my heart toward dear brothers and sisters who differ with me in textual matters. Hanging out with IFB folks for a while before coming here to PB, I appreciated their bare-knuckled approach to the matter. But here I came into contact with scholarly and godly opponents who protested my approach, as it was their conviction – based upon conscience and scholarship – that they did possess a “legitimate” Bible in the CT versions. I myself address this in the “adequate vs. minute preservation” discussions, and agree with them.

My mature (& present) attitude can be found in the OP of the “Responding to James White of AOMIN” thread. There is coming a time when all sectors of the true church will be afflicted and persecuted, even in the U.S., and we shall need that cement which holds the house of living stones firm and steady while in tribulation: that cement is genuine friendship. While the foundation is Christ in Scripture, and the pillars are sound doctrine in godly churches, friendship in Christ holds it all together – holds us all together.

Bitter souls (whatever side they are on) who indulge in stereotyping, inflammatory slanderous remarks, holding opponents in contempt, not only violate the grace our Lord commands us to show one another (as He sustains us by His undeserved grace), they reveal dire illness of the soul, channeling an infernal root of bitterness that indeed defiles many. Some boards allow such; I hope this board does not allow it to continue, for it has made its mark here (and I’m sorry to say I have participated to some extent in it; I would alter some words of mine, but the threads and posts are locked, and not to be changed). So when you may see harsh words I may have spoken, know that I have repented of this bad attitude.

If we ever find ourselves hidden in a house together, with evil posses outside hunting for us, I want to be known as a friend among friends, all of us in the presence of our mighty Captain, and not as a flaming-tongued disturber of the peace.

Our opponents will sufficiently try our views of Scripture. It is now to them I will give my attention, starting with Ehrman (I am procuring some of his books to study them).

I may add to this list.

In Jesus’ wonderful name,


Jerusalem Blade’s posts: [click on spoiler to see]

Ecclesiastical Text — Response to James White [August 2015]

A Majority Text pastor interacting with James White on a Youtube video, and I—starting in posts #45 & 46—also interacting with some of James' statements concerning the AV / TR, continuing the responses in posts #76 and down. James had said, “[Rev 16:5, Luke 2:22], Eph 1:18, Eph 3:9, 2 Tim 2:19. These are places the TR reading is basically indefensible.” So I defend them.

Answering Alan Kurschner of aomin thread

Hort on early Byz majority:

Borland essay; Lake, allegation Alexandrian text majority examined: ibid

W&H text not the same as CT/ET per White:

Responding to James White of AOMIN thread

Johannine Comma thread

Nolan on :

Minute vs. adequate preservation:

Pickering on the early history of the text:

Holland on :

Skepticism and doubt toward the Bible thread

Verse differences

(25 posts of mine in thread); partly on Erasmus and his place in the process of preservation, partly on his spiritual status, then further on who is faithful to the Reformation in their views? Free-wheeling.

How did the Bible come to be?

A simple, basic explanation

Letis on Inerrancy, and Warfield

Dr. Theodore Letis' essay, "B.B. Warfield, Common-Sense Philosophy and Biblical Criticism" (on Scribd). [The essays of Letis I post on Scribd I have done with the publisher’s permission, or recommendation.]

Theodore Beza as Text Critic, by Ted Letis

Two scanned essays (on Scribd): Dr. Ted Letis, “Theodore Beza as Text Critic: A View Into the Sixteenth Century Approach to New Testament Text Criticism”, from Letis’ book, The Majority Text: Essays and Reviews in the Continuing Debate

and, (almost entire) "Theodore P. Letis on John Owen Versus Brian Walton: A Reformed Response to the Birth of Text Criticism"

By Dr. / Rev. Paul Ferguson: The historic views of the Church concerning Preservation, Paul F.doc [click for download]

This KJVO article has ruined the ESV for me :-( thread

7 posts in this thread starting here:

LXX Discussion thread

Many issues concerning the Septuagint.

Do NT authors quote the LXX? thread

Further consideration of Septuagint issues.

On Will Kinney’s method (defense of), my views on textual stuff, etc.

Problems with the modern text-critical approach and the ESV

I really tried to stay out of this fray, being so busy, but entered it to defend the Bible I and others hold so dear – and ended up with 14 posts in it.


(20 posts all told; first post in #7, but then from #65 on)

KJV / Byz / TR Resources thread

[I will be making corrections in this post - and it will reappear shortly]

The above link contains many resources, online and hardcopy. I want to stress: online resources sometimes go defunct. Download as much as you are able while they exist. For example, Will Kinney's superb KJV Articles page has moved: Kinney's new website. These studies are not "expendable", but essential. Download the lot while you can!

Hebrew Vowel Points in Question thread (My posts are #22 and #24)

Not In Early Manuscript--Good or Bad? thread

"Phantom Manuscripts"? thread

WCF and CT thread

Extended quote of Letis on Warfield and WCF :


Burgon on :

A summing up:

KJV-Only Versus Byzantine Superiority thread

Burgon on :

Textual Manuscripts thread

Lane vs. Steve on Alexandrian/W&H (& Asa – Amon):

What is the authentic New Testament text? thread: (A partial list of contents in the OP)

Quoting Letis’ essay responding to D.A. Carson:

CONCERNING ERASMUS (Coats, Cloud, etc):

Letis / Borland on Asa and Amon (Matt 1:7, 10 ESV):

Kirsopp Lake, “It is hard to resist the conclusion that the scribes usually destroyed their exemplars when they had copied the sacred books.”:

From Dr. Peter Van Kleeck's essay, "The Genius of Ambiguity", on the authenticity of the AV's rendering of ,7:

Do Many Scholars Prefer the Majority Text? thread

Byz priority:

TTer gone CTer thread (many posts)

Warfield assertion countered by Lake:

History of the KJV and TR thread

Owen on variants (from Letis):

A History Of The Authorized Version thread

Extended discussion of the Septuagint starting at post #40:

Beelzebub or Beelzebul? thread (see post #9 ff.)

Byzantine readings of Paul thread

Pickering and Robinson on “no early Byz mss”:

Do textual variants give us confidence? thread

Some posts on the OT text:

Verses omitted from the ESV thread

Extensive Nolan quote:

Linguistic Superiority between Geneva and KJV? thread

Links to “Easter” discussions in KJV:

2015 thread on Easter

Steve starting in post #9:

Pascha in thread (re “Easter”) thread

Steve’s input starting in post #10:

Defending the Lord's Prayer 1 thread (Matt 6)

Defending the Lord's Prayer 2 thread (Luke 11)

On Gathering Intelligence and Evidence thread

Why do KJ Only types believe the Westcott and Hort manuscripts are bad? thread (my first post #14)

pierced/like a lion...need Hebrew help thread

NASB / ESV Revisions?? thread

THE ASCENDANCY OF THE CRITICAL TEXT thread (bare-knuckled poem)

On Enoch in Jude thread

Colossians 1:14 thread

Did Lazarus write the Gospel of John? thread (starting at post #18)

The Occult in the late 19th, early 20th centuries

Inspired in Teachings Only? thread

Biblical Preservation thread (RE: Tischendorf rescued [Codex Sinaiticus] from a waste basket)

Mark 16:12 thread

John 7:53-8:11 thread

King James Only Movement thread

Verbal Plenary Preservation thread

Discussion of Reformation texts:

Arians in power for 50 years in Greek empire:

Titus 2:13, 2 Peter 1:1, and Granville Sharp thread

Farstad & Hodges Vs. Robinson & Pierpont thread

The merits of the A.V. thread

On Bruce Metzger:

AV Theology Compared to Modern Versions thread

Dr. Vance Smith (Unitarian) on the 1881 Revisers effect on doctrines of the NT (see post #46)

KJV ... this FREEDOM? thread

Only Perfect Translation? thread

I joined this discussion at post #45.
Last edited:


Puritan Board Junior
If I may relate of a phenomena that occurred in the 17th century, on an English plain that borders my own country, when there were terrible floods. It was recorded that to escape drowning the wild life made for the small hills or gnolls on the flatland. So that there were foxes, rabbits, sheep, weasels, field mice and all the species of nature gathered together. Though they were prey and predators intermingling, they overcame their natural propensities, and during that period of mutual danger lived at peace with one another.
You make your point Steve, and whilst we cannot relinquish our doctrinal convictions, we are to love the brethren, and heed Paul's exhortation during these unpredictable days, "follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see God."


Puritan Board Professor

I appreciate you consolidating your posts on this topic as well as your demeanor. Have you written a single, extended work on your text/translation views? I'm finding the hopscotch topic to topic approach frustrating in getting a handle on the basic issues. The forums would be more useful for me after going through some decent introductions to the topic. I'm aware of Carson's and White's works that fall on the side of the CT.

I don't know how it would be done; maybe a greater use of the "Resources" section of the new forum for some of the articles, essays and books you've referenced as to access them easier. Others of varying convictions could upload materials their too. I'm interested in the topic and appreciate that I can come here among the godly for information despite some serious disagreements. Google searches on this topic are futile for finding systematically organized, introductory material from stable men. The wackos nearly drown everything out.

Jerusalem Blade

Puritan Board Professor
Hello Zach,

Thanks for your comments. I'd say the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th of the threads do give somewhat of an intro to the topic. True, as a bunch they are not an organized presentation, yet they do give respective overviews of the topic. A number of the others deal with specific issues, mostly regarding the validity of particular variants.

So, in some I have sought to give overviews of the terrain, and in others going down "into the trenches", as it were, to defend or oppose readings. In my view of "King James version priority" (not KJV only) I highlight that the primary issue pertains to the readings / variants, not the entire Bibles themselves. All Bibles (not including such as the JW's NWT) are legitimate and good, although many readings are not. A good question is where did these (alleged) illegitimate readings come from ?

One could also say that in the main I seek to defend the Reformation text, that which led the Westminster divines to write,

The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which, at the time of the writing of it, was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and, by His singular care and providence, kept pure in all ages, are therefore authentical; so as, in all controversies of religion, the Church is finally to appeal unto them... (WCF 1.8)​

What was “kept pure in all ages”— 1) an entire Greek NT? And that throughout the church age till printing came to be? I don’t think so (although it is possible). Or 2) the pure READINGS of the autographs kept in various Greek mss, and then compiled in an authoritative edition, and then printed? Which edition would that be? I know of none. OR 3) the pure readings of the Greek autographs kept in various mss—mostly the Traditional (Byzantine) Greek, but a very few kept in other versions due to attacks and mutilations of the Greek—and then put into print in the Greek Textus Receptus editions, known to and used by the Westminster divines, and put into the English, Dutch, and other translations? I hold to the third option.

There are a lot of details, a lot of stories—all of which do pertain to this discussion—and perhaps I could write it all in a book, but I do not have the time presently, having another book I'm trying to get out, plus teaching and occasionally preaching (all of which take a good bit of work). Not to mention that my memory is not what it used to be (in around two months I'll be 3/4ths of a century old). At least I have these articles preserved. And perhaps I will add a few more that I have not published yet.

I do appreciate your input—thank you for that.


Staff member
Zach, Burgon and Hill are the go-to guys for TR scholarship. DON'T read wackos like Gail Riplinger. Always read the best representatives of a position. They will give you a good handle on the issues. Steve has done a very good job as well of presenting the case for the TR in an irenic way. I remember with great fondness our debates on the topic: issue-focused, and charitable, like debates should be.


Puritan Board Professor
Zach, Burgon and Hill are the go-to guys for TR scholarship. DON'T read wackos like Gail Riplinger. Always read the best representatives of a position. They will give you a good handle on the issues. Steve has done a very good job as well of presenting the case for the TR in an irenic way. I remember with great fondness our debates on the topic: issue-focused, and charitable, like debates should be.

Thanks Pastor Lane. Who do you recommend for the CT case?


Staff member
Zach, I think Carson and White are the best resources for the CT position. Metzger has a lot of important things to say, but must be used with discretion. In addition to his liberal bias, he also weights subjective criteria too highly.

Stephen L Smith

Staff member
Zach, Burgon and Hill are the go-to guys for TR scholarship
Burgon was not TR. He was Byzantine text. He disagreed with some readings in the TR. Hills is certainly a leading Reformed defender of the KJV.

James Price's book King James Onlysm is also a key resource on the CT.


Staff member
Stephen, while you may be correct in picking a nit about the difference between someone who defends a Byzantine text type versus a TR defender, in almost any text-critical case in the NT, they would turn out to be the same thing. Burgon is generally reckoned (and quoted!) as being in the camp of the TR, which consists of the Byzantine text type.

Stephen L Smith

Staff member
Rev Keister I agree with you that the TR and Byzantine text have much in common but both James White's and James Price's book give examples of where Burgon would clearly distance himself from the TR camp. Price, for example, mentions many places Burgon would correct the TR by the Byzantine text, and White quotes Burgon that if one accepts 1 John 5:7 as scripture, the NT textual methodology would be up for grabs and the NT text would be uncertain and doubtful. See the full quote in White's revised edition pg 103-104.


Puritanboard Commissioner
If I recall correctly, Burgon said that the TR needed to be changed in over 1000 places. So his view seems to be closer to the more recent Majority Text/Byzantine Priority advocates, who deviate too much from the TR for the liking of those like Steve, the Trinitarian Bible Society, etc.

On the other hand, given his Anglicanism, my understanding is that Burgon would have agreed with the need or advisability of an ecclesiastical text as opposed to the kinds of independent committees that we see today.
Not open for further replies.