SeanAnderson
Puritan Board Freshman
Please note that the point of this thread is not to start a Critical Text versus Textus Receptus argument (I know it is a very contentious issue).
Since I've been a Christian, I've used the ESV, but have recently begun to look at alternative manuscript traditions.
In the Critical Text, some verses which are not present in one gospel are still present in another gospel or, additionally, in another location in the same gospel. Anyone making an argument for the Critical Text here can simply state that such verses have been transposed by scribes who are seeking to harmonise the accounts - whether this is true or not.
But something which has me scratching my head even more are those places where the Textus Receptus has content neither found in the Critical Text verse nor anywhere else in scripture.
Matthew 20:22
Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.” (ESV)
But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. (KJV)
Mark 9:49
For everyone will be salted with fire. (ESV)
For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. (KJV)
These are just two examples. I'm sure there are quite a few more, including the doxology of the Lord's Prayer.
What are we to make of these difficult passages? Is it possible that some of them could be scribes' notes rather than the Word of God?
As I said before, I didn't previously question the CT, but now that I have, it's still a minefield. I respect Burgon, but even he indicates that corrections could be made to the Textus Receptus. Is there a complete list anywhere of verses in the Textus Receptus where the manuscript evidence may be wanting?
Since I've been a Christian, I've used the ESV, but have recently begun to look at alternative manuscript traditions.
In the Critical Text, some verses which are not present in one gospel are still present in another gospel or, additionally, in another location in the same gospel. Anyone making an argument for the Critical Text here can simply state that such verses have been transposed by scribes who are seeking to harmonise the accounts - whether this is true or not.
But something which has me scratching my head even more are those places where the Textus Receptus has content neither found in the Critical Text verse nor anywhere else in scripture.
Matthew 20:22
Jesus answered, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am to drink?” They said to him, “We are able.” (ESV)
But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. (KJV)
Mark 9:49
For everyone will be salted with fire. (ESV)
For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. (KJV)
These are just two examples. I'm sure there are quite a few more, including the doxology of the Lord's Prayer.
What are we to make of these difficult passages? Is it possible that some of them could be scribes' notes rather than the Word of God?
As I said before, I didn't previously question the CT, but now that I have, it's still a minefield. I respect Burgon, but even he indicates that corrections could be made to the Textus Receptus. Is there a complete list anywhere of verses in the Textus Receptus where the manuscript evidence may be wanting?