Analytical-Literal Translation (ALT) Bible

Judge for yourself

http://www.dtl.org/alt/variants/intro.htm

HankD

 

The TR (all 30+ editions) are all representative of the Byzantine text type.

Sort of. The TR (Byzantine) came from Byzantium. The Byzantine Empire covered all of southern Europe east of Italy. The Byzantine Empire arose around 312AD and was defeated by the Ottoman Turks in 1453AD. It is only logical that the Byzantine Empire became the primary repository of the biblical text as it was the main Greek speaking country of the world of that time.

No. The Cesarean text was generally considered to be a separate text type. However, current thinking is that the Cesarean text type never really existed, but was the result of careless collation of Byzantine manuscripts. Bruce Metzgar stated in his book "Chapters in the History of New Testament Textual Criticism," (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1963, page 67) the "Cesarean" text-type is disintegrating. By this he did not mean the material upon which the text was written was crumbling, but rather, the concept of a "Cesarean text-type" was itself now largely understood to have been a false assumption. He went on to ask: "Was there a fundamental flaw in the previous investigation which tolerated so erroneous a grouping?" The evidence says there was indeed a fundamental flaw in the collation of manuscripts.

The Critical Texts are eclectic but weigh the Alexandrian text type far heavier than any other. When the two most prominent of the Alexandrian texts (Aleph and B) agree, the Critical text editors consider that reading to be virtually unchallengeable.

The TR is one of many representatives of the Byzantine text type. The other two most prominent representatives would be the Majority Text according to Hodges and Farstad and the Majority Text according to Robinson and Pierpont.

All translations prior to 1865 are based on the Byzantine/TR. After 1865 almost all translations were based on the Alexandrian text type with the exception of the NKJV, TMB, KJVII, and a few other little known versions.

For the most part that is correct.

Correct. The KJV, for the most part, follows the TR, but departs occasionally to follow the readings of the LV or other early vernaculars.

Correct.

The Western Text only exists today in a very few Greek manuscripts, but the Latin Vulgate of Jerome as later edited by Clement is Western in character.

No. The scholarly opinion today suggests the Western text represents a partially corrected Alexandrian text, corrected using the Byzantine text.

The only thing stupid is assuming you know all the answers. Kind of like Askjo!

 

As my pastor keeps telling me, "Paul, you are not a nice man!" Come to think of it my parents, my wife, my kids, the deacons, my students, well, just about everybody, says the same thing!

 

Ditto, here, Skan.

Way too amny times I speak from my ignorance. I do appreciate your explanation of it all.

In Christ,
Trotter