Do 99% of mss agree with Received Text?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Logos1560, Jan 18, 2008.

  1. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    At the Sword Scripture Conference, Pastor Bob reported that "Dr. [Norris] Belcher brought out the fact that there are 5,366 extant mss, 99% of which agree with the Received Text.
    2,209 lectionaries exist - 100% agree with the TR.
    99% of all the writings of the church fathers agree with the TR.
    The other 1% is out of Alexandria."

    What is the documented evidence that confirms that the above claims by Norris Belcher is actually a fact? Who checked and correlated all those 5,366 manuscripts and has presented evidence that they everyone agree with every reading of the Received Text?

    Some KJV-only authors have made a similar claim, but they have not proven it to be a fact. Do the speakers at the Sword Conference understand the difference between facts and unproven claims?

    KJV-only advocate D. A. Waite claimed that “the Textus Receptus is from a type of text known as the Traditional Text which is represented today by over 5,210 preserved Greek manuscripts” (Fundamentalist Distortions, p. 27). He asserted that “the Textus Receptus is the big circle of 5,210 Greek manuscripts or more” (p. 28). Waite declared that “the Textus Receptus is based on over 5,210 Greek manuscripts” (Fundamentalist Deception, p.56). Waite argued that “over 5,210 out of the 5,255 manuscripts as of the 1967 total lie behind our Textus Receptus” (p. 71). Who has carefully examined and collated all of those 5,210 Greek manuscripts so that it can accurately be implied that they are every word in agreement with the Textus Receptus?

    When KJV-only authors want to attack the Majority Text, they themselves make statesments that conflict or contradict the above claims.

    KJV-only author David Cloud maintained that “the extant Greek manuscripts have never been collated and examined in such a way that a majority text could be determined with any degree of certainty” (Bible Version Question/Answer, p. 207; Faith, p. 692). Cloud claimed that the collations of Hermann von Soden “is the most extensive collation that has ever been made” (Ibid.). Clinton Branine also admited that “Von Sodden has done more work for a critical apparatus than anyone else has in this point of time” (Waite, Fundamental Distortions, p. 27). If that most extensive collation is supposedly insufficient evidence to establish the text for a Majority Text, it indicates that use of a smaller number of manuscripts would be insufficient evidence for the Textus Receptus.
     
  2. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Here is a quick test for Belcher's claimed fact.

    Do 99% of the manuscripts agree with the reading "raise the dead" at Matthew 10:8?

    At Matthew 10:8, the Lamsa translation of the Syriac Peshitta does not have "raise the dead," which is also not found in the Greek Majority Text. Dean Burgon believed that this clause "raise the dead" did not belong in the text since it is only found in one out of every twenty manuscripts (The Revision Revised, p. 108). In Edward Miller's Textual Commentary, the Peshitta, Sahidic, Armenian, and Ethiopic versions are listed as not having this clause along with many Greek manuscripts (p. 75). KJV defender Edward F. Hills listed this clause "raise the dead" in his list of readings where Erasmus followed the Latin Vulgate, and he also noted that this clause "is omitted by the majority of Greek manuscripts" (KJV Defended, p. 200).
     

Share This Page

Loading...