"Majority (Byzantine) Text" English Translations

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by franklinmonroe, Feb 16, 2009.

  1. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    I know of just four English New Testament translations that claim to follow a 'majority' (or Byzantine) text: the Analytical-Literal Translation (ALT) the New Covenant Scriptures (NCS), the English Majority Text Version (EMTV), and the World English Bible (WEB). Does anyone know of others?
     
  2. John of Japan

    John of Japan
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    12,219
    Likes Received:
    192
    I assume by this you don't mean TR-based translations, right? If so, you've probably listed them all.

    However, I do have an interlinear where the Greek is the Hodges-Farstad Majority text, so the interlinear text is based on that and was translated by Farstad, Hodges, C. Michael Moss, Robert E. Picirilli and Wilbur Pickering. The parallel English version is the NKJV.

    I'd love to see a translation or an interlinear from the Byzantine Textform Greek NT. Maybe Dr. Robinson will see this and knows someone working on one! Actually, I've translated a couple of books from the Byzantine into English, but have no intention of publishing.
     
  3. EdSutton

    EdSutton
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not sure this is wholly accurate for the WEB, as it claims to follow both the ASV and MT.

    Because the ASV is not based on the MT, both cannot simultaneously be true.

    Neither is the MT identical to the TR, despite the oft stated claims of some.

    Regardless, the MT is ONLY applicable to the New Testament, and neither to the Old Testament or Apocrypha.

    These happens to be simple facts. Of course, when one is a [Ungracious description snipped!] of the sort that seem to often appear on these pages, for whom the agenda of one version ONLY is (or at least seems to be) more important than any mischaracterization, the truth or facts of the matter, such little, unimportant, minuscule, annoying, trivial, non-essential, details as truth and facts seem to often be overlooked.

    Ed
     
    #3 EdSutton, Feb 17, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 17, 2009
  4. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    The English translation entitled The Analytical-Literal Translation of the New Testament by Gary Zeolla was based on The Greek New Testament According to the Byzantine Text edited by Robinson and Pierpont. Zeolla's translation is produced by Darkness to Light Ministry (www.dtl.org).

    There is also a translation of the book of Revelation in print that is based on Robinson's text. It is entitled The Revelation of Jesus Christ Translated from the Byzantine Textform by Charles Wiese [Grand Rapids, MI].
     
  5. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    In another topic, stilllearning wrote --
    Perhaps, some people do not understand that there is a difference between the approximately 30 printed Greek editions collectively known as the Textus Receptus (TR) and the printed Greek texts claiming to represent the 'majority' readings from the Byzantine family of manuscripts (often abbreviated as MT, but not to be confused with the Masoretic Text of the Hebrew scripture).

    Two such Greek texts have been published: The New Testament in the Original Greek: Byzantine Textform compiled by Robinson & Pierpont; and, The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text by Hodges & Farstad. Only a handful of English translations have been attempted based on these or other MT efforts. Many differences between the TR and the MT can be smoothed over in the translation to English. However, some are obvious and could be considered important.

    For example, notice Matthew 10:8 in three TR-based versions include an additional phrase "raise the dead" not found in MT-based versions --
    Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give. (KJV)
    Heale the sicke, clense the lepers rayse the deed, cast out the deuils. Frely ye haue receaued, frely geue againe. (Coverdale)
    Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead,* cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give (NKJV)

    "Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you have received, freely give. (EMTV)
    Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers*, and cast out demons. Freely you received, so freely give. (WEB)
    "Be healing [ones] being sick, be cleansing lepers [or, [ones] with a skin disease], be casting out demons; freely you* received, freely give. (ALT)

    Another significant example, notice Matthew 23:25 in three TR-based versions have a different word basically meaning "excess", while the MT-based versions display a word that essentially means "unrighteousness" (also witnessed iby Wycliffe below) --
    Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. (KJV)
    "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence.* (NKJV)
    Wo vnto you scrybes and Pharises, ye Ypocrytes, which make cleane the vttersyde of the cuppe and platter, but within are ye full of robbery and excesse. (Coverdale)

    Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and unrighteousness.*(EMTV)
    “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and unrighteousness. (WEB)
    How horrible it will be to you*, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you* cleanse [or, purify] the outside of the cup and the plate, but within they are full of violent greed and unrighteousness. (ALT)

    Woo to you, scribis and Farisees, ypocritis, that clensen the cuppe and the plater with outforth; but with ynne ye ben ful of raueyne and vnclennesse. (WYC)

    A third quick example, notice Matthew 27:41 in three TR-based versions are lacking the word "Pharisees", included in the MT-based versions (also found in a Geneva edition) --
    Likewise also the chief priests mocking [him], with the scribes and elders, said, (KJV)
    Likewise the chief priests also, mocking with the scribes and elders,* said, (NKJV)
    The hye prestes also in like maner with the scrybes & elders, laughed him to scorne, and sayde: (Coverdale)

    Likewise the chief priests also, mocking Him with the scribes and elders, and Pharisees, said, (EMTV)
    Likewise the chief priests also mocking, with the scribes, the Pharisees, and the elders, said, (WEB)
    Then likewise also the chief priests, with the scribes and elders and Pharisees, ridiculing [Him], saying, (ALT)

    Likewise also the hie Priests mocking him, with the Scribes, and Elders, and Pharises, said, (GEN1562)
    It is evident that the KJV does NOT reflect all the majority readings from the Byzantine manuscript family. BTW: most modern versions based upon eclectic Greek texts (CT) agree with the KJV/TR versions in all three verses above against the MT.

    NOTE: the EMTV and WEB is text available online; I typed the ALT text in from my hardcopy. The ALT 'expands' some renderings in brackets. The ALT also has some special typographic features; one being that "you" followed by an asterisk indicates the plural form of the pronoun. The asterisks original to the NKJV verses denote that there are associated footnotes indicating the variant MT readings.
     
    #5 franklinmonroe, Feb 17, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 17, 2009
  6. annsni

    annsni
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    20,198
    Likes Received:
    376
    Thank you for the info on this. It's really fascinating - and important to know.
     
  7. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    Other times, modern versions based upon eclectic Greek texts (CT) agree with the MT versions against the TR.

    For example, notice that in Matthew 5:27 the TR-based versions insert the phrase "by them of old time" which is not actually supported by the majority of Byzantine manuscripts, nor the 'Alexandrian' --
    Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: (KJV)
    "You have heard that it was said to those of old,* 'You shall not commit adultery.' (NKJV)
    Ye haue herde, how it was sayde to them of olde tyme: Thou shalt not committe aduoutrie. (Coverdale)

    “You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' (EMTV)
    “You have heard that it was said, * ‘You shall not commit adultery; (WEB)
    “You heard that it was said: ‘You will not commit adultery.' (ALT)

    “You have heard that it was said, ‘Do not commit adultery.’* (NIV)
    "You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY'; (NASB)

    Staying in Matthew, a second example is at 6:18 where TR-based versions add the word "openly", not found in the MT or CT (or Wycliffe) --
    That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly. (KJV)
    so that you do not appear to men to be fasting, but to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.* (NKJV)
    that it appeare not vnto men, that thou fastest: but vnto thy father which is in secrete: and thy father which seyth in secrete, shal rewarde the openly. (Coverdale)

    so that you do not appear to men to be fasting, but to your Father who is in secret; and your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you. (EMTV)
    so that you are not seen by men to be fasting, but by your Father who is in secret, and your Father, who sees in secret, will reward you. (WEB)
    in order that you shall not appear to the people [as] fasting, _but_ [only] to your Father, the [One] in secret, and your Father, the [One] seeing in secret, will reward you. (ALT)

    so that it will not be obvious to men that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. (NIV)
    so that your fasting will not be noticed by men, but by your Father who is in secret; and your Father who sees {what is done} in secret will reward you. (NASB)

    that thou be not seen fastynge to men, but to thi fadir that is in hidlis, and thi fadir that seeth in priuey, shal yelde to thee. (WYC)
    The TR-based versions exhibit the plural "them" at Matthew 8:15, while MT & CT versions display a significant difference with the singular "Him" --
    And he touched her hand, and the fever left her: and she arose, and ministered unto them. (KJV)
    So He touched her hand, and the fever left her. And she arose and served them.* (NKJV)
    so he touched her hande, and the feuer left hir: and she arose, and ministred vnto them. (Coverdale)

    And He touched her hand, and the fever left her; and she got up, and began to serve Him.(EMTV)
    He touched her hand, and the fever left her. She got up and served him. (WEB)
    And He took hold of her hand, and the fever left her, and she arose and began serving Him. (ALT)

    He touched her hand and the fever left her, and she got up and began to wait on him. (NIV)
    He touched her hand, and the fever left her; and she got up and waited on Him. (NASB)
    In Matthew 12:35 the TR-based versions include the phrase "of the heart" lacking in the majority of manuscript evidence (also absent in Wycliffe) --
    A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. (KJV)
    A good man out of the good treasure of his heart* brings forth good things, and an evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth evil things. (NKJV)
    A good man out of the good treasure of his hert, bringeth forth good thinges: & an euel man out of his euell treasure, bringeth forth euell thinges. (Coverdale)

    A good man out of his good treasure brings forth good things, and an evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil things. (EMTV)
    The good man out of his good treasure brings out good things, and the evil man out of his evil treasure* brings out evil things. (WEB)
    "The good person out of the good treasure [within him] brings forth good [things], and the evil person out of the evil treasure [within him] brings forth evil [things]. (ALT)

    The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him. (NIV)
    "The good man brings out of {his} good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of {his} evil treasure what is evil (NASB)

    A good man bryngith forth good thingis of good tresoure, and an yuel man bringith forth yuel thingis of yuel tresoure. (WYC)
    Whether the CT is in agreement with the Majority Text (or not), the KJV does not fulfill the strict requirement of always following the Byzantine text type.
     
    #7 franklinmonroe, Feb 18, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 18, 2009
  8. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    George Gunn, M.Div. (Professor of Biblical Languages at Shasta Bible College) in his article King James and Other Versions in Part II addresses the ancient manuscripts behind translations (D. Manuscript Discoveries Since the Early 17th Century, 1. Majority Text Manuscripts) --
    Since the 17th century, hundreds of mss. have come to light. The majority of these are of Byzantine origin, where they were faithfully copied over the centuries by Eastern Orthodox monks. Of the Byzantine mss., it should also be observed that the vast majority of them originated late in the Middle Ages, from about the eighth century on. Proponents of the Textus Receptus and of the Majority Text view insist that these mss. preserve the original text of the New Testament. But why should these late mss. be preferred over other mss. which, in some cases were copied within a few years of the autographs? Gordon Fee, responding to arguments put forth by David Otis Fuller writes: 70; The logical consequence of the position that God's providential care is to be found in the majority of MSS, because they are the majority, is that the majority should all be identical and as free from error as the autographs. In lieu of that, [David Otis] Fuller's theology logically demands that at least one MS be identifiable as the divinely-preserved and therefore errorless MS against which all others can be checked. The proponents of the TR, however, are quick to deny that this is their intent -- and for good reasons. They also know that no two of the 5340-plus Greek MSS of the NT are exactly alike. In fact the closest relationships between any two MSS in existence -- even among the majority -- average from six to ten variants per chapter. It is obvious therefore that no MS has escaped corruption. We are reassured, however that these variations are "superficial," which turns out to be no argument at all. For "superficial" or otherwise, errors exist in the majority text.... If the text has merely fewer errors, then the whole theological argument of divine inspiration demanding divine preservation by the majority is a theological ploy.
    My underline.
     
  9. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    Again, modern versions based upon eclectic Greek texts (CT) agree with the MT versions against the TR in the book of Matthew.

    A typical example of a 'fuller' reading is in Matthew 27:35 where the TR-based versions insert an explict reference to prophetic fulfillment and then actually 'quote' Psalm 22:18 which is NOT supported by the majority of Byzantine manuscripts, nor the 'Alexandrian' --
    And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet,
    They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots
    . (KJV)
    Then they crucified Him, and divided His garments, casting lots, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet:
    "They divided My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots
    . (NKJV)
    So whan they had crucified him, they parted his garmetes, and cast lottes therfore: that the thinge might be fulfilled, which was spoken by the prophet:
    They haue parted my garmetes amonge the, & cast lottes vpon my vesture
    . (Coverdale)

    And having crucified Him, they divided His clothes among themselves, casting lots. (EMTV)
    When they had crucified him, they divided his clothing among them, casting lots, (WEB)
    Then having crucified Him, they divided His garments, casting a lot, (ALT)

    When they had crucified him, they divided up his clothes by casting lots.* (NIV)
    And when they had crucified Him, they divided up His garments among themselves by casting lots. (NASB)
    I wonder, have any of those supporters of the 'majority-of-the-received-text' position actually acquired an genuine MT-based translation yet?
     
    #9 franklinmonroe, Mar 4, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 4, 2009
  10. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,165
    Likes Received:
    322
    Though it is a "Traditional Text", are you aware of The Interlinear Literal Translation of The Greek New Testament by George Ricker Berry Ph.D. with the AV in the wide margin and includes a Lexicon?

    It is based upon the Elzevir 1624 Edition and includes an apparatus of the readings of Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford and Wordsworth.

    HankD
     
    #10 HankD, Mar 7, 2009
    Last edited: Mar 7, 2009
  11. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Both the 1557 Whittingham's New Testament and the 1560 Geneva Bible have "scribes, elders, and Pharisees" at Matthew 27:41 in agreement with the Majority Text Interlinear.

    By the way, the English translations of the Syriac Peshitta also have this rendering:
    Scribes and Elders and Pharisees (1851 Murdock's)
    scribes, the elders, and the Pharisees (1933 English translation of Peshitta by George Lamsa)
     
  12. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    Thanks, Logos1560. My latest Bible acquisition is a 1607 facsimile (of the 1602 third edition) Geneva, which also has "and Pharisees".

    Certainly the king's revisers would have been well aware of this text. On what basis did they reject including it in the AV?
     
    #12 franklinmonroe, Mar 8, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 8, 2009
  13. Logos1560

    Logos1560
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    3,127
    Likes Received:
    2
    Most defenders of the KJV that claim "the text is the issue" seem to be unwilling or unable to deal with such facts about majority readings from the Byzantine manuscripts.

    KJV defender Edward F. Hills did admit the manuscript evidence in some of your examples. For example, Edward F. Hills acknowledged that "raise the dead" at Matthew 10:8 "is omitted by the majority of Greek manuscripts" (KJV Defended, p. 200).

    Hills also admitted that the portion of Matthew 27:35 that you referred to was "omitted by the majority of the Greek manuscripts" (p. 200).
     
  14. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    The CT & TR agree against the Majority Text at Matthew 3:11--

    I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me ... : he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and [with] fire: (KJV)
    I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me ... . He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.* (NKJV)
    "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me ... ; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. (NASB)

    I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me ... . He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit, (EMTV)
    I indeed baptize you in water for repentance, but he who comes after ... . He will baptize you in the Holy Spirit. (WEB)
    "_I_ indeed baptize you* in [or, with, and throughout book] water to [or, because of] repentance. But the One coming after me ... , _He_ will baptize you* in [the] Holy Spirit, (ALT)
     
  15. franklinmonroe

    franklinmonroe
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    3
    I have provided 9 examples so far from just one NT book. On basis could someone claim that the TR has the superior (correct) reading rather than the reading exhibited in the majority of the MSS?
     

Share This Page

Loading...