1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Differences between the TR and Alexandrian

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by Boanerges, Feb 28, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    4,800
    Likes Received:
    124
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus

    kai eidon kai idou arnion esthkos epi to oroV siwn kai met autou ekaton tessarakonta tessares ciliadeV ecousai to onoma tou patroV autou gegrammenon epi twn metwpwn autwn


    As you can see, onoma only appears once in the TR text.The KJV translators, translated it correctly as written in the Greek.

    Now the Alexandrian:

    Alexandrian
    kai eidon kai idou to arnion estos epi to oroV siwn kai met autou ekaton tesserakonta tessares ciliadeV ecousai to onoma autou kai to onoma tou patroV autou gegrammenon epi twn metwpwn autwn

    As you can see there is two names in the Alexandrian.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Now the Majority Text

    REVELATION 14
    kai eidon kai idou [to] arnion esthkov epi to orov siwn kai met autou [ariymov] ekaton tessarakonta tessarev ciliadev ecousai to onoma autou kai to onoma tou patrov autou gegrammenon epi twn metwpwn autwn

    As you can see there are also two names in the Robinson/Pierpoint Majority or Byzantine Text.

    [ March 01, 2006, 12:32 AM: Message edited by: Gold Dragon ]
     
  2. Boanerges

    Boanerges New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus

    kai eidon kai idou arnion esthkos epi to oroV siwn kai met autou ekaton tessarakonta tessares ciliadeV ecousai to onoma tou patroV autou gegrammenon epi twn metwpwn autwn


    As you can see, onoma only appears once in the TR text.The KJV translators, translated it correctly as written in the Greek.

    Now the Alexandrian:

    Alexandrian
    kai eidon kai idou to arnion estos epi to oroV siwn kai met autou ekaton tesserakonta tessares ciliadeV ecousai to onoma autou kai to onoma tou patroV autou gegrammenon epi twn metwpwn autwn

    As you can see there is two names in the Alexandrian.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Now the Majority Text

    REVELATION 14
    KAI EIDON KAI IDOU [TO] ARNION ESTHKOJ EPI TO OROJ SIWN KAI MET AUTOU [ARIQMOJ] RMD XILIADEJ EXOUSAI TO ONOMA AUTOU KAI TO ONOMA TOU PATROJ AUTOU GEGRAMMENON EPI TWN METWPWN AUTWN

    As you can see there are also two names in the Robinson/Pierpoint Majority or Byzantine Text.
    </font>[/QUOTE]Yes, I am aware of that. As a matter of fact, I pointed that out earlier in the thread, however, that has nothing to do with the title of this thread.
     
  3. Gold Dragon

    Gold Dragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    4,800
    Likes Received:
    124
    Faith:
    Non Baptist Christian
    Sorry. Should have read the whole thread. [​IMG]
     
  4. Boanerges

    Boanerges New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    My next question is, do these changes/discrepencies matter in the identification of the players in the end times scenario?
     
  5. Boanerges

    Boanerges New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not to get off topic, but let's take a look at a translation difference between the KJV and other reformation translations, and the modern versions of Daniel 11:37:

    KJV
    Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god: for he shall magnify himself above all.

    NASB
    He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers or for the desire of women, nor will he show regard for any other god; for he will magnify himself above them all.

    Keeping in mind, that this is not a textual difference in the Hebrew (Ben Chayyim vs Ben Asher), but a choice of the translator(s).
     
  6. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    The TR is error filled in Revelation. As most everyone know's Erasmus didn't even have a copy of the last 6 verses of Revelation in Greek so he translated that portion from Latin. Overall the TR is the very worst in Revelations. A friend of mine translated the book of Revelation from the Majority text you can purchase it here Majority Text version of Revelations.
     
  7. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Daniel 11:37 "He will not respect98 the gods of his fathers – not even the god loved by women. He will not respect any god; he will elevate himself above them all." NET

    "Neither shall he regard the gods of his fathers, nor the desire of women, nor regard any god; for he shall magnify himself above all." ASV
    So the NASB scholars followed the ASV's rendering.

    "Et Deum patrum suorum non reputabit: et erit in concupiscentiis feminarum, nec quemquam deorum curabit: quia adversum universa consurget." Latin Vulgate

    Interesting point. Would like to know why Modern translations choose to translate "gods" rather than "God".
     
  8. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oops, Brother Boanerges, it is even 'worse' than you thought [​IMG]

    Dan 11:37 (KJV1611 Edition):
    Neither shall hee regard the god of his fathers,
    nor the desire of women, nor regard any god:
    for he shall magnifie himselfe aboue all.

    Daniel 11:37 (KJV1769 Edition):

    Neither shall he regard the God of his fathers,
    nor the desire of women, nor regard any god:
    for he shall magnify himself above all.

    Tee Hee, we know who the Translators of the
    KJV1611 Edition were. Who were the Translators
    of the so called 'Authorized Version' the KJV1769 Edition?
     
  9. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Modern versions said "gods" and "god" on Daniel 11:37. Can you explain who "gods" and "god are?

    The difference between the KJV and modern versions concerning "G" and "g" is to tell us who they are.
     
  10. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,606
    Likes Received:
    105
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Many people confuse the Greek used for the 1611 with the "Majority Text".

    But let's be careful of calling ANY translation "error-filled".
     
  11. Boanerges

    Boanerges New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have heard this error filled accusation by many, but I have yet to see anyone detail it. Can you direct me to a site that does?
     
  12. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    I searched for a site that has the errors laid out but couldn't find one. So I did researched based on the families. And it is a proven fact that Erasmus didn't have the last 6 verses of Revelation in Greek.

     
  13. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    The above post is just the first 9 chapters. The majority of those alterations by the TR have no, zilch manuscript support. In fact Revelation 8:13 is often cited by KJVO's as an error in MV'ers when they follow the true reading eagle rather than angel. All the time not realizing that the TR is the only Greek text to read that way.
     
  14. Boanerges

    Boanerges New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Revelation 1:11 "MT/ CT: saying, – TR: saying, “_I_ am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last;” and,

    Let's take a look at the transliterated Greek:

    Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus
    legoushV egw eimi to a kai to w o prwtos kai o escatos kai o blepeiV grayon eiV biblion kai pemyon taiV ekklhsiaiV tais en asia eiV efeson kai eiV smurnan kai eiV pergamon kai eiV quateira kai eiV sardeiV kai eiV filadelfeian kai eiV laodikeian

    Scrivener 1894 Textus Receptus
    legoushV egw eimi to a kai to w o prwtos kai o escatos kai o blepeiV grayon eiV biblion kai pemyon taiV epta ekklhsiaiV tais en asia eiV efeson kai eiV smurnan kai eiV pergamon kai eiV quateira kai eiV sardeiV kai eiV filadelfeian kai eiV laodikeian


    I am not sure what you are saying. The TR Greek pretty much reflects what the English translation says.Are you saying that the KJV translators were wrong in their word choices?
     
  15. Askjo

    Askjo New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    3,736
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can an eagle speak?
     
  16. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm not referring to any Enlgish translation. I'm just trying to point out the fact the TR has many errors in Revelation. Alterations to the text not backed by any manuscripts.
     
  17. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Is the beast spoken about in Revelation an animal? Revelation is full of metaphors.
     
  18. TCassidy

    TCassidy Late-Administator Emeritus
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    20,082
    Likes Received:
    3,483
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Well, actually, that "fact" is not all that "proven." It has been alleged that Erasmus translated the last 6 verses from the Vulgate into Greek because those verses were missing from manusrcript 1r. However, if we examine the evidence we find some overwhelming discrepencies. The first of which is that the Vulgate reads amen veni Domine Iesu in Revelation 22:20 but the TR reads Amen. Nai, erchou, kurie Iesou. Now, anyone who can read both Latin and Greek will notice immediately that, either Erasmus was really stupid (while, at the same time being one of the greatest scholars and thinkers of his day), or he didn't translate that passage from the Vulgate into Greek!

    In fact one of the greatest textual scholars in the field of textual criticism, Herman C. Hoskier, states that Erasmus got the reading from manuscript 141 which reads exactly as the TR. (Herman C. Hoskier, Concerning the Text of the Apocalypse, vol. 2, London, Bernard Quaritch, Ltd., 1929, page 644.)
     
  19. Boanerges

    Boanerges New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, actually, that "fact" is not all that "proven." It has been alleged that Erasmus translated the last 6 verses from the Vulgate into Greek because those verses were missing from manusrcript 1r. However, if we examine the evidence we find some overwhelming discrepencies. The first of which is that the Vulgate reads amen veni Domine Iesu in Revelation 22:20 but the TR reads Amen. Nai, erchou, kurie Iesou. Now, anyone who can read both Latin and Greek will notice immediately that, either Erasmus was really stupid (while, at the same time being one of the greatest scholars and thinkers of his day), or he didn't translate that passage from the Vulgate into Greek!

    In fact one of the greatest textual scholars in the field of textual criticism, Herman C. Hoskier, states that Erasmus got the reading from manuscript 141 which reads exactly as the TR. (Herman C. Hoskier, Concerning the Text of the Apocalypse, vol. 2, London, Bernard Quaritch, Ltd., 1929, page 644.)
    </font>[/QUOTE]Very nice Dr C. One thing that I have learned over the years. is that there are urban legends in every facet of life, including textual criticism. :confused:
     
  20. standingfirminChrist

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    9,454
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ever hear of the old saying, 'Too many chiefs and not enough warriors'?

    Well, this day it is 'too many doctors and not enough patients.'

    Every person gets a hears something being spoken of by some great 4 to 6 degree holding professor and automatically, it has to be right.

    Stop and think folks. What are the colleges producing today? People who do their term papers by copying and pasting an article that a past professor or student already was graded on. There is no real study for self.

    Even in the churches, the majority of the congregation believes what their pastor says to be fact without even studying their Bibles like they should. This is why there is so much debate over what is wrong and what is right.

    Maybe some need to stop practicing the Doctor role without a license and become patients, putting themselves in the hands of the Doctors who have spent long hours in the Word, and on their knees in prayer.

    Just as some medical doctors on this earth get slapped with a malpractice suit, many who call themselves theology doctors will be charged with spiritual malpractice when they stand before God.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...