Askjo said "Was the TR there in 2nd Century?
Yes or no?"
If you mean "was there was a received text", the answer is "yes". If you mean the Greek NT commonly known today as the "Textus Receptus", no, that did not exist before the Roman Catholic monk and priest Erasmus compiled it in the early 16th century, after more than 75% of church history (from today's perspective) had already past.
Probably.
And if there was, every shred of evidence we have shows that no two copies of the "2nd Century received text" were identical.
In fact, much of the evidence we have suggests that it was more like the Alexandrian text family than the Byzantine family.
You contention is not TR-Onlysim.
This, at least, has some reasonable discussion to it.
But your arguement is KJV-Onlyism, not TR-Onlyism, so your point is moot.
I do not think you are on the truth's side. That is very obvious. </font>[/QUOTE]Askjo, you're not going to be able to goad me into anything, so don't even try. YOU are the one who is allergic to the truth, and that is obvious by your lack of ability to back up your position without trying to use typical evasion techniques.
You contention is not TR-Onlysim.
This, at least, has some reasonable discussion to it.
But your arguement is KJV-Onlyism, not TR-Onlyism, so your point is moot. </font>[/QUOTE]I am TR/KJV onlyist, not KJVO!
Erasmus took care of the TR texts and threw Vaticanus manuscript out of his office because he rejected the Vaticanus manuscript.
The history of the TR (the Received Text, Traditional texts) began with the early apostolic period. It began with the MSS that were copied and recopied by the churches.
This is still a very active and useful thread and we will not allow rabbit trails.
I am interested in how the BB has helped folks deal with the KJV Controversy.