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!

Featured Is the KJV inspired?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions & Translations' started by John Rivera, Sep 27, 2020.

  1. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    overall an excellent text, better than the Byzantine text that some go on about!
     
  2. Reynolds

    Reynolds Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2014
    Messages:
    13,793
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Faith:
    Baptist
    When used at the end of every sentence, it is.
     
  3. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Both MT and CT though at least as good....
     
  4. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The theological concept of inerrancy in bibliology does not have to do with textual criticism (omissions, additions, etc.). (For the record, I don't like the term "corruption" when used for Scripture. God's Word cannot be corrupt.) It involves errors of science, history, internal contradictions, etc. I can take the TR, Byz., UBS, or even Hort & Westcott (I have the 1886 American edition), and answer any objections in these areas.
     
    #44 John of Japan, Oct 1, 2020
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
  5. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    getting there, though the TR is not without its own faults, as the great John Burgon admitted that it too needed to be "revised". The KJV is mainly based on the Greek text of Theodore Beza. The origin of the term "Textus Receptus" comes from the publisher’s preface to the 1633 edition produced by Abraham Elzevir and his nephew Bonaventure, "extum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum: in quo nihil immutatum aut corruptum damus. Translated "so you hold the text, now received by all, in which nothing corrupt.", this is after the 1611 KJV.
     
  6. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Would seem that the Majority text should be the choice of those not trusting in the CT
     
  7. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    it is well known in the study of Textual Criticism, that there are mss that have been wilfully corrupted by copyists. I have seen them form myself over the years when comparing many Bible passages. This is a fact, that sadly does exist.
     
  8. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Think John was stating that the term itself seems to bring in the notion means manuscripts are bogus...
     
  9. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The term "corruption" is, of course, common in textual criticism. But again, theologically you cannot corrupt God's Word. "The Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:35).

    The word "corrupt" in 2 Cor. 2:17 means something different now than it did in 1611: "For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ." In 1611, "corrupt" meant to dilute something, and that is the meaning of the Greek word.
     
  10. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Um, the TR is a Byz. text. This is why we could use it as the source text for our Japanese NT with no regrets. :Coffee
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    yes, but only in a wider sense?
     
  12. John of Japan

    John of Japan Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2005
    Messages:
    19,349
    Likes Received:
    1,772
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Wider sense? Don't know what you mean. All of the mss Erasmus used were Byz., so it's a Byzantine text. I'm pretty sure Dr. Robinson (of the Robinson/Pierpont Byz. Textform NT) would agree.
     
  13. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Whe I refer to "corrupt", I have in mind passages like 1 Timothy 3:16, where θεος has been wilfully (especially after the very strong objection to it by George Vance Smith, a Unitarian scholar, who was on the 1881 committee) changed to the grammatically nonsensical reading ὃς, which is also admitted to by Dr Charles Ellicott! Likewise, in 1 John 5:7, there is very strong internal Greek evidence from the grammitical construction, as well as very early Patristic evidence from Tertullian, Cyprian, and even the heretic, Pricillian, that John did indeed write the words, "ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὁ πατήρ, ὁ λόγος καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα. καὶ οὖτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν", etc, etc.
     
  14. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    because there are 100's of differences between the TR and Byz text, and that is only in the Four Gospels
     
  15. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    When I read KJVO use of that term though, they seem to be stating that those holding to other then TR are using corrupted as in intentional done tom prervert the scriptures. not honest mistakes!
     
  16. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    The Majority text is something else then, correct?
     
  17. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Is it true that Eramus though used at times readings from Latin Vulgate, and other times still do not know even today where he received those in from?
    Also. is it not true that the 1 John 5:7 was not found in his first 2 editions, and he "found it" in the third edition?
     
  18. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1 Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    52,624
    Likes Received:
    2,742
    Faith:
    Baptist
    There are also evidences to support that John did not write that in that way though also....
     
  19. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In two major places the Byz does not follow the TR
    there are always "evidences" to the contrary! When I first started out in textual criticism, over 35 years ago, I remember writing in a note in my KJV Bible, that 1 John 5:7 was not part of this Epistle. My conclusion then was based on what I had read in Dr A T Robertson's works. Years later I decided to invistigate this for myself, and after a long time of first hand research, I concluded without any doubt, that on this verse, Dr Robertson, and others like him, were very much mistaken in their conclusions. I have zero doubt that I can prove to anyone from the Greek grammar of verses 6-10, that it is IMPOSSIBLE for the Apostle John to have written, "For there are three that testify", only in verse 7.

    I here challenge anyone to show from the Greek, that the words, "For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one", in complete, are not the work of the Apostle John.
     
  20. SavedByGrace

    SavedByGrace Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2020
    Messages:
    10,142
    Likes Received:
    437
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Desiderius Erasmus, Robert Estienne (better known by his Latin name, Stephanus), and Theodore Beza, were the Greek editions that were used for the textual basis of the KJVNT. Beza's was the most followed of the three.
     
Loading...