Which KJVO are you?

So many other revel in their ignorance and feel that "stupidity and stubbornness" are Gifts of the Spirit.

A teachable spirit is what is truly rare around here. </font>[/QUOTE]Just thought it was a funny line, from someone's post up there a bit. I personally find you to have plenty of warmth, Doctor!

 

It is found in the Greek manuscripts noted by H. C. Hoskier as 57 and 141.

The Bohairic Version; Ambrose (4th Century); and the commentaries of Primasius and Haymo (6th and 9th centuries, respectively). Further, it is supported by Saint Ambrose (340-397 AD), by Bachiarius (late fourth century), and by Primasius in his commentary on Revelation (552 AD)"

Libro (book) is the reading of the Latin mss. Codex Fuldensis (sixth century); Codex Karolinus (ninth century); Codex Oxoniensis (twelfth to thirteenth century); Codex Ulmensis (ninth century); Codex Uallicellanus (ninth century); Codex Sarisburiensis (thirteenth century); and the corrector of Codex Parisinus (ninth century). </font>[/QUOTE]Hoskier 57 and 141 are both 16th C. hand copied transcriptions of the text of the printed TR, which means neither are properly part of the ancient Greek MS tradition because they were made *from* the TR *after* the TR was printed. So the number of Greek MSS of Revelation with "book of life" in the text of Rev. 22:19 is ZERO.

The rest of your list tells the story. All the sources reading "book of life" are from the Latin West (and those influenced by them). There's no way the Greek words βιβλιον ("book") and ζυλον ("tree") would be confused, as they are so orthographically different. But the Latin words libro ("book") and ligno ("tree") look very similar. The error at Rev. 22:19 occurred when a Latin scribe mistakenly copied the Latin word for "book" instead of the Latin word for "tree," thus introducing the corrupt reading into the Latin MSS tradition. Erasmus' sole copy of Revelation lacked the last six verses of Rev. 22, and he was in a hurry to rush his Greek NT into publication ahead of the competition, so he "back translated" the last six verses of Rev. 22 from a Latin copy containing the corrupt reading. The KJV was then translated from Erasmus' Greek text, and it preserved Erasmus' erroneous reading at Rev. 22:19.

 

Yes (FWIW) , I believe this case is in all probability a TR error stemming from the Latin confusion.

HankD