Revelation 16:5 and the Triadic Declaration - A defense of the reading of “shalt be” in the Authorized Version

From Textus Receptus

Revision as of 20:49, 15 December 2017 by Nick (Talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

--(unfinished)--

Contents

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study on Revelation 16:5 has grown from the collection of information put into my website Textus-Receptus.com[1] which is constantly being updated with material defending the Textus Receptus and the King James Version. My thanks go to the following people: the author of the article on the KJV Today website[2] who has stimulated many thoughts and collected a large concise body of evidence on this and many related issues; Will Kinney[3] for his tireless efforts in defending such verses and also collecting an innumerable amount of material on this and many other subjects; and also Scott Jones for his brilliant article on Jehovah, which while only brief, is filled with an abundance of confirmation for the sacred name of Jehovah.[4] My appreciation also goes to Jeffrey Khoo[5], Thomas Holland[6], D. A. Waite[7], and Jack Moorman[8], all of whose former work on Revelation 16:5 and other such issues, has provided a platform from which I can work. The online writings of Steven Avery[9], Jeff Riddle[10], and Steve Rafalsky[1], have also been very insightful and helpful in many forums debate groups. This private study has grown into the document you see now and has gleanings from each of the above people and others. Thanks also to Joseph Armstrong[12], David Daniels[13], and Keith Mason[14]. It has been said, tongue in cheek, that if you copy from one source it is plagiarism, but if you copy from many sources it is “good scholarship”. In this document I have copied and used the writings of the above people so frequently that it is hard for me to reference exactly where I found material and also which quotations are originally mine. On the TR (www.textus-receptus.com) website, I am constantly adding material from many different people who provide a defense for the TR/KJV position, directly from forums, websites, debate groups, YouTube clips, or their comments on videos, and am guilty of using quotes and phrases without reference. So if you find me quoting you here or on my site, my apologies for my lack of reference, my first pursuit here has been to defend the KJV/TR reading and not provide a perfectly referenced academic treatise. This paper was also written to inform those who know little about the topics involved and the entire concept could have been described in less than ten pages, but so as to not confuse those who are new to the issue, or have been duped but the pseudo scholarship of people like White, I have provided as much material as possible in the short amount of time I have had to write this. I hope this is not an annoyance to those familiar with these issues. (Some of the Latin in this article needs a polish, any volunteers are welcome to translate – textusreceptusbibles@gmail.com)

- Nick Sayers

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

“Imagine we came across an early manuscript copy of the Constitution of the United States, and the preamble said, “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect onion …” If we were to see that line, we would know that “union” was the original word, not “onion”.” –Dan Wallace15

References

http://www.credocourses.com/blog/2016/original-new-testament-lost-ehrman-vs-wallace-debate-transcript/ Disclaimer ~ Although I disagree with Wallace on many levels concerning his method of textual criticism, I think this quotation is very pertinent to this subject.

See Also

Retrieved from "http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Revelation_16:5_and_the_Triadic_Declaration_-_A_defense_of_the_reading_of_%E2%80%9Cshalt_be%E2%80%9D_in_the_Authorized_Version"
Personal tools