Textus Receptus - User contributions [en]

Lawrence E Bray

2016-04-19T03:47:28Z

Dr.bray:

Lawrence Bray (1970-?) was born in Columbus, OH. He was raised in an atheist family, not being drawn to Christ for salvation until he was about 21 years old. Dr. Bray now lives in Pennsylvania with his family: Priscilla (wife), Brian (son), and Zoe (daughter). He is an Elder with the Reformed Presbyterian Church (PCA) as well as being president of The North American Reformed Seminary (TNARS).

In 2008 he received his first doctorate (D.Min.) through TNARS (prior to becoming their president), in 2009 he earned a Doctor of Divinity (meritus causa) from Miami International Seminary. Dr. Bray earned his Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) from New Geneva Theological Seminary in 2013.

==See Also==
* [[Article: Modern Denial of Preservation by Lawrence E Bray|Modern denial of preservation]]
* [[Article: Text Selection by Lawrence E Bray|Text Selection]]

==External Links==
* [http://www.tnars.net/members.htm Lawrence E Bray at the The North American Reformed Seminary]

{{Donate}}

User:Dr.bray

2012-11-26T16:53:48Z

Dr.bray:

My name is Lawrence Bray. I live in Pennsylvania with his family: Priscilla (wife), Brian (son), and Zoe (daughter). I'm an Elder with the Reformed Presbyterian Church (PCA) and the president of The North American Reformed Seminary (TNARS).

In 2008 I received my first doctorate (D.Min.) through TNARS (prior to becoming their president), in 2009 I earned a Doctor of Divinity (meritus causa) from Miami International Seminary.

User:Dr.bray

2011-12-19T11:53:38Z

Dr.bray:

User:Dr.bray

2011-12-06T17:32:36Z

Dr.bray:

Lawrence E Bray

2011-08-08T16:49:31Z

Dr.bray:

Lawrence Bray (1970-?) was born in Columbus, OH. He was raised in an atheist family, not being drawn to Christ for salvation until he was about 21 years old. Dr. Bray now lives in Pennsylvania with his family: Priscilla (wife), Brian (son), and Zoe (daughter). He is an Elder with the Reformed Presbyterian Church (PCA) as well as being president of The North American Reformed Seminary (TNARS).

In 2008 he received his first doctorate (D.Min.) through TNARS (prior to becoming their president), in 2009 he earned a Doctor of Divinity (meritus causa) from Miami International Seminary. Dr. Bray earned his Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) from Maranatha Theological Seminary (Pakistan) in 2011.

==See Also==
* [[Article: Modern Denial of Preservation by Lawrence E Bray|Modern denial of preservation]]
* [[Article: Text Selection by Lawrence E Bray|Text Selection]]

==External Links==
* [http://www.tnars.net/members.htm Lawrence E Bray at the The North American Reformed Seminary]

User:Dr.bray

2011-06-21T14:39:18Z

Dr.bray:

Byzantine text-type

2010-05-05T19:46:24Z

Dr.bray: /* Characteristics of the Byzantine text */

[[Image:CodeAlexandrinusFolio76rExplActs.jpg|thumb|The end of the book of Acts (folio 76r) from the [[Codex Alexandrinus]], which has a mostly Byzantine text-type during the Gospels and is largely [[Alexandrian text-type|Alexandrian]] throughout the rest of the New Testament]]

The '''Byzantine text-type''' (also called '''Majority''', '''Traditional''', '''Ecclesiastical''', '''Constantinopolitan''', or '''Syrian''') is one of several text-types used in [[textual criticism]] to describe the textual character of [[Koine Greek|Greek]] [[New Testament]] [[biblical manuscript|manuscripts]]. It is the form found in the largest number of surviving [[manuscript]]s. The [[New Testament]] text of the [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Greek Orthodox Church]], the Constantinople Patriarchate edition of [[1904 AD|1904]], is based on this text-type. While considerably varying, it also underlies the [[Textus Receptus]] Greek text used for most Reformation-era translations of the [[New Testament]] into vernacular languages. Modern translations mainly use [[Textual criticism#Eclecticism|Eclectic]] editions that conform more often to the [[Alexandrian text-type]].

The Byzantine textform is often marked with the abbreviations [[Image:315af14eb79a0097df4e2c0166bb0a58.png]] or '''Byz'''.

== Manuscripts of the Byzantine text ==
According to [[Brooke Foss Westcott|Wescott]] and [[Fenton John Anthony Hort|Hort]], for some time following the fourth century different types of text were current in the East, but at the end the Byzantine text "almost wholly displaced the rest." [1] The Byzantine text-type has by far the largest number of surviving manuscripts, especially from the invention of the [[Lower case|minuscule]] (lower case) handwriting in the 9th century. For example, of 522 complete or nearly complete manuscripts of the [[General epistles|General Epistles]] collated by the [[Institute for New Testament Textual Research]] in Münster, Germany, 372 of them attest the Byzantine reading in at least 90% of 98 test places. Amongst the earliest surviving manuscripts, the position is reversed. There are six manuscripts earlier than the 9th century which conform to the Byzantine text-type; of which the 5th century [[Codex Alexandrinus]], (the oldest), is Byzantine only in the Gospels with the rest of the [[New Testament]] being [[[[Alexandrian text-type|Alexandrian]]. By comparison, the [[Alexandrian text-type]] is witnessed by nine surviving [[uncials]] earlier than the ninth century (including the [[Codex Alexandrinus]] outside the [[Gospels]]); and is also usually considered to be demonstrated in three earlier [[papyrus|papyri]]. Modern critical editions of the [[New Testament]] tend to conform most often to [[Alexandrian text-type|Alexandrian]] witnesses — especially [[Codex Sinaiticus]] and [[Codex Vaticanus]]. The earliest of the [[Church Fathers]] to witness to a Byzantine text-type in their [[New Testament]] quotations is [[John Chrysostom]] (c. [[349 AD|349]] — [[407 AD|407]]). The earliest translation to witness to a Greek base conforming to the Byzantine text is the Syriac [[Peshitta]]; usually dated to the 4th century.

The form of the Byzantine text found in the earliest witnesses varies considerably, and differs again from that which would predominate from the 9th century onwards; for example, no surviving Byzantine witness earlier than the eighth century includes the [[pericope adulterae]] ([[John 7:53]] — [[John 8:11|8:11]]). Amongst the bulk of later manuscripts however, it is generally possible to demonstrate a clear Byzantine majority reading for each variant; and a [[Greek New Testament]] text based on these majority readings — "[[The Majority Text]]" — has been produced by [[Zane C. Hodges]] and [[Arthur Farstad|Arthur L. Farstad]], although this text does not correspond to any one particular manuscript.

=== Notable Byzantine manuscripts ===

{|"wikitable"
|style="background:#DAE" align="center"|'''Sign'''
|style="background:#DAE" align="center"|'''Name'''
|style="background:#DAE" align="center"|'''Date'''
|style="background:#DAE" align="center"|'''Content'''
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| A (02)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Alexandrinus]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 5th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| C (04)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Ephraemi]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 5th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| W (032)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Washingtonianus]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 5th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Matt 1-28; Luke 8:13–24:53
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Q (026)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Guelferbytanus B]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 5th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Luke–John
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 061
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Uncial 061]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 5th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 1 Tim 3:15-16; 4:1-3; 6:2-8
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Ee (07)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Basilensis]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 8th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Fe (09)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Boreelianus]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Ge (011)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Seidelianus I]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| He (013)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Seidelianus II]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| L (020)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Angelicus]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Acts, CE, Pauline Epistles
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| V (031)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Mosquensis II]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Y (034)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Macedoniensis]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Θ (038)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Koridethi]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels (except Mark)
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| S (028)
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Codex Vaticanus 354]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 949
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| Gospels
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 1241
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Minuscule 1241]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 12th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| only Acts
|-
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 1424
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| [[Minuscule 1424]]
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| 9th/10th
|style="background:#EBE" align="center"| NT (except Mark)
|}

=== Other manuscripts ===
; Papyri
[[Papyrus 73|𝔓73]]
; Uncials
[[Codex Mutinensis]], [[Codex Cyprius]], [[Codex Mosquensis I]], [[Codex Campianus|Campianus]], [[Codex Petropolitanus Purpureus|Petropolitanus Purp.]], [[Codex Sinopensis|Sinopensis]], [[Codex Guelferbytanus A|Guelferbytanus A]], [[Codex Guelferbytanus B|Guelferbytanus B]], [[Codex Nitriensis|Nitriensis]], [[Codex Nanianus|Nanianus]], [[Codex Monacensis|Monacensis]], [[Codex Tischendorfianus IV|Tischendorfianus IV]], [[Codex Sangallensis|Sangallensis]], [[Codex Tischendorfianus III|Tischendorfianus III]], [[Codex Petropolitanus|Petropolitanus]], [[Codex Purpureus Rossanensis|Rossanensis]], [[Codex Beratinus|Beratinus]], [[Codex Athous Dionysiou|Dionysiou]], [[Codex Vaticanus 2066|Vaticanus 2066]], [[Uncial 047]], [[Uncial 049|049]], [[Uncial 052|052]], [[Uncial 053|053]], [[Uncial 054|054]], [[Uncial 056|056]], [[Uncial 061|061]], [[Uncial 063|063]], [[Uncial 064|064]], [[Uncial 065|065]], [[Uncial 093|093]] (Acts), [[Uncial 0103|0103]], [[Uncial 0104|0104]], [[Uncial 0105|0105]], [[Uncial 0116|0116]], [[Uncial 0133|0133]], [[Uncial 0134|0134]], [[Uncial 0135|0135]], [[Uncial 0136|0136]], [[Uncial 0142|0142]], [[Uncial 0151|0151]], [[Uncial 0197|0197]], [[Uncial 0211|0211]], [[Uncial 0246|0246]], [[Uncial 0248|0248]], [[Uncial 0253|0253]], [[Uncial 0255|0255]], [[Uncial 0257|0257]], [[Uncial 0265|0265]], [[Uncial 0269|0269]] (mixed), [[Uncial 0272|0272]], [[Uncial 0273|0273]] (?).

; Minuscules
More than 80% of minuscules represent the Byzantine text.<ref name = Aland>Kurt Aland, and Barbara Aland, ''The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism'', transl. Erroll F. Rhodes, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, [[1995 AD|1995]], p. 128. </ref>

[[Minuscule 2|2]], [[Minuscule 3|3]], [[Minuscule 6|6]] (Gospels and Acts), [[Minuscule 8|8]], [[Minuscule 9|9]], [[Minuscule 11|11]], [[Minuscule 12|12]], [[Minuscule 14|14]], [[Minuscule 15|15]], [[Minuscule 18|18]], [[Minuscule 21|21]], [[Minuscule 23|23]], [[Minuscule 24|24]], [[Minuscule 25|25]], [[Minuscule 27|27]], [[Minuscule 28|28]] (except Mark), [[Minuscule 29|29]], [[Minuscule 30|30]], [[Minuscule 32|32]], [[Minuscule 34|34]], [[Minuscule 35|35]], [[Minuscule 36|36]], [[Minuscule 37|37]], [[Minuscule 39|39]], [[Minuscule 40|40]], [[Minuscule 42|42]], [[Minuscule 44|44]], [[Minuscule 45|45]], [[Minuscule 46|46]], [[Minuscule 47|47]], [[Minuscule 49|49]], [[Minuscule 50|50]], [[Minuscule 52|52]], [[Minuscule 53|53]], [[Minuscule 54|54]], [[Minuscule 55|55]], [[Minuscule 57|57]], [[Minuscule 58|58]], [[Minuscule 60|60]], [[Minuscule 61|61]] (Gospels and Acts), [[Minuscule 63|63]], [[Minuscule 65|65]], [[Minuscule 66|66]], [[Minuscule 68|68]], [[Minuscule 69|69]] (excepr Paul), [[Minuscule 70|70]], [[Minuscule 73|73]], [[Minuscule 74|74]], [[Minuscule 75|75]], [[Minuscule 76|76]], [[Minuscule 77|77]], [[Minuscule 78|78]], [[Minuscule 80|80]], [[Minuscule 82|82]], [[Minuscule 83|83]], [[Minuscule 84|84]], [[Minuscule 89|89]], [[Minuscule 90|90]], [[Minuscule 92|92]], [[Minuscule 93|93]], [[Minuscule 95|95]], [[Minuscule 97|97]], [[Minuscule 98|98]], [[Minuscule 99|99]], [[Minuscule 100|100]], [[Minuscule 103|103]], [[Minuscule 104|104]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 105|105]], [[Minuscule 107|107]], [[Minuscule 108|108]], [[Minuscule 109|109]], [[Minuscule 110|110]], [[Minuscule 111|111]], [[Minuscule 112|112]], [[Minuscule 116|116]], [[Minuscule 119|119]], [[Minuscule 120|120]], [[Minuscule 121|121]], [[Minuscule 122|122]], [[Minuscule 123|123]], [[Minuscule 125|125]], [[Minuscule 126|126]], [[Minuscule 127|127]], [[Minuscule 128|128]], [[Minuscule 129|129]], [[Minuscule 132|132]], [[Minuscule 133|133]], [[Minuscule 134|134]], [[Minuscule 135|135]], [[Minuscule 136|136]], [[Minuscule 137|137]], [[Minuscule 138|138]], [[Minuscule 139|139]], [[Minuscule 140|140]], [[Minuscule 141|141]], [[Minuscule 142|142]], [[Minuscule 143|143]], [[Minuscule 144|144]], [[Minuscule 146|146]], [[Minuscule 147|147]], [[Minuscule 148|148]], [[Minuscule 149|149]], [[Minuscule 150|150]], [[Minuscule 151|151]], [[Minuscule 155|155]], [[Minuscule 156|156]], [[Minuscule 159|159]], [[Minuscule 162|162]], [[Minuscule 167|167]], [[Minuscule 169|169]], [[Minuscule 170|170]], [[Minuscule 171|171]], [[Minuscule 177|177]], [[Minuscule 180|180]] (except Acts), [[Minuscule 181|181]] (only Rev.), [[Minuscule 182|182]], [[Minuscule 183|183]], [[Minuscule 185|185]], [[Minuscule 186|186]], [[Minuscule 187|187]], [[Minuscule 189|189]], [[Minuscule 190|190]], [[Minuscule 192|192]], [[Minuscule 193|193]], [[Minuscule 194|194]], [[Minuscule 195|195]], [[Minuscule 196|196]], [[Minuscule 197|197]], [[Minuscule 198|198]], [[Minuscule 199|199]], [[Minuscule 200|200]], [[Minuscule 201|201]], [[Minuscule 202|202]], [[Minuscule 203|203]], [[Minuscule 204|204]], [[Minuscule 205|205]] (Epistles), [[Minuscule 206|206]] (except Cath.), [[Minuscule 207|207]], [[Minuscule 208|208]], [[Minuscule 209|209]] (except Gospels and Rev.), [[Minuscule 210|210]], [[Minuscule 212|212]], [[Minuscule 214|214]], [[Minuscule 215|215]], [[Minuscule 217|217]], [[Minuscule 218|218]] (except Cath. and Paul), [[Minuscule 219|219]], [[Minuscule 220|220]], [[Minuscule 221|221]], [[Minuscule 223|223]], [[Minuscule 224|224]], [[Minuscule 226|226]], [[Minuscule 227|227]], [[Minuscule 231|231]], [[Minuscule 232|232]], [[Minuscule 235|235]], [[Minuscule 236|236]], [[Minuscule 237|237]], [[Minuscule 240|240]], [[Minuscule 243|243]], [[Minuscule 244|244]], [[Minuscule 245|245]], [[Minuscule 246|246]], [[Minuscule 247|247]], [[Minuscule 248|248]], [[Minuscule 250|250]], [[Minuscule 254|254]] (except Cath.), [[Minuscule 256|256]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 259|259]], [[Minuscule 260|260]], [[Minuscule 261|261]], [[Minuscule 262|262]], [[Minuscule 263|263]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 264|264]], [[Minuscule 266|266]], [[Minuscule 267|267]], [[Minuscule 268|268]], [[Minuscule 269|269]], [[Minuscule 270|270]], [[Minuscule 272|272]], [[Minuscule 275|275]], [[Minuscule 276|276]], [[Minuscule 277|277]], [[Minuscule 278a|278a]], [[Minuscule 278b|278b]], [[Minuscule 280|280]], [[Minuscule 281|281]], [[Minuscule 282|282]], [[Minuscule 283|283]], [[Minuscule 284|284]], [[Minuscule 285|285]], [[Minuscule 286|286]], [[Minuscule 287|287]], [[Minuscule 288|288]], [[Minuscule 289|289]], [[Minuscule 290|290]], [[Minuscule 291|291]], [[Minuscule 292|292]], [[Minuscule 293|293]], [[Minuscule 297|297]], [[Minuscule 300|300]], [[Minuscule 301|301]],[[Minuscule 302|302]], [[Minuscule 303|303]], [[Minuscule 304|304]], [[Minuscule 305|305]], [[Minuscule 306|306]], [[Minuscule 308|308]], [[Minuscule 309|309]], [[Minuscule 313|313]], [[Minuscule 314|314]], [[Minuscule 316|316]], [[Minuscule 319|319]], [[Minuscule 320|320]], [[Minuscule 324|324]], [[Minuscule 325|325]], [[Minuscule 327|327]], [[Minuscule 328|328]], [[Minuscule 329|329]], [[Minuscule 330|330]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 331|331]], [[Minuscule 334|334]], [[Minuscule 335|335]], [[Minuscule 337|337]], [[Minuscule 342|342]], [[Minuscule 343|343]], [[Minuscule 344|344]], [[Minuscule 347|347]], [[Minuscule 350|350]], [[Minuscule 351|351]], [[Minuscule 352|352]], [[Minuscule 353|353]], [[Minuscule 354|354]], [[Minuscule 355|355]], [[Minuscule 356|356]], [[Minuscule 357|357]], [[Minuscule 358|358]], [[Minuscule 359|359]], [[Minuscule 360|360]], [[Minuscule 361|361]], [[Minuscule 362|362]], [[Minuscule 364|364]], [[Minuscule 365|365]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 366|366]], [[Minuscule 367|367]], [[Minuscule 368|368]], [[Minuscule 369|369]], [[Minuscule 371|371]], [[Minuscule 373|373]], [[Minuscule 374|374]], [[Minuscule 375|375]], [[Minuscule 376|376]], [[Minuscule 378|378]] (except Cath.), [[Minuscule 379|379]], [[Minuscule 380|380]], [[Minuscule 381|381]], [[Minuscule 384|384]], [[Minuscule 385|385]], [[Minuscule 386|386]], [[Minuscule 387|387]], [[Minuscule 388|388]], [[Minuscule 390|390]], [[Minuscule 392|392]], [[Minuscule 393|393]], [[Minuscule 394|394]], [[Minuscule 395|395]], [[Minuscule 396|396]], [[Minuscule 398|398]] (except Cath.), [[Minuscule 399|399]], [[Minuscule 401|401]], [[Minuscule 402|402]], [[Minuscule 404|404]], [[Minuscule 405|405]], [[Minuscule 407|407]], [[Minuscule 408|408]], [[Minuscule 409|409]], [[Minuscule 410|410]], [[Minuscule 411|411]], [[Minuscule 412|412]], [[Minuscule 413|413]], [[Minuscule 414|414]], [[Minuscule 415|415]], [[Minuscule 417|417]], [[Minuscule 418|418]], [[Minuscule 419|419]], [[Minuscule 422|422]], [[Minuscule 425|425]], [[Minuscule 426|426]], [[Minuscule 429|429]] (Paul and Rev.), [[Minuscule 431|431]] (except Acts and Cath.), [[Minuscule 432|432]], [[Minuscule 438|438]], [[Minuscule 439|439]], [[Minuscule 443|443]], [[Minuscule 445|445]], [[Minuscule 446|446]], [[Minuscule 448|448]], [[Minuscule 449|449]], [[Minuscule 450|450]], [[Minuscule 451|451]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 452|452]], [[Minuscule 454|454]], [[Minuscule 457|457]], [[Minuscule 458|458]], [[Minuscule 459|459]] (except Paul), [[Minuscule 461|461]], [[Minuscule 465|465]], [[Minuscule 466|466]], [[Minuscule 469|469]], [[Minuscule 470|470]], [[Minuscule 471|471]], [[Minuscule 473|473]], [[Minuscule 474|474]], [[Minuscule 475|475]], [[Minuscule 476|476]], [[Minuscule 477|477]], [[Minuscule 478|478]], [[Minuscule 479|479]], [[Minuscule 480|480]], [[Minuscule 481|481]], [[Minuscule 482|482]], [[Minuscule 483|483]], [[Minuscule 484|484]], [[Minuscule 485|485]], [[Minuscule 490|490]], [[Minuscule 491|491]], [[Minuscule 492|492]], [[Minuscule 493|493]], [[Minuscule 494|494]] [[Minuscule 496|496]] [[Minuscule 497497|Minuscule 497497]] [[Minuscule 498|498]] [[Minuscule 499|499]] [[Minuscule 500|500]] [[Minuscule 501|501]] [[Minuscule 502|502]] [[Minuscule 504|504]] [[Minuscule 505|505]] [[Minuscule 506|506]] [[Minuscule 507|507]] [[Minuscule 509|509]] [[Minuscule 510|510]] [[Minuscule 511|511]] [[Minuscule 512|512]] [[Minuscule 514|514]] [[Minuscule 516|516]] [[Minuscule 518|518]] [[Minuscule 519|519]] [[Minuscule 520|520]] [[Minuscule 521|521]] [[Minuscule 522|522]] (except Acts and Cath.) [[Minuscule 523|523]] [[Minuscule 524|524]] [[Minuscule 525|525]] [[Minuscule 526|526]] [[Minuscule 527|527]] [[Minuscule 528|528]] [[Minuscule 529|529]] [[Minuscule 530|530]] [[Minuscule 531|531]] [[Minuscule 532|532]] [[Minuscule 533|533]] [[Minuscule 534|534]] [[Minuscule 535|535]] [[Minuscule 538|538]] [[Minuscule 540|540]] [[Minuscule 541|541]] [[Minuscule 546|546]] [[Minuscule 547|547]] [[Minuscule 548|548]] [[Minuscule 549|549]] [[Minuscule 550|550]] [[Minuscule 551|551]] [[Minuscule 553|553]] [[Minuscule 554|554]] [[Minuscule 556|556]] [[Minuscule 558|558]] [[Minuscule 559|559]] [[Minuscule 560|560]] [[Minuscule 564|564]] [[Minuscule 568|568]] [[Minuscule 570|570]] [[Minuscule 571|571]] [[Minuscule 573|573]] [[Minuscule 574|574]] [[Minuscule 575|575]] [[Minuscule 577|577]] [[Minuscule 578|578]] [[Minuscule 580|580]] [[Minuscule 583|583]] [[Minuscule 584|584]] [[Minuscule 585|585]] [[Minuscule 586|586]] [[Minuscule 587|587]] [[Minuscule 588|588]] [[Minuscule 592|592]] [[Minuscule 593|593]] [[Minuscule 594|594]] [[Minuscule 596|596]] [[Minuscule 597|597]] [[Minuscule 600|600]] [[Minuscule 601|601]] [[Minuscule 602|602]] [[Minuscule 603|603]] [[Minuscule 604|604]] [[Minuscule 605|605]] [[Minuscule 607|607]] [[Minuscule 616|616]] [[Minuscule 618|618]] [[Minuscule 620|620]] [[Minuscule 622|622]] [[Minuscule 624|624]] [[Minuscule 625|625]] [[Minuscule 626|626]] [[Minuscule 627|627]] [[Minuscule 628|628]] [[Minuscule 632|632]] [[Minuscule 633|633]] [[Minuscule 634|634]] [[Minuscule 637|637]] [[Minuscule 638|638]] [[Minuscule 639|639]] [[Minuscule 640|640]] [[Minuscule 642|642]](except Cath.) [[Minuscule 644|644]] [[Minuscule 645|645]] [[Minuscule 648|648]] [[Minuscule 649|649]] [[Minuscule 650|650]] [[Minuscule 651|651]] [[Minuscule 655|655]] [[Minuscule 656|656]] [[Minuscule 657|657]] [[Minuscule 660|660]] [[Minuscule 662|662]] [[Minuscule 663|663]] [[Minuscule 664|664]] [[Minuscule 666|666]] [[Minuscule 668|668]] [[Minuscule 669|669]] [[Minuscule 672|672]] [[Minuscule 673|673]] [[Minuscule 674|674]] [[Minuscule 677|677]] [[Minuscule 680|680]] [[Minuscule 684|684]] [[Minuscule 685|685]] [[Minuscule 686|686]] [[Minuscule 688|688]] [[Minuscule 689|689]] [[Minuscule 690|690]] [[Minuscule 691|691]] [[Minuscule 692|692]] [[Minuscule 694|694]] [[Minuscule 696|696]] [[Minuscule 698|698]] [[Minuscule 699|699]] [[Minuscule 705|705]] [[Minuscule 707|707]] [[Minuscule 708|708]] [[Minuscule 711|711]] [[Minuscule 714|714]] [[Minuscule 715|715]] [[Minuscule 717|717]] [[Minuscule 718|718]] [[Minuscule 721|721]] [[Minuscule 724|724]] [[Minuscule 725|725]] [[Minuscule 727|727]] [[Minuscule 729|729]] [[Minuscule 730|730]] [[Minuscule 731|731]] [[Minuscule 734|734]] [[Minuscule 736|736]] [[Minuscule 737|737]] [[Minuscule 739|739]] [[Minuscule 741|741]] [[Minuscule 745|745]] [[Minuscule 746|746]] [[Minuscule 748|748]] [[Minuscule 750|750]] [[Minuscule 754|754]] [[Minuscule 755|755]] [[Minuscule 756|756]] [[Minuscule 757|757]] [[Minuscule 758|758]] [[Minuscule 759|759]] [[Minuscule 760|760]] [[Minuscule 761|761]] [[Minuscule 762|762]] [[Minuscule 763|763]] [[Minuscule 764|764]] [[Minuscule 765|765]] [[Minuscule 768|768]] [[Minuscule 769|769]] [[Minuscule 770|770]] [[Minuscule 773|773]] [[Minuscule 774|774]] [[Minuscule 775|775]] [[Minuscule 777|777]] [[Minuscule 778|778]] [[Minuscule 779|779]] [[Minuscule 781|781]] [[Minuscule 782|782]] [[Minuscule 783|783]] [[Minuscule 784|784]] [[Minuscule 785|785]] [[Minuscule 786|786]] [[Minuscule 787|787]] [[Minuscule 789|789]] [[Minuscule 790|790]] [[Minuscule 793|793]] [[Minuscule 794|794]] [[Minuscule 797|797]] [[Minuscule 798|798]] [[Minuscule 799|799]] [[Minuscule 801|801]] [[Minuscule 802|802]] [[Minuscule 806|806]] [[Minuscule 808|808]] [[Minuscule 809|809]] [[Minuscule 811|811]] [[Minuscule 818|818]] [[Minuscule 818|818]] [[Minuscule 820|820]] [[Minuscule 824|824]] [[Minuscule 825|825]] [[Minuscule 830|830]] [[Minuscule 831|831]] [[Minuscule 833|833]] [[Minuscule 834|834]] [[Minuscule 835|835]] [[Minuscule 836|836]] [[Minuscule 839|839]] [[Minuscule 840|840]] [[Minuscule 841|841]] [[Minuscule 843|843]] [[Minuscule 844|844]] [[Minuscule 845|845]] [[Minuscule 846|846]] [[Minuscule 848|848]] [[Minuscule 852|852]] [[Minuscule 853|853]] [[Minuscule 857|857]] [[Minuscule 858|858]] [[Minuscule 860|860]] [[Minuscule 861|861]] [[Minuscule 862|862]] [[Minuscule 864|864]] [[Minuscule 866a|866a]] [[Minuscule 867|867]] [[Minuscule 868|868]] [[Minuscule 870|870]] [[Minuscule 877|877]] [[Minuscule 880|880]] [[Minuscule 884|884]] [[Minuscule 886|886]] [[Minuscule 887|887]] [[Minuscule 889|889]] [[Minuscule 890|890]] [[Minuscule 893|893]] [[Minuscule 894|894]] [[Minuscule 896|896]] [[Minuscule 897|897]] [[Minuscule 898|898]] [[Minuscule 900|900]] [[Minuscule 901|901]] [[Minuscule 902|902]] [[Minuscule 904|904]] [[Minuscule 905|905]] [[Minuscule 906|906]] [[Minuscule 910|910]] [[Minuscule 911|911]] [[Minuscule 912|912]] [[Minuscule 914|914]] [[Minuscule 916|916]] [[Minuscule 917|917]] (Paul) [[Minuscule 919|919]] [[Minuscule 920|920]] [[Minuscule 921|921]] [[Minuscule 924|924]] [[Minuscule 928|928]] [[Minuscule 936|936]] [[Minuscule 937|937]] [[Minuscule 938|938]] [[Minuscule 942|942]] [[Minuscule 943|943]] [[Minuscule 944|944]] [[Minuscule 945|945]] (Acts and Cath.) [[Minuscule 950|950]] [[Minuscule 951|951]] [[Minuscule 952|952]] [[Minuscule 953|953]] [[Minuscule 955|955]] [[Minuscule 956|956]] [[Minuscule 957|957]] [[Minuscule 958|958]] [[Minuscule 959|959]] [[Minuscule 960|960]] [[Minuscule 961|961]] [[Minuscule 962|962]] [[Minuscule 963|963]] [[Minuscule 964|964]] [[Minuscule 965|965]] [[Minuscule 966|966]] [[Minuscule 967|967]] [[Minuscule 969|969]] [[Minuscule 970|970]] [[Minuscule 971|971]] [[Minuscule 973|973]] [[Minuscule 975|975]] [[Minuscule 977|977]] [[Minuscule 978|978]] [[Minuscule 980|980]] [[Minuscule 981|981]] [[Minuscule 987|987]] [[Minuscule 988|988]] [[Minuscule 991|991]] [[Minuscule 993|993]] [[Minuscule 994|994]] [[Minuscule 995|995]] [[Minuscule 997|997]] [[Minuscule 998|998]] [[Minuscule 999|999]] [[Minuscule 1000|1000]] [[Minuscule 1003|1003]] [[Minuscule 1004|1004]] [[Minuscule 1006|1006]] (Gospels) [[Minuscule 1007|1007]] [[Minuscule 1008|1008]] [[Minuscule 1010|1010]] [[Minuscule 1011|1011]] [[Minuscule 1013|1013]] [[Minuscule 1014|1014]] [[Minuscule 1015|1015]] [[Minuscule 1016|1016]] [[Minuscule 1017|1017]] [[Minuscule 1018|1018]] [[Minuscule 1019|1019]] [[Minuscule 1020|1020]] [[Minuscule 1023|1023]] [[Minuscule 1024|1024]] [[Minuscule 1025|1025]] [[Minuscule 1026|1026]] [[Minuscule 1028|1028]] [[Minuscule 1030|1030]] [[Minuscule 1031|1031]] [[Minuscule 1032|1032]] [[Minuscule 1033|1033]] [[Minuscule 1036|1036]] [[Minuscule 1044|1044]] [[Minuscule 1045|1045]] [[Minuscule 1046|1046]] [[Minuscule 1050|1050]] [[Minuscule 1052|1052]] [[Minuscule 1053|1053]] [[Minuscule 1054|1054]] [[Minuscule 1055|1055]] [[Minuscule 1056|1056]] [[Minuscule 1057|1057]] [[Minuscule 1059|1059]] [[Minuscule 1060|1060]] [[Minuscule 1061|1061]] [[Minuscule 1062|1062]] [[Minuscule 1063|1063]] [[Minuscule 1065|1065]] [[Minuscule 1067|1067]] (except Cath.) [[Minuscule 1068|1068]] [[Minuscule 1069|1069]] [[Minuscule 1070|1070]] [[Minuscule 1072|1072]] [[Minuscule 1073|1073]] [[Minuscule 1074|1074]] [[Minuscule 1075|1075]] [[Minuscule 1076|1076]] [[Minuscule 1077|1077]] [[Minuscule 1078|1078]] [[Minuscule 1080|1080]] [[Minuscule 1081|1081]] [[Minuscule 1083|1083]] [[Minuscule 1085|1085]] [[Minuscule 1087|1087]] [[Minuscule 1088|1088]] [[Minuscule 1089|1089]] [[Minuscule 1094|1094]] [[Minuscule 1099|1099]] [[Minuscule 1100|1100]] [[Minuscule 1101|1101]] [[Minuscule 1103|1103]] [[Minuscule 1104|1104]] [[Minuscule 1105|1105]] [[Minuscule 1107|1107]] [[Minuscule 1110|1110]] [[Minuscule 1112|1112]] [[Minuscule 1119|1119]] [[Minuscule 1121|1121]] [[Minuscule 1123|1123]] [[Minuscule 1129|1129]] [[Minuscule 1148|1148]] [[Minuscule 1149|1149]] [[Minuscule 1150|1150]] [[Minuscule 1161|1161]] [[Minuscule 1168|1168]] [[Minuscule 1169|1169]] [[Minuscule 1171|1171]] [[Minuscule 1172|1172]] [[Minuscule 1173|1173]] [[Minuscule 1174|1174]] [[Minuscule 1176|1176]] [[Minuscule 1177|1177]] [[Minuscule 1185|1185]] [[Minuscule 1186|1186]] [[Minuscule 1187|1187]] [[Minuscule 1188|1188]] [[Minuscule 1189|1189]] [[Minuscule 1190|1190]] [[Minuscule 1191|1191]] [[Minuscule 1193|1193]] [[Minuscule 1196|1196]] [[Minuscule 1197|1197]] [[Minuscule 1198|1198]] [[Minuscule 1199|1199]] [[Minuscule 1200|1200]] [[Minuscule 1201|1201]] [[Minuscule 1202|1202]] [[Minuscule 1203|1203]] [[Minuscule 1205|1205]] [[Minuscule 1206|1206]] [[Minuscule 1207|1207]] [[Minuscule 1208|1208]] [[Minuscule 1209|1209]] [[Minuscule 1211|1211]] [[Minuscule 1212|1212]] [[Minuscule 1213|1213]] [[Minuscule 1214|1214]] [[Minuscule 1215|1215]] [[Minuscule 1217|1217]] [[Minuscule 1218|1218]] [[Minuscule 1220|1220]] [[Minuscule 1221|1221]] [[Minuscule 1222|1222]] [[Minuscule 1223|1223]] [[Minuscule 1224|1224]] [[Minuscule 1225|1225]] [[Minuscule 1226|1226]] [[Minuscule 1227|1227]] [[Minuscule 1231|1231]] [[Minuscule 1241|1241]] (only Acts) [[Minuscule 1251|1251]] [[Minuscule 1252|1252]] [[Minuscule 1254|1254]] [[Minuscule 1255|1255]] [[Minuscule 1260|1260]] [[Minuscule 1264|1264]] [[Minuscule 1277|1277]] [[Minuscule 1283|1283]] [[Minuscule 1285|1285]] [[Minuscule 1292|1292]] (except Cath.) [[Minuscule 1296|1296]] [[Minuscule 1297|1297]] [[Minuscule 1298|1298]] [[Minuscule 1299|1299]] [[Minuscule 1300|1300]] [[Minuscule 1301|1301]] [[Minuscule 1303|1303]] [[Minuscule 1305|1305]] [[Minuscule 1309|1309]] [[Minuscule 1310|1310]] [[Minuscule 1312|1312]] [[Minuscule 1313|1313]] [[Minuscule 1314|1314]] [[Minuscule 1315|1315]] [[Minuscule 1316|1316]] [[Minuscule 1317|1317]] [[Minuscule 1318|1318]] [[Minuscule 1319|1319]] (except Paul) [[Minuscule 1320|1320]] [[Minuscule 1323|1323]] [[Minuscule 1324|1324]] [[Minuscule 1328|1328]] [[Minuscule 1330|1330]] [[Minuscule 1331|1331]] [[Minuscule 1334|1334]] [[Minuscule 1339|1339]] [[Minuscule 1340|1340]] [[Minuscule 1341|1341]] [[Minuscule 1343|1343]] [[Minuscule 1345|1345]] [[Minuscule 1347|1347]] [[Minuscule 1350a|1350a]] [[Minuscule 1350b|1350b]] [[Minuscule 1351|1351]] [[Minuscule 1352a|1352a]] [[Minuscule 1354|1354]] [[Minuscule 1355|1355]] [[Minuscule 1356|1356]] [[Minuscule 1357|1357]] [[Minuscule 1358|1358]] [[Minuscule 1359|1359]] (except Cath.) [[Minuscule 1360|1360]] [[Minuscule 1362|1362]] [[Minuscule 1364|1364]] [[Minuscule 1367|1367]] [[Minuscule 1370|1370]] [[Minuscule 1373|1373]] [[Minuscule 1374|1374]] [[Minuscule 1377|1377]] [[Minuscule 1384|1384]] [[Minuscule 1385|1385]] [[Minuscule 1392|1392]] [[Minuscule 1395|1395]] [[Minuscule 1398|1398]] (except Paul) [[Minuscule 1400|1400]] [[Minuscule 1409|1409]] (Gospels and Paul) [[Minuscule 1417|1417]] [[Minuscule 1437|1437]] [[Minuscule 1438|1438]] [[Minuscule 1444|1444]] [[Minuscule 1445|1445]] [[Minuscule 1447|1447]] [[Minuscule 1448|1448]] (except Cath.) [[Minuscule 1449|1449]] [[Minuscule 1452|1452]] [[Minuscule 1470|1470]] [[Minuscule 1476|1476]] [[Minuscule 1482|1482]] [[Minuscule 1483|1483]] [[Minuscule 1492|1492]] [[Minuscule 1503|1503]] [[Minuscule 1504|1504]] [[Minuscule 1506|1506]] (Gospels) [[Minuscule 1508|1508]] [[Minuscule 1513|1513]] [[Minuscule 1514|1514]] [[Minuscule 1516|1516]] [[Minuscule 1517|1517]] [[Minuscule 1520|1520]] [[Minuscule 1521|1521]] [[Minuscule 1523|1523]] (Paul) [[Minuscule 1539|1539]] [[Minuscule 1540|1540]] [[Minuscule 1542b|1542b]] only Luke) [[Minuscule 1543|1543]] [[Minuscule 1545|1545]] [[Minuscule 1547|1547]] [[Minuscule 1548|1548]] [[Minuscule 1556|1556]] [[Minuscule 1566|1566]] [[Minuscule 1570|1570]] [[Minuscule 1572|1572]] [[Minuscule 1573|1573]] (except Paul?) [[Minuscule 1577|1577]] [[Minuscule 1583|1583]] [[Minuscule 1594|1594]] [[Minuscule 1597|1597]] [[Minuscule 1604|1604]] [[Minuscule 1605|1605]] [[Minuscule 1607|1607]] [[Minuscule 1613|1613]] [[Minuscule 1614|1614]] [[Minuscule 1617|1617]] [[Minuscule 1618|1618]] [[Minuscule 1619|1619]] [[Minuscule 1622|1622]] [[Minuscule 1628|1628]] [[Minuscule 1636|1636]] [[Minuscule 1637|1637]] [[Minuscule 1649|1649]] [[Minuscule 1656|1656]] [[Minuscule 1662|1662]] [[Minuscule 1668|1668]] [[Minuscule 1672|1672]] [[Minuscule 1673|1673]] [[Minuscule 1683|1683]] [[Minuscule 1693|1693]] [[Minuscule 1701|1701]] [[Minuscule 1704|1704]] (except Acts) [[Minuscule 1714|1714]] [[Minuscule 1717|1717]] [[Minuscule 1720|1720]] [[Minuscule 1723|1723]] [[Minuscule 1725|1725]] [[Minuscule 1726|1726]] [[Minuscule 1727|1727]] [[Minuscule 1728|1728]] [[Minuscule 1730|1730]] [[Minuscule 1731|1731]] [[Minuscule 1732|1732]] [[Minuscule 1733|1733]] [[Minuscule 1734|1734]] [[Minuscule 1736|1736]] [[Minuscule 1737|1737]] [[Minuscule 1738|1738]] [[Minuscule 1740|1740]] [[Minuscule 1741|1741]] [[Minuscule 1742|1742]] [[Minuscule 1743|1743]] [[Minuscule 1745|1745]] [[Minuscule 1746|1746]] [[Minuscule 1747|1747]] [[Minuscule 1748|1748]] [[Minuscule 1749|1749]] [[Minuscule 1750|1750]] [[Minuscule 1752|1752]] [[Minuscule 1754|1754]] [[Minuscule 1755a|1755a]] [[Minuscule 1755b|1755b]] [[Minuscule 1756|1756]] [[Minuscule 1757|1757]] [[Minuscule 1759|1759]] [[Minuscule 1761|1761]] [[Minuscule 1762|1762]] [[Minuscule 1763|1763]] [[Minuscule 1767|1767]] [[Minuscule 1768|1768]] [[Minuscule 1770|1770]] [[Minuscule 1771|1771]] [[Minuscule 1772|1772]] [[Minuscule 1800|1800]] [[Minuscule 1821|1821]] [[Minuscule 1826|1826]] [[Minuscule 1828|1828]] [[Minuscule 1829|1829]] [[Minuscule 1835|1835]] [[Minuscule 1841|1841]] (except Rev.) [[Minuscule 1846|1846]] (only Acts) [[Minuscule 1847|1847]] [[Minuscule 1849|1849]] [[Minuscule 1851|1851]] [[Minuscule 1852|1852]] (only in Rev.) [[Minuscule 1854|1854]] (except Rev.) [[Minuscule 1855|1855]] [[Minuscule 1856|1856]] [[Minuscule 1858|1858]] [[Minuscule 1859|1859]] [[Minuscule 1860|1860]] [[Minuscule 1861|1861]] [[Minuscule 1862|1862]] [[Minuscule 1869|1869]] [[Minuscule 1870|1870]] [[Minuscule 1872|1872]] [[Minuscule 1874|1874]] (except Paul) [[Minuscule 1876|1876]] [[Minuscule 1877|1877]] (except Paul) [[Minuscule 1878|1878]] [[Minuscule 1879|1879]] [[Minuscule 1880|1880]] [[Minuscule 1882|1882]] [[Minuscule 1883|1883]] [[Minuscule 1888|1888]] [[Minuscule 1889|1889]] [[Minuscule 1891|1891]] (except Acts) [[Minuscule 1897|1897]] [[Minuscule 1899|1899]] [[Minuscule 1902|1902]] [[Minuscule 1905|1905]] [[Minuscule 1906|1906]] [[Minuscule 1907|1907]] [[Minuscule 1911|1911]] [[Minuscule 1914|1914]] [[Minuscule 1915|1915]] [[Minuscule 1916|1916]] [[Minuscule 1917|1917]] [[Minuscule 1918|1918]] [[Minuscule 1919|1919]] [[Minuscule 1920|1920]] [[Minuscule 1921|1921]] [[Minuscule 1922|1922]] [[Minuscule 1923|1923]] [[Minuscule 1924|1924]] [[Minuscule 1925|1925]] [[Minuscule 1926|1926]] [[Minuscule 1927|1927]] [[Minuscule 1928|1928]] [[Minuscule 1929|1929]] [[Minuscule 1930|1930]] [[Minuscule 1931|1931]] [[Minuscule 1932|1932]] [[Minuscule 1933|1933]] [[Minuscule 1934|1934]] [[Minuscule 1936|1936]] [[Minuscule 1937|1937]] [[Minuscule 1938|1938]] [[Minuscule 1941|1941]] [[Minuscule 1946|1946]] [[Minuscule 1948|1948]] [[Minuscule 1951|1951]] [[Minuscule 1952|1952]] [[Minuscule 1954|1954]] [[Minuscule 1955|1955]] [[Minuscule 1956|1956]] [[Minuscule 1957|1957]] [[Minuscule 1958|1958]] [[Minuscule 1964|1964]] [[Minuscule 1970|1970]] [[Minuscule 1971|1971]] [[Minuscule 1972|1972]] [[Minuscule 1974|1974]] [[Minuscule 1975|1975]] [[Minuscule 1978|1978]] [[Minuscule 1979|1979]] [[Minuscule 1980|1980]] [[Minuscule 1981|1981]] [[Minuscule 1982|1982]] [[Minuscule 1986|1986]] [[Minuscule 1988|1988]] [[Minuscule 1992|1992]] [[Minuscule 1997|1997]] [[Minuscule 1998|1998]] [[Minuscule 2001|2001]] [[Minuscule 2003|2003]] [[Minuscule 2007|2007]] [[Minuscule 2009|2009]] [[Minuscule 2013|2013]] [[Minuscule 2048|2048]] [[Minuscule 2096|2096]] [[Minuscule 2098|2098]] [[Minuscule 2111|2111]] [[Minuscule 2119|2119]] [[Minuscule 2125|2125]] [[Minuscule 2126|2126]] [[Minuscule 2127|2127]] (except Paul) [[Minuscule 2132|2132]] [[Minuscule 2133|2133]] [[Minuscule 2135|2135]] [[Minuscule 2138|2138]] (only in Rev.) [[Minuscule 2139|2139]] [[Minuscule 2140|2140]] [[Minuscule 2141|2141]] [[Minuscule 2142|2142]] [[Minuscule 2144|2144]] [[Minuscule 2160|2160]] [[Minuscule 2172|2172]] [[Minuscule 2173|2173]] [[Minuscule 2175|2175]] [[Minuscule 2176|2176]] [[Minuscule 2177|2177]] [[Minuscule 2178|2178]] [[Minuscule 2181|2181]] [[Minuscule 2183|2183]] [[Minuscule 2187|2187]] [[Minuscule 2189|2189]] [[Minuscule 2191|2191]] [[Minuscule 2199|2199]] [[Minuscule 2218|2218]] [[Minuscule 2221|2221]] [[Minuscule 2236|2236]] [[Minuscule 2261|2261]] [[Minuscule 2266|2266]] [[Minuscule 2267|2267]] [[Minuscule 2273|2273]] [[Minuscule 2275|2275]] [[Minuscule 2277|2277]] [[Minuscule 2281|2281]] [[Minuscule 2289|2289]] [[Minuscule 2295|2295]] [[Minuscule 2300|2300]] [[Minuscule 2303|2303]] [[Minuscule 2306|2306]] [[Minuscule 2307|2307]] [[Minuscule 2309|2309]] [[Minuscule 2310|2310]] [[Minuscule 2311|2311]] [[Minuscule 2352|2352]] [[Minuscule 2355|2355]] [[Minuscule 2356|2356]] [[Minuscule 2373|2373]] [[Minuscule 2376|2376]] [[Minuscule 2378|2378]] [[Minuscule 2381|2381]] [[Minuscule 2382|2382]] [[Minuscule 2386|2386]] [[Minuscule 2389|2389]] [[Minuscule 2390|2390]] [[Minuscule 2406|2406]] [[Minuscule 2407|2407]] [[Minuscule 2409|2409]] [[Minuscule 2414|2414]] [[Minuscule 2415|2415]] [[Minuscule 2418|2418]] [[Minuscule 2420|2420]] [[Minuscule 2422|2422]] [[Minuscule 2423|2423]] [[Minuscule 2424|2424]] [[Minuscule 2425|2425]] [[Minuscule 2426|2426]] [[Minuscule 2430|2430]] [[Minuscule 2431|2431]] [[Minuscule 2437|2437]] [[Minuscule 2441|2441]] [[Minuscule 2442|2442]] [[Minuscule 2445|2445]] [[Minuscule 2447|2447]] [[Minuscule 2450|2450]] [[Minuscule 2451|2451]] [[Minuscule 2452|2452]] [[Minuscule 2454|2454]] [[Minuscule 2455|2455]] [[Minuscule 2457|2457]] [[Minuscule 2458|2458]] [[Minuscule 2459|2459]] [[Minuscule 2466|2466]] [[Minuscule 2468|2468]] [[Minuscule 2475|2475]] [[Minuscule 2479|2479]] [[Minuscule 2483|2483]] [[Minuscule 2484|2484]] [[Minuscule 2490|2490]] [[Minuscule 2491|2491]] [[Minuscule 2496|2496]] [[Minuscule 2497|2497]] [[Minuscule 2499|2499]] [[Minuscule 2500|2500]] [[Minuscule 2501|2501]] [[Minuscule 2502|2502]] [[Minuscule 2503|2503]] [[Minuscule 2507|2507]] [[Minuscule 2532|2532]] [[Minuscule 2534|2534]] [[Minuscule 2536|2536]] [[Minuscule 2539|2539]] [[Minuscule 2540|2540]] [[Minuscule 2545|2545]] [[Minuscule 2547|2547]] [[Minuscule 2549|2549]] [[Minuscule 2550|2550]] [[Minuscule 2552|2552]] [[Minuscule 2554|2554]] [[Minuscule 255?|255?]] [[Minuscule 2558|2558]] [[Minuscule 2559|2559]] [[Minuscule 2562|2562]] [[Minuscule 2563|2563]] [[Minuscule 2567|2567]] [[Minuscule 2571|2571]] [[Minuscule 2572|2572]] [[Minuscule 2573|2573]] [[Minuscule 2578|2578]] [[Minuscule 2579|2579]] [[Minuscule 2581|2581]] [[Minuscule 2584|2584]] [[Minuscule 2587|2587]] [[Minuscule 2593|2593]] [[Minuscule 2600|2600]] [[Minuscule 2619|2619]] [[Minuscule 2624|2624]] [[Minuscule 2626|2626]] [[Minuscule 2627|2627]] [[Minuscule 2629|2629]] [[Minuscule 2631|2631]] [[Minuscule 2633|2633]] [[Minuscule 2634|2634]] [[Minuscule 2635|2635]] [[Minuscule 2636|2636]] [[Minuscule 2637|2637]] [[Minuscule 2639|2639]] [[Minuscule 2645|2645]] [[Minuscule 2646|2646]] [[Minuscule 2649|2649]] [[Minuscule 2650|2650]] [[Minuscule 2651|2651]] [[Minuscule 2653|2653]] [[Minuscule 2656|2656]] [[Minuscule 2657|2657]] [[Minuscule 2658|2658]] [[Minuscule 2660|2660]] [[Minuscule 2661|2661]] [[Minuscule 2665|2665]] [[Minuscule 2666|2666]] [[Minuscule 2671|2671]] [[Minuscule 2673|2673]] [[Minuscule 2675|2675]] [[Minuscule 2679|2679]] [[Minuscule 2690|2690]] [[Minuscule 2691|2692]] [[Minuscule 2696|2696]] [[Minuscule 2698|2698]] [[Minuscule 2699|2699]] [[Minuscule 2700|2700]] [[Minuscule 2704|2704]] [[Minuscule 2711|2711]] [[Minuscule 2712|2712]] [[Minuscule 2716|2716]] [[Minuscule 2721|2721]] [[Minuscule 2722|2722]] [[Minuscule 2723|2723]] [[Minuscule 2724|2724]] [[Minuscule 2725|2725]] [[Minuscule 2727|2727]] [[Minuscule 2729|2729]] [[Minuscule 2746|2746]] [[Minuscule 2760|2760]] [[Minuscule 2761|2761]] [[Minuscule 2765|2765]] [[Minuscule 2767|2767]] [[Minuscule 2773|2773]] [[Minuscule 2774|2774]] [[Minuscule 2775|2775]] [[Minuscule 2779|2779]] [[Minuscule 2780|2780]] [[Minuscule 2781|2781]] [[Minuscule 2782|2782]] [[Minuscule 2783|2783]] [[Minuscule 2784|2784]] [[Minuscule 2785|2785]] [[Minuscule 2787|2787]] [[Minuscule 2790|2790]].<ref>[[Kurt Aland]], and Barbara Aland, "The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism", transl. Erroll F. Rhodes, ''[[William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company]]'', Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1995, pp. 129-140; [[Kurt Aland]], "Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum. Locis parallelis evangeliorum apocryphorum et patrum adhibitis edidit", Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, Stuttgart [[1996 AD|1996]], p. XXXII. </ref>

=== Distribution of Byzantine type manuscripts by century ===
; 9th century
[[Minuscule 461|461]], [[Minuscule 1080|1080]], [[Minuscule 1862|1862]], [[Minuscule 2142|2142]], [[Minuscule 2500|2500]]

; 9th/10th
[[Minuscule 399|399]]

; 10th
[[Minuscule 14|14]], [[Minuscule 27|27]], [[Minuscule 29|29]], [[Minuscule 34|34]], [[Minuscule 36e|36e]], [[Minuscule 63|63]], [[Minuscule 82|82]], [[Minuscule 92|92]], [[Minuscule 100|100]], [[Minuscule 135|135]], [[Minuscule 144|144]], [[Minuscule 151|151]], [[Minuscule 221|221]], [[Minuscule 237|237]], [[Minuscule 262|262]], [[Minuscule 278b|278b]], [[Minuscule 344|344]], [[Minuscule 364|364]], [[Minuscule 371|371]], [[Minuscule 405|405]], [[Minuscule 411|411]], [[Minuscule 450|450]], [[Minuscule 454|454]], [[Minuscule 457|457]], [[Minuscule 478|478]], [[Minuscule 481|481]], [[Minuscule 564|564]], [[Minuscule 568|568]], [[Minuscule 584|584]], [[Minuscule 602|602]], [[Minuscule 605|605]], [[Minuscule 626|626]], [[Minuscule 627|627]], [[Minuscule 669|669]], [[Minuscule 920|920]], [[Minuscule 1055|1055]], [[Minuscule 1076|1076]], [[Minuscule 1077|1077]], [[Minuscule 1078|1078]], [[Minuscule 1203|1203]], [[Minuscule 1220|1220]], [[Minuscule 1223|1223]], [[Minuscule 1225|1225]], [[Minuscule 1347|1347]], [[Minuscule 1351|1351]], [[Minuscule 1357|1357]], [[Minuscule 1392|1392]], [[Minuscule 1417|1417]], [[Minuscule 1452|1452]], [[Minuscule 1661|1661]], [[Minuscule 1720|1720]], [[Minuscule 1756|1756]], [[Minuscule 1829|1829]], [[Minuscule 1851|1851]], [[Minuscule 1880|1880]], [[Minuscule 1905|1905]], [[Minuscule 1920|1920]], [[Minuscule 1927|1927]], [[Minuscule 1954|1954]], [[Minuscule 1997|1997]], [[Minuscule 1998|1998]], [[Minuscule 2125|2125]], [[Minuscule 2373|2373]], [[Minuscule 2414|2414]], [[Minuscule |2545]], [[Minuscule |2722]], [[Minuscule |2790]]

; 10th/11th
994, 1073, 1701

; 11th
7p, 8, 12, 20, 23, 24, 25, 37, 39, 40, 50, 65, 68, 75, 77, 83, 89, 98, 108, 112, 123, 125, 126, 127, 133, 137, 142, 143, 148, 150, 177, 186, 194, 195, 197, 200, 207, 208, 210, 212, 215, 236, 250, 259, 272, 276, 277, 278a, 300, 301, 302, 314, 325, 331, 343, 350, 352, 354, 357, 360, 375, 376, 422, 458, 465, 466, 470, 474, 475, 476, 490, 491, 497, 504, 506, 507, 516, 526, 527, 528, 530, 532, 547, 548, 549, 560, 583, 585, 596, 607, 624, 625, 638, 639, 640, 651, 672, 699, 707, 708, 711, 717, 746, 754, 756, 773, 785, 809, 831, 870, 884, 887, 894, 901, 910, 919, 937, 942, 943, 944, 964, 965, 991, 1014, 1028, 1045, 1054, 1056, 1074, 1110, 1123, 1168, 1174, 1187, 1207, 1209, 1211, 1212, 1214, 1221, 1222, 1244, 1277, 1300, 1312, 1314, 1317, 1320, 1324, 1340, 1343, 1373, 1384, 1438, 1444, 1449, 1470, 1483, 1513, 1514, 1517, 1520, 1521, 1545, 1556, 1570, 1607, 1668, 1672, 1693, 1730, 1734, 1738, 1770, 1828, 1835, 1847, 1849, 1870, 1878, 1879, 1888, 1906, 1907, 1916, 1919, 1921, 1923, 1924, 1925, 1932, 1933, 1934, 1946, 1955, 1980, 1981, 1982, 2001, 2007, 2098, 2132, 2133, 2144, 2172, 2176, 2181, 2183, 2199, 2275, 2277, 2281, 2386, 2295, 2307, 2381, 2386, 2430, 2442, 2447, 2451, 2458, 2468, 2475, 2539, 2547, 2559, 2563, 2567, 2571, 2587, 2637, 2649, 2661, 2723, 2746, 2760, 2782, 2787 
2306 (composite of parts from the 11th to the 14th centuries)

; 11th/12th
665, 657, 660, 1013, 1188, 1191, 1309, 1358, 1340, 1566, 2389, 2415, 2784

; 12th
2e, 2ap, 3, 9, 11, 15, 21, 32, 44, 46, 49, 57, 73, 76, 78, 80, 84, 95, 97, 105, 110, 111, 116, 119, 120, 122, 129, 132, 134, 138, 139, 140, 146, 156, 159, 162, 183, 187, 193, 196, 199, 202, 203, 217, 224, 226, 231, 240, 244, 245, 247, 261, 264, 267, 268, 269, 270, 275, 280, 281, 282, 297, 304, 306, 319, 320, 329, 334, 337, 347, 351, 353, 355, 356, 366, 374, 387, 392, 395, 396, 401, 407, 408, 419, 438, 439, 443, 452, 471, 485, 499, 502, 505, 509, 510, 514, 518, 520, 524, 529, 531, 535, 538, 550, 551, 556, 570, 571, 580, 587, 618, 620, 622, 637, 650, 662, 673, 674, 688, 692, 721, 736, 748, 750, 760, 765, 768, 770, 774, 777, 778, 779, 782, 787, 793, 799, 808, 843, 857, 860, 862, 877, 893, 896, 902, 911, 916, 922, 924, 936, 950, 967, 971, 973, 975, 980, 987, 993, 998, 1007, 1046, 1081, 1083, 1085, 1112, 1169, 1176, 1186, 1190, 1193, 1197, 1198, 1199, 1200, 1217, 1218, 1224, 1231, 1240, 1301, 1315, 1316, 1318, 1323, 1350a, 1355, 1360, 1364, 1375, 1385, 1437, 1539, 1583, 1673, 1683, 1714, 1737, 1752, 1754, 1755a, 1755b, 1800, 1821, 1826, 1872, 1889, 1914, 1915, 1917, 1926, 1951, 1970, 1971, 1974, 1986, 1988, 2013, 2096, 2126, 2135, 2139, 2173, 2177, 2189, 2191, 2289, 2282, 2426, 2437, 2445, 2459, 2490, 2491, 2507, 2536, 2549, 2550, 2552, 2562, 2639, 2650, 2657, 2671, 2700, 2712, 2725, 2727, 2781, 2785, 2791, 2794 
632 and 1227 (composites of parts from the 12th to the 14th centuries)

; 12th/13th
905, 906, 1310, 1341, 1897, 2311

; 13th
52, 55 60, 74, 107, 121, 128, 136, 141, 147, 167, 170, 192, 198, 204, 219, 220, 227, 248, 260, 284, 291, 292, 293, 303, 305, 309, 327, 328, 342, 359, 361, 362, 384, 388, 390, 410, 449, 469, 473, 477, 479, 482, 483, 484, 496, 500, 501, 511, 519, 533, 534, 546, 553, 554, 558, 573, 574, 592, 593, 597, 601, 663, 666, 677, 684, 685, 689, 691, 696, 705, 714, 715, 725, 729, 737, 757, 759, 775, 811, 820, 825, 830, 835, 840, 897, 898, 900, 912, 914, 966, 969, 970, 981, 995, 997, 999, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1011, 1015, 1016, 1031, 1050, 1052, 1053, 1057, 1069, 1070, 1072, 1087, 1089, 1094, 1103, 1107, 1129, 1148, 1149, 1150, 1161, 1177, 1201, 1205, 1206, 1208, 1213, 1215, 1226, 1238, 1255, 1285, 1339, 1352a, 1400, 1594, 1597, 1604, 1622, 1717, 1717, 1728, 1731, 1736, 1740, 1742, 1772, 1855, 1858, 1922, 1938, 1941, 1956, 1972, 1992, 2111, 2119, 2140, 2141, 2236, 2353, 2376, 2380, 2390, 2409, 2420, 2423, 2425, 2457, 2479, 2483, 2502, 2534, 2540, 2558, 2568, 2584, 2600, 2624, 2627, 2631, 2633, 2645, 2646, 2658, 2660, 2665, 2670, 2696, 2699, 2724, 2761

; 13th/14th
266, 656, 668, 1334, 2499, 2578

; 14th
18, 45, 53, 54, 66, 109, 155, 171, 182, 185, 190, 201, 214, 223, 232, 235, 243, 246, 290, 308, 316, 324, 358, 367, 369, 381, 386, 393, 394, 402, 404, 409, 412, 413, 414, 415, 417, 425, 426, 480, 492, 494, 498, 512, 521, 523, 540, 577, 578, 586, 588, 594, 600, 603, 604, 628, 633, 634, 644, 645, 648, 649, 680, 686, 690, 698, 718, 727, 730, 731, 734, 741, 758, 761, 762, 763, 764, 769, 781, 783, 784, 786, 789, 790, 794, 797, 798, 802, 806, 818, 819, 824, 833, 834, 836, 839, 845, 846, 848, 858, 864, 866a, 867, 889, 890, 904, 921, 928, 938, 951, 952, 953, 959, 960, 977, 978, 1020, 1023, 1032, 1033, 1036, 1061, 1062, 1075, 1099, 1100, 1119, 1121, 1185, 1189, 1196, 1234, 1235, 1236, 1248, 1249, 1252, 1254, 1283, 1328, 1330, 1331, 1345, 1350b, 1356, 1377, 1395, 1445, 1447, 1476, 1492, 1503, 1504, 1516, 1543, 1547, 1548, 1572, 1577, 1605, 1613, 1614, 1619, 1637, 1723, 1725, 1726, 1732, 1733, 1741, 1746, 1747, 1761, 1762, 1771, 1856, 1859, 1899, 1902, 1918, 1928, 1929, 1952, 1975, 2085, 2160, 2261, 2266, 2273, 2303, 2309, 2310, 2355, 2356, 2406, 2407, 2431, 2441, 2454, 2466, 2484, 2503, 2593, 2626, 2629, 2634, 2651, 2653, 2666, 2668, 2679, 2698, 2716, 2765, 2767, 2773, 2774, 2775, 2780, 2783

; 15th
30, 47, 58, 70, 149, 285, 286, 287, 288, 313, 368, 373, 379, 380, 385, 418, 432, 446, 448, 493, 525, 541, 575, 616, 664, 694, 739, 801, 841, 844, 853, 880, 955, 958, 961, 962, 1003, 1017, 1018, 1024, 1026, 1059, 1060, 1105, 1202, 1232, 1233, 1247, 1250, 1260, 1264, 1482, 1508, 1617, 1626, 1628, 1636, 1649, 1656, 1745, 1750, 1757, 1763, 1767, 1876, 1882, 1948, 1957, 1958, 1964, 1978, 2003, 2175, 2178, 2221, 2352, 2418, 2452, 2455, 2554, 2673, 2675, 2691, 2704, 2729

; 15th/16th
99, 1367

; 16th
90, 335, 445, 724, 745, 755, 867, 957, 1019, 1030, 1065, 1068, 1088, 1239, 1362, 1370, 1374, 1618, 1749, 1768, 1861, 1883, 1911, 1930, 1931, 1936, 1937, 1979, 2009,

; 16th/17th
1371

; 17th and later
289, 868, 956, 963, 988, 1044, 1063, 1101, 1104, 1303, 1748, 1869, 2267, 2450, 2497, 2581, 2619, 2656<ref>Kurt Aland, and Barbara Aland, "The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism", transl. Erroll F. Rhodes, ''[[William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company]]'', Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1995, pp. 140-142. </ref>

== Characteristics of the Byzantine text ==

Compared to [[Alexandrian text-type]] manuscripts, the distinct Byzantine readings tend to show a greater tendency toward smooth and well-formed Greek, they display fewer instances of textual variation between parallel [[Synoptic Gospel]] passages, and they are less likely to present contradictory or "[[Lectio difficilior potior|difficult]]" issues of [[exegesis]].<ref>"The Syrian text has all the appearance of being a careful attempt to supersede the chaos of rival texts by a judicious selection from them all." [[Brooke Foss Westcott]], [[Fenton John Anthony Hort]]. ''The New Testament In The Original Greek'', 1925. p. 551</ref> For example, [[Mark 1:2]] reads "As it is written in the prophets.." in the Byzantine text; whereas the same verse reads, "As it is written in [[Book of Isaiah|Isaiah]] the prophet.." in all other early textual witnesses. Since the quotation introduced is partly from [[Book of Malachi|Malachi]], the Byzantine form of the verse avoids the difficulty that might be adduced were it to be concluded that Mark was presenting a factual inaccuracy.

Many criticize the Byzantine Text because of its smoothness over and against the Alexandrian Text which is not nearly as smooth in its Greek renderings. These critics claim that the smoothness is proof of an editing process to refine the language.
These critics fail to account for other, more natural reasons for the smoothness in the Byzantine Text. One of these reasons is that the Byzantine Text reads smoother because it was transcribed by those who knew the Greek language.
There’s evidence that some Alexandrian manuscripts were copied by scribes who weren’t well learned in the source language, but rather copied syllable by syllable or letter by letter. For instance, P66 seems to have been produced by a scribe who didn’t know Greek because of the simple mistakes that any Greek reader would have detected. P75 has similar issues pointing to a non-Greek scribe.
This problem doesn't occur in Byzantium because they kept using the Greek language long after the Alexandrian and Western Church. The point being that Byzantium would have been better fit for having scribes who were well adept in the Greek language.
Consider that before 200 A.D. areas that spoke Latin stopped using Greek, though Byzantium kept the language alive. Aland speaks of this fact in - K. and B. Aland, The Text of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1981), pp. 52-53.
This smoothness is not only seen in the text itself, but also in the fact that the Byzantine Text as a whole became a more uniform text as it grew in predominance and was copied at greater frequency.
Generally speaking, as texts move further from their source in time and distance they become more and more divergent. How then could the manuscripts become more and more uniform as they moved past the 4th century, and the Byzantine Text-type began to take predominance? If it was not based on an early exemplar one would expect to find more divergence as time passed and as the regions that it was found in expanded. But we find quite the opposite. We actually find that, though time from the exemplars increased and the territories that it was found in spread, the text became more uniform. This gives us reason to expect an early exemplar(s) that the different regions began to go back to after the Church was settled from persecution.
Though the preservation of Scripture is “providential” and not “miraculous” in nature...none the less, it is a preservation that keeps the original language text “pure in all ages.”
We know from history that the Alexandrian Greek text was not promulgated after the Muslims took over that region.
Further, the Western Church did not promulgate the Greek text since Latin was its official language, and the Vulgate became its official version.
The Eastern Church was not affected by the Muslims until much later than the Alexandrian region, nor was its official language any other than Greek. Therefore, the Eastern Church was, in fact, the only Church that kept the Greek text preserved up until around the time of the Reformation.
This historical evidence shows us that it was only the Byzantium that kept the Greek text preserved in every age up until the Reformation since the other two regions neglected the Greek text in toto.

There are no consistent Byzantine witnesses amongst the early New Testament [[papyri (chronology)|papyri]]. Nevertheless, instances of distinctive Byzantine readings are not unusual in the earliest texts — even though they otherwise conform more to other text-types or none. Hence, many (and possibly most) distinctive Byzantine readings are likely to be early in date. Two broad explanations have been offered for this observation:

* that the Byzantine text-type transmits a text closest to the primary form of the New Testament books; whose early manuscript witnesses have not survived, as this text-type predominated in regions where the climate did not favour the preservation of papyrus;

* that the Byzantine text represents a consistent exercise in textual compilation and correction from around the 4th century, the editors having eclectically selected those readings from a range of early manuscripts, that best conformed to their presupposed standards of the characteristics to be expected in the New Testament text.

* grammar (f.e. οι δε ειπον, in Alexandrian text: οι δε ειπαν). Different order of words.

[[John 6:49]]
:εν τη ερημω το μαννα – codices [[Codex Vaticanus|B]], [[Codex Ephraemi|C]], [[Codex Bezae|D]], T, [[Codex Washingtonianus|W]], [[Codex Koridethi|Θ]]
:το μαννα εν τη ερημω – codices [[Codex Sinaiticus|ﬡ]], [[Codex Alexandrinus|A]], [[Codex Regius (New Testament)|L]], [[Codex Athous Lavrentis|Ψ]], [[Family 1|''f''1]], [[Family 13|''f''13]], mss. of the Byzantine text-type

[[Mark 1:9]]
:εις τον Ιορδανην υπο Ιωανου – codices ﬡ, B, D
:υπο Ιωανου εις τον Ιορδανην – codices A, W, and manuscripts of the Byzantine text-type

== Relationship to other text-types ==

[[Matthew 2:18]]
* κλαυθμος — Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, [[Codex Climaci Rescriptus|0250]], ''f''1, it(q),aur,b,c,f,ff1,g1, k, l, 1, vg, syrp,pal, copsa,bo, eth
* θρηνος και κλαυθμος — C, D, K, L, W, Δ, Π, ''f''13, [[Minuscule 28|28]], [[Minuscule 33|33]], [[Minuscule 565|565]], [[Minuscule 700|700]], [[Minuscule 892|892]], 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1241, 1253, 1365, 1546, 1646, 2148, 2174, Byz

[[Matthew 5:25]]
* ὁ κριτής — Αlexandrian mss ''f''1 ''f''13
* δώσει — D
* ὁ κριτής σε παραδῷ — K L W Δ Θ Π 28 33 565 700 Byzantine mss

[[Matthew 15:6]]
* τον λογον (see Mark 7:13) — Alexandrian mss, Θ, 700, 1230
* τον νομον — א*, C, [[Uncial 084|084]], [[Family 13|''f''13]], 1010
* την εντολην — K, L, W, X, [[Codex Sangallensis|Δ]], Π, [[Uncial 0106|0106]], ''f''1, 33, 565, 1009, Byz

[[Mark 1:13]]
* και ην εν τη ερημω — א, A, B, D, L, Θ, 33, 579, 892, 1342, [[Minuscule 2427|2427]]
* και ην εκει εν τη ερημω — W, Δ, [[Minuscule 157|157]], 1241, Byz, TR
* και ην εκει — 28, 517, 565, 700, ''f''1, [[Family Π]], syrs
* Omit — ''f''13
* Hiatus — C, Ψ, syrc

[[Mark 4:24]]
* και προστεθησεται υμιν — Alexandrian mss
* και προστεθησεται υμιν τοις ακουουσιν — mss of the Byzantine text-type
* omit — D, W, 565

[[Mark 6:33]]
* εκει και προηλθον αυτους — Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, [[Uncial 0187|0187]] (omit εκει), 892, '''ℓ''' ''49'', [[Lectionary 69|'''ℓ''' ''69'']], [[Lectionary 70|'''ℓ''' ''70'']], '''ℓ''' ''299'', '''ℓ''' ''303'', '''ℓ''' ''333'', '''ℓ''' ''1579'', ('''ℓ''' ''950'' αυτους), itaur, vg, ([[Coptic versions of the Bible|copsa,bo]])
* εκει και προσηλθον αυτοις — Codex Regius, [[Minuscule 1241|1241]], (Δ, Θ, [[Lectionary 10|'''ℓ''' ''10'']] αυτοις), [[Lectionary 12|'''ℓ''' ''12'']], '''ℓ''' ''80'', '''ℓ''' ''184'', '''ℓ''' ''211'', '''ℓ''' ''1127'', arm, geo
* εκει και συνηλθον αυτου — Codex Bezae (gr), 28, 700
* εκει και ηλθον αυτου — 565, it(a),d,ff,i,r, [[Diatessaron]]
* και ηλθον εκει — ''f''1
* προηλθον αυτον εκει — [[Peshitta]]
* προς αυτους και συνηλθον προς αυτον — 33
* εκει και προηλθον αυτοις και συνηλθον προς αυτον — K, Π, (''f''13 συνεισηλθον προς αυτους), 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1242, 1365, 1546, 1646, 2148, 2174, Byz
* εκει και προηλθον αυτοις και συνεδραμον προς αυτον — A
* εκει — codex W, [[Lectionary 150|'''ℓ''' ''150'']], itc

[[Mark 9:49]]
* πας γαρ πυρι αλισθησεται – Alexandrian and Caesarean mss
* πασα γαρ θυσια αλι αλισθησεται – Western mss
* πας γαρ πυρι αλισθησεται και πασα θυσια αλι αλισθησεται – Byzantine mss

[[Luke 2:38]]
* καὶ αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ (''and that hour'') — Alexandrian
* καὶ αὕτη αὐτῇ τῇ ὥρᾳ (''and she in that hour'') — Caesarean and Byzantine

[[Luke 12:14]]
* κριτην η μεριστην — Alexandrian mss, ''f''1, ''f''13, 700, 1241
* δικαστην η μεριστην — A, K, W, X, Δ, Θ, Π, [[Codex Athous Lavrensis|Ψ]], 565, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1242, 1253, 1344, 1365, 1546, 1646, 2148, 2174, Byz
* μεριστην η δικαστην — 472, '''ℓ''' ''1642'', eth
* κριτην η δικαστην — [[Minuscule 69|69]]
* αρχοντα και δικαστην — [[Minuscule 157|157]]
* κριτην — D, it(a), c, d
* δικαστην — 28
* μεριστην — copsamss

[[Luke 24:53]]
* ευλογουντες τον θεον ("blessing God") — Alexandrian
* αινουντες τον θεον ("praising God") — Western
* αινουντες και ευλογουντες τον θεον ("praising and blessing God") — Byzantine

[[John 1:18]]
* ο μονογενης υιος — A, C3, K, X, Δ, Θ, Π, [[Uncial 063|063]], [[Uncial 0234|0234]], ''f''1, ''f''13, 28, 565, 700, 892, 1009, 1010, 1071, 1079, 1195, 1216, 1230, 1241, 1242, 1253, 1344, 1365, 1546, 1646, 2148, Byz
* ο μονογενης θεος — p75, אc, 33, copbo
* μονογενης θεος — Alexandrian mss

In [[Mark 6:33]] and [[Luke 24:53]] the Byzantine text-type looks like a combination of the Alexandrian and the Western text. In other cases situation is more complicated. [[Mark 1:13]] looks like a combination of the Alexandrian and the Caesarean text.

== Origin of the Byzantine text ==

Among those who believe that the Byzantine text is only a secondary witness to the autograph, there is some debate concerning the origin of the Byzantine text and the reason for its widespread use. The suggestions that have been put forward are:

* That [[Lucian of Antioch]] used his [[Textual criticism|text critical]] skills to produce a recension. ([[Jerome]] makes separate references to Lucian's recensions of both old and new testaments).
* That [[Constantine I]] paid for the wide distribution of manuscripts which came from a common source. (There are several references in [[Eusebius of Caesarea]] to Constantine paying for manuscript production).
* That after the [[Western Roman Empire]] stopped using Greek, and because of [[Barbarian]] and [[Muslim]] invasions, the only church to actively preserve the Greek text was the [[Byzantine church]], which exercised central control from the [[Apostolic See]] of [[Antioch]] and withstood the Muslims until the 15th century.

== The Textus Receptus ==

The first printed edition of the Greek New Testament was completed by [[Erasmus]] and published by [[Johann Froben]] of Basel on [[March 1]], [[1516]] ([[Novum Instrumentum omne]]). Due to the pressure of his publisher to bring their edition to market before the competing [[Complutensian Polyglot Bible|Complutensian Polyglot]], Erasmus based his work on around a half-dozen manuscripts, all of which dated from the twelfth century or later; and only one of which was not of the Byzantine text-type. Six verses that were not witnessed in any of these sources, he back-translated from the Latin [[Vulgate]], and he also introduced many readings from the Vulgate and [[Church Fathers]]. This text came to be known as the ''[[Textus Receptus]]'' or ''received text'' after being thus termed by [[Bonaventura Elzevir]], an enterprising publisher from the Netherlands, in his 1633 edition of Erasmus' text. The New Testament of the [[King James Version]] of the Bible was translated from editions of what was to become the ''Textus Receptus''. If the "Majority Text" of Hodges and Farstad is taken to be the standard for the Byzantine text-type, then The Textus Receptus differs from this in 1,838 Greek readings, of which 1,005 represent "translatable" differences.<ref> Michael D. Marlowe states:[http://www.bible-researcher.com/majority.html] ''yet it differs from the Received Text in about a thousand places, most of them being trivial.'' while [[Daniel B. Wallace]] [http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=673] ''has counted 1,838 differences between it and the Textus Receptus''.</ref>

== Modern critical texts ==

[[Karl Konrad Friedrich Wilhelm Lachmann|Karl Lachmann]] ([[1850 AD|1850]]) was the first [[New Testament]] textual critic to produce an edition that broke with the ''[[Textus Receptus]]'', relying mainly instead on manuscripts from the [[Alexandrian text-type]]. Although the majority of [[New Testament]] textual critics now favor a text that is [[Alexandrian text-type|Alexandrian]] in complexion, especially after the publication of [[Brooke Foss Westcott|Westcott]] and [[Fenton John Anthony Hort|Hort]]'s edition, there remain some proponents of the Byzantine text-type as the type of text most similar to the autographs. These critics include the editors of the Hodges and Farstad text (cited below), and the Robinson and Pierpoint text. Depending on which modern critical text is taken as an exemplar of the Alexandrian text-type, then this will differ from the Hodges and Farstad text in around 6,500 readings (Wallace [[1989 AD|1989]]).

To give a feel for the difference between the Byzantine form of text and the [[Textual criticism#Eclecticism|Eclectic]] text, which is mainly Alexandrian in character, of 800 variation units in the [[Epistle of James]] collected by the Institute for New Testament Textual Research, the Byzantine and Eclectic texts are in agreement in 731 of the places (a rate of 92.3%). Many of the 69 disagreements involve differences in word order and other variants that do not appear as translatable differences in English versions. According to the preface to the [[New King James Version]] of the Bible, the [[Textus Receptus]], the [[Alexandrian text-type]] and the Byzantine text-type are 85% identical (that is, of the variations that occur in any manuscript, only 15% actually differ between these three).

The Byzantine type is also found in modern [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Greek Orthodox]] editions. A new scholarly edition of the Byzantine Text of John's gospel, (funded by the [[United Bible Societies]] in response to a request from Eastern Orthodox Scholars), was begun in Birmingham, UK. and in [[2007 AD|2007]], as a result of these efforts, ''[[Gospel of John|The Gospel According to John]]'' in the Byzantine Tradition was issued.

Von Soden divided manuscripts of the Byzantine text into five groups:
* Kx — no uncials, hundreds of minuscules, among them codex [[Minuscule 2|2]]
* Kr — no uncials, no early minuscules, hundreds of minuscules: [[Minuscule 18|18]], [[Minuscule 35|35]], [[Minuscule 55|55]], [[Minuscule 66|66]], [[Minuscule 83|83]], [[Minuscule 128|128]], [[Minuscule 141|141]], [[Minuscule 147|147]], [[Minuscule 155|155]], [[Minuscule 167|167]], [[Minuscule 170|170]], [[Minuscule 189|189]], [[Minuscule 201|201]]
* K1 (Family E) — S V G
* Ki — E F G H
* Ik (also Ka), now [[Family Π]] — (A) K P Y; this subgroup is the oldest, but only 5% of manuscripts belong to it. Majority of them have text mixed with other Byzantine subfamilies.

Since the discovery of the [[Papyrus 45]], [[Papyrus 46]], and [[Papyrus 66]], proof is available that occasionally the later Byzantine text preserves a reading that dates from early witness. Exampels:

[[Luke 11:33]]
: φῶς — א B F Θ ''f''1 ''f''13
: φέγγος — p45 33 Byz
[[John 10:29]]
: ὃ ... μεῖζον — B it
: ὃς ... μείζων — p66 ''f''1 ''f''13 Byz
[[John 11:32]]
: πρός — א B C* D L X
: εἰς — p66 Θ Byz
[[John 13:26]]
: βάψας — א B C L X 33
: καὶ ἐμβάψας — p66c A Θ
[[Acts 17:13]]
: ταράσσοντες —
: omitted — p45 E Byz
[[1 Corinthians 9:7]]
: τὸν καρπόν — א* A B D* G P
: ἐκ τοῦ καρποῦ — p46 Byz
[[Ephesians 5:9]]
: φωτός — א* A B D* G P
: πνεύματος — p46 Byz
Another examples of Byzantine readings were found in p66 in [[John 1:32]]; [[John 3:24|3:24]]; [[John 4:14|4:14]].[[John 4:51|51]]; [[John 5:8|5:8]]; [[John 6:10|6:10]].[[John 6:57|57]]; [[John 7:3|7:3]].[[John 7:39|39]]; [[John 8:41|8:41]].[[John 8:51|51]].[[John 8:55|55]]; [[John 9:23|9:23]]; [[John 10:38|10:38]]; [[John 12:36|12:36]]; [[John 14:17|14:17]]. It means some of the roots of the Byzantine text go back to a very early date, but it does not mean thery were occur in the original text.<ref>[[Bruce Metzger|Bruce M. Metzger]], ''Chapters in the History of New Testament Textual Criticism'', Wm. B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids [[1963 AD|1963]], p. 38.</ref> Some authors, not scholars, interpreted it even as rehabilitation of Textus Receptus.<ref>E. F. Hills, ''[[John William Burgon|Dean Burgon]] in the Light of Recent Research''; [[D. A. Waite]], ''Defending the King James Bible'', Bible For Today, Collingswood, New Jersey 2004. </ref>

== See also ==
=== Families of the Byzantine text-type ===
* [[Family Π]]
* [[Family E]]
* [[Family Kr|Family Kr]]
* [[Family Kx|Family Kx]]
* [[Family K1|Family K1]]
* [[Family 1424]]

=== Other text-types ===
* [[Categories of New Testament manuscripts]]
* [[Alexandrian text-type]]
* [[Caesarean text-type]]
* [[Western text-type]]
* [[Textus Receptus]]
=== [[Textual criticism#The New Testament|Critical text]] ===
* [[Novum Testamentum Graece]]
* [[Textual Criticism]]

==Notes==
* 1. [[Brooke Foss Westcott]], [[Fenton John Anthony Hort]]. ''[[The New Testament In The Original Greek]]'', [[1925 AD|1925]]. p. 552

== Further reading ==
* Harry A. Sturz, The Byzantine Text-Type & New Testament Textual Criticism ([[1984 AD|1984]]).
* ''The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text'', Second Edition, Edited by Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, [[1985 AD|1985]]. ISBN 0-8407-4963-5.
* ''The New Testament in the Original Greek - Byzantine Textform 2005'', Edited by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont, Chilton Book Publishing. ISBN 0-7598-0077-4.
* "[http://www.bible.org/page.php?page_id=673 Some Second Thoughts on the Majority Text]", Daniel B. Wallace, ''[[Bibliotheca Sacra]]'', vol. 146, 1989. 270-290.
* ''The Identity of the New Testament Text II'', Wilbur N. Pickering, ThM PhD, http://www.revisedstandard.net/text/WNP/
* [http://www.majoritytext.org The Majority Text Society]
* [http://www.bible-researcher.com/majority.html ''What about the Majority Text?'', Michael D. Marlowe] www.bible-researcher.com
* [[Bruce Metzger|Bruce M. Metzger]], [[Bart D. Ehrman]], ''The Text Of The New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration'', 1968 etc, Oxford University Press.
* B. M. Metzger, ''A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament: A Companion Volume To The United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament'', 1994, United Bible Societies, London & New York, pp. 7*-9*, 15*-16*.
* M. A. Robinson, "The Case for Byzantine Priority", in: "Rethinking New Testament Textual Criticism", ed. D. A. Black, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids: 2002, pp. 125–139

==External links==
* [http://byztxt.com/ Online version of ''The New Testament in the Original Greek - Byzantine Textform 2005'', Edited by Maurice A. Robinson and William G. Pierpont]
* [http://openscriptures.org/prototypes/manuscript-comparator/ Comparison of the Byzantine/Majority Text with other manuscript editions] on the Manuscript Comparator
* [http://www.skypoint.com/members/waltzmn/ByzPrior.html The Byzantine Priority Hypothesis] At the ''Encyclopedia of Textual Criticism''
* [http://itsee.bham.ac.uk/iohannes/byzantine/transcriptions.htm The Gospel According to John in the Byzantine Tradition]
* http://www.biblebelievers.com/Hills_KJVD_Chapter7.htm
* Paulo José Benício, [http://www.mackenzie.br/fileadmin/Mantenedora/CPAJ/revista/VOLUME_VIII__2003__2/paulo_benicio.pdf ''O Texto Bizantino na Tradição Manuscrita do Novo Testamento Grego''] PDF

[[Category:New Testament text-types]]
[[Category:Bible versions and translations]]

0724

2010-04-25T23:51:55Z

Dr.bray: /* See Also */

{{Template:Hebrew Concordance}}

'''0724''' אֲרוּכָה ''arukah (ar-oo-kaw')''

passive participle of [[0748]] (in the sense of restoring to soundness); [[Noun]] [[Feminine]]

[[AV]]-health 4, perfected 1, made up 1; 6

:'''1)''' healing, restoration

Refers to the new flesh that grows over a wounded spot when healing takes place.

==See Also==

* [[Scriptures Containing 0724]]

Ezekiel 19:7

2010-04-06T12:38:17Z

Dr.bray: New page: '''Ezekiel 19:7''' And he knew their desolate palaces, and he laid waste their cities; and the land was desolate, and the fulness thereof, by the noise of his roaring. ---- Notice the NA...

'''Ezekiel 19:7''' And he knew their desolate palaces, and he laid waste their cities; and the land was desolate, and the fulness thereof, by the noise of his roaring.

----

Notice the NASB translation of this same verse:
'''He destroyed their fortified towers''' And laid waste their cities; And the land and its fullness were appalled Because of the sound of his roaring.

The reason they use "destroyed" rather than "knew" is because they translate from the Targum rather than the Masoretic Text. The Masoretic Text has the Hebrew - וַיֵּדַע - which means "knew."

They also change "desolate palaces" to "fortified towers." This is interesting because the phrases carry inverse meanings. There would be no reason to "destroy" a "desolate palace" and so because they use the Targum's "destroyed" they must change "desolate palaces" to "fortified towers" in order to make sense of their decision to depart from the Masoretic Text.

The Hebrew word translated here is: אַלְמְנוֹתָיו

It means "widow"...which figuratively can be applied to the palaces in being helpless and exposed. But it can hardly be used in the sense of being "fortified."

Textus Receptus:Community Portal

2010-03-25T14:11:28Z

Dr.bray: /* Online Books */

==Links to other sites==

* [http://www.facebook.com/textus.receptus Txtus Receptus Facebook linked to this site]

==Forums==
===Pro King James Version===
* [http://av1611godsword.yuku.com/ AV 1611 God's Word]
* [http://av1611.com/forums/ AV1611.Com Forums]

===Pro Modern Version===
* [http://bibleversiondiscussionboard.yuku.com/forums/4/t/KJV-Only.html Bible Versions Discussion Board]
* [http://tcg.iphpbb3.com/forum/index.php?nxu=64774768nx21631 Textual Criticism Forum - Textual Criticism of the Bible]

==Biblical Commentaries==
==Lectionaries==
==English Versions==
==Download sites==
* [http://www.theword.gr The Word - Completely free, high quality, portable Bible software]
* [http://www.onlinebible.net/ Online Bible]
* [http://www.e-sword.net/index.html E-Sword]

==King James Onlyism==
* [http://www.lamblion.net lamb Lion Net] [[Scott Jones]]' Website

==Greek==
* [http://www.ellopos.net/elpenor/default.asp Elpenor's Home of the Greek Word] Copious amounts of information about the Greek Language

==Hebrew==
* [http://www.ancient-hebrew.org/ Ancient Hebrew Research Center]

==Ancient Versions==
==Biblical Canon==
==Theology==
* [http://www.thebereancall.org/ The Berean Call]

==Online Manuscripts==
* [http://www.csntm.org/ The Centre for the study of New Testament Manuscripts]
* [http://www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/ Codex Sinaiticus Online]

==Dispensationalism==
==Church History==
==Foriegn Language Bibles==
* [http://www.thaipope.org/webbible/index.html Thai King James Version]

==Online Books==
* [http://www.revisedstandard.net/text/WNP/ The Identity of the New Testament Text II; by: Wilbur N. Pickering, ThM PhD]
* [http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/kjvdefen.htm The King James Version Defended; by: Edward F. Hills]

==Cults==

==Facsimiles==
* [http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=1 Original 1611 King James Version Facsimile]

==Dictionaries==
* [http://www2.mf.no/bibel/vines.html Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words online]
* [http://av1611.com/kjbp/kjv-dictionary/kjv-dictionary-index.html KJV Dictionary]

User talk:Nick

2010-03-25T13:52:59Z

Dr.bray: /* Thank you */

G'day. Good luck with your wiki. I noticed that you had put a link into WikiChristian's "Christian wiki", which is great. Feel free to make an article for this website on WikiChristian too if you want; also feel free to help out at WikiChristian too - the entire Bible has already been uploaded there, verse by verse, uploaded in Hebrew, Greek and a couple English translations already (e.g. [http://wikichristian.org/index.php/John_1:1 John 1:1] and so on). Cheers, [http://wikichristian.org/index.php/User:Graham_grove Graham]

== Hi ==
I do not know exactly what is your idea, but I like every people who loved the Holy Scripture. It is only one thing in my live, which makes that I still want to live. The Holy Scripture, Word of God, etc. I believe in every word of the Holy Scripture... but there are some differences between manuscripts, f.e. this:
: Luke 9:55b-56a — και ειπεν, Ουκ οιδατε ποιου πνευματος εστε υμεις; ο γαρ υιος του ανθρωπου ουκ ηλθεν ψυχας ανθρωπων απολεσαι αλλα σωσαι (''and He said: "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them'') omitted by the manuscripts: p45, p75, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Ephraemi, Regius, Koridethi, Zacynthius, 33, 700, 892, 1241, numerous Byzantine mss, syr, copbo. Codex Bezae has Ουκ οιδατε ποιου πνευματος εστε υμεις; ''and He said: "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of''). May be it is original, because "the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them" looks like evident interpolation used in many places.

If you want to follow Burgon, Scrivener, Miller, and Hoskier, it is OK, I can support this point of view. But if you want to follow KJOM... It is even impossible to defence. The last six verses of the Book of Revelation, 17th chapter of the Book of Revelation (Erasmus altered after Vulgate not Greek manuscripts), several passages in the Acts and in the Gospels. They are evidently not authentic. Now we have too much evidences, too much early manuscripts (like P45, P66, P75). Burgon declares that the Textus Receptus needs correction.<ref>Burgon, ''The Revised Revision'', p. 548. </ref> Burgon suggested 150 corrections in the ''Textus Receptus'' Gospel of Matthew alone.<ref>Burgon, ''Revised Revision'', p. 242. </ref> 1 Timothy 3:16 according to TR is impossible to defence. Not only early Greek mss, but also all early versions (also Gothic version and Peshitta, which used the Byzantine text). Only some manuscripts of Vulgate have variant the same as in TR (in Timothy 3:16), but the late text of Vulgate was altered (several times). The Greek NT mss are divided into Alexandrian, Byzantine, Caesarean, and Western, but mss of Vulgate into: Spanish, Irish, French, and several other smaller groups.

In books of KJOM I found a lot of errors, a lot of propaganda. For instance: 99% of mss used "traditional text" it is not true. 100% lectionaries used "traditional text". What means traditional text? The Byzantine text of lectionaries is different than Byzantine text of minuscules. Perhaps the Byzantine text of leciotnaries represents earlier stage of the Byzantine text. Perhaps. In hundreds of places it supports Alexandrian readings. Hundreds... it is not a lot, the standard Byzantine text is different in 8000-9000 places from the Alexandrian text. The minuscules 483 and 484 are different in 183 places (errors of itacisms excluded) only in the Gospels, but they are almost the same. Between Boernerianus and Augiensis 1982 differences, but they are very similar. Peshitta has many of the Alexandrian readings, and Alexandrian omissions. I do not know why according to many of supporters of the Textus Receptus used Peshitta as a witness of the traditional text (Edward Miller used Peshitta as an argument, but he wanted to correct TR). Peshitta has also some Western readings. Gothic version has some Alexandrian readings, but not so much as in Peshitta. Alexandrian? Codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus have a lot of Western readings (and some Caesarean). They are not pure Alexandrian manuscirpts. What is pure Alexandrian text? Perhaps papyri 66 and 75 have a pure Alexandrian text (or almost pure, because they have some textual pecularities and unique readings, which we can not find in any other manuscript). They were not written by professional scribes. Situation is very complicated. Textual critics? Westcott and Hort supported Vaticanus (it was better), Aland supported Sinaiticus (it worse).

In every case your work is good. I want only suggest that you continue work of Burgon, Miller, and Scrivener. [[User:Leszek Jańczuk|Leszek Jańczuk]] 14:35, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

==Hi Leszek==
Hey there Leszek, my ultimate goal is to make the scriptures, based upon the KJV/TR, easily accessable on the site, in all languages, and with all words linked to original word meanings and study helps. I know there is error in both KJV and MV camps. From what I have seen, many are focusing their efforts discrediting the other camp, where I thought it would be good to focus energy to promote the scriptures in all languages. While I do follow the KJV I am not an onlyist. I suppose I hold the position that the Dean Burgon Society holds. Some KJV arguments make sense and some MV make sense. I hope to put all sides of these arguments on this site, so that someone researching can make an informed conclusion, so that if James Whites articles were placed up along D.A. Waite's, people would be able to then search through both. Although, ultimately the sites general articles will favor the KJV/TR position, and will be linked to in all articles. So say where White calls Easter Pagan, the word Easter itself will be hyperlinked to other articles favoring Easter. But Also Jack Moormans articles claiming Easter is Pagan, will have the same, so hopefully by having all point of views, we can learn what the extremes on both sides are. [[User:Nick|Nick]] 12:42, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

== Main page ==
Now is much better. Good idea. [[User:Leszek Jańczuk|Leszek Jańczuk]] 23:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

== Thank you ==
I just wanted to thank you for editing my posts. I'm not that good with formatting on wiki's yet and i really appreciate the work you do in making my posts more standard. I'm sorry if my posts are a trouble for you. [[User:Dr.bray|Dr.bray]]

== Ezek 13:8 ==
I noticed that my article on Ezek 13:8 has this in the log...

(Protection log); 12:09 . . Nick (Talk | contribs) protected "Ezekiel 13:18" ([edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

I'm not sure what that means, can you please explain it to me? Something about being protected maybe?

Genesis 4:7

2010-03-23T20:41:44Z

Dr.bray:

'''Genesis 4:7''' If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

----

The King James Version rightly translates the Hebrew text here when it reads, "And unto thee shall be '''his''' desire..." Many other versions (even the New King James Version) mistranslate this verse based on their perception of what the text is saying rather than simply translating what the text actually does say.

When we read "his desire" rather than "its desire" we identify the antecedent as Cain's brother Abel rather than as sin (which the translation of "its" implies).

The Hebrew for "his desire" is masculine 3rd person. When modern translations translate it as "its" they are changing the masculine to a neuter, for which there is no manuscript evidence.

The similarity between this verse and the previous chapter where we are told that Eve's desire shall be for her husband (Gen 3:16) is striking. The same word "desire" is used and is second person female.

The proper translation of Gen 4:7 is "his" rather than "its," which leads to an interpretation more along the lines of the order between older and younger brothers, correlating to Gen 3:16 and the order between husband and wife.

Genesis 4:7

2010-03-23T20:39:15Z

Dr.bray:

'''Genesis 4:7''' If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

----

The King James Version rightly translates the Hebrew text here when it reads, "And unto thee shall be '''his''' desire..." Many other versions (even the New King James Version) get mistranslate this verse based on their perception of what the text is saying rather than simply translating what the text actually does say.

When we read "his desire" rather than "its desire" we identify the antecedent as Cain's brother Abel rather than as sin (which the translation of "its" implies).

The Hebrew for "his desire" is masculine 3rd person. When modern translations translate it as "its" they are changing the masculine to a neuter, for which there is no manuscript evidence.

The similarity between this verse and the previous chapter where we are told that Eve's desire shall be for her husband (Gen 3:16) is striking. The same word "desire" is used and is second person female.

The proper translation of Gen 4:7 is "his" rather than "its," which leads to an interpretation more along the lines of the order between older and younger brothers, correlating to Gen 3:16 and the order between husband and wife.

Ezekiel 13:18

2010-03-20T22:41:59Z

Dr.bray: New page: '''Ezekiel 13:18''' And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe to the women that sew pillows to all armholes, and make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature to hunt souls! Will ye hunt the s...

'''Ezekiel 13:18''' And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Woe to the women that sew pillows to all armholes, and make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature to hunt souls! Will ye hunt the souls of my people, and will ye save the souls alive that come unto you?

----

This verse is different in modern versions where it reads:

''and say, 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "Woe to the women who sew magic bands on all wrists and make veils for the heads of persons of every stature to hunt down lives! Will you hunt down the lives of My people, but preserve the lives of others for yourselves? (Eze 13:18, NASB)
''

The KJV is condemning women who "sew pillows to all armholes [sleeves]" and who "make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature." Modern versions change the pillows on sleeves to "magic bands on wrists." So we are left with the impression that the women are being condemned for witchcraft in the modern versions and for something quite different in the KJV. Let's take a look at the context to get a better understanding of what this passage is all about.

The prophets are condemned in the first part of the chapter for claiming to give God's people His word when, in fact, it was a word from their own hearts. And what was this word? It was declaring peace where there was no peace (Ezek 13:10). These prophets build a wall of protection around the people of Israel that they might find comfort, when the Lord has not built the wall nor given His people comfort (Ezek 13:10-15).

After the prophets, the Lord turns to condemn the women. The women are guilty of the same sins but in a different manner. So while the prophets are telling the people "peace and comfort" the women are sewing pillows for their peace and comfort. And while the prophets tell the people that they will be blessed, the women make kerchiefs for everyone's head as a garment of pride and prosperity.

To move from condemning the prophets for saying "peace" to condemning the women for witchcraft would be a strange move indeed. Rather, the KJV rendering makes the best sense in the context of God judging the people, both men and women, for different aspects of the same sin.

User talk:Nick

2010-03-16T14:32:07Z

Dr.bray: /* Main page */

User:Dr.bray

2010-03-16T14:31:47Z

Dr.bray: New page: My name is Lawrence Bray. I live in Pennsylvania with his family: Priscilla (wife), Brian (son), and Zoe (daughter). I'm an Elder with the Reformed Presbyterian Church (PCA) and the presid...

Textus Receptus

2010-03-14T16:30:28Z

Dr.bray: /* Defense of the Textus Receptus */

'''Textus Receptus''' ([[Latin]]: "received text") is the name subsequently given to the succession of printed [[Greek language|Greek]] texts of the [[New Testament]] which constituted the translation base for the original German [[Luther Bible]], for the translation of the New Testament into English by [[William Tyndale]], the [[King James Version]], and for most other Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western and [[Central Europe]]. The series originated with the first printed Greek New Testament to be published; a work undertaken in [[Basel]] by the [[Netherlands|Dutch]] [[Catholic]] scholar and humanist [[Erasmus|Desiderius Erasmus]] in 1516, on the basis of some six [[biblical manuscript|manuscripts]], containing between them not quite the whole of the New Testament. Although based mainly on late manuscripts of the [[Byzantine text-type]], Erasmus's edition differed markedly from the classic form of that text.

== History of the Textus Receptus ==
See Also [[Novum Instrumentum omne]]
The Dutch humanist Erasmus had been working for years on two projects: a collation of Greek texts and a fresh Latin New Testament. In 1512, he began his work on a fresh Latin New Testament. He collected all the [[Vulgate]] manuscripts he could find to create a critical edition. Then he polished the Latin. He declared, "It is only fair that Paul should address the Romans in somewhat better Latin."<ref>"Epistle 695" in ''Collected Works of Erasmus Vol. 5: Letters 594 to 841, 1517-1518'' (tr. R.A.B. Mynors and D.F.S. Thomson; annotated by James K. McConica; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), 172.</ref> In the earlier phases of the project, he never mentioned a Greek text: "My mind is so excited at the thought of emending Jerome’s text, with notes, that I seem to myself inspired by some god. I have already almost finished emending him by collating a large number of ancient manuscripts, and this I am doing at enormous personal expense."<ref>"Epistle 273" in Collected ''Works of Erasmus Vol. 2: Letters 142 to 297, 1501-1514'' (tr. R.A.B. Mynors and D.F.S. Thomson; annotated Wallace K. Ferguson; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), 253.</ref>

[[Image:ErasmusText LastPage Rev22 8 21.jpg|thumb|180px|right|The last page of the Erasmian New Testament (Rev 22:8-21)]]
While his intentions for publishing a fresh Latin translation are clear, it is less clear why he included the Greek text. Though some speculate that he intended on producing a critical Greek text or that he wanted to beat the [[Complutensian Polyglot Bible|Complutensian Polyglot]] into print, there is no evidence to support this. Rather his motivations seems to be simpler: he included the Greek text to prove the superiority of his Latin version. He wrote, "There remains the New Testament translated by me, with the Greek facing, and notes on it by me."<ref>"Epistle 305" in ''Collected Works of Erasmus. Vol. 3: Letters 298 to 445, 1514-1516'' (tr. R.A.B. Mynors and D.F.S. Thomson; annotated by James K. McConica; Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1976), 32.</ref> He further demonstrated the reason for the inclusion of the Greek text when defending his work: "But one thing the facts cry out, and it can be clear, as they say, even to a blind man, that often through the translator’s clumsiness or inattention the Greek has been wrongly rendered; often the true and genuine reading has been corrupted by ignorant scribes, which we see happen every day, or altered by scribes who are half-taught and half-asleep."<ref>"Epistle 337" in ''Collected Works of Erasmus Vol. 3, 134.</ref> Erasmus's new work was published by [[Johann Froben|Froben]] of [[Basel]] in 1516 and thence became the first ''published'' Greek New Testament, the ''[[Novum Instrumentum omne]], diligenter ab Erasmo Rot. Recognitum et Emendatum''. He used manuscripts: [[Minuscule 1|1]], [[Minuscule 2814|1rK]], [[Minuscule 2|2e]], [[Minuscule 2815|2ap]], [[Minuscule 2816|4ap]], [[Minuscule 7|7]], 817.<ref>W.W. Combs, ''Erasmus and the textus receptus'', DBSJ 1 (Spring 1996), 45. </ref>
The second edition used the more familiar term ''Testamentum'' instead of ''Instrumentum,'' and eventually became a major source for Luther's [[German language|German]] translation. In second edition (1519) Erasmus used also [[Minuscule 3]].

Typographical errors (attributed to the rush to complete the work) abounded in the published text. Erasmus also lacked a complete copy of the book of [[Revelation]] and was forced to translate the last six verses back into Greek from the Latin [[Vulgate]] in order to finish his edition. Erasmus adjusted the text in many places to correspond with readings found in the Vulgate, or as quoted in the [[Church Fathers]]; and consequently, although the Textus Receptus is classified by scholars as a late [[Byzantine text-type|Byzantine]] text, it differs in nearly two thousand readings from standard form of that text-type; as represented by the "[[Majority Text]]" of Hodges and Farstad (Wallace 1989). The edition was a sell-out commercial success; and was reprinted in 1519, with most—though not all—the typographical errors corrected.<ref>Bruce M. Metzger, B. D. Ehrman, ''The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration'', [[Oxford University Press]], 2005, p. 145. </ref>

Erasmus had been studying Greek New Testament manuscripts for many years, in the Netherlands, France, England and Switzerland, noting their many variants; but he only had six Greek manuscripts immediately accessible to him in Basel.<ref>W.W. Combs, Erasmus and the textus receptus, DBSJ 1 (Spring 1996), 45. </ref> They all dated from the 12th Century or later, and only one came from outside the mainstream [[Byzantine text-type|Byzantine]] tradition. Consequently, most modern scholars consider his text to be of dubious quality.<ref name="dubious">[[Bruce Metzger]], ''The Text of the New Testament'', p. 99.</ref>

With the third edition of Erasmus' Greek text (1522) the [[Comma Johanneum]] was included, because a single 16th-century Greek manuscript ([[Minuscule 61|Codex Montfortianus]]) had subsequently been found to contain it, though Erasmus had expressed doubt as to the authenticity of the passage in his ''Annotations''. Popular demand for Greek New Testaments led to a flurry of further authorized and unauthorized editions in the early sixteenth century; almost all of which were based on Erasmus's work and incorporated his particular readings, although typically also making a number of minor changes of their own.

[[Image:NT Estienne 1551.jpg|thumb|right|180px|4th edition of New Testament of Robert Estienne]]
The overwhelming success of Erasmus' Greek New Testament completely overshadowed the Latin text upon which he had focused. Many other publishers produced their own versions of the Greek New Testament over the next several centuries. Rather than doing their own critical work, most just relied on the well-known Erasmian text.

''See Also [[Editio Regia]]''

[[Robert Estienne]], known as Stefanus (1503-1559), a printer from Paris, edited four times the Greek New Testament, 1546, 1549, 1550, and 1551, the last in Geneva. The first two are among the neatest Greek texts known, and are called ''O mirificam''; the third edition is a splendid masterpiece of typographical skill. It has critical apparatus in which quoted manuscripts referred to the text. Manuscripts were marked by symbols (from α to ις). He used ''Polyglotta Complutensis'' (symbolized by α) and 15 Greek manuscripts. In this number manuscripts: [[Codex Bezae]], [[Codex Regius (New Testament)|Codex Regius]], minuscules [[Minuscule 4|4]], [[Minuscule 5|5]], [[Minuscule 6|6]], [[Minuscule 2817|2817]], [[Minuscule 8|8]], [[Minuscule 9|9]]. The first step towards to modern Textual Criticism was made. The third edition is known as the [[Editio Regia]]; the edition of 1551 contains the Latin translation of [[Erasmus]] and the [[Vulgate]], is not nearly as fine as the other three, and is exceedingly rare. It was in this edition that the division of the [[New Testament]] into verses was for the first time introduced.

The third edition of Estienne was used by [[Theodore Beza]] (1519-1605), who edited it nine times between 1565 and 1604. In the critical apparatus of the second edition he used the [[Codex Claromontanus]] and the Syriac New Testament published by Emmanuel Tremellius in 1569. Codex Bezae was twice referenced (as Codex Bezae and β' of Estienne).

The origin of the term "Textus Receptus" comes from the publisher's preface to the 1633 edition produced by [[Bonaventure Elzevir|Bonaventure]] and [[Abraham Elzevir]], two brothers and printers at Leiden: ''textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum, in quo nihil immulatum aut corruptum damus'', translated "so you hold the text, now received by all, in which nothing corrupt." The two words, ''textum'' and ''receptum'', were modified from the [[accusative]] to the [[nominative]] case to render ''textus receptus''. Over time, this term has been retroactively applied to Erasmus' editions, as his work served as the basis of the others.<ref>[[Bruce M. Metzger]], [[Bart D. Ehrman]], "The Text Of The New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration", ''[[Oxford University Press]]'', 2005, p. 152. </ref>

== Textual criticism and the Textus Receptus ==

[[John Mill]] (1645-1707), collated textual variants from 82 Greek manuscripts. In his ''Novum Testamentum Graecum, cum lectionibus variantibus MSS'' (Oxford 1707) he reprinted the unchanged text of the ''Editio Regia'', but in the index he enumerated 30,000 textual variants.<ref>T. Robertson, ''An Introduction to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament'', Nashville: Broadman, 1925, pp. 107-108. </ref>

Shortly after Mill published his edition, [[Daniel Whitby]] (1638-1725), attacked his work. He claimed that the autographs of the New Testament were identical to the Textus Receptus, and that the text had never been corrupted. He believed the text of the Holy Scripture was endangered by the 30,000 variants in Mill's edition. Whitby claimed that every part of the New Testament should be defended against these variants.<ref>D. Whitby, Examen variantium Lectionum Johannis Milli, London 1709. </ref>

[[Johann Albrecht Bengel]] (1687-1752), in 1725 edited ''Prodromus Novi Testamenti Graeci Rectè Cautèque Adornandi'', in 1734 edited ''Novum Testamentum Graecum''. Bengel divided manuscripts into families and subfamilies. He favoured (''[[lectio difficilior potior]]'').

[[Johann Jakob Wettstein]]. His Apparatus was fuller than of any previous editor. He introduced the practice of indicating the [[List of New Testament uncials|ancient manuscripts]] by capital Roman letters and the [[List of New Testament minuscules|later manuscripts]] by Arabic numerals. He published in Basel ''Prolegomena ad Novi Testamenti Graeci'' (1731).

[[Johann Jakob Griesbach|J. J. Griesbach]] (1745-1812) combined the principles of Bengel and Wettstein. He enlarged the Apparatus by a more [[List of New Testament Church Fathers|citations from the Fathers]], and various versions, such as the Gothic, the Armenian, and the Philoxenian. Griesbach distinguished a Western, an Alexandrian, and a Byzantine Recension.<ref>[http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&id=BLk9AAAAIAAJ&dq=graece&printsec=frontcover&source J. J. Griesbach, ''Novum Testamentum Graece'', (London 1809)] </ref> [[Christian Frederick Matthaei]] (1744-1811) was a Griesbach opponent.

[[Karl Lachmann]] (1793-1851), was the first who broke with the Textus Receptus. His object was to restore the text to the form in which it had been read in the ancient Church about A.D. 380. He used the oldest known Greek and Latin manuscripts.

[[Brooke Foss Westcott|Westcott]] and [[Fenton John Anthony Hort|Hort]], ''[[The New Testament in the Original Greek]]'' (1881).

The majority of textual critical scholars since the late 19th Century, have adopted an [[textual criticism#Eclecticism|eclectic]] approach to the Greek New Testament; with the most weight given to the earliest extant manuscripts which tend mainly to be [[Alexandrian text-type|Alexandrian]] in character; the resulting eclectic Greek text departing from the Textus Receptus in around 6,000 readings. A significant minority of textual scholars, however, maintain the priority of the [[Byzantine text-type]]; and consequently prefer the "Majority Text". No school of [[textual criticism|textual scholarship]] now continues to defend the priority of the Textus Receptus; although this position does still find adherents amongst the [[King-James-Only Movement]], and other [[Protestant]] groups hostile to the whole discipline of text criticism—as applied to scripture; and suspicious of any departure from [[Protestant Reformation|Reformation]] traditions.

== Defense of the Textus Receptus ==

Frederick von Nolan, a 19th century historian and Greek and Latin scholar, spent 28 years attempting to trace the Textus Receptus to apostolic origins. He was an ardent advocate of the supremacy of the Textus Receptus over all other editions of the Greek New Testament, and argued that the first editors of the printed Greek New Testament intentionally selected the texts they did because of their superiority and disregarded other texts which represented other text-types because of their inferiority.

:It is not to be conceived that the original editors of the [Greek] New Testament were wholly destitute of plan in selecting those manuscripts, out of which they were to form the text of their printed editions. In the sequel it will appear, that they were not altogether ignorant of two classes of manuscripts; one of which contains the text which we have adopted from them; and the other that text which has been adopted by M. Griesbach.<ref name="text-types">''An Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, or Received Text of the New Testament; in which the Greek Manuscripts are newly classed; the Integrity of the Authorised Text vindicated; and the Various Readings traced to their Origin'' (London, 1815), [http://mountainretreatorg.net/classics/inquiry1.html ch. 1]. The sequel mentioned in the text is Nolan's ''Supplement to an Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, or Received Text of the New Testament; containing the Vindication of the Principles employed in its Defence'' (London, 1830).</ref>

Regarding Erasmus, Nolan stated:
<blockquote>
Nor let it be conceived in disparagement of the great undertaking of Erasmus, that he was merely fortuitously right. Had he barely undertaken to perpetuate the tradition on which he received the sacred text he would have done as much as could be required of him, and more than sufficient to put to shame the puny efforts of those who have vainly labored to improve upon his design. [...] With respect to Manuscripts, it is indisputable that he was acquainted with every variety which is known to us, having distributed them into two principal classes, one of which corresponds with the Complutensian edition, the other with the Vatican manuscript. And he has specified the positive grounds on which he received the one and rejected the other.<ref name="varieties">''ibid.'', [http://mountainretreatorg.net/classics/inquiry5.html ch. 5]</ref>
</blockquote>

Regarding 1 John 5:7, the long-standing belief that MS. 61 was created specifically to force Erasmus to add the text is no longer considered a legitimate concern. Metzger himself admits this in the 3rd edition of ''The Text of the New Testament...'' when he notes (footnote 2 on p. 292):
<blockquote>
What was said about Erasmus promise and his subsequent suspicion that MS. 61 was written expressly to force him to [add 1 John 5:7 to the text], needs to be corrected in light of the research of H.J. de Jonge, a specialist in Erasmian studies who finds no explicit evidence that supports this frequently made assertion.
</blockquote>

Textus Receptus was defended by [[John William Burgon|Burgon]] in his ''The Revision Revised'' (1881), by Edward Miller in ''A Guide to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament''. According to Burgon [[Codex Alexandrinus]], and [[Codex Ephraemi]] are older than [[Codex Sinaiticus|Sinaiticus]], and [[Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209|Vaticanus]]. Peshitta originated from the 2nd century. Arguments of Miller were of the same kind, but two of the agreed that Textus Receptus needs correction. [[Edward Freer Hills|Hills]] took different point of view. Hills rejected text of majority (Byzantine text) and according to him Textus Receptus was the closest text to the autographs. He concluded that Erasmus was divinely guided when he introduced Latin Vulgate readings into his Greek text.<ref>Edward F. Hills, ''King James Version Defended!'', pp. 199-200. </ref> He even argued for the authenticity of the Comma Johanneum.<ref>Edward F. Hills, ''King James Version Defended!'', pp. 209-213. </ref>

[[Image:Textus receptus.jpg|thumb|]]

== Relationship to the Byzantine text ==
Textus Receptus was established on a basis of the [[Byzantine text-type]], called also 'Majority text', and usually is identified with him by his followers. But Textus Receptus has some additions and variants which did not exist in the Byzantine text before the 16th century. The [[Comma Johanneum]] in [[1 John 5:7]] is well known example, but there are also other texts like: [[Matthew 10:8]]; 27:35; Luke 17:36; John 3:25; Acts 8:37; 9:5; 15:34; and some readings ("book of life" instead of "tree of life" in Revelation [[22:19]]) which the Byzantine text did not have. In these cases the majority of manuscripts agree with the [[Alexandrian text-type]] against the Textus Receptus.

[[Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener|F. H. A. Scrivener]] (1813-1891) remarked that Matt. 22:28, 23:25, 27:52, 28:3, 4, 19, 20; Mark 7:18, 19, 26, 10:1, 12:22, 15:46; Luke 1:16, 61, 2:43, 9:1, 15, 11:49; John 1:28, 10:8, 13:20 are under the influence of [[Minuscule 1]] ([[Caesarean text-type]]).<ref name = Scrivener183>[[Frederick Henry Ambrose Scrivener|F. H. A. Scrivener]], ''A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament'', London 1894, vol. 2, pp. 183-184. </ref> Scrivener showed that some texts were incorporated from the Vulgate (for example, Acts 9:6; Rev 17:4.8).
[[Daniel Wallace]] enumerated that in 1,838 places (1005 are translatable) Textus Receptus differs from the Byzantine text-type.<ref>Daniel Wallace, "Some Second Thoughts on the Majority Text", Bibliotheca Sacra, July-September, 1989, p. 276. </ref>

[[John William Burgon|Dean Burgon]], one of the main supporter of the Textus Receptus declares that the Textus Receptus needs correction.<ref>Burgon, ''The Revised Revision'', p. 548. </ref> He suggested 150 corrections in the ''Textus Receptus'' Gospel of Matthew alone.<ref>Burgon, ''Revised Revision'', p. 242. </ref>

: Matthew 10:8 it has Alexandrian reading νεκρους εγειρετε (''raise the dead'') omitted by the Byzantine text.<ref>NA26, p. 24. Burgon, ''The Revised Revision'', p. 108; Edward Miller, ''Textual Commentary Upon the Holy Gospels'', p. 75. </ref>
: Acts 20:28 it has Alexandrian reading του Θεου (''of the God'') instead of Byzantine του κυριου και του Θεου (''of the Lord and God'').

== See also ==
; Other text-types
* [[Alexandrian text-type]]
* [[Byzantine text-type]]
* [[Caesarean text-type]]
* [[Western text-type]]
; Other articles
* [[New Testament]]
* [[Vulgate]]
* [[King-James-Only Movement]]

== Notes ==

== Further reading ==
* S. P. Tregelles, ''The Printed Text of the Greek New Testament'', London 1854.
* Bruce M. Metzger, B. D. Ehrman, ''The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration'', [[Oxford University Press]], 2005.
* W. W. Combs, ''Erasmus and the textus receptus'', DBSJ 1 (Spring 1996).
* Daniel B. Wallace, ''Some Second Thoughts on the Majority Text''. ''[[Bibliotheca Sacra]]'' '''146''' (1989): 270-290.
* Dr James White. ''King James Only Controversy, Can You Trust the Modern Translations?'' Bethany House, 1995.

== External links ==
; Modern Textual Criticism
* [http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn/TR.html The Textus Receptus at the Encyclopedia of Textual Criticism]
* [http://www.dbts.edu/journals/1996_1/ERASMUS.PDF W.W. Combs, Erasmus and the textus receptus, DBSJ 1 (Spring 1996): 35-53.]
* [https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/1887/1033/1/279_016.pdf H. J. de Jonge, Daniel Heinsius and the Textus Receptus of the New Testament]
* [http://www.martinarhelger.de/textgrundlage.pdf M. Arhelger, Die Textgrundlage des Neues Testaments, 2006] {{de icon}}
* [http://www.bible-researcher.com/kutilek1.html Westcott & Hort vs. Textus Receptus] from Bible Research
* [http://www.bible-researcher.com/hodges-farstad.html The Majority Text Compared to the Received Text] Bible Research
* [http://openscriptures.org/prototypes/manuscript-comparator/ Comparison of the Textus Receptus with other manuscript editions] on the Manuscript Comparator
; Defense of Textus Receptus
* [http://www.trinitarianbiblesociety.org/site/articles/tr-art.pdf A Brief Look at the Textus Receptus]
* [http://www.wayoflife.org/fbns/isthereceived.htm Is the Received Text Based on a Few Late Manuscripts? ]
* [http://www.textus-receptus.com/w/mediawiki-1.13.2/index.php/Main_Page A Wiki Style site promoting the Textus Receptus and the King James Version]

[[Category:Greek New Testament]]
[[Category:King James Only movement]]
[[Category:New Testament text-types]]
[[Category:Early printed bibles]]
[[Category:Books by Desiderius Erasmus]]

Article: Text Selection by Lawrence E Bray

2010-03-14T16:17:07Z

Dr.bray: New page: There are over 5,350 New Testament manuscripts in existence today 1. Each manuscript is considered part of a family. Families are organized by common traits found in the manuscripts. Thes...

There are over 5,350 New Testament manuscripts in existence today 1. Each manuscript is considered part of a family. Families are organized by common traits found in the manuscripts. These traits include style, content, and age. For our purposes we will focus on the two main families – Alexandrian and Byzantine. Scholars differ as to which family of manuscripts are the closest to the originals. Some who advocate the Byzantine text will argue that since the majority of manuscripts are from the Byzantine family, they must be the ones that the Church considered were derived from the originals. Those who advocate the Alexandrian text will argue that since the Alexandrian manuscripts are the oldest, and therefore closest to the originals, they must be the ones with less corruption and which are derived from the originals.

When considering the text to use we must not simply count the number of manuscripts, we must weigh them. If ten manuscripts were copied from the same source we should not count them ten times since it is truly only one source that they represent. Likewise, when we have five manuscripts copied from different sources we should take that into consideration as having more weight than if they were from the same source.

Another element we need to consider is corruption of the text. Whenever corruption is evident it should be excised. Some have pointed to what they consider corruptions in the Received Text. This text is from the Byzantine family, and it was the text used to translate the KJV and the NKJV. The Received Text was an early effort in textual criticism as it was a New Testament text derived from various extant Greek manuscripts of the time. Some of the corruptions noted in this text are as follows:
• No Greek manuscript was used for the last six verses of Revelation, instead the Latin Vulgate was used for this portion.
• In 1 Jn 5:7, the Trinitarian formula of, ''“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”'' are only found in a few manuscripts, none earlier than the sixteenth century.

There are also problems with the critical text, which gives much weight to the Alexandrian family of manuscripts. In particular the critical text favors the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. Some problems with this text are as follows:
• Mk 1:2 has a quote from Isaiah, ''As it is written in '''Isaiah''' the prophet, "Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way,"'', but that quote is actually from the prophet Malachi. Malachi 3:1 reads, ''“Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the LORD of hosts.”''
• The UBS critical text uses the Greek word “prwthS” in Acts 16:12. The problem is that this word is not found in '''any''' Greek manuscript. The reading should be “prwth” without the “S.” Adding the “S” onto this noun makes it genitive, and that changes the whole meaning of the text. So the Critical Text says that Philippi is a city of the first district of Macedonia. The actual Greek manuscripts say that Philippi is a first city of Macedonia.

There are a couple of things to note here. First, the problems that are pointed out in the Received Text are not really errors. Just because something was translated from the Vulgate does not mean that it shouldn’t be in the text. And just because something has few and late manuscript support doesn’t create a definite error. However, quoting Isaiah with the words of Micah is an actual error. With regard to Acts 16:12 it is worth mentioning that most translations that use the Critical Text depart from it at this point because of it having absolutely no manuscript support.

We will now show the support for maintaining the text that the Church has used for hundreds of years, the Received Text. We will do this by looking at various aspects including manuscript evidence, Church history, and the internal evidence of the scripture itself.

Let’s look at one of the arguments others posit for using the Alexandrian based manuscripts. Some suggest that because of their early date these texts have had less opportunity to become corrupt. It is also more important that the type is of an early date than the document itself 2. This would imply that corruptions and heresies were something that came about with time. But does the bible give us any clues regarding this argument? The bible tells us plainly that corruptions and heresies were from the beginning. Look at some of these passages:

''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.
(2Co 2:17)''

''But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. (2Co 4:2)''

''That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, '''nor by letter as from us''', as that the day of Christ is at hand. (2Th 2:2)''

''But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. (2Pe 2:1)''

''I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.(Gal 1:6-8)''

''For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. (Jud 1:4)''

We see from these passages that corruption of the Christian faith was from the beginning. Just as Satan was at the beginning of God’s creation trying to lead man away from God’s Word –

''Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? (Gen 3:1)''

As Satan was in the original creation he was also in the beginning of God’s new creation wrought through Christ trying to lead men away from God’s Word. Since it is plain that corruptions were from the beginning, the argument of “the earliest are the best” just isn’t logical.

We can also look into the discrepencies within the families of manuscripts themselves. The two most trusted manuscripts from the Alexandrian family (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) differ from each other in numerous places. In the gospels alone they disagree over 3,000 times 5. The Critical Text that is used in modern translations is characterized by language that is difficult, abrupt, and even impossible 5. Whereas the Byzantine family of manuscripts have remarkable congruance. Some have even speculated a formal Church edit of the Byzantine manuscripts because they are so similar in content and style. But there has never been any proof offered for such an official editing of the manuscript text.

Although many modern scholars are fond of the Alexandrian type texts, the methods that they use for their textual criticism is suspect at best. The basic criteria for externally assessing variant readings is as follows 2:

1. The older the manuscript the better.
2. The wider the geographical dispersion of a variant the better.
3. Witnesses are to be weighed by family, not simply counted.

The basic criteria for internally assessing variant readings is as follows 2:

1. The more difficult the reading the better.
2. The shorter the reading the better.
3. The reading that is in verbal dissidence with other readings is better.
4. The less refined and more rough reading is to be preferred.

The first issue of this modern critical approach is that it is all very suppositional. As a matter of fact, now that a very good Alexandrian text-type manuscript (manuscript 2427) is believed to be from a late date (fourteenth century), critics are suggesting that this later manuscript may be more preferred than the older ones. It appears that their critical approach is quite flexible to whatever will best support their cause. Aland puts this manuscript at category I - "Manuscripts of a very special quality which should always be considered in establishing the original text." (To this are added all manuscripts prior to the fourth century.) It is also strange that one would find it hard to phathom that God could have His Bible written smoothly and with a measure of refinement. The point that is the most unbelievable is that the modern textual critic will find manuscripts that are in opposition to other parts of the Bible to be more trustworthy. It would seem this particular rule of criticism is fairly new. We read from Loraine Boettner’s ''Studies in Theology'' (pg 32), “…the accepted principle of interpretation is that the meaning which assumes the document to be self-consistent and reasonable is to be preferred to the one which makes it inconsistent and unreasonable. To act on any other basis is to act with prejudice and to assure error rather than to prove it. The critics of the Bible, however, have often been only too glad to neglect this rule.” As a matter of fact, as we read the current criteria for internally assessing variant readings we find that they have actually made the reading that is in dissidence with other readings the acceptable reading!

When we consider the Byzantine family we find that they are not of an early date. However, they are in great agreement with each other. These texts do not contradict other parts of the bible, but form one cohesive whole – as the Bible should be. The region they are most focused in is the Byzantine empire, where the originals were actually dispersed. Consider that false documents may have been circulating with the originals as is hinted to in 2 Thess 2:2 (''That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand''). Then consider how difficult it would have been to denounce false documents without the originals to test them against. The Byzantine region had the originals to test other writings against, while the Alexandrian region did not. This is why the texts in the Alexandrian region not only differ from the Byzantine text but also differ from each other; while the Byzantine texts are in remarkable agreement with each other.

Even though the Byzantine manuscripts are generally of a later date there are early witnesses of such a family of New Testament text. Some of the early Church Fathers used this same family of text when refering to the Bible that they read. One such example is Polycarp (70-155 A.D.). He was Bishop of Smyrna and a student of the apostle John. His witness to the ancient Biblical text is important because he cites many New Testament quotations in his letter to the Philippians. Most of these are quoted from the epistles of Paul. Polycarp’s quotations reflect the Traditional Text over the Alexandrian Text. Polycarp wrote, "knowing that by grace ye are saved; not by works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ … he that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also raise up us in like manner … For whosoever does not confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, he is Antichrist: and whoever does not confess his suffering upon the cross, is from the devil. And whosoever perverts the oracles of the Lord to his own lusts; and say that there shall neither be any resurrection, nor judgment, he is the first-born of Satan. Wherefore leaving the vanity of many, and their false doctrines; let us return to the word that was delivered to us from the beginning. " 6 (Phili. 1:5,1:8; 3:1-3). Clearly if age is an important characteristic of good manuscripts early Church Fathers such as Polycarp would add credibility to the Traditional Text.

--------------------

[1] – Philip W. Comfort, Ph.D., “Essential Guide to Bible Versions”, Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 2000, p 60
[2] – Bruce M. Metzger, “The Text of the New Testament – It’s Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration”, Third Edition, Oxford University Press, Inc., 1992, p 209

Lawrence E Bray

2010-03-14T05:25:21Z

Dr.bray: New page: Lawrence Bray (1970-?) was born in Columbus, OH. He was raised in an atheist family, not being drawn to Christ for salvation until he was about 21 years old. Dr. Bray now lives in Pennsylv...

Lawrence Bray (1970-?) was born in Columbus, OH. He was raised in an atheist family, not being drawn to Christ for salvation until he was about 21 years old. Dr. Bray now lives in Pennsylvania with his family: Priscilla (wife), Brian (son), and Zoe (daughter). He is an Elder with the Reformed Presbyterian Church (PCA) as well as being president of The North American Reformed Seminary (TNARS).

In 2008 he received his first doctorate (D.Min.) through TNARS (prior to becoming their president), in 2009 he earned a Doctor of Divinity (meritus causa) from Miami International Seminary. Dr. Bray is currently working on his Doctor of Theology (Th.D.) from Trinity Graduate School (Apologetics and Theology) which he hopes to complete in 2010.

Modern denial of preservation

2010-03-14T05:05:11Z

Dr.bray: New page: The doctrine of preservation is a foundational teaching of the Protestant Church. Most conservative Christians are in agreement that the original manuscripts of Scripture are inspired. But...

The doctrine of preservation is a foundational teaching of the Protestant Church. Most conservative Christians are in agreement that the original manuscripts of Scripture are inspired. But as we do not possess these originals the doctrine of the preservation of those originals is of utmost importance. What this doctrine states is that while the Bible was immediately inspired in the originals, it was also kept pure throughout the ages. The purity of preservation is no less than the purity of inspiration as it is the work of God Himself. Yet sadly today the conservative Christian Church is teaching something quite different. They no longer believe in the doctrine of preservation, though some do claim a belief in it. There are pockets of Christianity that still hold to this doctrine, being unshaken by the postmodernism that has infected the Church at large. Some of the organizations that represent this remnant of historic Christian belief in preservation are the Trinitarian Bible Society, the James Begg Society, and the Dean Burgon Society.

To better see the distinction between historic Christianity and postmodern Christianity we will look at two confessions that deal with the preservation of Scripture – The Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. The Westminster Confession of Faith (chapter 1, section 8) says this:

''The Old Testament in Hebrew (which was the native language of the people of God of old), and the New Testament in Greek (which at the time of the writing of it was most generally known to the nations), being immediately inspired by God, and by his singular care and providence '''kept pure in all ages''', are therefore authentical; so as in all controversies of religion the Church is finally to appeal unto them. But because these original tongues are not known to all the people of God who have right unto, and interest in, the Scriptures, and are commanded, in the fear of God, to read and search them, therefore they are to be translated into the language of every people unto which they come, that the Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, they may worship him in an acceptable manner, and, through patience and comfort of the Scriptures, may have hope.''

We can see that the accepted doctrine of the Protestant Church was that God kept His Scripture pure in all ages. That is how preservation was defined. Now before we go much further, let’s look at what the word “pure” means. To be pure is to be complete, without fault, free of foreign elements.1 This gives us an excellent idea of what the Westminster Divines were telling us in this passage of the Confession. They believed that the Scriptures in their original languages were pure and perfect in the apographs (copies), not solely in the autographs.

Now let’s see what a modern confession has to say about the purity and preservation of Scripture. The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (article X) says this:

''We affirm that inspiration, strictly speaking, applies only to the autographic text of Scripture, which in the providence of God can be '''ascertained from available manuscripts with great accuracy'''. We further affirm that '''copies and translations of Scripture are the Word of God to the extent that they faithfully represent the original.'''

We deny that any essential element of the Christian faith is affected by the absence of the autographs. We further deny that this absence renders the assertion of Biblical inerrancy invalid or irrelevant.''

This clearly shows us that modern Christian teaching promulgates the idea that we can have Scripture with “great accuracy,” but not pure. How great is the accuracy? I’ve heard scholars suggest numbers from 98% to over 99% (Bruce Metzger et al), but never 100%. The statement of faith also shows that they look on the apographs as being the Word of God only to the extent that they represent the original. This is an interesting statement, as the originals do not exist. Logically speaking, since we do not have the originals this statement of faith confirms a belief that they do not know to what extent the Scriptures that we have are the Word of God since it is impossible for them to see how closely they represent the original.

There is another interesting statement in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy that seems to contradict modern textual criticism. Article XIV says:

''We affirm the '''unity and internal consistency of Scripture'''.''

We deny that alleged errors and discrepancies that have not yet been resolved violate the truth claims of the Bible.

While they say that they believe in the internal consistency of Scripture, let’s see what their modern textual criticism teaches us…

The basic criteria for internally assessing variant readings is as follows 2:

1. The more difficult the reading the better.
2. The shorter the reading the better.
3. '''The reading that is in verbal dissidence with other readings is better'''.
4. The less refined and more rough reading is to be preferred.

The modern textual critic believes that the reading in dissidence with other readings is better! That’s hardly a case for internal consistency.

We also see the doctrine of preservation vanishing among Bible translators and Greek Text editors. I will look at two popular conservative translations as well as the critical Greek Text put out by the United Bible Society.

''2 Chr 31:16 (NASB)
without regard to their genealogical enrollment, to the males from thirty years old and upward--everyone who entered the house of the LORD for his daily obligations--for their work in their duties according to their divisions;''

All ancient manuscripts contain "3 years old" and not the 30 that we see in the NASB. This shows that the translators feel a need to correct the Scriptures. This need to correct clearly goes against any honest teaching on preservation.

''1 Sam 13:1 (ESV)
Saul was... years old when he began to reign, and he reigned... and two years over Israel.''

Here the ESV translators show that there is missing text in the Scriptures. Clearly you cannot show that there is missing text and still believe the text has been preserved. Remember that the definition of pure includes completeness. Besides, this would sound very strange if read in public.

The editors of the UBS critical Greek text also have a different idea of preservation. The UBS critical Greek text at Acts 16:12 uses "prwthS" - which is found in no manuscript. The reading should be "prwth" without the "S." The "S" makes the noun genitive, which changes the meaning. Instead of reading that Philippi is a foremost city of Macedonia, it reads that Philippi is a city of the first district of Macedonia. They do this because they do not think the text has been preserved, but rather it needs correcting.

I strongly urge Christians to consider where a denial of the preservation of Scripture will lead the Church. Without preservation there is no purity. Without purity the text can be questioned. When the text can be questioned we have no final authority. The early Protestant Church understood the importance of this doctrine. We should seek to embrace it again as something that is dearly beloved to us.

----------------------------------------------------

[1] – “The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language”, Fourth Edition, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2000.

[2] – Bruce M. Metzger, “The Text of the New Testament – It’s Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration”, Third Edition, Oxford University Press, Inc., 1992, p 209.