Search results

Majority Text. Byzantine Text and Family 35 are 98 & 1/2 % alike.

I really liked the New American Standard Bible. But they should update to the Greek Byzantine Text. They would have had the best translation based on quite possibly the best Greek Text.

You are blaming all that on a Bible translation? Pretty sure those Pentecostals were using KJVs.

This collection of various readings in the margin distinguished Estienne's third edition as the first Greek text with a critical apparatus, and greatly enhanced the reputation of the text. It was thought by many that Estienne had edited his text directly from these manuscripts, and indeed...

No they do not . That is false witness. Mark the person who told you that as unreliable.

Isn't Iran the last on the list of nations to invade? Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Sudan , Lebanon, Iran? Remember Gen Wesly Clark revealed to the press the Bush Administrations list of 7 nations to be invaded in 5 years? This conflict with Iran was planned long ago. And since we are getting...

The NKJV is based on the Textus Receptus just like the KJV is. It has some Majority Text readings in the footnotes when they differ, as well as Critical Text footnotes when they differ.

Tyndale 1534 facsimile. This Jesus Christ cam by water and blood. And it is the sprete that beareth witness / because the sprete ys truth. (for there are thre which beare recorde in heaven / the father / the word / and the holy goost. And these thre are one) for there are thre which beare...

So then when all of these agree , which is the overwhelming majority of the time, we have undisputed the Original Text. It is only when there is a serious Variant , that there is any doubt. Which rarely, but does occasionally happen.

F.H.A. Scrivener, The Authorized Edition of the English Bible (1611), its subsequent Reprints and modern Representatives. Cambridge: University Press, 1884. This is the definitive work on the textual sources and history of the Authorized Version

They are not lies. You are rather in denial that they happened. Here is one source you can see some changes in. https://www.bible-researcher.com/canon10.html

No. They have modern meanings now. They are used for a totally different purpose than in 1534. Changes. Updating.

But those printer errors had to be updated to get them out. Also there were textual changes, for good and/or ill. Updating in many ways. I would say for the better. But not always perhaps.

Correct. You can read the verses however you want. With, and without the words. The best of both ways to read. If you think the words are original and belong you can read every word right in the Text. If you think they don't belong do not read the words in (parenthesis). The best printed Bible...

This has nothing to do with the Critical Text or modern Bible translation. This all happened in the early 1500s. I will give you a picture of the facsimile so you may see for yourself.

Wasn't the KJV constantly updated? Had they not done much updating there would not be a PCE KJV now would there?

Read the chapter with, and then without the words in (parenthesis) . Then you will have looked at the evidence for yourself. You can believe whatever you want. But don't be afraid to look at both readings.

It's a no brainer for the time period. Erasmus didn't have the Comma Johanneum in his first or second edition. But under pressure from the Roman Catholic Church put it in his 3rd edition. Tyndale used Erasmus's 3rd edition for his 1526. I didn't check that edition, but a facsimile of his most...

The Comma is in Tyndale's Bible. But the Comma Johnneum is in parenthesis so the reader can read the text without the CJ. From a 1534 facsimile. This Jesus Christ cam by water and blood. And it is the sprete that beareth witness / because the sprete ys truth. (for there are thre which beare...

Didn't you read what others posted?