The Received Text

Beloved brothers and sisters without faith it is impossible to please God.  That faith is centered upon Jesus Christ, His love for us, the glory of His Holy inspired, infallible, inerrant, preserved Word, and confidence that He has provided for us all that we need for this life of faith and godly living.  We see many such statements and promises throughout the Scriptures.

Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ:  (2)  Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,  (3)  According as His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him that hath called us to glory and virtue:  (4)  Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. 2Peter 1:1-4 

So our very life of faith is built upon the truth of the Holy Scriptures, for without them we cannot know the great and precious promises, or have confidence in Jesus Christ as He is revealed to us in His Holy Book.  This is extremely serious business, because of the proliferation of modern versions of the Bible based upon corrupt and counterfeit Greek manuscripts.  With the proliferation of these modern versions has come the declination of genuine faith and godliness, for if we can’t trust what God has said, then how can we truly know the truth?  Many have had their faith shipwrecked by neglecting the revelation given to us by God that He has promised to preserve His Word.  They have embraced the false teaching of the naturalistic method of studying the manuscripts of the Bible, whereby they regard the Holy Word of God as if it were any other ancient text.  Many have perished on the rocky shoals of this egregious error that has begotten so much unbelief within the visible church.  The men who worked on the translation of the King James Version, by contrast were men of faith, great learning, and exceptional skill.  They accepted the Received Text as the preserved Word of God and worked to translate it into English so that all could read the Scriptures because they believed in the virtue and power of God’s Holy Word.  All who belong to Jesus Christ through faith in Him have this as their testimony, which is broadcast through the apostle Peter in 2 Peter chapter one.

Moreover, I will endeavor that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance.  (16)  For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty.  (17)  For He received from God the Father honor and glory, when there came such a voice to Him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.  (18)  And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with Him in the holy mount.  (19)  We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:  (20)  Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.  (21)  For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 2 Peter 1:15-21 

Here Peter extolls the Scriptures as those that are given to us by the Holy Spirit and shine as a light in a dark place raising up the truth about Jesus Christ in our minds and hearts.  Peter, by the power of the Holy Spirit, promises to make written copies of the Scripture that God has given him available for those who love Jesus Christ.  If Peter did not have such confidence in the power of God to preserve His Word would he make such a declaration?

So those who attack the veracity and sufficiency of Scripture do so because they are unbelievers, even though they may hold learned titles in the visible church.  I am reminded of a protégé of Bruce Metzger, Bart Ehrman, who started out with faith in Christ, albeit weak, who now denies the truth about our Lord and God and delights to present his unbelief to others so that he can spoil their faith also.  Bruce Metzger, an editor of the Nestle/Aland Greek New Testament Text worked on the Reader’s Digest Bible, which was horribly mutilated translation of the Bible under his profane guidance.  Are we going to believe what God has told us that He has promised to preserve His Word, or are we going to bow the knee to profane scholarship that informs us that we don’t have God’s Word and don’t really know the actual Words of Jesus Christ?  It all comes down to whether or not one is filled with the Holy Spirit through regenerating faith in Jesus Christ, this faith will usher in the God given confidence that we have extant, at our fingertips now the inspired, infallible, inerrant, preserved Word of God in the King James Version translated from the Received Text taken from the Majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts.

Here are some facts to help us to see the difference between the manuscripts used by unbelievers and the Received Text relied upon by champions of the faith.

The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, upon which the modern versions are based, diverge from each other in over 3000 places in the gospels alone, and these are not minor copyist errors but additions, deletions and words changed.  So they disagree with each other more than they agree with each other and they are definitely at variance with the Majority Text. When it comes to the Majority Text the agreement between the manuscripts is so pervasive that Hort had to come up with his genealogy and recession and conflation theories to try to explain away the cohesiveness of the texts and the great number of manuscripts for the Majority text.  Biblical scholars today agree that his theories have no merit whatsoever.  The reason why Westcott and Hort choose the “Alexandrian” text over the Majority Text was because Hort had a deep seated hatred of the Received Text which he expressed at a very early age, even before he began his work.

The Alexandrian manuscripts, of which the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are both examples, come from an area known for its error.  Clement of Alexandria (155-200), a heretic within the visible church, had a tremendous influence in the corruption of the Scriptures because of his apostasy from the truth.  His protégé, Origin, also from Alexandria, (185-254), had a team of scribes who were supposed to “correct” the manuscripts.  Origin is the father of much of the corruption that has dogged the true church through the ages.    However, the Scriptures that were from the Byzantine area visited by Paul and the other apostles were the Autographs, or faithful copies of the epistles, and fountainhead of the Received Text.  This is what Tertullian had to say in defense of the truth against the work of apostates.

,Tertullian (160-221) said the following in 208 in answer to the heretics:

“Run over to the apostolic churches, in which the very thrones of the apostles are still preeminent in their places, in which their own authentic writings are read.  Achaia is very near you, in which you find Corinth.  Since you are not far from Macedonia you have Philippi…And the Thessalonians.  Since you are able to cross to Asia, you get Ephesus.  Since, moreover, you are close upon Italy, you have Rome, from which there comes even into our own hands the very authority of the apostles themselves.” Dr.Moorman, Jack, Forever Settled, 1999

The paucity of manuscript evidence for those manuscripts that deviate from the Majority text proves they were rejected by early Christians who held onto the Traditional text and had it translated into the Old Latin Version, when Greek was no longer being spoken.  This version of the New Testament Scriptures was used by believers throughout Africa, Europe, and Italy and was the version held onto by the Waldenses, fiercely persecuted by the Roman Catholic Church, as opposed to the Latin Vulgate.

The Traditional Text has multiple witnesses through the cursive manuscripts copied from the uncials in the 9th century.  Of the 2764 cursive manuscripts most are of the Traditional text, while only a small fraction, about 22 agree with the other text types (Alexandrian and Western).  This fact bears testimony to the preservation of the Word of God through the Received Text, and the rejection of the counterfeit manuscripts by believers through the ages.

Throughout the visible church are those who call into question whether or not we have God’s Word available for us today.  They have perpetrated much harm and grievous mischief within the visible church and throughout the world.  The throwing off of the Received Text and accepting as likely genuine the counterfeit manuscripts has ushered in widespread unbelief and with it the perplexing panoply of perversion that is assaulting our modern era.  If we want to stand firm in this age of apostasy we must hold fast the truth of God’s Word and know for sure that He has preserved His Word for His church throughout the ages in the Received Text and faithfully, providentially translated for us in the King James Version.

For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually works also in you that believe. 1Thessalonians 2:13 

Lord Jesus Christ may we by Your grace stand fast upon Your Word of truth for Your praise, glory and our mutual edification.  Amen

Please visit this blog for more information about Textual Criticism.  Philip has an excellent series on this topic taught from a position of faith.  Amen!

https://matthew714ministries.wordpress.com/2016/04/11/textual-criticism-pt-1/

 

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in End Time Deception and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to The Received Text

  1. Bob Wheeler says:

    And so what about Hodges and Farstad? And the New King James Version?

    Like

    • Eliza says:

      Here you go for the NKJV

      https://matthew714ministries.wordpress.com/2016/04/27/textual-criticism-new-king-james/

      https://matthew714ministries.wordpress.com/2016/04/28/textual-criticism-doctrines-affected/

      I already gave you a link for Hodges and Farstad, but here it is just in case:

      http://solascriptura-tt.org/Bibliologia-PreservacaoTT/MajorityTextMovingAwayFromPreservedScripture-Cloud.htm

      You can read these at your leisure. BTW since the case is made for the Traditional Text, why do you have these questions? The Received Text is the printed form of the Traditional Text which is the preserved, inerrant, infallible, inspired Word of God, so why agitate and try to stir up controversy over what is not controversial? Belief stands on the revelation of God’s Word. Amen!

      Liked by 1 person

      • Bob Wheeler says:

        I did take a look at the link on the NKJV, where the author looked at several passages in I Corinthians in which the NKJV eliminated the word “man” from the translation. The problem? The word “man” does not occur in the Greek — and I specifically used the Textus Receptus on this one. What the text does is use masculine pronouns and adjectives. There are no nouns in those verses that correspond to the word “man.” And if the use of a grammatically masculine pronoun or adjective requires us to understand that the subject must be a male, then we are going to have to argue that most of what is in the Bible simply doesn’t apply to women. Most of the references are to “men”! In the verses cited the NKJV translation is just fine.

        Like

      • Bob Wheeler says:

        As for the Greek text, what makes the subject controversial is the use of the word “inerrant” when applied to the Received Text. The plain fact of the matter is that the Received Text does not always agree with the Majority Text (especially in the Book of Revelation, where they differ in 140 places). That means that if we are going to argue that the Received Text is “inerrant,” the implication is that the Majority Text is corrupt and we should not be using it at all. But how do we know that Erasmus’ work was inerrant, and no one else’s? Was Erasmus, and Erasmus alone, an inspired prophet, so that we have to go by his text, no matter what the majority of Greek manuscripts say?

        Like

        • Eliza says:

          Is not God able to preserve His Word? Isn’t that the promise He has given us in the Scriptures? Can He not use a man to faithfully copy the Received Text so that we have the inerrant, infallible, inspired, preserved Word of God? Doesn’t God use men every time they share the gospel and a lost soul gets saved? Was God’s work done when He had His prophets write the original Autographs? Are we to suppose that God can’t use a man to faithfully and inerrantly give to us the copy of His Holy inspired preserved Word? Do you know the history of Erasmus and his access to the many manuscripts?

          Like

          • Bob Wheeler says:

            God had preserved His Word — in the great majority of Greek manuscripts that have survived until the present day. And I think that the edition of Hodges and Farstad is the best available printed edition.
            I just think that God’s Word should be available in language that the people can understand, which is why I routinely use the NKJV in my writing and teaching.

            Like

          • Eliza says:

            But the Old Latin was based upon the Traditional text, Erasmus, a highly intelligent person with access to many manuscripts continued with the Traditional Text with a few alterations based upon his learned mind and skill led by the Holy Spirit. There are numerous deletions between the TR and the MT, where Hodges and Farstad employ the same rejected critical techniques that the interlopers Westcott and Hort used. Hodges and Farstad used their best guesses and at many times just a few of the MT for their decisions. How does that equate with the MT say this? BTW, they never had the complete MT at their disposal, nor does anyone else, the complete MT has never been collated and compared

            This is what a solid TR defender had to say:

            Dr. Waite, in his summary of the topic at hand, makes an important point:

            I see in this entire regression from the Dean John Burgon methodology once espoused by Zane C. Hodges indeed a sad spectacle. I remember how Hodges for years had a paper he entitled a defense of the ‘Textus Receptus.’ Then he changed the title to the ‘Majority Text.’ I have seen him move closer and closer to the former Westcott and Hort position of textual criticism. Now we have seen him use the genealogical method of the Hortian heretics. We have seen him being quite at home with the Intrinsic and transcriptional probability of these same heretics. Where will it all end? Is there no bottom? One of our DBS Vice Presidents, Dr. David Otis Fuller, uses the expression ‘scholarolatry.’ Is this what Hodges is guilty of now? (The Dean Burgon News, May-August, 1985, pages 2-4).

            The MT Greek NT of Hodges and Farstad is a discredited compilation of some of the Greek manuscripts from the MT.

            Oh, the NKJV ignored the TR over 1200 times. It is just a supposedly palatable modern version alternative for those who would have nothing to do with the other versions. You should stick with The Book, the TR faithfully translated into English in the KJV.

            Like

  2. gracealone1 says:

    It’s always interesting to find out who was/is behind all the new “versions” (perversions) of the Bible.

    http://watch-unto-prayer.org/revision.html

    A well researched history covering nearly 200 years of all the Jews, Zionists, assorted heretics and most of all the source of the money to do all this damage to the Word in the face of those who should know better, but do not. Yet there are those who are in this “discussion” solely for notoriety, and have no interest in defending the faith (that comes to us through the hearing of the Word) but choose rather to “debate the issue” as if there is merit before God for their nonsensical words. Just as the Gospel is not up for debate, neither is the Word of God up for debate. If the god one serves is able to produce an infallible and inerrant word and yet cannot keep it from the corrupting antics of man, then he is no god at all, so why bother to serve this none-god?

    Keep digging and writing, Eliza.

    Darrel

    Liked by 2 people

  3. unworthy1 says:

    Eliza,

    This is an interesting video that upholds the KJV – https://youtu.be/kFtI_mVOXbQ

    Like

  4. unworthy1 says:

    Those who argue for ‘modern translations’ always use the excuse, ‘a language that all can understand’. This is a lie from the pit of hell. NO ONE can understand God’s word unless God grants them understanding. Unless they’ve been chosen by God, regenerated by the Spirit and gifted with eternal life, they will not understand God’s truth. The KJV is written in English, just because we no longer use ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ does not make this Bible obsolete. A child can understand God’s truth, so why do grown men and women scoff at the KJV and opt for the more modern ones? Because they don’t understand? The logic of such a statement is beyond ridiculous.
    I watched the video I linked to in my prior comment and learned much about the origin of the KJV, it was quite interesting. I also learned how modern translations are being used by Satan to bring about the end time one world religion, translations such as the NIV. I did not agree with everything stated in the video, but there was enough information presented to allow me to make an informed choice.

    Lyn

    Liked by 2 people

    • Eliza says:

      My husband and I also watched the video and are also more informed. Thank you Lyn for sharing it here. Be aware that the gospel message at the end does not contain repentance which is a serious departure from the truth of God’s Word. Amen!

      Liked by 1 person

      • unworthy1 says:

        Exactly Eliza, yes, the message was worthless. Avoid their attempt at presenting ‘another gospel’, but do not overlook their informative presentation for the KJV!

        Liked by 1 person

  5. gracealone1 says:

    Reading through Scripture one can readily find a recurring theme, that God preserves. He preserves the heavens and the earth until the day they are destroyed by fire—objectors being the environmental escapees from the nut house (Neh. 9:6). He preserves His elect—objectors being those who would rather be able to “opt out of salvation” the same way they “gained” it in the first place, by an act of their will(Eph. 1:13 & 14 along with a few hundred other verses). He even preserves the wicked until the day of judgment—the objectors being those who say there is no sin and no cause or right for God to judge anyone (2 Peter 2:17). He preserves knowledge (Prov. 22:12) meaning His own Word—the objectors being those who from their father, the devil, take orders to try and destroy His Word, render it ineffectual and even remove it from the earth. One of the revisionists has stated that he wanted the new “revised” edition to remove completely from the text 1 John 5:7 where the Trinity is on plain display.

    There is most definitely “guilt by association” for any and all who continue to try and make the case for any types of revision to the Word in even the minutest detail. Read about the men and women who promote this heresy and consider yourself just as guilty as they. You will be opposed and exposed, no matter what your name, Bob Wheeler. may the Lord be gracious to you and gift you with repentance, because you will not find repentance in your wish list or your “free-will”.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s