Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

The TR and Byz: How Different in the General Epistles?

Expand Messages
  • james_snapp_jr
    How different is Scrivener s 1894 edition of the Textus Receptus fron the Robinson-Pierpont 2005 edition of the Byzantine Text? To find out, I consulted the
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 17, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      How different is Scrivener's 1894 edition of the Textus Receptus fron the Robinson-Pierpont 2005 edition of the Byzantine Text? To find out, I consulted the collation of those two texts that is now available at the CSPMT website, tweaked it slightly, noted where the Byzantine Text is divided, and analyzed the variants. Here are my results:

      In the General Epistles, there are 107 differences between Byz and the TR. Of those 107 differences, 43 are differences that could be made by two disciplined copyists who used the same exemplar or had the same exemplar read to them (such as itacisms, especially omicron-omega interchanges, and variants attributable to parablepsis). Of the remaining 64 variants, five occur where Byz is divided.

      Thus there are 59 variants in the General Epistles in the TR which indicate a non-Byzantine influence in its textual ancestry. (Thirty of them involved a variant that consisted of the addition, omission, or substitution of a word.)

      These numbers could be adjusted slightly, since there are a few variants that are capable of being explained as deliberate adjustments or as an accidental instances of parablepsis.

      In Second John, Byz and TR vary by only two letters:
      In 1:3, Byz has HMWN where TR has UMWN
      In 1:12, Byz has EBOULHQHN where TR has HBOULHQHN

      Yours in Christ,

      James Snapp, Jr.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.