Is the TR a corrupt form of the Traditional NT text?

logos1560

Well-known member
Are the varying editions of the Textus Receptus a corrupt form of the Traditional Greek NT text?

Alfred Martin as edited by David Otis Fuller wrote: “The traditional text is not synonymous with the Received Text, but the latter does embody it in a rather corrupt form” (Which Bible, fifth edition, p. 148).

Alfred Martin asserted: “One cannot say that the Textus Receptus, for example, is verbally inspired. It contains many plain and clear errors, as all schools of textual critics agree” (p. 149). Alfred Martin wrote: “Admitted, it [the Textus Receptus] will have to undergo extensive revision. It needs to be revised according to sound principles which will take account of all the evidence” (p. 173). Alfred Martin quoted H. C. Hoskier as observing that Burgon “did not contend for the acceptance of the Textus Receptus, as has so often been scurrilously stated” (p. 153).
 
Last edited:

Steven Avery

Well-known member
Do you consider these verses in the Geneva and AV as scripture?

1 John 5:7 (AV)
For there are three that bear record in heaven,
the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost:
and these three are one.

Acts 8:37 (AV)
And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart,
thou mayest. And he answered and said,
I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

1 John 2:23 (AV)
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father:
[but] he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.

If you do, you would seem to be a Textus Receptus supporter.
 

Conan

Active member
When scholar's use the word "corrupt", they mean mistake. So yes, the Textus Receptus has corruptions, or mistakes. All Greek Texts and hand written manuscripts have some mistakes in them. Copy the Bible by hand and you will make some mistakes.
 

Shoonra

Active member
The Textus Receptus (whichever edition you accept as such) and the so-called Majority Text (ditto) are imperfect versions of the authentic NT text.

Is there a perfect version? I doubt it but the Critical Text comes closer than the TR or MT.
 

Conan

Active member
The Textus Receptus (whichever edition you accept as such) and the so-called Majority Text (ditto) are imperfect versions of the authentic NT text.

Is there a perfect version? I doubt it but the Critical Text comes closer than the TR or MT.
I used to believe the Critical Text(s) were more accurate. I learned from critical text authors. But they have more unreliable readings than even the TR. They have more "Comma Johanneum" type readings than even the TR.
The Majority Text is most accurate. Then usually the TR. Then Critical Text's get ranked.

MT, TR, CT agree.
MT, TR, agree verses the CT.
MT, CT, agree verses the TR.
CT, TR, agree verses the MT.
MT verses TR verses CT.
 
Top