Why%20I%20Prefer%20the%20Byzantine%20Text

1
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
In the original manuscripts, every word of
Scripture was given by the inspiration of God, so
as to produce a Bible completely without error or
omission.
All scripture is given by inspiration of God,
and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly
furnished unto all good works. --2 Timothy 316,
17
Inspiration is theopneustos which means
God-breathed
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the
scripture is of any private interpretation. 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 120, 21
2
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
While divine inspiration extends ONLY to the
original manuscripts, God promised to
providentially preserve His Word. For ever, O
LORD, thy word is settled in heaven.
--Psalm 11989 For all flesh is as grass, and
all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The
grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth
away But the word of the Lord endureth for ever.
And this is the word which by the gospel is
preached unto you.
--1 Peter 124,
25 Think not that I am come to destroy the law,
or the prophets I am not come to destroy, but to
fulfil. 18 For verily I say unto you, Till
heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle
shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be
fulfilled.
--Matthew 517, 18
3
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text

• There is more textual evidence for the Greek New
  Testament than any other piece of ancient
  literature.
• The best attested piece of secular literature is
  Homers Iliad. There are 643 surviving copies of
  Homers Iliad, the oldest being copied 500 years
  after the original documents.
• There are over 5,300 copies of manuscripts of
  the Greek New Testament or portions thereof, the
  oldest dating from only 150 to 200 years after
  the originals.
• There are over 18,000 other witnesses to the
  text of the New Testament, such as translations,
  lectionaries, and quotations.
• As manuscripts of the Greek New Testament have
  come to light over the years, they have been
  analyzed and catagorized as belonging to either
  one of TWO families, either the Alexandrian
  text-type or the Byzantine text-type.
• Some of the most early manuscripts uncovered in
  the 19th century belong to the Alexandrian text
  family, because they have their roots in
  Alexandria, Egypt.

4
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text

• However, the vast majority of manuscripts of the
  Greek New Testament belong to the Byzantine
  text-type, because they agree with the text
  commonly used by the Greek speaking churches.
• Between 90 to 95 of the known Greek NT
  manuscripts are of this type.
• Byzantine texts were more widely distributed and
  accepted than those of the Alexandrian text type,
  which was used primarily in Egypt.
• The Byzantine (Majority) text predominated
  during the greatest period of manual copying of
  Greek New Testament manuscripts (ca. AD 350 to AD
  1516). It was the dominant text used by the Greek
  speaking community.
• Early translations of the New Testament into
  other languages show evidence of being translated
  from a Byzantine text type. Among these are The
  Syriac Peshitta (c. 400) the Palestine Syriac
  Version (c. 400) the Armenian Version (c. 400)
  the Gothic Version (c. 341)

We believe the The Byzantine (Majority) Greek
text is closest to the original manuscripts of
the Greek New Testament.
5
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
These translations were based upon the Textus
Receptus

• In February 1516, the Dutch humanist scholar
  Desiderius Erasmus produced an edition of the
  Greek New Testament. He had at his disposal six
  Greek manuscripts belonging to the Byzantine text
  type. He also used the Latin Vulgate, to
  supplement missing portions of his manuscripts.
• As more manuscripts became available, subsequent
  revisions of Erasmus work were made, the most
  scholarly being that of Robert Stephens
  (Estienne) in 1550. This is the Greek text from
  which the King James Version was translated.
• In 1624 the Elzevir brothers printed an updated
  edition of the same text. In their preface they
  indicated that this is the text which has been
  commonly received. The name Textus Receptus was
  then commonly applied not only to their edition
  of the Greek New Testament, but those which had
  preceded it, beginning with the work of Erasmus.

6
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
4) The Byzantine (Majority) form of the text
provided the basis for almost all translations of
the New Testament into modern languages down to
the nineteenth century.
Martin Luther - German (1522)
William Tyndale - English (1525)
Miles Coverdale - English (1535)
The Great Bible - English (1539)
The Geneva Bible - English (1560)
The Bishops Bible - English (1568)
The King James Version - English (1611)
Revisions of the King James Version - English
(1629, 1638, 1762, 1769) Note The King James
Version in general use today is not the 1611
version, but the 1769 REVISION.
7
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
The Alexandrian Text of Westcott and Hort

• In the 19th century, two English scholars, B.F.
  Westcott and F.J.A. Hort published a critical
  edition of the Greek New Testament based
  primarily on three Greek manuscripts dating back
  to the 4th century, Vaticanus, Siniaticus, and
  Alexandrinus. Their overriding major premise was
  that the oldest manuscripts must be the best
  manuscripts.
• The parchment codices B (Vaticanus) and Aleph
  (Sinaiticus) were assigned to the fourth century
  and are generally understood to have been
  produced in Egypt, along with the third
  manuscript Alexandrinus.
• In the Gospels alone these first two MSS differ
  from each other well over 3,000 times, which
  number does not include minor errors such as
  spelling, nor even variants between certain
  synonyms.
• The United Bible Societies Greek text, based on
  Westcott and Horts work varies from the
  Byzantine (Majority) Greek text in over 6,000
  places.
• The best explanation for the survival of these
  parchments is that they were set aside, because
  it was recognized they had been corrupted.

8
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
Factors leading to a corruption of some of the
Greek manuscripts (1) Localized text types
During the persecution of Christians prior to the
time of Constantine, copying of New Testament
Greek manuscripts would have been localized, as
Christians sought to keep a low profile.
Copyists errors would have been perpetuated in
what may be called localized text types.
After Christianity was sanctioned under
Constantine (AD 313), improved communication
between the churches led to a cross-correction of
localized text types. Faulty manuscripts would
have been be corrected or laid aside as being
corrupted. Gradually localized readings would
be weeded out, and the text which most closely
followed the originals would be restored.
9
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
Factors leading to a corruption of some of the
Greek manuscripts (2) The Egyptian
(Alexandrian) influence

• A number of early manuscripts and fragments have
  been found in the region around Alexandria in
  Egypt. This is due, in part, to climatic
  conditions favourable to the preservation of
  papyri on which they were written.

• During the 1st and 2nd centuries, Egypt was the
  centre for the Gnostic heresy. The church
  historian Eusebius records the claim of an
  unknown writer that Gnostics tampered with the
  Scriptures without fear.

• The church in Egypt had a long record of being
  influenced by various schools of philosophy. The
  brilliant Alexandrian philosopher, Origen, (185
  to 254 A,D.) believed that Christ was 'born of
  the Father before all creatures', was a 'second
  God', and a 'creature. The 4th century heretic
  Arius developed his theology from Origin, and
  taught that Christ was the highest of created
  beings.

10
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
The Westcott and Hort text tends to de-emphasize
the deity of Christ, as compared with the
Byzantine text.
Mark 11 1 (AV) The beginning of the gospel of
Jesus Christ, the Son of God 1 (BYZ) arch tou
euaggeliou ihsou cristou uiou tou yeou
1 (WH) arch tou euaggeliou ihsou cristou (the
Son of God is omitted) 1 Tim 316 16 (AV) And
without controversy great is the mystery of
godliness God was manifest in the flesh,
justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached
unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world,
received up into glory. 16 (BYZ) kai
omologoumenwv mega estin to thv eusebeiav
musthrion yeov efanerwyh en sarki edikaiwyh en
pneumati wfyh aggeloiv ekhrucyh en eynesin
episteuyh en kosmw anelhfyh en doxh 16 (WH) kai
omologoumenwv mega estin to thv eusebeiav
musthrion ov (God is omitted and replaced by
who efanerwyh en sarki edikaiwyh en pneumati
wfyh aggeloiv ekhrucyh en eynesin episteuyh en
kosmw anelhmfyh en doxh
11
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
The Westcott and Hort text deemphasizes the
virgin birth of Christ and His ascension into
heaven.
Luke 233 33 (AV) And Joseph and his mother
marvelled at those things which were spoken of
him. 33 (BYZ) kai hn iwshf kai h mhthr autou
yaumazontev epi toiv laloumenoiv peri autou 33
(WH) kai hn o pathr (Here father is substituted
for Joseph )autou kai h mhthr yaumazontev epi
toiv laloumenoiv peri autou
John 311 13 (AV) And no man hath ascended up to
heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even
the Son of man which is in heaven. 13 (BYZ) kai
oudeiv anabebhken eiv ton ouranon ei mh o ek tou
ouranou katabav o uiov tou anyrwpou o wn en tw
ouranw 13 (WH) kai oudeiv
anabebhken eiv ton ouranon ei mh o ek tou
________ouranou katabav o uiov tou anyrwpou
(which is in heaven) is missing
12
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
If the Alexandrian (Wescott and Hort) text is the
correct Greek text of the New Testament. . .

• it means that the family of Greek N. T. texts
  which prefers readings that tend to diminish the
  person and work of Christ is correct.
• it means that the 90 to 95 of the extant Greek
  N. T. manuscripts which belong to the Byzantine
  family (Majority text) are wrong.

• it means that the proper text of the Greek New
  Testament was preserved by professing Christians
  in an area where the church was known for its
  blending of Greek philosophy with Christian
  thought.

• it means God did not allow His people to have
  the proper Bible until the 19th century, a period
  of almost 1,500 years. This is highly unlikely in
  view of Gods promise to preserve His word.

13
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
If you want to use a Bible translation closest to
the original manuscripts, choose one based on the
correct Greek text of the New Testament, the
Byzantine (Majority) Text.
This translation is based on the Textus Receptus,
which is supported by the Byzantine text
type. The King James Version (KJV, AV) This
translation follows the traditional readings of
the Textus Receptus in the body its text,
although many editions have footnotes indicating
where the Textus Receptus and Majority Texts
differ. The New King James Version (NKJV)
These translations are based on the Alexandrian
(Westcott Hort) text type American Standard
Version (ASV) Revised Standard Version (RSV) New
American Standard Bible (NASB) New English Bible
(NEB) Living Bible (LB) Good News Bible (TEV) New
International Version (NIV)
14
Why I Prefer the Byzantine Text
Choose a Bible translation which seeks to be as
literal as possible, while maintaining
readability in English.

• Some translations, such as the NIV, are based on
  the principle of dynamic equivalence. The
  translators only seek to capture the thoughts of
  the author.
• Some translations are, in fact, not
  translations at all. They are paraphrases of
  Scripture. One example is The Living Bible.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or
the prophets I am not come to destroy, but to
fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven
and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no
wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

-Matthew 517, 18

• We believe that, not only the thoughts, but the
  very words of the Scripture are inspired by God.
• For the believer, the issue is not how easily
  understood is the translation, but how faithful
  is it to the original writings of Scripture.