Steven Avery
Administrator
On the Comma Johanneum in printed editions, “Which TR?” and working from inaccurate data
by Elijah Hixson December 01, 2021
https://evangelicaltextualcriticism...showComment=1639055231411#c555488176673873519
Elijah Hixson then highlights verses that are not in the CP.
by Elijah Hixson December 01, 2021
https://evangelicaltextualcriticism...showComment=1639055231411#c555488176673873519
Numerous men during the past four centuries have produced editions of the Textus Receptus; these editions bear their names and the years in which they were published. These include:
- the work of Stunica as published in the Complutensian Polyglot (printed in 1514 but not circulated until 1522) ....
Elijah Hixson then highlights verses that are not in the CP.
1. The Complutensian Polyglot lacks the Doxology to the Lord’s Prayer, though it does have a marginal note about it. The place where it would be if it were here is marked by a cross in the Greek text.
2. The Complutensian Polyglot omits the Greek text of Acts 8:37, though it retains it in the Latin side. Space-fillers are printed here in place of the Greek text.
...
I expect one could find even more places of difference, especially where the Complutensian Polyglot goes off on its own, and especially in Revelation. But to say with certainty would take more familiarity with the data than I currently have other than in a couple of instances (compare the Complutensian Polyglot to Erasmus’ first two editions at Rev. 1:2 and 1:11, for example). If we focus only on a handful of ‘test passages’, we can easily miss differences that occur where we aren’t looking—especially if we are not even accurately representing what is happening where we are looking. Worse still is taking the ‘absence’ (or rather, unawareness) of evidence where we aren’t looking as evidence of absence in general or assuming that there is no such evidence simply because we are unaware of it.
Last edited: