Greek New Testament printed editions depart from Textus Receptus

Steven Avery

Facebook - Timothy Berg

Matthew Rose
Timothy Berg who is defining the TR as, "any of the printed texts prior to 1831?" Thanks


Steven Avery

The Griesbach editions began in 1774, 57 years before 1831. Although the first one may have been a Gospel harmony. So he may date more succinctly to 1796-1806.

Daniel Mace published in 1729, The New Testament in Greek and English.

Harwood in 1776 departs using Cantebrigiensis and Claromontanus.

Alter in 1786-1787 is using Codex Lambeccii

Birch in 1788 and 1798 uses Vaticanus, but it may be in notes, not the Stephanus text.

Knapp in 1797 has similarities to Griesbach, changing the text to include his errors away from the Received Text.

As to exactly what Bengel and Wettstein published, I would have to check a bit. Apparently Bengel made his changes in the apparatus, not the base text, so that can be seen one way or another.

There were a variety of 1500s editions that would be hard to categorize as Received Text editions. Colinaeus in 1530 and Bogardus (the publisher) left out the heavenly witnesses even after Erasmus got it right, and likely have other differences.

The one begun by Cyril Lucaris which led to the 1638 Orthodox edition (Maximos of Gallipoli, or Kallioupolites, died 1633) may have other textual elements. Similar with other editions, Seraphim of Mytilene was edited in London in 1703 and is in Wiki. . Also the Zosimas of 1820 that was used by Simonides and Benedict at Mt. Athos as part of the Sinaiticus creation.

Complutensian Polyglot is a maybe and had errant omissions on the Greek side like Acts 8:37, not sure about the London and Amsterdam Polyglots. Goldhagen in 1753 is a follow-up to the Complutensian.

Schmid has a GNT that was published in 1679 and has differences.

Bowyer (starts in 1763) had at least one edition in 1782 that throws in his conjectures.

Discussed five years ago, aiming for more completeness now.

Dibdin info


Matthew Rose
Steven Avery Matthaei, Alter, Scholz and Griesbach were the primary examples I had in mind. Bengel is a tricky one, although I wouldn't define his edition as a proper TR (personally). He did make changes in the text (especially Revelation), albiet they had to be printed in a previous edition (Revelation being the exception). Wettstein put his changes in the apparatus IIRC.
Colinaeus and the Complutensian should both be recognized as part of the TR corpus IMO.
Last edited: