Please help?

Carolyn Scott

New member
I would like to know the actual definitions of KJV Only, Majority Text position, TR only and the differences?

I always say I'm kjv only because I read the king james bible, but I'm against double inspiration. I don't think there's anything wrong with that.
Please give me feedback on these terms?
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Double inspiration is a bit of a red herring.

Anyway, KJV Only really means KJV the only English Bible to use, pure and perfect. If a person speaks Russian and not English, it is hard for them to use only the KJV. The TR is, more or less, the Greek text used to translate to the AV (Authorized Version == King James Bible). It is a bit vague but still is meant to mean the excellent text. However, we read English fluently, not Greek.

Majority and Byzantine are a different Greek text, since the Authorized Version was able to include wonderful minority verses like the heavenly witnesses and Acts 8:37. See my recent post on the Textus Receptus Academy on Facebook.
 

Carolyn Scott

New member
Double inspiration is a bit of a red herring.

Anyway, KJV Only really means KJV the only English Bible to use, pure and perfect. If a person speaks Russian and not English, it is hard for them to use only the KJV. The TR is, more or less, the Greek text used to translate to the AV (Authorized Version == King James Bible). It is a bit vague but still is meant to mean the excellent text. However, we read English fluently, not Greek.

Majority and Byzantine are a different Greek text, since the Authorized Version was able to include wonderful minority verses like the heavenly witnesses and Acts 8:37. See my recent post on the Textus Receptus Academy on Facebook.
Thank you, it's my understanding that someone made things confusing by taking the phrase Majority Text and put certain documents together, turning it into a book and entitled it The Majority Text? So when you say Majority which do you mean?
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Before around 1975, the TR-AV text would sometimes be called inexactly the Majority Text (without the Greek necessarily being specified, the TR-AV uses other sources as well, including the Latin mss.)

1951
http://books.google.com/books?id=yU...ook_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAQ

Around 1975 the Greek Majority and Byzantine Text movements (there are a few different editions that vary some) came forth, the half-way house position that I described here

Facebook - Textus Receptus Academy
https://www.facebook.com/groups/467217787457422/posts/1003932327119296/

The Byzantine and Majority Greek positions are like a half-way house for folks who do not want to accept the ultra-corrupt horrid Westcott-Hort recension but have been indoctrinated against the TR and AV.

Maurice Robinson has been the major proponent in recent years. Wonderful gentleman, good geek-work (e.g. on the Mark ending where, unlike Snapp, he properly accepts Markan authorship, and the Pericope Adulterae) but an underlying hostility to the purity and excellence of our Bible.
Almost at times a seething hostility, and we know where that comes from.

Trying soooo hard to be accepted by the dark side of modern Hortian textual criticism, and their Vaticanus-primacy corruption text. It is wacky that he tries to align with textual charlatans like Peter Gurry and Daniel Wallace.

Text and Canon Institute
The Letter and the Spirit
The evangelical scholar has no need to fear or to exclude the Holy Spirit when practicing textual criticism.
Nov 6, 2021
https://textandcanon.org/the-letter-and-the-spirit/

And there was a Majority Text Society.

So overall, we simply should not use the term unless we are describing the half-way house position. It has been co-opted for a far weaker text.
 
Top