Home » Uncategorized » The Nestle-Aland Greek Text is Based on 0% of Greek MSS: #14

The Nestle-Aland Greek Text is Based on 0% of Greek MSS: #14

My fourteenth debate review video of the James White / Thomas Ross debate on Biblical preservation or King James Onlyism goes through John 13 and examines every single variant between the Nestle-Aland Textus Rejectus and the Received Text or Textus Receptus.  It is valuable to those who watched the debate, since it proves that Dr. White cannot be consistent when he attempts to prove the superiority of the Nestle-Aland text and modern English versions by attacking the Received Text based on one word in Ephesians 3:9 and one word that is in some TR editions in Revelation 16:5.  His text has orders of magnitude more minority readings than does the Textus Receptus, so his attacks are not just like him pointing one finger at the KJV while four fingers point back at his LSB; rather, it is like a millipede pointing one leg at the KJV while all his other legs are pointing at the LSB.

However, the analysis in this video is also very helpful for those who never end up watching the debate.  (I discussed debate-specific matters that relate to what is examined in video #14 in video #13.)  While I do not doubt that I am biased, since I created the video, I believe it would be valuable for anyone who is entering the Baptist ministry and is going to confront textual-critical issues, valuable for any student of Biblical Greek who wishes to understand the overall differences between the TR and the NA/UBS Greek text, and valuable for any Christians who wish to have a level of understanding of the matter of Biblical preservation beyond what is rudimentary.

In this video, I demonstrate that in John 13 alone, the Nestle-Aland text rejects:

90% or more of Greek manuscripts 43 times
95% or more of Greek manuscripts 42 times
99% of Greek manuscripts or more 28 times
99%+ of Greek manuscripts 18 times
100% of Greek manuscripts in John 13:2.

Extrapolating for the entire New Testament from John 13, the Nestle-Aland text rejects:

99% of Greek MSS c. 4,680 times
90%+ of Greek MSS c. 11,180 times.

I also demonstrate that in vast numbers of short sections of text the Nestle-Aland text does not look like any known Greek manuscript on the face of the earth, and that even Nestle himself, from whom the Nestle-Aland text is named, recognized that the critical texts extant in his day were a patchwork that never existed in real space and time in textual history. The Nestle-Aland or United Bible Society Greek text is indefensible Scripturally, historically, and rationally.

I would encourage all defenders of God’s preserved Word in the Textus Receptus to learn, understand, and use these facts as they stand for the perfect preservation of Scripture.  I believe these facts are not as well known in King James Only circles as they should be.

I also demonstrate in this video some facts about the Textus Receptus and how it compares to printed Majority Text editions that are not well known. While there certainly are minority readings in the TR–approximately 1% of the time when there are variants–and there are good reasons to follow the TR in this small percentage of Greek text for Scriptural and historical reasons–there are also plenty of places in all printed Majority Text or Byzantine Priority editions–whether that of Hodges / Farstad, Robinson / Pierpont, or Pickering–where the printed Majority Text follows a minority of Greek manuscripts while the Textus Receptus follows the majority.  In fact, in John 13, while the TR and the Byzantine priority text editions were very close to each other, the TR actually follows the majority of Greek manuscripts in more letters in the chapter than does any printed Majority Text edition.  The fact that the TR frequently follows a majority of Greek manuscripts when printed “Majority Text” editions do not is also a fact that is not well known enough in King James Only circles.

You can watch the video using the embedded link below, or view it at FaithSaves.net, Rumble, or YouTube.

 

These are important facts.  Christians who believe in the perfect preservation of God’s Word can rejoice in them.  Those who defend modern English versions and the corrupt United Bible Society / Nestle – Aland Greek text from which they are translated need to both understand and explain why these things are so, and why they are defending as God’s Word a patchwork text that never existed in real space and time in the history of textual transmission.

TDR


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives