Textus Receptus and the KJV

[Gail]

Quote:

For many years now many are the attacks on the KJV that are false, don't believe them, stick to the best out there and the Hebrew Greek dictionary runs with it on your computer which is a real plus, gives you the meaning of all words and you can decide if translators used the best English words.

Gibs, have you done any translating of any language into English? I would like to know if you are aware of the issues people run into.

If you want to translate word for word literally you will end up with something like Young's. Try reading THAT and gain the sense of it! But there are times when Young's is helpful.

Then you can add Rotherham's to get where the emphasis should be. That is a help, too.

Since I don't know of anyone near to me who is an expert in modern Greek or Hebrew, let alone the historical uses of those languages, that also comes into play.

People who are in the know, whom I repect, don't make those accusations that we have seen here. They will explain their stance using the information they have.

[Gail]

Gibs, you have not addressed why you think Ellen White used the RV (ERV) in the Desire of Ages.

Since she was not also gifted in the use of historical Greek or Hebrew, we can assume that the Holy Spirit helped her discern which verses were the ones she could correctly use. She did not reject that Westcott and Hort translation. She probably used it in the cases she did because in those cases the version was BETTER than the KJV for the points she wanted to get across.

[joeb]

That is why you find various publishing houses putting out KJV Bibles.

I think that in the U.S. copyrights are invalid after 17 years, isn't it?

Copyright law has changed significantly in the last few years, and not for the better as far as society is concerned. Here's a link to the copyright offices faq on duration.

http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-duration.html

[joeb]

Gibs, you have not addressed why you think Ellen White used the RV (ERV) in the Desire of Ages.

Since she was not also gifted in the use of historical Greek or Hebrew, we can assume that the Holy Spirit helped her discern which verses were the ones she could correctly use. She did not reject that Westcott and Hort translation. She probably used it in the cases she did because in those cases the version was BETTER than the KJV for the points she wanted to get across.

Gail,

You'll find that Gib's often won't address things that contradict his point of view. He'll just ignore it and keep on repeating his point of view as if nothing that contradicts it has been said.

It's pretty sad.

[Gordon1]

Many SDAs are unaware this issue was addressed by Benjamin G. Wilkinson, in his 1930 book entitled:

Our Authorized Bible Vindicated.

Wilkinson was Dean of Theology at Washington Missionary College (SDA) in Takoma Park, D.C. He may be one of our last Protestant authors.

The GC tried to block publication of the book and ran a campaign to denigrate his scholarship, likely because his manuscript research was solid and supported the KJV.

He countered with An Answer to Objections to clear his name. Both books are available from Leaves of Autumn Books in Payson, Arizona. Possibly free online downloads too.

He's also known for discovering a Jesuit infiltrator on the College faculty, who quickly departed when exposed.

[Gibs]

At the time of EGW and the pioneers of Adventism, it wasn't realized that corruption was coming in and the easier to read versions that come out didn't have so much fault in them.

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

2Ti 3:13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

As he will present anything and everything possible to make of no effect the testimonies that the Lord has given me, I must do my part to meet the situation just now. {PC 7.1}

The same with the Word of God.

No I don't get to answer all comebacks at times because I miss them but never intentionally.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[Kevin H]

Many SDAs are unaware this issue was addressed by Benjamin G. Wilkinson, in his 1930 book entitled:

Our Authorized Bible Vindicated.

Wilkinson was Dean of Theology at Washington Missionary College (SDA) in Takoma Park, D.C. He may be one of our last Protestant authors.

The GC tried to block publication of the book and ran a campaign to denigrate his scholarship, likely because his manuscript research was solid and supported the KJV.

He countered with An Answer to Objections to clear his name. Both books are available from Leaves of Autumn Books in Payson, Arizona. Possibly free online downloads too.

He's also known for discovering a Jesuit infiltrator on the College faculty, who quickly departed when exposed.

Elder Wilkinson was also a close friend of an Elder Washburn who received many letters of reproof from Mrs. White that I read when I was at Andrews. Washburn and Wilkinson's letters sound a lot a like and it took me a while to realize that they were actually 2 different men. Wilkinson and Willie White had similar exchanges of mail that Mrs. White and Washburn had. Mrs. White's criticisms of Washburn were basically the same as Willie's criticisms of Wilkinson.

Graham Maxwell pointed out that Elder Wilkinson's background was in MODERN language, that he did NOT have a theological background and was NOT familiar with ancient languages.

Dr. Maxell said that when he did find that Catholic infiltrator that he became suspicious of everyone and refused to listen to any redirection and was very suspicious that even Willie White may have been a Jesuit. I've read in other articles that he would compare Willie with the accusations of Samuel's sons, accusing him of controlling his mother over the last years of her life and that her last messages were not from God but from her evil son, and if there were things that Mrs. White said or did that disagreed with his views he would blame them on Willie.

Getting back to Dr. Maxwell, he said that Wilkinson's attitudes drove his children away and as adults they wanted not only nothing to do with his religion, but that they wanted nothing to do with God as well. And that at the end of his life he saw where his views have brought him and that he recanted his views.

[Gail]

Hmmm... Seems I've heard stories like this before. Once people hold on to a suspicious and critical spirit, where does it stop?

[Gordon1]

There's evidence Willie White controlled his mother's messages and at times doubted her wisdom & counsel.

It's also possible Graham Maxwell is repeating the party line to thwart Wilkinson's influence. Smear campaigns have been run against the most upright men and women. Christ said this would happen and it continues to this day. Man's majority position in the realm of religion has always been found to be fighting against the truth and crushing out any voice of dissent or warning.

The denomination blocked Wilkinson's book which exposed the history of the two streams of Bible manuscripts - the Jesuit adoption of one and the Protestant fidelity to the other. There's no evidence Wilkinson was any more paranoid than Luther, Miller or E.G. White, all marginalized for their faith.

[Gibs]

Whistle blowers are always derided and expect it. In many cases God has sent them.

Willie got too big for his shoes is right I too believe and that isn't all but have no proof or I'd post more.

The Lithograph that James White drew up is alarming too, a copy is in Loma Linda University and the original is in the White Estates. It shows a Masonry relationship.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[joeb]

Hmmm... Seems I've heard stories like this before. Once people hold on to a suspicious and critical spirit, where does it stop?

Bowing at the feet of the originator of that kind of behavior.

[barnz]

Here's an article from our very own Adventist Biblical Research Institute regarding the KJV and Modern Translations.

https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/sites/default/files/pdf/kjversion.pdf

I also found these videos to be pretty helpful. If anything, they bring out certain points of view.

Debate between the KJV and modern translations

[Bert]

Just recently I've been looking into some of the history of Bible manuscripts, and I find a 'problem'.

The term “Textus Receptus” appeared for the first time after the 1633 publication of the New Testament Greek text by the Elzevirs’.

In the preface of that 1633 edition were the words (originally in Latin):

“The reader has the text which is now received by all, in which we give nothing changed or corrupted.”

And “thus, [writes a commentator,] the publishers ‘blurb’ became the catchword (Textus Receptus, “Received Text”) to designate the Greek text which they had incorporated from the editions of Stephanus, Beza, and Ximenes.” (Geisler and Nix, p.386)

I am now certain that the timing of this cannot be challenged:

KJV = 1611.

Genuine Textus Receptus = 1633.

So I am persuaded that the Textus Receptus was not in existence when the KJV was published in 1611. Those that advocate a strong Textus Receptus / KJV link, seem to be advocating a commonly held, but rather false and misleading view.

The Textus Receptus did not exist until more than 20 years after the KJV came into being.

Not so, for the basis of the Textus Receptus was the translations made by Erasmus in the early 1500's, which were published by Froben of Basel in 1516. His second edition was published in 1519, and another edition printed in 1551.

The reference to 1633 is based on the following:

"The origin of the term Textus Receptus comes from the publisher's preface to the 1633 edition produced by Bonaventure and his nephew Abraham Elzevir who were partners in a printing business at Leiden. The preface reads, Textum ergo habes, nunc ab omnibus receptum: in quo nihil immutatum aut corruptum damus, translated as, "so you hold the text, now received by all, in which (is) nothing corrupt." The two words textum and receptum were modified from the accusative to the nominative case to render textus receptus. Over time, this term has been retroactively applied to Erasmus' editions, as his work served as the basis of the others." (Source: Wikipedia)

[Bert]

Here's an article from our very own Adventist Biblical Research Institute regarding the KJV and Modern Translations.

https://adventistbiblicalresearch.org/sites/default/files/pdf/kjversion.pdf

I also found these videos to be pretty helpful. If anything, they bring out certain points of view.

Debate between the KJV and modern translations

">