[B-Greek] difference between TR and MT in John 17:3

Cirk Bejnar eluchil404 at yahoo.com
Mon Jul 11 00:46:55 EDT 2005


--- david at lapointenclick.com wrote:

> It sounds to me from some posts I've read from the
> archives that the Textus
> Receptus was a particular document published in 1550
> and the "Majority
> Text" was more of a strain of or family of
> manuscripts maintained over
> centuries...a group to which the Textus Receptus
> belongs.

Oversimplified but essentially accurate.  As the name
implies the "Majority Text" can be found by examining
the total corpus of extant NT manuscripts and choosing
the reading read by an absolute majority of
Manuscripts.  This text, as is the TR, is of the type
commonly known as Byzantine.

>  So, I'm not
> sure what is meant in E-Sword by labelling one of
> their Greek NT's as
> "Majority Text"...but anyway, what they distribute
> under that title
> differs from the TR in John 17:3...by one character
> (not to mention the
> lack of accents, breathing marks and some
> punctuation, because those
> differences are uniform throughout the documents). 

I am pretty sure that the "Majority Text" in E sword
is _The New Testament in the Original Greek According
to the Byzantine / Majority Textform_ edited by
Maurice Robinson and William Pierpont.  This text
omits breathings, accents, and punctuation because
these marks were not in the original copies of the NT
and are instead inserted into modern texts accoring to
the opinion of the editors.  Though their origins are
ancient they were not in common use until the Middle
Ages.  Indeed, most early manuscripts lack even spaces
between words.  There is only real doubt in a very few
cases but there is no need to belabor the point.

> So, my question is, my TR has GINOSKOSIN whereas my
> MT only has GINOSKOSI:
> what difference would that make to the meaning of
> the verse?
> 
> Thank you for your help.
> Dave LaPointe

Checking my Robinson Pierpont (First Edition),
however, I find GINWSKWSIN.  Maybe the TR reads
GINWSKWSI? This appears to be an example of "movable
nu".  See e.g. Smyth 134
<http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0007&layout=&loc=134>
 Normally this N is dropped before a following
consonant but Robinson and Pierpont have chosen to
retain it throughout their text.  It is purely a
matter of spelling and does not effect the meaning of
the text in any way.

Yours in His Grace,
Cirk R. Bejnar

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



More information about the B-Greek mailing list