In studying manuscript evidence, the reader will quickly realize that there are really only two types of Bibles available today. Those that have come from the Received Text family of manuscripts, and those that have come from the Critical Text (Alexandrian) family. The Received Text has historically been used by churches dating back to the time of the apostles. The Critical Text Bibles have only dominated new translations for the last 150 years.
Those who support the Critical Text Bibles rarely claim that the Critical Text is where the promise of preservation has been fulfilled. They do not usually believe in the doctrine of the Preservation of the Scriptures. They almost always believe that the Greek text of the New Testament has been lost and must be reconstructed by means of textual criticism.
The method of preservation
As we learned in the previous chapters, God has promised to preserve His Word. The good news is that He has kept that promise. The promise made by Jesus Christ, that not one jot or tittle would be lost from the Scriptures, has been kept in the New Testament through the textual lineage of the Received Text manuscripts. The question is, how did God providentially work in order to preserve His Word? He did not just leave the preservation of the Scriptures to chance. God providentially worked throughout the human process of copying and protecting faithful copies of the Bible.
Dr. Moorman notes three specific steps in this process: First, many trustworthy copies of the original New Testament manuscripts were produced by faithful scribes. Second, these trustworthy copies were read and recopied by true believers down through the centuries. Third, untrustworthy copies were not so generally read or so frequently recopied...Thus as a result of this special providential guidance the true text won out in the end, and today we may be sure that the text found in the vast majority of the Greek New Testament manuscripts is a trustworthy reproduction of the divinely inspired original text.[1]
The vast majority of the over 5,000 Greek New Testament manuscripts that exist today are indeed in agreement. At least 85 percent of the New Testament Greek manuscripts in existence today are part of the Received Text family.[2]Textual expert John Burgon estimated that 995 of every 1000 manuscripts he examined supported the Received Text.[3]
The Received text has historically been the Bible that the common people used. In fact, it was the common Christians and churches who were the most faithful in protecting their copies of the Scriptures. These Christians were very unlikely to damage their precious Bibles by writing on them. The manuscripts today that were owned by the common people are the most clean and free from alterations.[4]
Evidence abounds that the traditional Received Text was present in the earliest days of the church. Many church fathers quoted and recognized the distinct Received Text readings in their Scripture citations. The following notable ancient Christians have cited the traditional Bible in their writings:
(100 - l50 AD) The Didache, Diognetus, Justin Martyr;
(150 - 200 AD) Gospel of Peter, Athenagorus, Hegesippus, Irenaeus;
(200 - 250 AD) Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Clementines, Hippolytus, Origen;
(200 - 300 AD) Gregory of Thaumaturgus, Novatian, Cyprian, Dionysius of Alexandria, Archelaus;
(300 - 400 AD) Eusebius, Athanasius, Macarius Magnus, Hilary, Didymus, Basil, Titus of Bostra, Cyril of Jerusalem, Gregory of Nyssa, Apostolic Canons, Epiphanius, and Ambrose.[5]
The fact that these ancient men cited the distinct readings of the traditional Bible is unquestionable evidence that the traditional text existed during the earliest days of the church. The traditional Bible of today is the same Bible that was used by the earliest Christians, it has not been lost. Those that claim that the words of Scripture have been lost and must be reconstructed are simply wrong.
There are many ancient Bibles in other languages that were translated from the traditional text. Their existence is strong evidence that the Received Text manuscripts represent the original biblical text that was used by the early churches. Let us examine some of these ancient Bibles that support the belief that the traditional text is the preserved Word of God.
The Itala Version
An Old Latin Version of the Bible, called the Itala Version, was produced by the Italic Church by 157 AD.[6] This Latin translation is based on the Received Text. Quoting Dr. Jeffrey Young:
The old Latin translation that was in use when Jerome prepared the Vulgate was translated much earlier than 300 AD because 50 copies are still extant dated between 300 and 400 AD. This translation is also a witness, prior to the fourth century, that testifies to the authenticity of the traditional text.[7]
Frederick Nolan confirms the existence of the Itala Version in 157 AD, which is less that one hundred years after most of the books of the New Testament were written.[8] This is very powerful evidence that the traditional text is the text used by the first Christians. The Itala Version was known to be used by the common people, to be a quite literal translation of the Greek, and to have been copied until the 9th century.[9]
The Peshitta Version
The Syrian Peshitta Version is another powerful ancient witness to the integrity of the traditional text. According to Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, the Old Testament of the Peshitta is translated from a Hebrew text almost identical to that of the Hebrew Masoretic.[10] The New Testament of the Peshitta is based on the traditional Received Text.
The Peshitta was used by the common Christians in Syria during a time shortly removed from the apostles. The Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible also gives the origin of the name:
The word peshitta … functions as an adjective meaning "simple." The translation was apparently the "simple" or "common version." (Most believe the designation was to distinguish this standard Syriac version from the more sophisticated, annotated Syro-Hexapla.)[11]
The translation could have been made as early as the first century.[12]
The fact that the Peshitta is based on the traditional text is strong evidence that the Received Text is the true text of the Bible. The Peshitta was later revised several times and unfortunately, corruptions made their way into these later revisions. The Peshitta originally omitted the Apocrypha, but these books were later added from the Septuagint.[13]
Textual expert John Burgon noted the antiquity and receptivity of the Peshitta:
The churches of the region of Syria have always used the Peshitta. There has never been a time when these churches did not use the Received Text based Peshitta.[14]
Today, the Peshitta is a powerful witness to the validity of the traditional texts and hence to the preservation of the Scriptures.
The Gothic Version
The Gothic Version is a Received Text based Bible that was originally translated into the Gothic language around 350 AD by a missionary to the Goths by the name of Ulfilas.[15] The book of Second Corinthians and considerable portions of the four Gospels, as well as some of the other Pauline Epistles, survive today. The Gothic Version is a very literal translation of the Greek.[16]
To quote Norman Geisler, who is no friend to the doctrine of the Preservation of the Scriptures, "This translation adheres closely, almost literally, to the Greek text of the Byzantine type (Received Text)."[17] The Eerdmans Bible dictionary also confirms that it is based on the traditional text.[18] Those who say that there is no evidence that the traditional text existed prior to the fifth century are silenced by the existence of the Gothic Version.
The traditional text was common and accepted in its day if it was used to translate into other languages. The Gothic Version is a great witness that the traditional text is the preserved Word of God.
Other Translations
Dr. Waite gives an extensive list of the Received Text being used in European translations:
These include the Gallic Church of Southern France, (177 AD); the Celtic Church of Great Britain; the Church of Scotland and Ireland; Codex W of Matthew in the fourth or fifth century; Codex A in the Gospels in the fifth century; the vast majority of extant New Testament manuscripts; the early Greek church (312-1453 AD); all the churches of the Reformation; Erasmus's Greek New Testament of 1516 as well as his later editions, The Complutensian Polyglot of 1522; Luther's German Bible; the French Version of Olivetan of 1537; the Taverner's Bible of 1539; Stephanus' Greek New Testament (1546-51); the Geneva Bible of 1557-60; the Bishops' Bible of 1568; … Beza's Greek New Testament of 1598 as well as his other editions; the King James Bible of 1611; and the Elzivers' Greek New Testament of 1624.[19]
Many other examples could be given of translations of the traditional Bible. The evidence is abundant that the Received Text has been used by the churches since the earliest days of church history. This is because it is the true Bible. God providentially preserved His Word over the centuries and fulfilled His promises. Psalms 119:89 states, "For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven."
While the vast majority of all existing manuscripts support the Received Text, opponents of the doctrine of the Preservation of the Scriptures will point out that there are occasionally slight discrepancies amongst individual manuscripts. Although these differences are small and few (such as the spelling of a word), the Bible tells us that not one jot or tittle will pass away and therefore we should resolve these differences, however small they may be. The good news is that these discrepancies are easily resolved through a process of comparison with all the available manuscripts within its family.
To help the reader understand this process, imagine a table with 1,000 manuscripts of the gospel of John. Suppose that 990 contain a word in a verse and 10 of the manuscripts omit the word. The conclusion can be safely made that the word is indeed part of Scripture and that the 10 manuscripts that omit it contain a scribal error. This process of comparison is what is used to allow us to resolve any discrepancies within a manuscript family, however small they may be.
It is the personal conviction of many (including this author), that the King James Bible Translation Committee was providentially used by God to produce a standardized, collated Received Text that eliminated all scribal errors. Many modern textual experts agree, that this collation of the Received Text family of manuscripts done by the AV1611 scholars, even today, cannot be improved upon. In this standardized text (the KJV and its textual base), the promise of every jot and tittle being preserved has been fulfilled. Many great books exist explaining the background and methods used by the over fifty King James Translators to produce a faithful and preserved Bible. If someone wants to see a perfect copy of God's Word today, they can find it in the King James Bible and its base text.
[1] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, 60.
[2] Ibid, 71.
[3] Burgon, John William. The Revision Revised. Kindle Edition. 134.
[4] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, 69.
[5] Ibid, 95.
[6] David H. Sorenson, Touch not the Unclean Thing, (Duluth, MN, NorthStar Baptist Ministries), 78. Quoting Frederick Henry Scrivener, A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament, 2d ed (Cambridge, Deighton, Bell, & CO., 1874), 2:43
[7] Will Kinney, "The Old Latin Versions and the KJB," http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Article:_The_Old_Latin_versions_and_the_KJB_by_Will_Kinney (accessed 3-29-21).
[8] David H. Sorenson, Touch not the Unclean Thing, 78. Quoting Frederick Nolan, An Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate: or, Received Text of the New Testament (London: F. C. & J. Rivington, 1815), xvii, xviii.
[9] Carroll D. Osburn, “Itala,” ed. David Noel Freedman, Allen C. Myers, and Astrid B. Beck, Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, 659.
[10] Ibid. “Peshitta,”
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Jack Moorman, Forever Settled: A Survey of the Documents and History of the Bible, 36.
[14] David H. Sorenson, Touch not the Unclean Thing, p. 81; quoted in John Burgon and Edward Miller, The causes of the Corruption, 128.
[15] Carroll D. Osburn, “Gothic Version,” ed. David Noel Freedman, Allen C. Myers, and Astrid B. Beck, Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, 524.
[16] F. L. Cross and Elizabeth A. Livingstone, eds., The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 698.
[17] Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, Rev. and expanded, (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986), 519.
[18] Carroll D. Osburn, “Gothic Version,” ed. David Noel Freedman, Allen C. Myers, and Astrid B. Beck, Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, 524.
[19] D.A. Waite, Defending the King James Bible, (Collingswood, N.J.: Bible for Today, 1992), 45-48.
Comments