How many times does it have to be said? So here is the real rest of the story.
NESTLE-ALAND = UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES = NESTLE = WESTCOTT & HORT = THE TWO MOST CORRUPT GREEK MANUSCRIPTS IN EXISTENCE.
Those 6,000 manuscripts are still waiting to be collated while Kurt Aland continues to promote the lie that the most corrupt and the most pure, and the most pure are the most corrupt. Erasmus had the wisdom to reject Vaticanus, but Aland and other textual scholars continue to idolize it as "the best"!
This is utter nonsense! Nestle Aland have a Greek text which differs from Westcott and Hort, because in the last 100 years or so, many, many new and earlier manuscripts have been found.
The Textus Receptus is truly the corrupt version. It uses the Byzantine only, which is rife with scribal errors and additions, with succeeding editions incorporated and passed down to succeeding generations. The only reason there are so many (hence the so-called “Majority Text”) is because the Byzantine Empire kept their Greek, and monasteries kept copying down the GNT. Now, that is not a bad thing, if it means having many copies. But the problem is that the generations of manuscripts became more and more corrupt, until you enter the early 1600’s and Erasumus and hence the KJV are using very corrupted manscripts, as compared to the original autographs, (which yes, we do not have!). But even he protested having to add certain things, because they appeared in NO manuscripts. But, the imprimatur of the RCC said, keep those errors, and he did, or his GNT would not have been published first. Yes, the publishing industry, in its fledgling state was already competitive!
We won’t even get into the fact that Erasmus, who was a good Greek scholar, was forced to kept things like the Johannian Comma in 1 John 5, because the Catholic Church demanded it. And that was found in the Vulgate, a Latin, text, which Jerome, who was NOT a good scholar, translated.
Anyway, I would be more worried about obsolete grammar and arachiac words, instead of wondering whether the lies of Riplinger and Ruckman are truth, and if you are that obsessed with the “pure” text, learn Greek and Hebrew as some of us have, and then you can understand that there are so many options for words, and that differences in the modern text arise simply and often because no language directely translates to another.
Anyone who speaks a foreign language knows that! For me, I far prefer a modern Bible, in a language I understand. Further, it is reprehensible to preach the gospel to someone in 16th century English, who wants to hear the gospel. Because what they will hear is a language that is not their own.
Finally, just for anyone reading this thread, I do NOT read long passages from the KJV, much too hard to plough through. I seriously just skip what those people have written. So, please use any other modern text, as well as your preferred version.
I really cannot believe people are really not just defending, but calling every other translation but the KJV as ”impure” or other nonsense. This doesn’t happen in other languages. I just finally found my German Bible, which is an update of Martin Luther’s translation. It is very readable, and much closer to the Greek than any English translation. That is because German uses noun cases and a complicated adjectival system. So, it can throw the nominative to the end, just like the Greek, which makes no sense in English. In fact, it is a pleasure to read and compare to the Greek. Not perfect, but one of the better translations I have read.
