1. There is no unambiguous evidence that the Textus Receptus NT Text was known before the 16th Century. 2. The argument that defends the Textus Receptus Text by appealing to the fact that most extant manuscripts of the Greek New Testament attest to the Byzantine text-type, is logically fallacious and historically naive. 3. The Textus Receptus NT Text is demonstrably a derivative NT Text of the Byzantine and Latin Vulgate texts by Erasmus. 4. The Byzantine Text has better credentials than any other Textus Receptus text-type (Erasmus, Stephanus, Beza and Scrivener) NT Text now in print. 5. The argument that defends the Textus Receptus text by appealing to the providence of God is logically and theologically fallacious. 6. The argument that appeals to the 16th scholarship to deny the possibility that the Textus Receptus text is a Greek NT Text made to conform to the Latin Vulgate NT Text, is fallacious. 7. Textual arguments that depend on adopting the Textus Receptus and comparing other text-types with it are guilty, methodologically speaking, of begging the issue; and in any case they present less than the whole truth. 8. The charge that the non-Textus Receptus text-types are theologically aberrant is fallacious. 9. The 1611 Authorized Version was not accepted without a struggle, and some outstanding believers soon wanted to replace it. 10. The Textus Receptus Text must not be thought to be the precise equivalent of the Byzantine Text, which is the only NT Greek Text represented by the Majority of NT Greek Manuscripts. 11. The argument that ties the adoption of the Textus Receptus to verbal inspiration is logically and theologically fallacious. 12. Arguments that attempt to draw textual conclusions from a prejudicial selection of not immediately relevant data, or from a slanted use of terms, or by a slurring appeal to guilt by association, or by repeated appeal to false evidence, are not only misleading, but ought to be categorically rejected by Christians who, above all others, profess both to love truth and to love their brothers in Christ. 13. Adoption of the Textus Receptus and the 1611 English Text dependent upon it should not be made a criterion of orthodoxy.
Posted on: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 00:51:27 +0000